Auckland Council Future Vision Committee Agenda 17/2

I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Auckland Future Vision Committee will be held on:
Date: Time: Meeting Room: Venue:
Friday 17 February 2012 10.00am Reception Lounge Level 2 Auckland Town Hall 301-305 Queen Street Auckland
Auckland Future Vision Committee OPEN ADDENDUM AGENDA

MEMBERSHIP Chairperson Deputy Chairperson Councillors Mayor Len Brown, JP Deputy Mayor Penny Hulse Cr Anae Arthur Anae Cr Cameron Brewer Cr Dr Cathy Casey Cr Sandra Coney, QSO Cr Alf Filipaina Cr Hon Chris Fletcher, QSO Cr Michael Goudie Cr Ann Hartley, JP Cr Mike Lee Member Anahera Morehu
Cr Des Morrison Cr Richard Northey, ONZM Cr Calum Penrose Cr Dick Quax Cr Noelene Raffills, JP Cr Sharon Stewart, QSM Member Glen Tupuhi Cr Sir John Walker, KNZM, CBE Cr Wayne Walker Cr Penny Webster Cr George Wood, CNZM
(Quorum 12 members) Crispian Franklin Committee Secretary 15 February 2012 Contact Telephone: (09) 373 6205 Email: crispian.franklin@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
Note:
The reports contained within this agenda are for consideration and should not be construed as Council policy unless and until adopted. Should Members require further information relating to any reports, please contact the relevant manager, Chairperson or Deputy Chairperson.
Auckland Future Vision Committee 17 February 2012 ITEM TABLE OF CONTENTS 9 10 11 12 A Auckland Plan Deliberations Report Sections A-C Auckland Plan Deliberations Report Section D Aucklands Development Strategy Auckland Plan Deliberations Report Chapter 1 Aucklands People Auckland Plan Deliberations Report Chapter 10 Aucklands Infrastructure Consideration of Extraordinary Items A.1 Auckland Council's Submission to the Productivity Commission's Draft Paper on International Freight Transport Services 179 PAGE 5 69 73 103
Page 3
Auckland Future Vision Committee 17 February 2012
File No.: CP2012/01413
Executive Summary
Formal consultation on the draft Auckland Plan took place between 20 September 2011 and 31 October 2011 in accordance with the special consultative procedure. The proposed changes to the draft Auckland Plan are detailed in a series of chapter reports which will be presented to the Auckland Future Vision Committee over several meetings scheduled in February 2012. The following chapter report is to be considered by the Committee at its meeting on 17 February 2012: Sections A (The Auckland Plan a plan for all Aucklanders), Section B (Auckland Now and in the Future), Section C (The journey to 2040) Officers are seeking Committee direction on a number of proposed changes detailed in this chapter report in order to prepare a revised/final version of the Auckland Plan. These proposed changes have resulted from the formal submission and hearings process, and additional research in response to issues identified in submissions. The chapter report includes a brief summary of feedback, recommended major changes to the chapter, a table listing minor changes along with potential implications for other chapters. A marked up version of the proposed changes is attached to the chapter report. The recommendations for Sections A - C are provided below. Further detail and reasons for the proposed amendments can be found in the chapter report (refer Attachment 1).
Recommendation/s
a) b) c) That the report be received. That the text in sections A to C be amended to make it clearer that the Auckland Plan is a plan for all Auckland, not just the Auckland Council. That section B be reworked to focus more on what makes Auckland special now and how it might evolve to respond to global trends affecting cities around the world in the years to 2040. That the Committee approve minor changes as outlined in the chapter report (Attachment 1). That the Committee approve the amendments to the text and visuals relating to Sections A - C (Attachment 1), subject to any necessary alignment and integration with other chapters.
d) e)
Background
N/a
Decision Making
N/a
Significance of Decision
This report deals with the Auckland Plan which is a significant activity. The development of the Auckland Plan has been carried out in accordance with the special consultative procedure, as provided for in the Local Government Act 2002 (sections 83 and 87).
Auckland Plan Deliberations Report Sections A-C
Page 5
Item 9
Maori Impact Statement
Item 9
Consultation with Maori on the draft Auckland Plan occurred over 2011 beginning with 2 mayoral hui held in January. These were followed up with 8 sub-regional hui, 4 technical workshops and an additional 2 mayoral hui. All matters in relation to Maori content in the plan have been either drafted or reviewed by the Maori Strategy and Relationship Department. To assist the Auckland Council during the preliminary stages of drafting, the Maori Strategy and Relationship department identified significant issues concerning Maori in May 2011 and subsequently presented a supporting technical paper in August 2011 as part of a suite of papers that informed the draft. The department led the consultation process prior to adoption of the draft Auckland Plan and during the special consultative procedure. Iwi have made contributions through direct face to face engagement, submissions and values and issues papers. Engagement and consultation with the Independent Maori Statutory Board has also been undertaken. Significant matters affecting Maori arising from the special consultative procedure were presented to the Committee through the chapter report on Aucklands Maori on 3 February 2012, with cross-references to other chapters of the plan as appropriate. Further detail and recommendations, including a summary of iwi feedback, has been provided to the Committee through the chapter report Aucklands Maori.
Consultation
The Auckland Plan consultation process has been undertaken in accordance with the special consultative procedure set out in sections 83 and 87 of the Local Government Act 2002. Auckland Council has involved central government, Councils Advisory Panels, infrastructure providers (including network utility operators), the communities of Auckland, the private sector, the rural sector and a number of other parties in the preparation and development of the Auckland Plan in accordance with section 80 of the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009. As noted above a parallel process of engagement with Mana whenua and Mataawaka has been undertaken.
Local Board Views

Local Boards have been engaged throughout the development of the Auckland Plan through presentations, meetings and workshops with the Committee and officers. All Local Boards presented their views on the draft Auckland Plan through 3 hearings days held in November 2011 and nine of the 21 local boards made formal submissions on the Auckland Plan. A summary of Local Board views has been provided in the deliberations background report, taking into account views expressed both in formal submissions and in presentations made in November 2011. The views of local boards were also considered in relation to draft Auckland Plan chapters and topic areas and have informed proposed amendments to the draft Auckland Plan.
Financial and Resourcing Implications

The Auckland Plan is a multi-party plan that requires the commitment, funding and implementation from many different organisations and individuals in Auckland. The Auckland Council has a leadership role in both developing and delivering the Plan. The Councils contribution to funding the Auckland Plan will be detailed through the Long Term Plan. Preparation of Auckland Councils first generation Long Term Plan 2012-2022 is underway and will be completed by June 2012.
Legal and Legislative Implications

The Auckland Plan (spatial plan for Auckland) is being developed in accordance with section 79 and section 80 Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009. The consultation process took place in accordance with the special consultative procedure provided for through sections 83 and 87 of the Local Government Act 2002.
Page 6
Implementation Issues
The Auckland Plan contains an Implementation Framework (Chapter 12), the purpose of which is to ensure that processes are in place within the Council and among the key partners to ensure that the many projects and actions listed in the Plan are implemented. The chapter sets out the main regulatory and funding tools already available to the partners and lists further tools and techniques to be explored. Further detail and recommendations will be provided to the Committee through the chapter report Implementation Framework.
Attachments
No. A B C D E F Title Chapter Report Sections A C Appendix 1 Appendix 2 Appendix 3 Appendix 4 Appendix 5 Page 9 15 25 33 41 45
Signatories
Authors Authorisers Robert Simpson, Principal Policy Analyst David Clelland, Manager Spatial and Infrastructure Strategy Ree Anderson, Manager Regional Strategy, Community and Cultural Policy Roger Blakeley, Chief Planning Officer
Page 7
Item 9
1.Summary
ThisreportprovidesasummaryofthemajorandminorchangesproposedtosectionsA,BandCofthe DraftAucklandPlan. With more than 1600 submission points received sections A, B and C were amongst the most heavily commenteduponpartsoftheAucklandPlan.Ingeneralasignificantmajorityofsubmitterswerehighly supportiveoftheoveralldirectionoftheplan,thevisionofAucklandastheworldsmostliveablecityand the five transformational shifts that are required to get us to that vision (see the submissions summary attachedasappendixfive). Weproposeanumberofminorchangesinresponsetothesubmissionsanalysis,feedbackreceivedfrom aninternationalexpertoncityspatialplansandsubsequentinputfromofficers.Thesechangesarelisted in the table in section three below. In addition to the changes listed in the table we make two recommendationsthatwillrequiremoresignificantchange: ThatthetextinsectionsAtoCbeamendedtomakeitclearerthattheAucklandPlanisaplanforall Auckland,notjustthecouncil
That section B be reworked to focus more on what makes Auckland special now and how it might
evolvetorespondtoglobaltrendsaffectingcitiesaroundtheworldintheyearsto2040. Overall,the minorand majorchanges werecommendin this chapterreport willresultin aconsiderably shorter,punchierandmorecoherentintroductiontothedocument. RecommendedversionsofsectionsA,BandCareattachedasappendices,asisasummaryofsubmissions receivedinrelationtothesepartsoftheDraftAucklandPlan.
Page 9
Attachment A
Item 9
AucklandPlan ChapterReportSectionsA,BandC
Item 9 Attachment A
2.Discussion
StructureofsectionsA,BandC TherecommendedversionsofsectionsA,BandCareattachedasappendicestothischapterreportand follow the revised structure set out below. This structure accommodates the changes suggested in this chapterreport,providesamorecoherentintroductiontotheAucklandPlan,andallowsreaderstogetto thepolicychaptersmorequickly. SectionA: TheAucklandPlanaplanforallAucklanders AlthoughwedorecommendmanychangestothetextandcontentofsectionA,wesuggestthattherebe minimalchangetoitsactualstructure.SectionA5(howtobeinvolved)isclearlynolongerrequired.We recommendthattherevisedstructureofsectionAbe: A1 Introduction - wehavestrengthenedthissectiontomakeitclearrightfromtheoutsetthatthisisaplanfor allAucklandersandwillrequirecommitmentfrommanyparties,notjustAucklandCouncil A2 WhyanAucklandPlan A3 TreatyofWaitangi A4 Keyimplementationstrategiesandplans - wehaveaddedabriefoutlineofAucklandCouncilsgeneralapproachtoimplementation(as discussedindetailinsubsequentchapters)andmadeitclearthatsuccessfulimplementationis alongtermprocessinwhichmanypartieshaveaparttoplay. SectionB: AucklandNowandintheFuture Greg Clark, the international consultant on city plans, observed that the front part of the Auckland Plan needed to get to the point much more quickly and was not sufficiently focussed on the long term (i.e. 2040).TheproposedrestructuringofsectionBaddressestheseconcerns. ThenewsectionBcouldbestructuredasfollows: B1 ThevisionforAuckland statementofthevisionandbriefexplanationofwhatitmeans(i.e.introductiontowhat we meanbythetermliveability) B2 WhatmakesAucklandspecial? - thecharacteristicsofAucklandthatdefineitandwhichAucklanderscherish BoxBx Aseparateboxoutliningsomekeydemographicandemploymentstatistics B3 TheroleofAucklandinNewZealandandtheworld - brief explanation of Aucklands importance to, and interdependence with, the rest of New Zealand - therevisedtextisacondensedversionofsectionB1fromtheDraftAucklandPlan B4 Citiesin2040 whatarethekeyglobaltrendsthatwillimpactthewaycitiesdevelopbetweennowand2040 andwhatarethefactorsthatwillmakeacitysuccessfulin2040 B5 WhatdotheseglobaltrendsmeanforAuckland? whatwillAucklandneedtodotorespondtothetrendsoutlinedinB4andachieveitsvision
Auckland Plan Deliberations Report Sections A-C Page 10
Auckland Future Vision Committee 17 February 2012 briefoutlineofsomeofthechallengesitwillneedtoovercometogetthere SectionC: TheJourneyto2040 Although we suggest maintaining the existing structure of section C we do recommend a considerable tighteningofitstextandsignificantamendmentstothestrategicframeworkdiagram.Werecommend sectionCbestructuredasfollows: C1 Aucklandsstrategicframework brief statement of the link between the vision, outcomes, transformational shifts and the strategicdirections revisedstrategicframeworkdiagram(spreadacrosstwofacingpages,withtextfromC1and C2sittingbeneath) C2 Outcomes:whatthevisionmeansin2040 verybriefintroductionfollowedbyshortstatementsforeachofthesevenoutcomes C3 Transformationalshiftstoachievethevision verybriefintroductiontobeaugmentedbyboxCx,whichsetsoutshortstatementsforeachof thesixtransformationalshifts C4 Principleswewillworkbytoachievetheoutcomes verybriefintroductionfollowedbyshortstatementsforeachoftheprinciples RevisionstothecontentofsectionB The proposed section B focuses on Auckland as it is now and as it might be in the future. Much of the materialcoveredinsectionBofthedraftplaniseithercondensedorremoved.TheproposedsectionB2 discussesthethingsthatmakeAucklandspecial.ItiscomplementedbyB3,whichtalksabouttheroleof Auckland(albeitmuchmorebrieflythantheequivalentsectioninthedraftdocument),andthestandalone box Bx, which outlines some key demographic and employment statistics. Sections B4 and B5 offer a broaddiscussionofsomeofthekeyglobaltrendsthatarelikelytoaffectcitiesbetweennowand2040and howAucklandmightneedtorespondtothem. TherevisionstosectionBaddressthe needfor the frontofthe documenttobe bothshorterandmore futurefocused. Roleofcouncil Many submitters were confused as to the purpose of the Auckland Plan with a significant number mistakenlybelievingthatthecouncilisproposingtotakealeadingimplementationroleinnontraditional areassuchashealth,educationandsocialpolicy.Tohelpavertthisperceptionfurtherreinforcementof the fact the Auckland Plan is a plan for all Auckland rather than just the council, and as such will need actionandinvestmentfromawidevarietyofparties,isrequired.Wehaverecommendedinclusionofa stronger opening statement to this effect (section A1) and other smaller changes throughout sections A andC. A further group of submitters (at least 3040) objected to the inclusion of nontraditional policy areas irrespective of whether the council is proposing to deliver on them or simply advocate to central government.Thisviewisnotconsistentwiththerequirementsofthelegislation. Strategicdirectionwording Note that two new strategic directions have been added (related to heritage and sport and recreation) bringing the total to 13. The titles of several of these strategic directions are currently under review to
Page 11
Attachment A
Item 9
Auckland Future Vision Committee 17 February 2012 ensure they are still relevant given the proposed changes to the document. A complete list of the recommended wording for the strategic directions will be presented to a subsequent meeting of the AucklandFutureVisionCommittee.
Item 9
3.MinorChanges
Thetablebelowprovidesfurtherdetailonchangeswehavesuggestedtothedocumentinlinewiththe feedbackfromthesubmissions,theoversightgroupsdiscussionsandourownconcerns.
Paragraph
Cover and introductory pages 25 27 26,29
Suggestedchanges
Recommend a prominent statement upfront that this is a plan for all of Auckland. Statements have been inserted throughout sections A to C. Recommend a more prominentstatementisconsideredforthecoverandintroductorypages. Oneortwomoresentencesaddedtoexplainwhattheplanisandwhatitwilldo Clearerstatementofthegovernanceframework StrongerandclearerexplanationofthefactthattheAPisaplanforallAucklanders, not just council, and as such will require commitment from many parties to ensure Aucklandissuccessfulandthevisionisachieved 28 ExplicitreferencetothelegislationunderpinningtheAucklandPlan SectionA3 Maori Relationship Framework changed to Maori Responsiveness Framework in accordancewithAFVCresolution Reorderingofparagraphstoenhanceflow SectionA4 WehavesuggestedaslightlymoredetailedexplanationofhowtheAucklandPlanwill beimplementedbothintermsofcouncilskeydocumentsanditspartnershipswith otherstakeholders. SectionA5 Deleteasnolongerrequired(informationonhowtorespondtothedraftplan) SectionB Significant change to both the structure and the text of section B in line with submission feedback, review by Greg Clark and officer consideration subsequent to draftplan. SubsectionsonwhatmakesAucklandspecial,citiesin2040andAucklandsresponse to global trends between now and 2040 have been added. The section on the challengesAucklandfaceshasbeenremoved(withmuchofthecontentcoveredata highlevelelsewhereinsectionBandthroughoutthedocument),whilstthesectionon theroleofAucklandhasbeentightenedconsiderably. MapB1(p23) Suggest the map on interregional connectivity be relocated to the infrastructure chapterasthatiswheremostoftherelevantdiscussionwillbecontained. Page24 Recommendsignificantchangetothestrategicdirectiondiagram: incorporationofMaoriaspirationsoutcomeandtransformationalshift relocationofprinciplessotheyrundownthesideofthediagram - incorporationofthe13strategicdirectionsintothediagram - reorientationofdiagramacrosstwopagespreadwithaccompanyingtext (C1andC2)runningbeneath Sections C2 We recommend revised and considerably shorter narratives for all of the outcomes andC3 andtransformationalshifts.Thenewoutcomeandtransformationalshiftrelatingto Maoriaspirationshavealsobeenadded. 108 Recommend stronger emphasis on fact the outcomes will require investment and commitmentfrommanyparties,notjustcouncil
Attachment A
Page 12
Auckland Future Vision Committee 17 February 2012 109: Fair, safe Recommendreferencestocontributionofsporttothisoutcomebeincluded &healthyAKL 128 Suggest the introduction to transformational shifts emphasises they will require investmentandcommitmentfrommanyparties,notjustcouncil TS1 Recommendinclusionofreferencetoroleparticipationinsportcanplayinenhancing prospects of wellbeingandprospectsofyoungpeople. children Figures C.1a Recommend deletion of these diagrams as they do not directly relate to the andC.1b(p26) remainderofsectionCandarenotreferencedelsewhereinthedocument.
Page 13
Attachment A
Item 9
Item 9 Attachment A
4.Recommendations
1. ThatthetextinsectionsAtoCbeamendedtomakeitclearerthattheAucklandPlanisaplanforall Auckland,notjusttheAucklandCouncil. 2. That section B be reworked to focus more on what makes Auckland special now and how it might evolvetorespondtoglobaltrendsaffectingcitiesaroundtheworldintheyearsto2040. 3. Thatthecommitteeapproveminorchangesasoutlinedinthischapterreport.
6. Attachments
Appendixone:markedupversionofproposedchangestosectionAoftheDraftAucklandPlan Appendixtwo:markedupversionofproposedsectionBoftheAucklandPlan Appendixthree:markedupversionofproposedchangestosectionCoftheDraftAucklandPlan Appendixfour:mockupofsectionCasitmightappearintheAucklandPlan Appendixfive:summaryofwrittensubmissionsinrelationtosectionsA,BandCoftheDraftAucklandPlan
Page 14
WAHANGA A. TE MAHERE A TAMA KI MAKAURAU ME PEHEA TE WHAKAURU ATU A.1 Introduction

25_ The Draft Auckland Plan is the strategy to make Auckland an even better place that it is now and create the worlds most liveable city. It is also the plan through which we prepare for the additional one million people and 400,000 new homes we may have to accommodate by 2040. 26_ The Auckland Plan is a plan for all Aucklanders. Aucklanders from all walks of life have been involved in the preparation of this plan. Residents, community groups, infrastructure providers, central government, business groups and voluntary organisations were amongst the many who devoted their time and energy to helping shape Aucklands future. Although the Mayor and Auckland Council have led its development, the Auckland Plan is a plan for all Aucklanders and its success will depend on the actions and commitment of many groups and individuals. On behalf of Aucklanders, the Auckland Council has prepared the Plan by engaging with stakeholders and considering the feedback from Aucklanders, other New Zealanders and from overseas. Actions are required by many parties including council, government, business, community and others. Council welcomes your feedback and ideas on the Draft Plan. You are encouraged to make suggestions which could improve this draft Plan, using any of the methods described in Section A.5. 0
A.2 Why an Auckland Plan?

[New para 27] Auckland Council represents a new model of local government in New Zealand (see Figure A1). The governance structure has been set up to strengthen regional leadership while providing effective local and community democracy. Since 1 November 2010 Auckland has been served by one council consisting of the governing body (mayor and councillors), and 21 local boards which represent the interests of the wider Auckland community. 27_ Given the recent governance changes Auckland has the This provides a unique opportunity to think about and plan for the whole of Auckland in an integrated way. give some serious thought to its future. The Auckland Plan is the mechanism by which we can do this. where we can speak with one voice and collaborate with our neighbours and central government to ensure the prosperity of Aucklanders and contribute to the prosperity of all of New Zealand. 28_ As part of its planning role, the Auckland Council is required to produce the the Auckland Plan; a longterm strategy (20-30 years) that contributes to Aucklands social, economic, environmental and cultural well being. Section 79 of the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 requires Auckland Council to prepare a spatial plan (the Auckland Plan). The purpose of the plan is to: contribute to Aucklands social, economic, environmental, and cultural well being through a comprehensive and effective long term (20 to 30 year) strategy for Aucklands growth and development. To achieve this purpose the Auckland Plan must: set a strategic direction for Auckland and its communities that integrates social, economic, environmental and cultural objectives outline a high level development strategy that will achieve the strategic direction and enable coherent and co-ordinated decision making by Auckland Council and other parties describe Aucklands role in New Zealand identify the existing and future location of residential, business, rural production and industrial activities identify the existing and future location of critical infrastructure facilities, such as transport, water supply, wastewater and stormwater, other network utilities, open space and social infrastructure
Page 15
Attachment B
Item 9
SECTION A. THE AUCKLAND PLAN A PLAN FOR ALL AUCKLANDERS AND HOW TO BE INVOLVED

identify nationally and regionally important recreational and open space areas, ecological areas that should be protected from development, environmental constraints on development, landscapes and areas of historic heritage value identify the policies, priorities, land allocations, programmes and investments that will be needed to implement the strategic direction. a strategic direction for Auckland that long-term objectives - social, economic, environmental and cultural for Auckland and its communities Aucklands role in New Zealand the location of existing and future residential, business, rural production and industrial activities use patterns and how Auckland will grow and develop in the future the location of existing and future critical infrastructure facilities, such as transport, water supply, wastewater and stormwater, other network utilities, open space and social infrastructure nationally and regionally significant ecological areas, recreational and open space areas, landscapes, heritage, natural features, and environmental importance what 29_ The development of the initial Plan for Auckland presents a unique challenge and opportunity to visualise what The Auckland Plan describes the kind of place we want to develop, and helps to determine how we are to will renew and to transform Auckland. and to change. This is not up to The Auckland Council will be a major player in improving our city but it will not be the only one. though it certainly can make a major contribution through its operations and agencies (Figure A.1). As Aucklanders we all have a part to play to help secure our citys Aucklands future in an increasingly globalised and competitive world. We need to ensure that the changes Auckland experiences over the next 30 years are catalysts for enhancing, rather than degrading, our prosperity and quality of life. The way to achieve the best result is for Aucklanders to make their contributions now. This can only be achieved through working in partnership and through a shared commitment to achieving the outcomes that will make Auckland the worlds most liveable city. [Insert Figure A1, see end of this appendix]
Attachment B
Item 9
A.3 Te Ti ri - ti o- Waitangi The Treaty of Waitangi

30_ Box A.2 provides background about the Treaty of Waitangi and its importance for Auckland. Figure A.3 provides a Maori Responsiveness Framework that for sets out the core elements which the Auckland Council has identified that will to enable robust relationships to be developed with Mori. [see Box A2 below] Figure A2 provides a conceptual explanation of how the articles and principles of the Treaty of Waitangi apply to the Auckland Council: The intention and purpose of the framework are derived from the articles of the Treaty of Waitangi as they relate to the Auckland Council: Article 1 Kawanatanga / governance relates to the governance structure of New Zealand. Article 2 Tino Rangatiratanga / self determination relates to iwi / Mori entitlements under the Treaty to control how resources will be managed, used, developed and protected. Caring and restoring the health of Papatuanuku / earth and Ranganui / sky is consistent with Rangatiratanga because Rangatiratanga confers not only status but also responsibility to ensure that the natural world and its resources are maintained into the future. Local government acts as an agent of the Crown in administering the Resource Management Act 1991 which is the principal statute that governs natural resource management in New Zealand. Article 3 Oritetanga / citizenship guarantees Mori the same rights of citizenship as all New Zealanders. This is relevant to issues such as health, education, housing and social and cultural well being which are included in this Plan. [Insert Figure A.2, see end of this appendix] 31_ Figure A.2 diagramatically shows the Articles.
Page 16

32_ The Treaty, in law, is currently being articulated in law through an evolving set of principles1 that are being developed over time. These include: reciprocity rangatiratanga partnership active protection options mutual benefit right of development redress 33_ Auckland Council is developing a Maori Responsiveness Framework to enable the development of robust relationships with Maori and to govern its own operations (which will be underpinned by the tribal maxim, Te Pai me Te Whai Rawa o Tamaki the abundance and prosperity of Auckland). The basis of this framework is shown in Figure A.3. 34_ The framework identifies four key drivers to guide councils relationship with Mori: Te Tiriti Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi Mana Whenua Mana Motuhake self-sustainability, self-identity, self-determination Mataawaka Te Puawaitanga o Te Tangata Realisation of Mori Potential Councils statutory obligations. 35_ The framework incorporates three objectives of the Council that will guide its primary activities concerning Mori: effective Mori communication and engagement contribution to Mori well being development of Mori capacity. [Insert Figure A.3, Maori relationship Framework, Draft Auckland Plan, p10]
Box A.2 The Auckland Plan and The Treaty of Waitangi The Auckland Plan and the IMPLE MENT ATION PLANS The Treaty of Waitangi is the founding document of our nation. Since its signing in 1840 it has undergone intense scrutiny from many quarters, including Mori, concerning its validity, constitutional integrity, and status in what is now a global community. The Treaty, however, remains an enduring and living document and its principles continue to guide legislative provisions and rulings by the Court of Appeal and the New Zealand Supreme Court. Since the establishment of the Waitangi Tribunal in 1975 and the subsequent Treaty settlement process, a new dynamic has developed. Court and Tribunal decisions and settlements have recognised customary rights which now require a response from authorities such as the Auckland Council. There are many different iwi in Auckland (see below). Several agreements are due to be signed within the next two years, which will result in increased participation by Mori in matters relating to economic development, cogovernance, and community development. This creates an opportunity for local government to work with Mori to ensure just and fair solutions to Mori issues. Customary rights may also be recognised through mechanisms other than the Treaty. For example, the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act 2011 enables iwi to claim customary marine title areas as a form of property right. Such contemporary claims require outcomes that will give effect to customary rights in a manner that will ensure the future development of Auckland embraces this new horizon for Mori. It is therefore critical that the Auckland Plan has the appropriate policies and strategies in place. The Treaty of Waitangi has long been a driver compelling individuals and groups to action. The Auckland Plan is a watershed opportunity to change the discourse around Treaty obligations and
The articulation of Treaty principles has evolved through both case law and statute, important examples of which include the Waitakere Ranges Heritage Area Act, 2008; the Hauraki Marine Park Act, 2000; the Land Transport Management Act, 2003; Carter Holt Harvey v Te Runanga o Tuwharetoa ki Kaweau [2003]; New Zealand Maori Council v Attorney General [1987]; Ngati Maru Hauraki Inc v Kruithof [2005]. Auckland Plan Deliberations Report Sections A-C Page 17
1
Attachment B
Item 9

ensure that authorities such as the Auckland Council act in a way which is cognisant of the need to recognise Mori values and work to deliver Mori aspirations. The Treaty of Waitangi can play a key role in creating a vision for Auckland that facilitates, for example, partnerships between communities, alternative approaches to urban design, and delivers a range of resulting benefits to all Aucklanders.
Item 9
AUCKLANDS IWI
Attachment B
Ngti Manuhiri Ngti Rhua Ngti Wai Ngti Whtua Kaipara ki te Tonga (Ng Rma) Ngti Whtua rakei Te Runanga Ngti Whtua Te Uri Hau Ngti Paoa Ngti Maru
Ngti Tamater Ngai Tai Te Kawerau Maki Ngti Tamaoho Ngti Te Ata Te kitai Te Ahiwaru Waikato/Tainui Ngti Whanaunga Patukirikiri
A.4 Key implementation strategies and plans

36_ Implementation of the Auckland Plan will involve the investments and actions of many parties, including private infrastructure providers, community groups, the development sector, business organisations, Iwi, central government and private individuals. Successful implementation requires an awareness of where the world is heading over the next 30 years and what it will mean for Auckland (see Section B). The current constrained global and local economy puts a focus on the importance of shared investment programmes and long term implementation partnerships, such as public private partnerships. Internal alignment within the wider council organisation is required as is the development of effective tools and processes. Auckland Council will produce an annual implementation update that will describe progress on the many projects and actions set out in this plan. The first update is attached as a separate addendum. [36A] Two plans are especially critical to Auckland Councils role in implementing There are two critical Auckland Council plans that will help implement the Auckland Plan over the first 10 years of its life. They are the Unitary Plan, which details how we design, develop and grow the city; and the Long Term Plan which prioritises the funding to deliver the plan on a staged basis. The diagram below shows graphically how the Auckland Plan relates to the Councils other key strategies, policies and plans. Essentially the Auckland Plan provides the direction and path for other implementation strategies to follow.
Unitary plan [moved to reflect order of discussion in previous paragraph]

3739_ The unitary plan is the Councils key land use planning document. It takes an overall view of the whole of Auckland. The unitary plan will set the rules for development in the region and is will be an important tool for implementing the strategic directions set in the Auckland Plan, using both rules and incentives to achieve the high-quality outcomes that are sought. Auckland Council must develop is developing Aucklands first a new unitary plan to replace the district plans of the former regional council, city and district councils.
Page 18
Long Term Plan

3837_ Every three years the Auckland Council must prepare a Long Term Plan. This is a statutory plan that describes the Councils intended activities, key projects and programmes, and funding information for a 10year period. The Long Term Plan As such, it is will be councils the key funding tool for the actions in the Auckland Plan that council will deliver during its first 10 years. Auckland Councils first Long Term Plan will be adopted in 2012 covers the period 2012 to 2022.
Local board plans and agreements

3938_ Local boards also review the development of their own plans every three years. These plans set out the priorities and key projects each local board and its community have identified for its area. These priorities have informed the development of the Draft Auckland Plan and will inform the development of the Long Term Plan. The first local board plans are due in October 2011. In addition, annual agreements between Local Boards and the Governing Body set out what funding will be available for key projects in their areas.
Other key strategies and plans

40_ Over time the council will also develop and consult on a range of more detailed strategies, policies and plans that will map out how the priorities of the Auckland Plan will be achieved. The council will also work with a range of stakeholders and partners to identify the best ways to deliver the outcomes and priorities of the Plan. The Council continues to work with its partners and other stakeholders to develop a range of more detailed strategies, policies and plans that will help achieve the objectives of the Auckland Plan. Documents such as the Economic Development Strategy, City Centre Masterplan and the Waterfront Plan are important tools for implementing the Auckland Plan and will provide more detail as to how our city will progress over time. [Insert Figure A4, see end of this appendix]
A.5 How to be involved

41_ The Draft Auckland Plan has been developed with the help of your submissions to date. We received over 8,000 pieces of feedback to the Auckland Unleashed discussion document and we have met with many private and public sector organisations, communities, and individuals to hear their views. This has helped us to develop the Draft Auckland Plan. 42_ The table below shows the main stages that we have gone through in developing this Draft Auckland Plan and the next key steps in the process. The Auckland Plan will be finalized in December and adopted by the Council in February 2012. 43_ The Auckland Plan is a plan for all Aucklanders and so we need your further help to know if we have got it right. We invite you to have your say and give us your feedback in the following ways: By post: Auckland Council The Auckland Plan Private Bag 92300
Attachment B
Item 9

Auckland 1142 Freepost Authority 237170 By email: theaucklandplan@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
Item 9 Attachment B
By website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz Closing date: 4.00pm, Tuesday 25 October 2011
Stage Date Formal consultation on Draft Auckland Plan including hearings September-November 2011
Stage Auckland Council formed Initial key stakeholder informal discussions Launch of Auckland Unleashed Informal engagement period Preparation of Draft Auckland Plan Formal consultation on Draft Auckland Plan including hearings Finalisation of Auckland Plan Adoption of the Auckland Plan
Date 1 November 2010 November 2010-March 2011 23 March 2011 March-May 2011 March-August 2011 September-November 2011
December 2011 February 2012
Page 20
Page 21
Attachment B
Item 9
Attachment B
Local democracy throughout Auckland is served by 21 local boards. [Insert below label of this map]
Item 9
Page 22
Figure A2 Treaty of Waitangi Framework
Page 23
Attachment B
Item 9
Figure A1 Auckland Council Structure
Item 9
Figure A4 Auckland Councils Strategic Framework
Attachment B
Page 24
Aucklands vision is to become the worlds most liveable city. A place that Aucklanders love and are proud of, that visitors want to visit again and again, and skilled immigrants from around the world want to make their home. Liveability can mean different things to different people. For Auckland liveability is defined in the following way: Definition of liveability is pending and will be inserted here Chapter 13(?) describes in detail how we will assess liveability in Auckland. This part of the Auckland Plan considers some of the key trends that are likely to impact on cities between now and 2040 and how Auckland will need to respond if the vision is to be realised. Before we can do that however, we need to understand Auckland as it is now both in terms of the things that make it internationally unique and its key role in New Zealand life.
B2
What makes Auckland special?
Auckland is an emerging global city and is fast developing an international reputation for the quality of life it offers its residents. Auckland has a natural environment that few other cities can match. Its beaches, islands, harbours, waterways, volcanoes, lush forests and productive rural areas offer a superb combination of physical beauty, recreational opportunity, economic significance and cultural identity. This stunning environment provides an internationally unique setting for an urban metropolis. Our mild climate means that we can enjoy this environment and participate in outdoor recreational activities year round. Whether it be organised sport, swimming, bush walks or picnicking in the park, the outdoor lifestyle is integral to Aucklands sense of identity. Since the arrival of the Tangata Whenua many centuries ago, it is this environment and the opportunities it affords that has, more than anything else, attracted generations of people from around the world to our shores. As the sources of immigration to Auckland have diversified in recent decades the makeup of our population has been truly transformed and our sense of identity has evolved with it. Such has been the extent of this change, that by some counts we now rank amongst the most multicultural cities in the world and with 37 percent of Aucklanders coming from overseas (2006 figures) immigrants will continue to be absolutely critical to our citys well being. Whilst the rich diversity of our people is a source of pride for many Aucklanders, Maori hold a special place in our citys identity. The Treaty of Waitangi underpins many aspects of public life in the city. Through the treaty settlement process and subsequent partnership agreements, local iwi are playing an ever more prominent role in shaping Aucklands development and are likely to become economic powerhouses in their own right in years to come. Less formally, traditions such as the haka are increasingly recognised world-wide and spark an interest in authentic Maori cultural experiences that many international visitors seek to satisfy upon their arrival in Auckland.
Page 25
Attachment C
Item 9
B1
The vision for Auckland
Many ethnic groups also make valuable contributions to life in Auckland. Pacific peoples, for example, are prominent in high profile sectors such as sports and the arts, and they provide increasingly important economic and trading links to the Pacific Island nations. Similarly, our status as the worlds largest Polynesian city [alt: a major Pacific city] is now a key aspect of our identity. Our large, diverse and growing Asian communities have revitalised whole neighbourhoods, providing a wide range of experiences (food, arts, festivals) that have captivated us and become part of life in Auckland. The business connections of new Asian communities have helped to influence our increasing international focus something that will be critical to Aucklands future success. By global standards Auckland is still a relatively small, comparatively young (both in terms of the age profile of its population and the history of its development) city. However, its youthfulness and rapid growth have contributed to the increasingly energetic, busy feel of parts of the city that has more in common with larger cities elsewhere in the world than other New Zealand centres. Many Aucklanders take great pride in this and in our urbanity, as manifest in our cosmopolitan population and our many and varied restaurants, cultural events, theatres and galleries. Given the difference in scale between Auckland and other New Zealand centres, Aucklanders increasingly compare themselves with the dynamic cities of the Asia Pacific, such as Sydney, Brisbane and Singapore, rather than Wellington and Christchurch. Like the principal cities in many countries this leads to a unique relationship with the rest of the nation that is characterised by economic interdependence and friendly rivalry. Despite its rapid growth in recent years, it is often said that Auckland is a collection of villages, each with their own distinctive characteristics. Whilst the role of the city centre is increasingly important, this view of Auckland does convey something of the intimacy of life here. Many Aucklanders still hold dear the egalitarian principles that our city and country were founded upon. However, in recent years these traditions have come under scrutiny given the alarming growth in inequality in Auckland and the concentration of highly deprived communities in some parts of the city. Addressing inequalities is a major focus of the Auckland Plan. Nevertheless, our views of ourselves as a classless society runs deep and we still expect, and largely enjoy, a degree of access to decision makers and figures of authority that is often not possible in larger centres. This brings an immediacy to local democracy that is often evidenced by the vigorous debate of issues of importance to the community.
Attachment C
Item 9
B3
The role of Auckland in New Zealand and the World
Auckland is home to around a third of the countrys population and is by far New Zealands largest city and commercial centre. Its population density, market size and business clustering are unique in New Zealand and as such it performs a number of functions that cannot be performed as effectively, or at all, elsewhere. Cities are integral to the economic prospects of nations. As the nations only city of scale, Auckland is New Zealands best hope of attracting the high-value economic activities,
Page 26
Auckland is New Zealands commercial centre, dominating the finance, insurance, transport and logistics and business services industries. It is also the largest centre for manufacturing, with growing clusters in sectors such as marine, advanced materials and food and beverage. Insert box from p16 of DAP Aucklands contribution to New Zealand (ensure NZ is replaced with New Zealand) The scale of commercial activity, concentration of relatively high value industries and greater number of highly skilled workers is such that labour productivity is 30 to 50 percent higher in Auckland, and 150 percent higher in the city centre, than in other New Zealand regions. With a 35 percent share Auckland is one of a handful of cities around the world that generate more than a third of national GDP. As a trade-dependent nation with a migrant heritage New Zealand is heavily dependent on its connections with the outside world for much of its economic prosperity. With its international airport, ports, transport and freight infrastructure Auckland is New Zealands gateway to and from the rest of the world (see box B1). Insert box B1 from page 16 of the draft AP (Aucklands gateway function) Given its size and isolation, New Zealand needs its cities and regions to work in tandem with each other if it is to compete successfully internationally. The move to enhance links between Auckland and the other regions of the upper North Island (the area north of Taupo including the cities of Tauranga, Hamilton and Whangarei) is probably the most important example of this. This area accounts for 52 percent of New Zealands population and as such it is critical to the well being of the country as a whole. To this end, councils across the region recently signed an agreement to co-operate on matters of shared interest such as transport links, other forms of infrastructure and land use planning. Auckland is the key distribution centre for the upper North Island and the improved interregional links that the agreement may encourage are needed to cope with the significant increase in freight volumes expected over the next few years. Chapter 10 of the Auckland Plan discusses the importance of Aucklands interregional links in more detail. Skilled people are critical to our future competitiveness. Auckland is the most important centre in New Zealand for education and skills training. Its tertiary institutes attract thousands of students and staff from around the country and the world every year. Auckland hosts 41 percent of New Zealands tertiary students and 58 percent of its foreign fee paying students (2010). Auckland is also home to a number of nationally important research, innovation and entrepreneurship facilities that can play a key role in the drive to enhance economic growth in New Zealand through a focus on innovation. Given the diversity of its population relative to that of the rest of the country, Auckland lies at the centre of the increasingly important personal and business to business links between New Zealand and the dynamic economies of the Asia Pacific region. The opportunities for cultural enrichment and economic development that arise from migration will be crucial to New Zealands long term economic prospects and its emerging identity
Attachment C
Item 9
skilled migrants and international investment required to improve the living standards of all New Zealanders.
as a more internationalised society. However, if Auckland, its existing communities and new migrants are to fully realise the benefit of increased diversity, new settlers must be able to readily participate in all aspects of the citys life and access employment that makes full use of their qualifications and experience. This requires collaboration and adaptation on the part of employers, host communities and migrants themselves.
Item 9
B4
Cities in 2040
The long term focus of the Auckland Plan requires consideration of what the world might be like in 2040 and what this would mean for Auckland. Forecasting this far in advance is highly speculative but nevertheless important, as we plan for Aucklands future. It is likely that the worlds population will continue to grow. The United Nations estimates the global population will be 9 billion by 2040, an increase of 2 billion from 2011. Almost all of this growth will occur in the developing world. Decreased death rates relative to birth rates will result in aging populations in both the developing and developed world. The United Nations forecasts that the median age will rise from 40 to 45 in developed countries and from 27 to 35 years in the developing world. Aging populations will have significant implications for many aspects of urban planning, including the provision of healthcare services, open space, transport infrastructure and housing. Perhaps the most significant economic impact of aging populations will be the relative decline of the tax base in many countries and the consequent increase in competition between nations for skilled people of working age. Cities will be at the forefront of this competition. The drift towards cities of the last century is likely to continue and by 2040 the United Nations estimates that around two thirds of the worlds population will live in urban areas (compared to just over half today). Some cities are likely to be extraordinarily large by todays standards with Beijing, Shanghai and Mumbai in particular set to have populations approaching 40 million people. Vast urban conglomerates of unprecedented scale are likely to result from the merging of large and growing, but previously distinct, cities. The Pearl River Delta in Southern China is a prominent example of this and may have a population of at least 80 million people by 2040. Cities and urban areas such as these will pose new challenges for urban planning and are likely to be at the forefront of a shift in the balance of global economic power over the coming decades. Between now and 2040, cities from China and India may displace the likes of San Francisco, Toronto, Madrid, Munich, Osaka-Kobe and Sydney from the worlds 30 largest city economies. A key means by which cities will compete with each other is their approach to supporting innovative businesses. The rapidity of technological innovation, ongoing internationalisation of national economies around the world and the potential for further reductions to trade barriers, will intensify competition between firms to unprecedented levels. Any competitive advantage a firm has is likely to be short lived and thus the pressure on them to constantly innovate will be even more intense than it currently is. Successful cities in 2040 will carefully consider what they can do to help local firms compete in this environment, support start-ups and attract dynamic companies from elsewhere. This will require them to move beyond simply providing world class communications infrastructure and a conducive regulatory environment. To be recognised as innovation centres cities will need to, amongst other things, provide
Attachment C
concrete and effective support to education in the sciences and engineering; support the creation of leading research centres, particularly in disciplines relevant to key sectors such as life sciences and clean technologies; foster closer links between those research centres and business; foster collaboration between complementary sectors to encourage the development of new (and unexpected) products and solutions to pressing issues. By 2040 the impacts of climate change will be obvious, and in some cases devastating. Although specific parts of the world will be affected differently, the incidence of extreme weather events will have increased markedly by 2040, even if current efforts to combat climate change are stepped up over the next few years. Changing climate patterns will also reduce the viability of agriculture in some areas and force changes to the types of crops grown in others. Some areas that are currently heavily populated may become unfit, or at least less desirable, for habitation as food and water shortages result from more frequent and more severe flooding or drought. Environmental migration from affected areas is likely to increase significantly. Inevitably it will be the educated and highly skilled who will be most able to depart to less affected nations and thereby further exacerbate existing inequalities. Conversely, it is possible that by 2040 the number of climate change refugees may be so overwhelming that wealthier, less severely affected nations, such as New Zealand, may come under intense pressure to open their borders to a greater degree than they would otherwise choose. Many of the natural resources that have powered economic growth in the twentieth century are likely to be scarcer, and priced significantly higher, in 2040. This is especially true of oil as many experts believe that we are already beyond the point where total production has peaked. Increased oil prices could drive further exploration into areas previously considered uneconomic or environmentally sacrosanct. Governments, cities and societies in general will each need to consider the impacts of this and whether they are willing to incur the inevitable environmental and social costs that will result. As technology improves, the search for viable forms of non-fossil fuels will continue. However, if alternatives to oil are unable to cover the supply deficit, fundamental change to transportation systems, employment patterns, food production and potentially energy generation, in and around cities will be required well before 2040. Drastic action in response to climate change, resource shortages and environmental degradation will by 2040 have long since gained wide public acceptance as an essential element of the prosperity of cities. Cities that are perceived not to fully embrace sustainability across all aspects of urban planning will struggle to attract talent and investment and will inevitably decline.
B5
What do these global trends mean for Auckland?
So, how might Auckland adapt to and thrive in this complex and ever changing global environment? Like cities everywhere, Auckland will compete keenly for the migrants and investment necessary to maintain our lifestyles and help us adapt to the momentous global changes described in the previous section. We will always remain a relatively small centre compared to the global megacities that will dominate economic activity in 2040 and beyond. However, in many ways Auckland is well placed to cope with and benefit from
Page 29
Attachment C
Item 9
Item 9 Attachment C
the changing global environment, provided that we do so in a way that enhances, rather than degrades, those things which already make us special (see section B2). Aucklands key point of difference, and the primary reason why it is able to attract skilled migrants, is the high quality of life it offers to most of its residents. Overcrowding in many cities around the world will likely accelerate as the global population increases, thereby further enhancing the relative attractiveness of Auckland as a destination for some migrants, especially those for whom quality of life is a key consideration. Our physical remoteness, historically a significant disadvantage for New Zealand, is likely to grow as a key aspect of our appeal given the potential for increased conflict and terrorism in other parts of the world. Its role as the prime destination for migrants to New Zealand means that Auckland in particular stands to benefit from the perception of our country as a politically stable, democratic and relatively corruption free safe haven. Although the changing global climate will increase the frequency of storms and droughts in Auckland, we are likely to escape the worst of the severe inundation and/or desiccation expected in some parts of the world. This too may add to our appeal as a destination for migrants and capital, particularly from Pacific and Asian countries that are especially severely affected. In the face of the impact of climate change, resource shortages and heightened food safety concerns, consumers in the developed world may place an increasing premium on goods and services that are perceived to be produced in a sustainable manner. By 2040, this may translate into significantly improved opportunities to enhance our economy by leveraging off New Zealands clean and green reputation. However, like all brands, our clean and green reputation will only survive and be of benefit in the long term if we live up to it and embrace sustainability as a guiding principle across everything we do. Future central and local governments in particular will need to make sustainability and environmental impacts a key considerations for all policy decisions. In Auckland, this may translate into policies that would, for example: considerably reduce its greenhouse gas emissions develop a more balanced transport network that includes a much greater emphasis on cleaner public transport options and getting around the city by cycling and walking promote energy efficiency through, for example, the enablement of smart grids and better designed residential and commercial buildings protect productive agricultural land on the urban periphery to protect both our export base and our ability to supply our own population during times of global food shortages improve our ability to cope with natural disasters and resource shortages.
Enacting policies such as these will not only improve Aucklands resilience and our ability to cope with unexpected shocks (such as global energy and food shortages) but may also contribute to our attractiveness as a preferred destination for skilled migrants and dynamic companies with a green growth focus.
Page 30
Aucklands population has grown steadily for many decades and is projected to continue doing so throughout the period covered by this plan (see box Bx). In a world where our liveability is our key selling point the impacts of this growth on housing affordability, infrastructure and our rural and urban environments must be carefully managed to ensure that growth is a catalyst for enhanced liveability. Lifestyle alone is not enough however, and it must be underpinned by a stronger and more resilient economy if we are to be the worlds most liveable city in 2040. For many years Aucklands economy has consistently underperformed relative to similar sized cities in Australia and elsewhere. There are many complex and interrelated reasons for this, including our lower rates of productivity compared to other cities in the developed world, our low levels of national savings and capital formation, and the domestic focus of many of our businesses. Finding solutions to these problems and improving our ability to retain skilled people of working age (both migrants and New Zealanders) is central to many of the priorities of the Auckland Plan. Growing social and economic inequalities are both a symptom and a cause of Aucklands relative economic underperformance. Quite apart from the pressing moral imperative to ensure all Aucklanders have the opportunity to reach their potential and the need to reduce the potential for social unrest, Auckland will need everyone participating fully in the economic life of the city if it is to thrive in the intensely competitive environment that will characterise the global economy of 2040. Having set the context of the world and Auckland in 2040 the next section of the Auckland Plan describes the desired outcomes that will characterise the worlds most liveable city in 2040 and the transformational shifts that are required to get us there.
Box Bx
Auckland in numbers
Aucklands estimated current population is 1.5 million. Recent projections suggest that by 2040, Auckland could reach a population of between 2.2 and 2.5 million (medium to high growth projections). Aucklands population growth reflects natural increase and net migration (both internal and international). Natural increase is a relatively steady contributor, while net migration patterns vary. Between 2001 and 2006, just over half (55%) of Aucklands population increase resulted from net gains in migration and just under half (45%) was due to natural increase, which varies across ethnicities. Half of the population growth in New Zealand between 2001 and 2006 was in Auckland. Aucklands population is continuing to grow at a faster rate than that of the country as a whole, and so its proportion of New Zealands overall population will also grow.
Page 31
Attachment C
Item 9
Whilst several of the likely changes to the global political and economic environment discussed above could work in Aucklands favour we will not be able to fully benefit from them unless we deal with a number of existing challenges.
Item 9 Attachment C
One third of children in NZ live in Auckland. Those under 25 make up almost 40% of Aucklands population, and the proportion of children in Auckland is projected to grow at a significantly faster rate than the national average. While Aucklanders are on average younger than other New Zealanders, the proportion of the population over the age of 60 is projected to increase from 10% in 2006 to around 19% by 2040. Auckland has a diverse ethnic and cultural composition. In 1986, 23% of Aucklands population was born overseas, and this proportion rose steadily to reach 37% by 2006. Auckland is currently home to over 150 ethnicities. Aucklands diversity is likely to continue to increase and the Asian and Pacific proportion of the population is likely to grow most significantly. Employment projections suggest that the total number of employees in Auckland could range between 870,000 and 1.04 million by 2041. Under the medium growth scenario, the number of employees in the region is expected to grow from 682,500 in 2011 to 955,800 in 2041. This represents growth of around 275,000 employees or 40%. Under this scenario, the office sector is expected to experience the largest growth in employees. While growth is next strongest in the education and health sectors, the production and distribution industry sectors will still have a higher number of employees. Text to be supported by a number of demographic and employment graphs (figures B1, B5 and B6 from pages 18, 19 and 21 of the draft Auckland Plan)
Table 1. Employment Growth in Auckland by Sector (2007 to 2041)

Base Employment Demand 2007 161,700 143,100 220,400 103,300 628,500 Projected Employment Demand 2011 183,600 150,900 236,300 108,900 679,700 Projected Employment Demand 2041 290,700 180,600 309,100 175,400 955,800 Employment Growth 2007-2041 129,000 37,500 88,700 72,100 327,300 Employment Growth (%) 2007-2041 80% 26% 40% 70% 52%
Sector
Office Retail Industrial Education and Health Total Employment
Page 32
[NB. Refer to mocked up version to see how the diagrams in this section could be presented]
C1 Aucklands Strategic Framework

The previous section (Section B) talked about what the world will be like in 2040 and what that will mean for Auckland. This section describes the path we need to take (see C.4 strategic directions) to ensure we are prepared for the challenges that lie ahead, and ready to take advantage of Aucklands opportunities. Aucklands vision is to be the worlds most liveable city. A place that Aucklanders love and are proud of, that visitors want to visit again and again, and that skilled immigrants from around the world want to make their home.
107_ Auckland can become the most liveable city by 2040 if we have the courage and determination to implement this Draft Auckland Plan. Being the most liveable city means Auckland will have an outstanding quality of life, economic opportunity and sense of belonging.
C.2 Outcomes: what the vision means in 2040

108_ We already love Auckland because of what it offers. Yet by 2040 Auckland will be a much better place. The desired outcomes of this plan are: The following aspirational outcomes statements describe what it will be like to live in Auckland in 2040, based on the direction set out in this plan. Achieving these outcomes will require commitment, investment and collaboration from all Aucklanders.
A fair, safe and healthy Auckland

Auckland is a strong and equitable society. Social and economic disadvantage has been significantly reduced, particularly for children and young people. Strong whanau and family units form the backbone of our resilient communities. Participation in civic activities, recreation and sport, is widespread and supported by an excellent range of public services, parks and sporting amenities that are valued by all. Our housing is of high quality and the incidence of health problems arising from damp and cold living conditions has significantly reduced. Auckland is well prepared for the risk posed by natural hazards and the effects of climate change. 109_ Auckland in 2040 is a strong and equitable society. There is significantly less disadvantage and local communities are actively involved in shaping and leading their own future. Our children and young people are supported and thrive in their communities. They are safe and cared for. The educational and skill achievements of all Aucklanders are the highest they have ever been. The next generation is well equipped for the future. 110_ All Aucklanders think of Auckland as their true home. Strong families, community spirit and cohesion are seen everywhere, and people value the excellent services and facilities available. There is no discrimination nor any barriers to participation, and we participate significantly in civic and cultural life.
Page 33
Attachment D
The diagram shown on these two pages (figure C1) sets out the framework to achieve the vision. The seven aspirational outcomes describe what Auckland will be like in 2040 and provide further definition of the vision. The six transformational shifts describe the type of deep change required to achieve those outcomes, whilst the six principles underlie and guide everything we do. The development strategy is the high level description of how the vision and other objectives of the Auckland Plan will be achieved. The 13 strategic directions are more specific areas of focus that, if successfully implemented, will contribute toward the development strategy and, ultimately, the outcomes that define the vision.
Item 9
SECTION C. AUCKLANDS STRATEGIC DIRECTION WA-HANGA C. TE RAUTAKI ARA TAKAHI MO- TA-MAKI MAKAURAU THE JOURNEY TO 2040

111_ All Aucklanders are housed well. We are healthy and active people.
Item 9 Attachment D
A green Auckland
Our waterways and coastlines are clean. Our air is healthy and we have low rates of water consumption and greenhouse gas emissions. Many Aucklanders prefer to use public transport and our energy supply is resilient and sustainably sourced. We have a network of parks and protected areas of native bush and wetlands. We have developed new important industries in leading edge green technology. 112_ Our waterways and coastlines are clean and healthy, and sea life abounds. Everyone enjoys Aucklands natural and marine heritage and the world recognises the way we protect and care for it. Our air is clean and we have low greenhouse gas emissions. We have one of the lowest water consumption rates for a city our size. We capitalize on our reputation as clean and green by observing stringent sustainability criteria in our building and development; and leverage our expertise in land-based production in the development of leading-edge clean tech and green technology. 113_ Many Aucklanders prefer to use public transport or telecommute. Auckland has a resilient energy supply, much of it coming from sustainable sources. Our homes are well-insulated and highly energyefficient, with low household energy costs. 114_ Auckland has a tremendous linked network of green and public open space - from maunga to moana. Our safe streets, parks and playgrounds are lined with trees and form green oases throughout the city. Protected native bush and wetlands abound and help create our many stable eco-systems.
An Auckland of prosperity and opportunity

Auckland is renowned for technological innovation and the ability to commercialise research ideas. Auckland is home to many flourishing small and medium sized enterprises and a well educated, highly skilled workforce. While the city centres role as Aucklands economic and cultural heart is stronger than ever, high quality employment opportunities can be found in centres right across the city. Connections between our businesses and the rest of the world are strong. There are opportunities for all Aucklanders to participate in our vibrant and strong performing economy. 115_ Auckland provides employment for everyone, from the most advanced high-value, clean tech firms to the critical jobs that keep Auckland going. The knowledge and skills of our people match the demands of our vibrant and strong performing economy, which provides opportunities for all Aucklanders to participate in fully. 116_ Auckland is known throughout the world for its innovation. Our excellent tertiary institutions and entrepreneurial firms continue to commercialise the ideas coming from their research. High-tech industries reap the benefits from locating in science and technology clusters, while our universities prepare the next generation of scientists and engineers for industry. Industry and manufacturing continue to be important parts of our economy. 117_ Our many small and medium businesses also flourish and many of them have set new benchmarks in green growth and technologies. Though the city centre and waterfront is Aucklands business and cultural heart, businesses are found across Auckland and provide local employment for many. They are also well connected with each other and across the world, especially with India and South-East Asia. At the same time Mori have made significant investments in Aucklands economy and are major players in the region.
A well connected and accessible Auckland

Aucklands infrastructure is well planned and up-to-date, effectively meeting the needs of its communities and the economy. People find public transport a convenient and comfortable way to travel, and businesses move freight efficiently around the region using an integrated roading and rail transport system. Our sea and air ports play a crucial role in New Zealands export economy and our telecommunications network is one of the most advanced in the world.
Page 34

118_ Auckland plays a big and important role in New Zealands success. Our seaport and airport connect New Zealand to the rest of the world and are critical parts of our strong export economy. A key feature is how easy it is to move goods and freight from door to door. 119_ Our roading network is complete and serves Auckland well. Public transport is the way most Aucklanders travel to work because it is comfortable and extremely convenient. Visitors comment about how easy it is to get around Auckland. 120_ Our infrastructure and utilities are in step with our growth, and are well networked, connected and built to last. Schools, libraries, hospitals, sport and other facilities serve communities well, and deliver services through the most up-to-date technology through our world-class telecommunications network.
A beautiful Auckland that is loved by its people

Auckland is one of the most beautiful cities in the world. It has vibrant urban areas that are full of character and rural areas that make a significant contribution to our exports and offer great lifestyle options to all. Right around Auckland, communities take great pride in their surroundings and work together to create places they value. Aucklanders are proud of their city and take pleasure in sharing it with the many visitors who come here. 121_ Auckland is considered one of the most beautiful cities in the world. Our urban areas are vibrant, full of character and designed for people to enjoy. Locally, communities and volunteers work together to create places that they value and which reflect who they are. We are the place where people come to see what cities of the future could be like. 122_ Rural Auckland is a hive of activity. Our produce makes a significant contribution to Aucklands exports, and is highly valued locally. The environmental health, and sustainable practices that are a way of life, underpin our trademark of fresh and local. The outlook for rural production remains strong. Our rural towns and villages are great places to live and work. They are the hub for surrounding communities and continue to serve their needs. 123_ Aucklanders love to be out-and about and to take part in the many things on offer. There is something for everyone, from vineyards, farmers markets and farm-stays, to theatres, museums and art galleries. We are proud of our place and take pleasure in sharing it with the many tourists and visitors who come here.
A culturally rich and creative Auckland

Arts and culture are alive and well in Auckland and are part of our everyday life. Our major arts and cultural institutions are known world wide for their excellence and they are major tourist attractions. The many local arts and cultural events on offer in Auckland enjoy high levels of participation and attendance, and help strengthen our communities. Aucklanders are known for their creativity and innovation as evidenced by the quality of our arts and the export earnings of our creative industries. Aucklands excellent sporting parks and facilities support high levels of year round participation at both a grassroots and elite level. 124_ Arts and culture are alive and well in Auckland. We have a full, year round arts and cultural programme that offers something for everyone. Our major arts and cultural institutions are known world-wide for their excellence and they are major tourist drawing cards. As Aucklanders, we are known for our creativity and innovation. This is clear in the quality of our arts and also in the creative industry that is a major export earner. 125_ Locally, arts and cultural expression have strengthened communities through involvement, understanding and participation. Arts and culture are part of everyday life.
A Mori Identity that is Aucklands point of difference in the world

Mori culture and identity is celebrated by all Aucklanders and is our point of difference in the world. Te Tiriti o Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi is appropriately recognised and given effect with Mori in Tmaki Makaurau exercising their rangatiratanga /self determination. The mana of Tmaki Makaurau iwi and hap is empowered, enabled and recognised in their customary kaitiaki role. Maori values are integrated into
Page 35
Attachment D
Item 9

planning decision making and operations. Mori are empowered and enjoy a high and safe standard of living, across the social, economic and cultural spectrum.
Item 9 Attachment D
C3. C.4 Transformational shifts to achieve the vision

128_ Our vision will not be achieved by incremental change. Transformational change is needed but this requires a commitment to a better future from all Aucklanders. The six five transformational shifts we need to make are:
1. Dramatically accelerate the prospects of Aucklands children and young people

Auckland performs relatively poorly when compared to other OECD cities on a number of key indicators such as youth unemployment, teenage pregnancy, child abuse, suicide, youth offending, cannabis use and hazardous drinking. A focus on our children and young people is therefore fundamental to making Auckland the worlds most liveable city. Education and learning is key to transforming the prospects and general well being of our children and young people, as is the opportunity to participate in sport, recreational and other cultural activities. 129_ Auckland has very high rates of 15- to 19-year-old unemployment compared with other OECD cities. High unemployment leads to other social issues and Aucklands youth, on average, have high rates of criminal offences, teenage births, suicide, obesity, cannabis use and hazardous drinking. The long tail of educational underachievement, particularly in the South and West of Auckland and pockets in other areas, is a waste of the potential of many of our young people. Disadvantage is strongly concentrated in Mori and Pacific ethnic groups. 130_ Education is the key to transform the prospects of Aucklands children and young people. Education depends on the policies and strategies of central government to a large extent. Chapter 1, Aucklands People, recommends three simple targets: all pre-school children demonstrate readiness for success in school and life through early childhood education or learning each and every young person in Auckland will graduate from secondary school with at least NCEA level 2 each and every young adult will complete a post-secondary qualification. 131_ Achieving these targets will place all young people in Auckland on the high road to educational success, employment and lifelong learning.
2. Strongly commit to environmental action and green growth

Our stunning natural environment is one of the key reasons Auckland ranks so highly on international quality of life surveys. Yet the health of that environment is not what it should be due to the pressures of development and the lifestyles we lead. A fundamentally different approach to the way Auckland will grow and develop is required. We must make a concerted effort to protect and restore our environment, and respect its values. This Plan sets an aspirational target to make a 40 per cent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions relative to 1990 levels by 2030. Joining the global shift towards green growth is essential to achieving environmental and economic goals. 132_ Recent studies have shown that the health of Aucklands natural environment is not what it should be, especially our coastal and marine environment. More concerted effort in protecting and restoring our environment, and respecting its values is needed to achieve the required transformation.
Page 36

133_ This shift requires a fundamentally different approach to the way we grow and develop. More sustainable buildings, infrastructure and practices such as energy efficiency and waste minimization must become part of how we do things in Auckland. It also requires restoring and enhancing our natural environment including improving our biodiversity, quality of our air, land, waters and seas to back up our international brand. 134_ Chapter 6, Aucklands Response to Climate Change, sets the target to deliver the goal of a 40% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions relative to 1990 levels by 2030, and a transition to a low carbon economy. The Development Strategy, Chapter 8, Urban Auckland and Chapter 10, Aucklands Infrastructure give further direction on green development. 135_ There is also an emerging global shift towards green growth, driven by a growing awareness of environmental challenges and the pressure on global resources. The OECD country report on New Zealand (2011), recommends greening the growth path to give long-run competitive advantage. The Governments Green Growth Advisory Group in July 2011 said that economies will shift to more sustainable practices, driven by change in many sectors including consumer preferences, market demand, business strategy, government policy, global governance and the emergence of clean tech technologies. Our ability to anticipate and respond appropriately to these changes is critical to maintain and strengthen our competitiveness and positive reputation in the global market place.
137_ The Development Strategy and other Chapters throughout give further direction on green development and action.
3. Move to outstanding public transport within one network

The congestion on Aucklands transport network is set to continue to increase as the population grows. This will have a negative impact on our economic performance and our quality of life. Addressing this congestion requires a transformational shift towards greater use of public transport and a stronger focus on planning, developing and operating the entire transport system as an integrated network. 138_ The congestion on Aucklands transport network has become increasingly intolerable. Any motorist who sits in traffic for an hour or more during rush hour can explain what the problem is. 139_ The transformational shift required is to create an integrated transport system, planned, developed and operated as one network. It must provide effective connections internationally, inter-regionally, and within Auckland. 140_ Most significantly, over the next 30 years Auckland requires a transformational shift towards greater use of public transport. Chapter 11, Aucklands Transport, sets a target to increase trips by public transport, cycling and walking from 23% currently, to 37% of trips by 2040. This will be achieved through a range of measures: integrated ticketing, infrastructure projects such as the City Rail Link, rail to the airport and the additional harbour crossing, busways and bus feeder services, land use planning, intensification in rail corridors and effective travel demand management.
4. Radically improve the quality of urban living

Auckland has a stunning natural environment which sits in stark contrast to much of the built environment. Improving the quality of our urban environment whilst coping with the substantial projected growth that is forecast will be challenging. This requires a radical improvement in design particularly in creating a more human Auckland where the beauty of the built environment enhances the everyday experiences of people. 141_ Auckland has a stunningly beautiful natural environment. By contrast, with notable exceptions, the built environment is a mixed bag. There are many examples of poor quality architectural and urban design: poor
Attachment D
136_ New Zealand is already known for its innovation in some of the green industries through leveraging its land-based expertise. The transformation required is to capitalise on our present position and expand further into green technologies. There are major opportunities and advantages in this and Auckland and New Zealand can be world leaders in this field.
Item 9

living places, poor building design, bland streetscapes, lack of green spaces, poor design of public spaces and one of the citys most beautiful assets, the waterfront, is largely cut off from the city centre. 142_ The quality of urban living in the central city, and in urban and rural town centres and villages, must radically transform. This requires a radical improvement in design particularly in creating a more human Auckland where the beauty of the built environment enhances the everyday experience of people. 143_ Chapter 8, Urban Auckland, sets out the plan for the transformation of Aucklands urban environment, including the urban settlements in our rural areas.
Item 9 Attachment D
5. Substantially raise living standards for all Aucklanders and focus on those most in need
Ongoing improvement to living standards in Auckland is inhibited by New Zealands relatively poor economic performance compared to other OECD nations. Although our region is rich in lifestyle opportunities that do not depend on a strong economy, improving our economic performance will greatly enhance our ability to address the growing socio-economic inequalities found in Auckland. A substantial improvement in educational attainment and an increased focus on exports, rather than domestic consumption, are critical to driving the kind of transformational uplift in incomes for all Aucklanders that is required. 144_ Auckland has multiple challenges to living standards. Over the last few decades, New Zealand has slipped down the OECD countries list for GDP per capita, from near the top to near the bottom. GDP is, of course, only one measure of well being, but economic wealth underpins our ability to fund much that supports our quality of life. There are wide socio-economic disparities in Auckland, with a heavy concentration of social deprivation in the South and, to a lesser extent, in the West. 145_ The transformational shift required is to achieve a step-change in economic growth, and to ensure that all Aucklanders enjoy the benefits of that growth. 146_ Chapter 4, Aucklands Economy, sets out bold economic targets over the next 30 years that will: raise productivity growth from current 1% p.a to 2% p.a raise export growth from current 3% p.a to 5% p.a raise GDP growth from current 3% p.a to 5% p.a. 147_ This shift will require a structural change in the Auckland economy, from being import-led and domestically focused, to being more export driven. It also requires a shift to new economy industries and long-term sustainable growth, and substantial improvements in educational achievement and skills.
6. Significantly lift Maori social and economic well-being

Although Maori culture is a cornerstone of our identify and contributes greatly to the branding of New Zealand around the world, the over representation of Maori at the wrong end of so many social and economic indicators continues to blight our nation. Compared to the population as a whole, Maori are more likely to leave school without formal qualifications, be unemployed, be the victim of a crime, be incarcerated, suffer from a chronic disease and die early. The waste of human potential these statistics represent is a tragedy at all levels of our society. As New Zealands largest city and home to the highest concentration of Maori people it is incumbent upon all stakeholders in Auckland to help reverse these indicators and unleash the latent and unrealised talent of the Maori people. The iwi of Tamaki Makaurau are an emerging economic powerhouse and will play a key role in lifting Maori well being and transforming Auckland into the worlds most liveable city.
C.4 C.3 Principles we will work by to achieve the outcomes

126_ How we go about achieving our vision and outcomes requires a change in behaviour that is consistent with takes forward the following principles outlined on [xx] in Box C.1 below.
Box C.1 Principles
Page 38

Work together Work collaboratively and as partners on the priorities identified in the Auckland Plan. Recognise the interdependence of projects, programmes and initiatives. Value te Ao Mori Acknowledge the special place of Mana Whenua and enable their participation in decision-making. Build lasting and reciprocal relationships with Aucklands Mori. Be sustainable Take a long-term view and have the resilience and flexibility to adapt to changing conditions that affect our communities, our economy, our environment and our infrastructure. Do more with less. Act fairly Consider the needs of all groups in the community to ensure that all Aucklanders can participate equally. Make the best use of every dollar spent Act prudently and commit to projects and initiatives that achieve the best value result without compromising quality, or stifling creativity and innovation. Focus on achieving long-term benefits and intergenerational equity.
127_ The above principles reflect an eco city approach and the creation of healthy neighbourhoods as expressed in Figure C.1 below. The eco city approach represents a strong commitment to conserving resources, minimising waste and preserving biodiversity and the natural habitat to enhance liveability and generate new sustainable economic opportunities. The eco city concept is consistent with traditional Matauranga Mori and Tikanga understanding around sustainable living and while having a strong focus on the natural environment, is also closely linked with the idea of a greener urban and rural economy.
C5 Development strategy and strategic directions

148_ The chapters that follow traverse a wide range of strategic directions to help Auckland make these shifts and achieve our vision for 2040. Our directions (listed below in Box C.2) come together as a high-level Development Strategy for Auckland that describes how Auckland will grow and change to become the quality compact city we need it to be.
Page 39
Attachment D
Item 9

The 13 strategic directions are defined in more detail in the chapters that follow. Each strategic direction includes: priority focus areas specific directives for each priority area a group of actions (set out in the Implementation Update) Each strategic direction also includes measurable targets so we can monitor our progress. 149_ Each chapter has a strategic direction aligned to Aucklands vision to be the most liveable city. The targets support the strategic direction. Within the chapters, priorities which we will focus on are identified. Each priority contains a number of directions which are effectively the policy framework for the Plan. Some directives include a set of principles to guide decision making. Directives are in turn supported by a range of actions. These actions are contained in Table 12.5 in Chapter 12: Implementation Framework. Additionally, measureable targets for each Chapter have been developed so we can monitor our progress. This is shown diagrammatically as follows:
Attachment D
Item 9
Page 40
Page 41
Attachment E
Item 9
Attachment E
Item 9
Page 42
Page 43
Attachment E
Item 9
Attachment E
Item 9
Page 44
Codes0.1to0.7sectionsA,BandCofthedraftAucklandPlan
December2011 SummarycompiledbyRobertSimpson,RichardLoganandCraigGlover Introduction
Withcontributionsfrommorethan1600submitterssectionsA,BandCwereamongstthemostheavily commentedonpartsoftheAucklandPlan.However,asthesesectionsweremoreaboutscenesetting ratherthanpolicyresponsesnokeyissuesrequiringfundamentalchangetothedocumentemergedfrom theanalysisofthecommentsreceived.Nevertheless,numeroussuggestionsforminorchangeswere received,manyofwhicharedocumentedinthissummary. Wearestillconsideringthesesuggestionsforminoramendmentstotheplanandanythatwerecommend foractionwillbeenteredinthechangeregisterinduecourse.Atthispointhoweverweareabletomake twogeneralrecommendations.Suggestionsastohoweachcanbespecificallyimplementedwillfollowin thechangeregister.Neitheroftheserecommendationsconstitutekeyissuesasneitherwillrequire fundamentalchange.Bothhoweverwerethesubjectofmoresubmittercommentsthananyothersingle topicareacoveredbythisanalysis. Recommendationone ItshouldbemadeclearerinthefrontendofthedocumentthattheAucklandPlanisaplanforallAuckland andwillrequireaction,commitmentandfundingfrommanyparties.Itisnotsimplyadescriptionofwhat thecouncilintendstodooverthenext30years.Thisseemedtobeapointofconfusionforagreatmany submitters. Recommendationtwo Thereneedstobemoreemphasisontheroleofsportinthenarrativeaccompanyingboththeoutcomes andthetransformationalshifts. Althoughverylittleofthesubjectmattercoveredthesecodeslentitselftoquantitativeanalysiswewere abletonumericallytrackresponsesinthreeareas. Oftheapproximately270submitterswhowereidentifiedasexpressinganopinionontheoveralldirection oftheplanasawhole(code0.1): Almost80percentweresupportiveorhighlysupportive Around20percentwereunsupportiveorhighlyunsupportive Ofthe173submissionsthatcommentedonAucklandsmostliveablecityvision(code0.4): 50percentspecificallysupportedthevision 3percentspecificallyopposedthevision 47percentneitherexpressedspecificsupportfornorspecificoppositiontothevisionbutwere generallysupportiveoftheAucklandPlan Ofthe500submittersthatexpressedaviewonthestrategictransformations(code0.6): Around77percentagreedwithallfivetransformationalshifts Around12percentagreedwithatleastonetransformationalshift Around10percentdisagreedwithallfivetransformationalshifts
Attachment F
Item 9
Auckland Future Vision Committee 17 February 2012 Thesevencodesdealtwithinthisanalysisare: 0.1allofplan 0.2keyimplementationstrategiesandplans 0.3Aucklandnow(roleofAucklandandkeytrends) 0.4Aucklandsvisionandoutcomes 0.5principles 0.6transformationalshifts 0.7strategicdirections
Attachment F
Item 9
Page 46
428submittersmadecommentsthatwerecodedtoallofplan.Thiscodetendedtobeacatchallfor commentsthatcouldnotbeallocatedelsewhereandconsequentlyawidevarietyoftopicswerecovered includingoverallimpressionsoftheplan,highlevelthoughtsonitsimplementationandopinionsonthe consultationprocess. Viewsontheplanasawhole Approximately270submittersexpressedaviewspecificallyontheplanasawhole(asopposedto individualaspectsofit).Oftheseanoverwhelmingmajority(almost80percent)madehighlyfavourableor favourablecommentswhilstaround20percentwereunsupportiveoftheplanasawhole.Representative commentsfromthosewhosupportedtheoveralldirectionoftheplaninclude: Weapplaudthevisionarynatureoftheplan(NZInstituteofArchitects)
Applaudscouncilforcreatingaboldandambitiousplan(WWFNZ) CommendscouncilonthecontentsofthePlan,whichifimplementedinfull,willmateriallyimprove healthoutcomes,andsocialwellbeingforallAucklanders(AucklandRegionalPublicHealth Service). Theplanisexcellent,excitingandtheauthorsneedtobecomplemented(anindividual) Planisambitious,visionaryandprovidesclearstrategicdirection(HamiltonCityCouncil) Theplanneedstobebold,innovativeanddesignfocusednotcontrolledbydemandsforlowrates andnaysayers.Timeforanewdirectionandthisisit(anindividual) SupportsthePlan.Dontletitbewatereddownbygreen,cycleorPTwash.Bestrong.Thisiswhat Aucklanderswant(anindividual) ThePlanisaspirational,strategic,visionary,verycomprehensive,containsabundantuseful information,andiswrittenclearly.Itisbroadlysupportedasawhole(MasseyUniversity) Thefollowingarerepresentativecommentsofthosewhowereunsupportiveofthegeneraldirectionof theplan: ThePlanispoorlythoughtout,poorlypresentedandpotentiallydisastrous(anindividual) Completelydisagreeswithhighlevelstrategy,thisisthe21stnotthe19thcenturyandpeople shouldbeallowedtodowhattheywantprovidedtheypaythefullcosts(anindividual) TheDraftPlanshouldnotbeadoptedinitspresentformaswhileitclaimstomakeanecouser friendlycityit:isoverambitiousinplacesapipedreaminothers,wouldcostmillions,andfailsto addressthefundamentalneedsofAucklandforthenext30years(HowickResidents&Ratepayers Association) thedraftplanisnotaforwardthinkingdocuments,(it)doesnotprovideaprogressiveand innovativestrategicdirectionandisunlikelytoenableruralareatoprosperorcontinuetowards AKLbeingthemostliveablecityintheworld(anindividual)
Page 47
Attachment F
Fullysupportthedirectionandintentoftheplan,establishingasoundandsustainablefuturefor Aucklandiscritical(anindividual)
Item 9
0.1
AllofPlan
Auckland Future Vision Committee 17 February 2012 DisappointedinthequalityoftheinformationcontainedinthePlan,andthewayithasbeen presented,essentialinformationislacking(NZAutomobileAssociation) Someofthethemesemergingfromtheanalysisofsubmitterscommentsonwhethertheysupportthe overalldirectionoftheplanarecoveredinthediscussionsbelow. Consultationprocessandclarityofthelanguageoftheplan Alargenumberofsubmittersexpressedconcernovertheperceivedtighttimeframesfortheconsultation processandcommentedhowthismadeitverydifficulttoprovideacomprehensiveresponsetowhatwas averylongdocument. Thestandardconsultationformalsocameinforsomecriticismwithsomesubmittersstatingthatitwas toorestrictiveintheresponsesitallowedandtooselectiveintheareasthequestionscovered.Several submittersthoughttheplanwastoolonganddense,whilstotherscomplainedoftheperceivedoveruse ofjargon(thewordsustainablewasaparticularfocusofcomplaintinthisrespect).
Item 9 Attachment F
MorepositivelytheAlbertEdenLocalBoardsuggestedthataglossarywouldhelppublicunderstanding. Similarly,boththeHeartoftheCityandBeaconPathwaysrecommendthecouncilestablishmeansfor engagingwiththepubliconanongoingbasissoastoenhanceunderstandingofthescaleofthe transformationsrequiredandprovideamechanismthroughwhichthepubliccanbecomeinvolvedin determiningsomeofthedetailsoftheplansimplementation. Therolesofcentralandlocalgovernmentinimplementingtheplan DespitesupportingthegeneralthrustoftheAucklandPlananumberofsubmittersquestionedits statutorystatus,especiallytheapparentlackofrequirementforRMAprocessestohaveregardtoit. ThesesamesubmittersworriedthatunlesstheappropriatelegislativechangesweremadetheAuckland Planwouldremainunimplemented. TheroleoftheAucklandCouncilinimplementingtheplanwasacommontopicforcomment.Both UNITECandtheEmployersandManufacturersAssociation,forexample,weregenerallyhighlysupportive oftheplanbutarguedthatitneededtobecleareraboutwhatthecouncilsroleisinimplementingit. Severalothersubmitterswerelesssupportiveoftheplanastheythoughtaspectsofitoversteppedthe properroleoflocalgovernment.TheBusinessRoundtableforexamplearguedthattheAucklandPlan greatlyexceedsthemandateofcouncil,almosteverythinginitwilldetractfromliveabilityanditreflects anunlimitedfaithintheefficacyofcentralplanning(which)consequentlyrestrictspersonalfreedomand individualchoice.Otherobjectionstotheperceivedoverextensionofcouncilfunctionswerebasedmore onamisunderstandingofthepurposeoftheAucklandPlanratherthananideologicalobjectionto perceivedbiggovernment.AsignificantnumberofsubmittersappeartobelievethattheAucklandPlanis alistofcouncilinitiativesasopposedtoitstruefunctionasaplanforallAucklandthatrequiresaction frommanyparties.Consequentlythesesubmittersobjectedtotheinclusionofissuesthataretraditionally thedomainofcentralgovernmentsuchashealth,socialpolicyandredistributiveeconomicpolicies. Helpfully,theEMAarguedthatfurtherexplanationofthecouncilsrolewouldhelpavertthisperception thatitisproposingamassiveextensionofitsremit. Othersubmittersacknowledgedthatbothcentralandlocalgovernmenthadaroletoplayinimplementing theplan.TheNZCouncilforInfrastructureDevelopmentandotherspointedtotheriskoftheplannot
Page 48
Auckland Future Vision Committee 17 February 2012 beenimplementedunlesstherewasbetteralignmentbetweenAucklandCouncilandthegovernment. Similarly,theMtEdenPlanningGroupsuggestedthatinorderfortheplantoberealisedthegovernment wouldneedtobemoreforthcomingwithfundingandmakechangestothetaxsystem,whilstAuckland Councilmustencourageexcellenceinbuildingbyadjustingitsconsentprocessandotheraspectsofthe regulatoryregime. Evidence,levelofdetailintheplanandrelationshipwithotherplans Afewdozensubmitterscommentedonwhattheyconsideredtobetheappropriatelengthandlevelof detailintheAucklandPlan.ThosewhothoughttheAucklandPlanistoodetailedareoutnumberedby thosewhobelieveadditionaldetailwithintheplanwillmakeitmoremeaningful.Essentiallythese submitters TheChamberofCommerceisprominentamongstthefirstgroupsuggestingthattheplanshouldbe trimmedrightbackandfocusonfiveorsixgamechangingprojectsforAuckland.Similarly,Auckland CouncilPropertyLtd(aCCO)suggestedthatthelevelofdetailintheplanweakensitsimpactandfocus.It recommendsthattheplanincludeasharpprioritisationprogrammethatidentifiesthemoststrategically importantinitiatives.Someothersubmitterssuggestedthatthedocumentmustremainaspirational,and thereforeflexible,ratherthanbecomingladenwithdetailandprescriptive. Conversely,othersubmittersfindtheplantobeshortondetail.FoodstuffsLtdsuggestthattheplan needstobemorespecificifitistoprovideasolidbasisfortheunitaryplan,whilstothersubmittersfound itdifficulttoofferaconsideredassessmentoftheplangiventheperceivedlackofdetailastohowthe visionandoutcomesweretobeachieved. Inarelatedpointseveralsubmitterscommentedontheabsenceofaprioritisationframeworkthatwould enableprojectstobeassessedagainsteachotherintermsoftheircontributiontothestatedoutcomesof theplan.Thisisparticularlyimportantinlightofwhatsomesubmittersperceivedtobethecontradictory natureofsomeofthegoalsoftheAucklandPlan(economicgrowthversusenvironmentalprotectionbeing anoftencitedexample)andlimitedfunding.Submittersweresplitastowhetherthisframeworkshould beincludedintheAucklandPlanitselfordevelopedinsubsequentandmoredetailedwork. Severalsubmitterscommentedontheperceivedlackofevidenceinsupportofaspectsoftheplan.The BusinessandHousingGrouparguedthattheplandoesnotcomplywiththestatutoryrequirementforitto beevidencebasedandthoughtthatitconclusionsintermsofurbanformandtransportprioritieswere predetermined.Othersubmittersthoughtthattheadoptionoftheplayshouldbedelayeduntilcertain issuesofdetailcouldberesolved,generallyaroundthecostoftheproposedpriorities.Whilst commendingmuchoftheplantheNZPropertyCouncilsuggesteditsadoptionbedelayeduntilagranular analysisofAucklandsbuiltformiscompleteandcouncilhasabetterunderstandingofthemarketforces thatshapeit. ThequestionoftheAucklandPlansrelationshipwithotheraspectsofthecouncilsstrategicframework wastouchedonbyanumberofsubmitters.TheNZPlanningInstituterecommendsthatmoreclaritybe providedonthiswhilstMeridianPlanningConsultantsgofurtherandbyassertingthatafundamental failingoftheplanisthatit:
Page 49
Attachment F
Item 9
Auckland Future Vision Committee 17 February 2012 appearstohavebeenpreparedinavacuumwithoutdueconsiderationoftheARPSandrelating (sic)planningdocuments..(itistherefore)attimesatoddswithplanningstrategyandpolicy documentsthathavebeenpreparedoverthelast1015years. AlthoughnotcommentingontherelationshipbetweentheAucklandPlanandpreviousplanninginitiatives BeaconPathwaysproposesthatalargescalediagrambeincludedatthefrontofthedocumenttoclarify thelinksbetweenthevision,theoutcomesandotheraspectsofthestrategicframeworkrightthroughto thespecificactionsdetailedineachchapter.Similarly,theOrakeiLocalBoardsuggestthattheplandoes notarticulateaclearvisionofAucklandsplaceintheworldandwhatitwouldlooklikeastheworldsmost liveablecity,consequentlythevisionisoftenlostthroughoutthedocument. TherelativefocusonruralareasandtheCBD Manyindividualsubmittersandseveralsuburbanorruralresidentsassociationscommentedonthe perceivedCBDcentricfocusofthedocument.Manyruralsubmittersinparticularwereatthiswithsome believingthattheirratesaresubsidisingthecitycentricfocus.Notallruralsubmissionfollowedthisline however.FederatedFarmers,forexample,supportedtherecognitionoftheimportanceoftherural economyintheplanandwelcomedthedistinctionbetweenruralandurbanareas.Othersubmitterswere notnecessarilyopposedtotheCBDfocusbutwarnedthatthecentralcitycouldnotreachitspotential unlessitwassupportedbyhealthycentresthroughoutthecityandwiderregion. Despitethesemisgivingsitmustbenotedthatthenumberofsubmittersexpressingconcernatthefocus ontheCBDwereoutnumberedheavilybythosewhowereexcitedbythepossibilitiesitpresented. Maoriissues SubmissionmadeinrelationtospecificMaoriissuesaredealtwithunderothercodeshowevergeneralised commentsontheplaceofMaoriintheAucklandPlanwereoftencodedto0.1andassucharesummarised here.SeveralMaoriorganisationssupportedthefocusintheplanontheTreaty.TheTeAraiCoastal LandsTrustexpresseditshopethattheplansignalsaneweraofcollaborationbetweenMaoriandthe council.WhilstwelcomingthefocusonTreatyissuestheNgatiTamaohoTrustwantsthesectiononthe TreatytobemovedtopartCofthedocument(Aucklandsstrategicdirection)asameansofbetter integratingtheTreatywiththewiderstrategicframework.Italsorecommendsthatapassageonthe impactofeachstrategicdirectiononpeoplesandcommunities(includingMaori)beincludedatthestartof eachchapter.Similarly,theAucklandregionalPublicHealthServicerecommendsthatMaoriaspirations beintegratedthroughouttheplan.TheBNZBankalsopicksuponthispointandsuggeststhatthereneeds tobemorefocusonMaoriaspirationsthroughoutthedocument,particularlychapterseight(Urban Auckland)andnine(Housing).TheBNZalsosuggeststhatthefactAucklandhasthelargestMaori populationintheworldneedstobebetteracknowledgedinthecitysbeautificationprogramme, specificallyintermsofpublicartandbilingualsignage. AminorityofsubmittersthatmadegeneralcommentsontheplaceofMaoriintheplanexpressedconcern attheperceivedspecialtreatmentforoneraceinamulticulturalcity. Miscellaneousissues Asthe0.1.codewasusedasacatchallforcommentsthatcouldnotbecodeselsewherealargenumberof miscellaneoustopicswerecanvassedbyoneormoresubmitters.Someoftheseareoutlinedinthis section.
Attachment F
Item 9
Page 50
Auckland Future Vision Committee 17 February 2012 AnumberofsubmittersarguethattheprimaryfocusoftheAucklandPlanshouldbeonminimising rates. TheWasteandRecyclingCouncilsuggestthatadoptionoftheAucklandPlanshouldbedelayeduntil theWasteMinimisation&ManagementPlanandothersupportingdocumentsarefinalised. TheFamiliesCommissionsupportsthevisionbutrecommendsthatfamiliesmustbeatthecentreofit ifitistobeachieved.Similarly,anothersubmitterurgedthecounciltoconsidertheUNICEFChild FriendlyCitiesframeworkwhenfinalisingtheplanandsuggesteditwouldbeusefultoassesstheplan fromthepointofviewofachild. TheMentalHealthFoundationbelievesthatwellbeinginabroadsenseisparamountandmustbe centretotheplansvision.Itrecommendsthatthecouncildevelopappropriatemeasurestoassess this.Similarly,severalsubmitterscalledfortheplantofocusmoreonpeopleandcommunitiesbutdid spelloutwhattheymeantbythis.WhilstanothersubmittersaidthatthesuccessoftheAucklandPlan wouldbejudgedbyitsoutcomesfortheleastwelloffAucklanders.
TheWaikato,NorthlandandBayofPlentyRegionalCouncilsbothofferedsupportfortheplanbut wantmorefocusontheissueofinterregionalinterdependence.TheSmartGrowthImplementation CommitteeandWatercaresupportthis,withthelattercitingthefactitsourceswaterfromthe Waikatoasanexampleofwhytheneighbouringcouncilsneedtoworktogether. TheInstituteofProfessionalEngineersNZstronglysupportstheplan,particularlyitsfocusonpublic transport.TheRoadFreightCarriersorganisationsuggeststhereisnotenoughemphasiswithinthe planontheefficientmovementoffreight.Italsowantsthegoaloffastereconomicgrowthtobe prioritisedandusedasafilterthroughwhichotheraspectsoftheplanareassessed.
Page 51
Attachment F
InitssubmissionAlcoholHealthWatchexpressesitsdisappointmentatthelackoffocusonalcohol hardintheplanandsaysthattheinstanceswhereitismentionedrequireamendment.Severalother submittersalsoexpresseddisquietatthepaucityofreferencestoalcoholharmandavailability.
Item 9
0.2
Keyimplementationstrategiesandplans
Item 9 Attachment F
Thiscodecoversthe71submissionpointsonsectionA.4KeyImplementationStrategiesandPlans,on page12ofthedraftAucklandPlan.ThissectionincludestheCouncilsstrategicframeworkwith descriptionsofthelinkagestokeyimplementationstrategiesandplanssuchasthelongtermplan,unitary plan,andlocalboardplansandagreements. Overview Criticismandsuggestionsforimprovement ThedraftAucklandPlanwillonlyaddtothesizeandcomplexityofcurrentplanningdocuments, whichwillonlyleadtoincreasedcoststothosehavingtoworkwiththesedocuments.(N.Z. BusinessRoundtable). Submittersuggeststhatthereisalackofclearprojectprioritisation.(IPENZTGA/NB).Another submitterstronglyrecommendstheCounciltrimsdownthePlanandfocusesondelivering5or6 majorprojectsthatwilldrasticallyshiftAuckland'sstatusasthemostliveablecity.(Auckland ChamberofCommerce). Ambitiousplanbutlacksdetailintermsofdelivery.(F.Lang). NotethelackofclarityregardingthelegalrelationshipbetweentheAucklandPlanandtheUnitary Plan.(RoyalICS). TheAucklandPlanneedstogivestrongerdirectiontoitsexpectationsfromotherdocumentsand howtheywillimplementthegoalsofthePlan.Forexample,howthelandusegoalswillbe implementedthroughtheUnitaryPlanandhowtransportgoalswillbeimplementedthrough futureRegionalLandTransportstrategies.(JArbury). TheAucklandPlansrelationshipwithnationalstatutorydocument(e.g.RMA,GovernmentPolicy Statements,NationalPolicyStatementsandNationalEnvironmentalStandards)needsa frameworkandrationalisation.(NZPI). TheCouncilneedstostatehowitwillalignfutureplans(i.e.theLongTermPlanandUnitaryPlan) withtheAucklandPlanprovisions.NodetailsareprovidedinthedraftAucklandPlan.(NZPI). SupporttheinclusionoftheTeTiritiWaitangiasanintegralpartoftheCouncil'sStrategic Framework,replacing"MonitoringandEvaluation"onpage12.(TeAtatuMaraeDevelopment Group,TeRopuWahineMaoriTokoITeOra,ORanui,RanuiMaoriWomensWelfareLeague). SupporttheproposalsintheCityCentreMasterplanandtheWaterfrontPlanbutnotethatthey dontconnectortalkabouttheirrelationshipwiththeAucklandPlan.(NZPI). Support SupportthattherearetwokeyplansthatwillhelptoachievetheAucklandPlanvision,being,the UnitaryPlan(dealswithhowtheCouncilwilldesign,developmentandgrowAuckland)andthe LongTermPlan(prioritisesthefundingtodeliverthePlanonastagedbasis).(NationalRoad Carriers). Supportforallcurrentcouncilplansandpoliciesandallthosedevelopedafteradoptingthe AucklandplanarereviewedtoincludeCouncilsTreatyFrameworkandincorporatethevalues, cultureandbeliefsonMaoribyJune2012.(TeoraoManukau) UnitaryPlan
Page 52
Auckland Future Vision Committee 17 February 2012 SupportfortheUnitaryPlanbeingakeytoolforimplementingmanyaspectsoftheAucklandPlan. Forexample,settingtherulesfordevelopment,planningforgrowth,centres,greenfieldsetc. (TranspowerNZLtd.). SubmittersarekeentobeinvolvedindevelopingtheUnitaryPlan.(RoyalInstitutionofChartered Surveyors). SupportforlowerlevelplanningdocumentsbeingalignedtotheUnitaryPlan.Theselowerlevel documentsshouldprovideincentivestoachievesustainableoutcomes(e.g.fasttrackingor discountingchargesforapplicationsthatareclearlyalignedwiththeprovisionsofthePlan).(D. Clendon). SupportforappropriateresourcingoftheUnitaryPlan,whichitseemsfromtheLongTermPlan,it isnot.TheUnitaryPlanwillplayacriticalpartinprotectingthebuiltheritagethroughthe comprehensiveidentification,assessmentandrecognitionofwhatAucklandsbuiltheritageis. Heritageschedulesfromthedistrictplansoflegacycouncilsareneithercompletenoraccurate (CivicTrustAucklandProtection). SupportfortheCounciladoptingtherecommendationsfromthereportoftheAuditorGeneral, (ISBN047838312online)thatlocalauthoritiesbuildappropriateflexibilityintotheirdistrictplans toallowhousingtobebuiltonMaorilandandidentifyandworkwithlandownerswhohave particularlysuitablelandblocksandwhowanttobuildhousingonMaoriland.Thesechangesneed tobeincorporatedintothereviewoftheUnitaryPlan.(TeoraoManukau). Localboardplans Supportlocalboardshavingappropriatepowers,funding,resourcesandstaff,sothattheycan helpimplementtheAucklandPlan,astheyensurecommunitymemberscanvoicetheiropinions andallowsareflectionofourdiversevibrantsociety.(WendyBailey)(Also,CockleBayR&RAInc.). Supportforlocalboardshavingsomeconsentpowers(e.g.placementofcellphonetowersetc) andforbeingtheadvisorstotheCouncilregardingtheirconsultationwiththeirdifferent communities.(TheTrustStadium). Otherstrategies,plansandpolicies Submitterslikedthefollowingcurrent/futurestrategiesandplanswhichtheywantedendorsedand actioned: ManukauRuralStrategyCouncilshouldadoptthislegacydocumentasitrecognisesgrowthand newsettlementswhereappropriateinruralandcoastalareas(e.g.themaritimevillagesnear Clevedon).(A&KSmith). MarineSpatialPlanfortheHaurakiGulf(WardaleMarineIndustryConsulting). MineralsStrategyAnysuchstrategyshouldavoidreversesensitivityeffectswhichconstrain existingorfuturemineralextractionsites.ThisshouldbemanagedthroughtheUnitaryPlan. (Aggregate&QuarryAss.ofNZ). MuriwaiPlanSubmitterurgestheCounciltodevelopmentaformalplanspecificallyforMuriwai, toallowfortheresidentstobeeffectivelyrepresented.(MuriwaiBeachProgressiveAssociation). OrakeiBasinManagementPlan(OrakeiLocalBoard). PositiveAgeingStrategy(WarkworthandDistrictsGreyPowerAssociation)(Also,TheHope FoundationForResearchonAging) Reservemanagementplans/structureplansSubmitterbelievesCouncilshouldreviewand implementexistingplansastheyreflectlocalcommunityneeds.(RGreen).A.Greenmadea
Attachment F
Item 9
Auckland Future Vision Committee 17 February 2012 similarpointinrelationtoWaiheke.AlsomentionedbytheOrakeiLocalBoardabouttheirlegacy localplans. TakapunaWaterfrontPlanThisisneededtodoTakapuna'sbeachjusticeandavoidthecurrent piecemealapproach.(TakapunaBeachBusinessAssociation). TamakiDrivetransportmasterplan(OrakeiLocalBoard) VisionRodneyThisdocumenthashadwideconsultationandacceptanceinthecommunity. (KumeuR&RA) WellbeingstrategyE.g.liketheMentalWellbeingProgrammerunbyLambethCouncilor LiverpoolCityCouncilortheGovernmentofSouthAustralia.(MentalHealthFoundation). Supportconsultationwithessentialparties Forexample: PartnershipwithMaoriSuggestedbyWaikatoTainuiTeKauhanganuiIncorporated,
Item 9 Attachment F
DisabilitygroupsForexample;CCSDisabilityAction,BarrierFreeNewZealandTrust,Be Accessible,CCSDisabilityAction,DeafAotearoa,DisabilityStrategicAdvisoryGroup,Disabled PersonsAssembly,GreyPower,PeopleFirst,RoyalNewZealandFoundationoftheBlind,and TransportAccessibilityAdvisoryGroup. LandscapeForumToestablishalandscapeforumtoconsiderthevisionforlandscape,public openspace,urban/ruralandwildernessenvironmentsindesignandmanagementterms.(NZILA). IntegratedconsultativeapproachovercurrentsiloedapproachthatincludestheCouncil,CCOs andresidents.Puttinginthisinvestmentinconsultationwouldincreaseefficiencyindesignof infrastructureandreducerework.(E.Wrench).NorthShoreCOSSsuggestsCouncildevelopa "wholeofCouncil"communicationnetworkbetweenallCouncildepartmentsandCCOs.
Page 54
0.3
AucklandNowRoleofAuckland&KeyTrends
209submissionsmadecommentsinrelationtosectionB(AucklandNow)oftheAucklandPlan. TheroleofAuckland VeryfewsubmitterscommentedonsectionB1theroleofAucklandinNZandtheWorld. Aswasdocumentedintheanalysisofcode0.1above,anumberofneighbouringcouncilstalkedaboutthe importanceofinterregionalinterdependenciesintheirsubmissions.Whilsttheyweregenerallyvery supportiveoftheplanallwantedincreasedrecognitionoftheinterregionalrelationshipsintheAuckland Nowsection.Thesecommentswerenotjustrestrictedtotheobvioustransportandinfrastructure connectionswithBOP,NorthlandandtheWaikato.TheRodneyLocalBoardstatedthatitisimportantthat AucklandCouncilworkcloselywithKaiparaDistrictCouncilregardingthemanagementoftheKaipara Harbour.AnothersubmittersuggestedthecouncilsfromtheupperNorthIslandcouldputinplace arrangementstoalleviatesomeofthepressureonAucklandbyencouragingthespreadofpopulation growtharoundsurroundingregions. KeytrendsandchallengesforAuckland NumeroussubmissionswerereceivedinrelationtomostofthesixkeychallengesoutlinedinsectionB2of theAucklandPlan.Thesearediscussedbelowunderseparateheadingsforeachofthechallenges.Fewer commentswerereceivedinrelationtothechallengesasawholeorboxB2,whichlistedanumberof globalmegatrends. AnurbandesignprofessorfromUNITECwantsthesixchallengestobereworkedandsuggestedtheyfocus onunemployedyouth,theenvironment,transport,lackofurbanism,andlowincomes/poverty. AgeConcernsuggeststhattheagingpopulationinalldevelopedcountriesshouldbeacknowledgedinbox B2asaglobaltrend.BeaconPathwaysbelievethereferencestopeakoilandresourceavailabilitymore generallyneedtobestrengthenedasmegatrendsintheirownright.TheCivicTrustarguedthat increasingimportanceofheritagetoacitysprofileshouldbeacknowledgedinthemegatrendsbox. A. Populationgrowthanddemographicchange OfthesixchallengesdescribedintheAucklandPlanpopulationgrowthattractedbyfarthemost commentsfromsubmitters.Asignificantnumberofsubmittersexpresseduneaseaboutprojected populationgrowthanditspotentialimpactonthelifestylecurrentlyenjoyedbymostAucklanders,our ruralandcoastalenvironments,andourinfrastructure.TheviewthatitisunhealthyforAucklandtogrow sorapidlywhilstmuchoftherestofthecountrystagnatedintermsofpopulationwasalsomentionedby severalsubmitters.DozensofproformasubmissionswerereceivedspecificallyinrelationtoOrewaand theprospectofnewprojectionsforrapidpopulationgrowththerethataresignificantlygreaterthan previousforecastsand,intheviewofsubmitters,outstripthelikelycapacityoflocalinfrastructure. AnumberofarguedthattheAucklandPlanappearstowronglyassumerapidpopulationgrowthisagiven andthereislittlethecouncilcandotomoderateit.Severalsubmitterssuggestedthecouncilcouldcurb immigration.Morepracticalsuggestions(assumingthatcouncilsroleinimmigrationpolicyisrestrictedto lobbyinggovernment)includedworkingwithcouncilsinneighbouringregionstoassesswhether mechanismscouldbeputinplacetospreadgrowtharoundtheupperNorthIslandratherthan concentratingthebulkofitinonecity.TheHeartoftheCitybusinessassociationarguethatmoreshould
Page 55
Attachment F
Item 9
Auckland Future Vision Committee 17 February 2012 bedonetoattractNewZealandersbacktoAucklandratherthanrelyingonimmigrantstounderpin populationgrowth. IntheinterestsoftransparencyboththeCommitteeforAucklandandtheAlbertEdenSustainability AdvisoryBoardwanttoseemoreclarificationintheAucklandPlanaroundtheassumptionsthatunderlie thepopulationprojections.Othersubmitterssuggestedongoingpublicdebateinitiatedbythecouncilwas requiredtodevelopaviewastowhattheimplicationsofpopulationgrowthareforAucklandandwhata desirablepopulationlevelmightbe.Theneedformorepublicdialogueisborneoutbythefactthatmost ofthesubmitterswhoexpresseddisquietattheprospectofpopulationgrowthreferredonlytomigration andappearednottoappreciatethefactthatnaturalincreaseisaverysignificant(andinsomeyearsthe mostsignificant)contributortogrowth. Anumberofsubmittersquestionwhetherthelevelofpopulationgrowthprojectedisevenlikelyto actuallyoccur.SomesuggestthisisaconcernasmuchofwhattheAucklandPlanhopestoachieve appearstopredicatedonrapidgrowth.Conversely,atleastonesubmitter(TheBusinessandHousing Group)arguesthattheplanasawholeneedstobebasedonthehighergrowthscenariosasthisis consistentwithrecentpatternsandreducestheriskofhousingandinfrastructureshortages.Thissame submitteralsoarguesthatpassagesdescribingthebenefitsofadiversepopulationneedstobeclarified particularlyinrespectoftheeconomicopportunitiesthataresaidtobecreatedbyit. Severalsubmitters,includingAgeConcern,suggestthattheAucklandPlanasawholepayslittleheedto theassertionmadeearlyinthedocumentthatby2041theproportionofourpopulationagedover75will bemorethandoublewhatitisnow.AgeConcernsuggeststhatAucklandCouncilneedsanolderpersons advisorygrouptorepresentthisincreasinglyprominentsectionofsociety. TheAucklandLatinAmericanCommunityIncappreciatestheinclusionofareferencetotheMELAAcensus categoryinfigureB5butsuggeststhatfutureprojectionsforthisgroup(whicharecurrentlynotincluded) couldbeobtainedbyAucklandCouncilandincludedinthedemographicanalysisatrelativelylittlecost. OnesubmitterarguedthattheexistenceofgaypeopleisnotacknowledgedintheAucklandPlandespite theirsignificantcontributiontocertainsectorsoftheeconomy.Thesubmitteralsosuggeststhatasgay peoplearemorelikelytobesingleinoldagethanothersthiswillhaveanimpactonhousingrequirements intheregion. TheGreatBarrierLocalBoardseesasignificantincreaseintheislandspopulationasvitaltoitscontinued economicsurvival. B. Climatechangeandenergysecurity Oftherelativelysmallnumberofsubmitterswhocommentedontheinclusionofclimatechangeand energysecurityasoneofthesixmajorchallengesfacingAucklandthemajorityagreedthatitisa significantissue.Infactseveralsubmittersthoughtthattheplandoesnotgofarenoughinitsrecognition oftheimpactclimatechangeandthereducedsecurityofourenergysupplywillhaveonAuckland.Beacon Pathways,forexample,welcomestheintentiontoreduceemissionsbutarguesthatthisneedstobe reflectedmorethoroughlythroughtheentiredocumentratherthanjustthechapterdedicatedtoit.It alsosuggestedthatcomparisonswithmorecitiesthanjustSydney(paragraph75)arerequiredtogivea fulleraccountofAucklandsrelativeemissions.Othersubmittersexpressedsimilarconcernswithatleast onestatingthatmuchofthedocumentreflectedbusinessasusualpoliciesratherthanthe transformationalchangeneededtocombatclimatechangeandpreparefordecreasedsuppliesofnon
Attachment F
Item 9
Auckland Future Vision Committee 17 February 2012 renewableenergy.Asanexampleofthisseveralsubmittersarguedthatthependingzoningchangeto allowformoreintensivecommercialactivitiesinanareasouthofDrurymadelittlesenseinlightoffears aroundfuturesealevelrises. AtleastonesubmitteragreedthatclimatechangeisasignificantissueforAucklandbuturgethatitbe managedinawaythatdoesnotundermineoureconomicperformanceandassucharguedthatrather thanpenalisingtheuseoftraditionalenergysourcesotherinitiativessuchasmoreefficientvehicles,better homeinsulationandqualityurbandesignshouldbepursued.Inrealityeffectivelyaddressingemissions andencouragingtheuseofrenewableenergywillrequireawiderangeofmeasures. MightyRiverPowersupportedtheissuesraisedinthissection.Itarguesthatmorerecognitionoftheneed forAucklandtoobtainmoreofitselectricityfromrenewablesourcesisrequiredaswewillnotreach emissionsreductiontargetsongooddesignandenergyefficiencyalone.AmajorissueisthatAucklands currentgenerationcapacityissolelypoweredfromnonrenewablesources.MRPgoesontorequestthat paragraph78(andtheAucklandPlaningeneral)makeadistinctionbetweenthetransportandelectricity sectors.TheyarguethatitisimperativethatAucklandreducesitsrelianceonimportedfuelbutgivenits geographicallocationanditslimitedrenewableenergysourcesitwillalwaysrelyonelectricitygenerated inandimportedfromotherpartsofNewZealand.MRPalsorequeststhattheAucklandPlanavoid precludingtheprospectoffuturegaspoweredgenerationcapacitywithintheregion. OnesubmitterarguedthattheplansfocusonclimatechangeandenergysecurityissuesreflectedNew Zealandsleastinitialcostapproachtoplanningandassuchwouldleaveusillequippedtocopewith futurerisk. TheBusinessRoundtabledeclaredpeakoiltobeafallacyandarguedthatthecouncilhadnolegitimate roleinaddressingitanyway. Onlyonesubmitterappearedtopickuponthefactthatthedefinitionofpeakoilprovidedinparagraph72 oftheplanisincorrect. C. Aucklandsinternationaleconomiccompetitiveness VeryfewcommentsonAucklandseconomicperformancewerecodedto0.3.Lifewiseandseveralother submitterssuggestedthatwhilsteconomicperformanceisimportantitisameansratherthananendand assuchGDPpercapitaisoflimiteduseasameasureofwellbeing.Similarly,theNewZealandCouncilof ChristianSocialServicesrecommendedthatAucklandCouncilconsiderthefullrangeofwellbeing indicatorsthatTreasuryaredevelopingastheywillprovideamoreroundedviewofprogressintheregion. AnumberofaggregateandconstructioncompaniesarguedthatAucklandneedstodevelopaminerals strategyinordertoidentifyandpotentiallyprotectuntappedregionalsourcesoftheaggregateandother vitalmaterialsthatwillberequiredifwearetomeettheeconomicgrowthgoalssetoutintheplan. D. Socialandeconomicinequalities Severalgroupsrepresentingdisabled,blindanddeafpeoplemaderecommendationsastohowthesection onthekeychallengesfacingAuckland,andinparticularthepassagesoninequalities,couldbe strengthenedthroughmoreexplicitreferencetotheneedsofthesegroups.Thesesuggestionsaretoo
Page 57
Attachment F
Item 9
Auckland Future Vision Committee 17 February 2012 numeroustolisthere,howeverwhentheredraftingofthissectionisconsideredthefollowingsubmissions shouldbeconsultedinthisrespect: 1165 NewZealandDisabilityLaw 1214 AucklandBranchoftheAssociationofBlindCitizensofNewZealandInc 1456 NewZealandRoyalFoundationoftheBlind 1621 DeafAotearoa AucklandDisabilityLawalsorefersthecounciltoavarietyofreportssuchasthe2009jointACC/ADHB paperentitledStepupAucklandthatwillenableabetterunderstandingofthespecialneedsofdisabled groupsandtheimplicationsofthisforeconomicwellbeing,urbandesignandtransport. AgeConcernarguesthattheeconomicmarginalisationofmanyelderlypeopleisnotfocussedonenough. Itsuggeststhatcouncilcanhelpalleviatethisbylobbyingcentralgovernmenttoprovidemoresocial housingacrossallcommunitiesratherthanjustinspecificareasthatruntheriskofbecomingghettos.Age Concernagreesthattheintergenerationalhardshipreferredtoinparagraph94requiresgovernment interventionbutsuggeststhatitisolderaswellasyoungerpeoplethatareworstaffectedbythis. TheOfficeoftheChildrensCommissionerpointedtothedisparityintheavailabilityofearlychildhood educationservicesasacontributortoinequalitiesintheregion.Wealthierpartsofthecityhaveanexcess ofECEserviceswhilstthereisashortageofaffordableservicesinmoredeprivedareas.Asidefrom deprivingchildreninpoorerareasofthebenefitsofECEservicesthisdisparityofprovisioncanreinforce existinginequalitiesbymakingitmoredifficultforparentstoentertheworkforceandenforcingadditional travelrequirementsonthemoncetheyareabletodoso. E. Environmentquality AlthoughalargenumberofsubmitterscommentedonAucklandsenvironmentalargemajoritydidsoin thecontextofchapterfive(whichdetailsspecificactionsinrelationtotheenvironment)asopposedtothe keychallengeofmaintainingandimprovingenvironmentalqualityasdescribedinsectionB(codedas0.3). TheWaitakereRangesProtectionSocietywantsexplicitrecognitionoftheimportanceoftheWaitakere Rangesinthissection.TheNewZealandHistoricPlacesTrustsuggeststhattheenvironmentalquality challengeisframedtoonarrowlyandshouldhighlighttheplightofoururbanenvironment,andin particularoururbanheritage,aswellasthenaturalenvironment. F. Infrastructureplanning,provisionandfunding Anumberoflargeinfrastructureorganisationscommentedontheinclusionofinfrastructureasakey challengeforAuckland. SeveralsubmittersemphasisedtheimportanceofjointplanningforinfrastructurebetweenAucklandand itsneighbouringregionsandfeltthatreferencestothiscouldbestrengthened. IngeneraltermsWatercareagreewithmanyoftheissuesraisedinthissection,suchastheunderstanding thatlandusedevelopmentshouldbedependentupontheabilityofinfrastructureagenciestoprovide essentialservicesinacosteffectivemanner.However,theydomakeanumberofsuggestionsforslight amendmentstosomepassages.WatercarepointedoutthatnotallofAucklandsinfrastructureis overburdenedandundercapitalisedasparagraph45seemstoimplyandsuggeststhatthewordsomebe insertedasappropriate.Theyalsosuggestthatinorderforparagraph48tobeconsistentwiththerestof
Attachment F
Item 9
Auckland Future Vision Committee 17 February 2012 thedocumentthereferencetoessentialinfrastructureshouldbeamendedtocriticalinfrastructure. Finally,forpurposesofclarityWatercarerequeststhattheimplicationinparagraph100thatbecauseour waterresourcesareunderstressinvestmentindevelopingnewsourcesisrequired,bemadeexplicit. Appendixoneoftheirsubmission(760)setstheserequestedchangesoutintabularform. Vectorrequeststhatparagraph104,whichpointsoutthatmaximumvaluemustbeobtainedfromexisting assetsbeforeinvestmentiscommittedtonewinfrastructure,acknowledgethatnoncouncilcontrolled networks(suchasenergyandtelecommunications)mayhavecompetinginvestmentpriorities. NumerousproformasubmissionswerereceivedinsupporttheportsroleinAucklandseconomyand requestingthattheAucklandPlangivecertaintytotheitsfutureandmakeprovisionforinvestmentin requiredtransportinfrastructureintermsofbothroadinginitsimmediatevicinityandtherailnetworkin general.ThePortsofAucklanditselfmadesimilarpointsinitssubmissionandalsowarnedagainstreverse sensitivityissuesarisingasitsfootprintandactivitylevelsgrow. NationalRoadCarrierswantedtheAucklandPlantoplacemoreemphasisontheimportanceoffreightto theregionseconomyandthefactthatfreightlevelsareforecasttogrowsubstantially.Twosubmitters notedthelikelysubstantialincreaseintransportationoffreightaroundtheregionandassertedthatitis imperativethebulkofitbecarriedbyrail. Safekidsrequestedthatinfrastructureplanningtakeaccountofthegrowingnumberofchildrenprojected acrosstheregionasinfrastructure,especiallyimprovedpublictransport,isoffundamentalimportancein reducinginequalitiesandimprovingchildsafety.AgeConcernalsonotedtheimportanceofpublic transportservicestothewellbeingoftheelderly,especiallyinruralareas.
Page 59
Attachment F
Item 9
0.4
AucklandsVisionandOutcomes
Item 9
173submissionpointswerereceivedinthistopicarea. Overallsummaryofkeyissuesandmainthemesraisedbysubmissions: LevelofSupport 86outof173(50%)submissionsspecificallystatedsupportfortheliveablecityvision.Only6(3%) submissionpointsdidnotsupportthevision.Theremainingsubmissionpoints(81/47%),whilenot specificallystatingtheirsupportforthevision,weregenerallysupportiveoftheAucklandPlanandmany providedfeedbackandsuggestionsastohowthevisioncanbedeliveredandenhanced.Suggestions included: (SC1101599)Addingtextwhichdescribeswhattheworldsmostliveablecitywilllooklikeand whatAucklandsroleintheworldwillbe.Thesubmitteralsostatedthatamore international/visitorfocusshouldbeaddedtotheplan.
Attachment F
(SC1101084)CouncilwillachievegreatersupportfortheAucklandPlanifthePlanoutlinesthe socialandeconomicbenefitsoftheproposedprojectsandoptionsandlinksthesetothe AucklandPlanvision. (SC1101289,SC1101398,SC1101426andSC1101853)addinginanadditionaloutcomeof StrongandResilientCommunitiesandFamilies. (SC1101073andSC1101297)prioritisingcommunityandchildsafetymeasures. (1100130,SC1101358,SC1101535andSc1101749)workingandconsultingwiththecommunity inimplementingthevision. (SC1101458andSC1101849)theinclusionofdisabledpeopleinconsultationandin implementingmeasurestoachievethevision. (SC1101418,SC1101458andSC1100727)givingsportandrecreationmoreprominencewithin theAucklandPlanandmoreofaroleinachievingthevision. (SC1101601andSC1101604)furtheremphasisingtheroleofruralAucklandinachievingthe visionandacknowledgingtheimportanceofruralareastoAucklandasawhole.Submission SC1101948supportsthevisionbutstatesthatanUrbanRuralPartnershipshouldbe establishedtobringaboutamutualunderstandingofbothruralandurbanissues. (SC1101792)thePlanshouldfurtheremphasiseAucklandsPacificheritageandnew developmentsshouldacknowledgethis.Thiswouldaddtoliveability.SubmissionSC1100462 statesthatembracingthePacificcultureofAucklandwillhelptoachievethevision. Thosethatarenotinsupportofthevisiongavethefollowingreasonsandsuggestions: (SC1101213)thevisionisimpreciseandcannotbeachievedgivenfactorsthatareoutsideof thecontrolofCouncilsuchastheclimateandnaturalenvironment.Thesubmitteralsosaid thatthevisioncannotbeachievediflandsupplyisconstrained.SubmissionSC1100387states thattheRUBistootightandshouldnotbeadopted. (SC110124)thevisionisnotachievablewithoutlowcostlandforhousingbeingmadeavailable.
Page 60
Auckland Future Vision Committee 17 February 2012 (SC110192,SC1101495andSC1101665)thevisioncannotbeachievedwithoutfirsttackling trafficcongestion. (SC1101428)intensivedevelopmentandapartmentlivingwillmakeAucklandlessliveable.
Page 61
Attachment F
Item 9
0.5
Principles
Item 9 Attachment F
16submissionscommentedontheprinciplesdescribedonpages24to26oftheAucklandPlan. Areasofsupport,plusfurthersuggestions AllsubmitterssupportedthevariousprinciplesofthePlan,butsomewantedtheplantogofurther.For example: SupportstheActfairlyprinciple,butwantittoincludedisabilityexplicitly,otherwisedisability willneverbeprioritised(AssociationofBlindCitizens) SupportstheBesustainableprinciple,butconcernedthattheremaynotbeenoughfocusonhow CouncilwillencouragethepeopleofAucklandtochangetheirbehaviourtowardsmoresustainable living. SupporttheBesustainableor'ecocity'andworktogetherprinciples,asessentialforcreating healthyneighbourhoods.Unlesshealthdisparitiesareaddressedsuccessfully,therelatedand interwovensocialinequalitieswillnotbesolved.Addressingsingleissuesisnotsuccessful,since theyareallinterwoven. SupportstheValueteAoMaori'principleasthatpresentsanopportunitytorealisingtheheritage andsuiteofvaluesheldbyManaWhenua,butconcernedaboutdiminishedprofileandlackof recognitionofkaitiakitangaandmanakitanga. Support'valuingteaoMaori',butareconcernedthatwithanincreasingpopulationand internationalmigrationtoAuckland,thisthreatenstodiluteMaorivaluesandstatus. Currentomissions ThePrinciplesofthePlanneedtoincludetheConventionontheRightsofPersonswithDisabilities.
Page 62
0.6
TransformationalShifts
618submittersmadecommentsinrelationtothefivetransformationalshifts. Approximately500submittersexpressedaviewonthetransformationalshifts(TS)asawhole.Ofthese around77percentsupportedallfive,afurther12percentsupportedatleastoneandapproximately10 percentdisagreedwiththemall. GiventhattheoverwhelmingmajorityofpeoplesubmittingontheTSsupportedthemallnokeythemes requiringfundamentalchangetothissectionofthedocumentemergedasaresultofthefeedback provided.Therewerehoweverplentyofusefulsuggestionsforamendmentsthatcouldbeconsidered. Commentsmadeinrelationtothepurposeofthetransformationalshiftsingeneral OfthosewhodisagreedwiththeTSoneofthemostcommonlyexpressedobjectionswasthatsomeofthe shiftsaretheresponsibilityofcentralgovernmentratherthancouncil.Atleast3040submittersargued thatcouncilsroleshouldberestrictedtocorefunctions.Commentsalongthelinesofcouncilsonlyrole istoreduceregulationinrelationtoraisinglivingstandardsor,moregenerally,councilsroleistoserve ratherthandirectchangeweremostfrequentlymadeinrelationtoTS1(youngpeople)andTS5(living standards). Asidefromphilosophicalobjectionsofthiskind,theviewthatsomeoftheTSwereoutsideofcouncils remitmayalsohavebeendrivenbyamisunderstandingofthefunctionoftheAucklandPlan.To overcomethisthefinalversioncouldincludeamoreexplicitstatementthattheAucklandPlanisnot simplyadocumentdescribingcouncilactionsbutratheritisaplanforallAucklandandwillrequire commitmentandinvestmentfrommanyparties.Morepositively,manysubmittersrecognisedthisand talkedoftheneedforcounciltoworkcloselywithgovernment,theprivatesectorandothers.Severalalso suggestedthatitwouldbehelpfulfortheplantobemoreexplicitaboutthesplitbetweencouncilsrolein progressingtheseTSandthatofotherparties. AnothercommonobjectiontotheTSwastheirpotentialimpactonratesandthecouncilsfinancesin general.ObjectionsofthisnaturewereoftenmadebythesamepeoplewhothoughttheTSstretchedwell beyondcouncilsremit. Several(1520)submittersdescribedthewordingoftheTSassobroad,nebulousandapplepieastobe virtuallymeaningless.Ashighlevelstatementsthatsitabovethemoredetailedstrategicdirections describedelsewhereinthedocumentitisappropriatethattheTSbeveryfairlybroadinnature.However, thefactthatsomesubmitters(albeitasmallminority)raisedthisissuemaypointtoaneedtoconsider whetheramoreexplicitlinkbemadeatthefrontendofthedocumentbetweenthehighlevelconcepts describedthereandthemoredetaileddirectives/priorities/actionsthatfollow.TheCommitteefor AucklandwasamongstthesubmittersthatmadethispointbutwentfurtherbysuggestingthattheTSalso belinkedtotheactionsintheEconomicDevelopmentStrategy. ConcernsastotheachievabilityoftheTSwasraisedbysomesubmitters.Severalofthosewhoobjectedto theTSdidsoonthegroundsthattheyweretotallyunrealisticandinsomeinstanceswentagainsttheway Aucklanderschoosetolive(TS3transportinparticular).Morecommonweresubmitterswhosupported theTSbutwerealsoconcernedastotheirachievability,particularlyinlightofperceivedcentral governmentintransigenceinrelationtoAucklandsaspirations.
Page 63
Attachment F
Item 9
Auckland Future Vision Committee 17 February 2012 AnumberofsubmitterspointedtothefactthatAucklandisalreadyhighlyratedonliveabilityindexesand sothereforetheTSarenotrequired.Severalsubmitterswhowereotherwiseinfavourofthegeneral thrustoftheTSobjectedtothelanguageusedtoframethemdescribingthestatementsastoocorporate andoverburdenedwithunnecessaryadverbssuchasdramatically,radicallyandsubstantially. AnumberofsubmittersfeltthatAucklandCouncilwaspromotingoratleastacceptingasinevitablerapid populationgrowthandthatthiswouldultimatelydetractfromprogressagainsttheTSwearetryingto bringabout. TheBNZsuggestedthatthenarrativeaccompanyingeachTSshouldexplainhowtheyareadeparturefrom businessasusualandtherebydemonstrateexactlyhowtheyaretransformational. Commentsmadeinrelationtospecifictransformationalshifts WhilsttheoverwhelmingmajorityofsubmitterscommentingontheTSsupportedthemtherewere neverthelessmanyindividualsuggestionsthatmightbeconsideredtofurtherstrengthenthem.
Item 9 Attachment F
NumeroussuggestionsweremadefortheinclusionofadditionalTScoveringareassuchas: Artsandculture Heritageprotection Empowermentofpeopleandcommunities SafeandmoralAuckland Accessibilitytosport AccelerateprospectsofMaoriandPacificapeople Rurallivingandruralproduction
WorkiscurrentlyunderwaytoconsiderwhetheranewTSisrequiredspecificallyinrelationtoMaori aspirations.Mostoftheothersuggestionsarecovered,orcanbecoveredwithslightchangestothetext, bythefiveexistingshifts.Severalsportingorganisations,forexample,suggestedthatsport,cyclingand walkingarecrucialtoallfiveTSandrequestedthatthenarrativesforeachshouldbeslightlyreconfigured toexplicitlyrecognisethis.Somesubmittersalsosuggestedthattheneedsofruralareaswillnotbe adequatelyrecognisedbytheTSespeciallyinrelationtotransport,jobsandintermsofthepotentialtrade offbetweenenvironmentalprotectionandruralproduction.Severalofthesesamesubmittersfoundthis tobeespeciallydisappointinggiventhereluctance(intheirview)oftheruralareastobeincludedinthe supercityinthefirstplace. ManysubmittersthoughtthefiveTSwereaboutrightaseachrepresentedapositivechangethatwould addressafundamentalneedofAucklandandwouldultimatelyenhanceAucklandasaplacetolive. SeveralsubmittersagreedwiththethrustoftheTSbutsuggestedtheyneededtoberewordedtogive themaslightlydifferentfocus.TheFamiliesCommissionproposedalternativeversionsofallfiveTSto enhancethefocusonfamilies.AprofessorofurbandesignfromUNITECalsosuggestedsmall amendmentstothefiveshiftssothattheywouldfocuson(respectively)childneglect&youthalienation; sustainability&resilience;infrastructure;urbancentres;economicrestructuring. AnumberofsubmitterstalkedabouttheinterrelatednatureoftheTS.Businessorganisationssuchasthe ChamberofCommerceandanumberofindividualsubmittersexpressedtheirviewthatAucklands economicperformance(TS5)underliesalltheotherTS.Onthecontraryotherswarnedthatthegoalof
Auckland Future Vision Committee 17 February 2012 economicgrowthisfundamentallyincompatiblewithTS2(environmentalaction)andthetradeoffs inherentinthismustbemadeexplicitintheAucklandPlan. TS1 DramaticallyacceleratetheprospectsofAucklandschildrenandyoungpeople Somesubmittersthoughtthattheplandoesnotacknowledgeelderlyenough,mostobviouslyintermsof thefocusofTS1onyoungpeople.Similarly,whilstacknowledgingthatyoungpeopleareimportant BeaconPathwaysalsopointsoutthattheyarearelativelysmallproportionoftheoverallpopulationand assuchTS1islessfundamentalthansomeoftheothershifts.Atleastonesubmitterarguedthatthe prospectsofyoungpeoplewillimprovewithprogressontheotherfourTSandassuchacceleratingthose prospectsshouldnotbeashiftinitsownright. TS2 Stronglycommittoenvironmentalactionandgreengrowth Thefocusontheenvironment(TS2)waswidelywelcomed.Suggestionsmadeinrelationtothisshift includedwideningitsscopetoincludethebuiltenvironmentandrecognisingtheimportanceoforganic farming.Responsesinrelationtoproposedemissionsreductiontargetsarecoveredinmoredetailunder othercodes,howeverwheretheissuewasraisedinthecontextoftheTSamajoritysupportedcouncilin drivingareductionwhilstasignificantminoritysawitprimarilyasacentralgovernmentconcernthatis outsidetheremitofcouncil.ManysubmittersmadethelinkbetweenthisTSandTS3(transport). TS3 Movetooutstandingpublictransportwithinonenetwork Thevastmajorityofsubmitterswelcomedthefocusonsignificantlyimprovedpublictransport(TS3). Manysubmittersdescribedtheproposedrailprojectsascritical.Wheretherewereobjectionsthey centredoncost,theperceivedunlikelihoodthatAucklanderswoulduserailduetoapreferenceforcars andthequestionable(intheviewofthesesubmitters)benefitoftheraillinkinparticulartoAucklanders whoneitherworknorliveinthecitycentre.Somesubmittersalsoraisedthepossibilityofreducingthe focusonthecitycentre,encouragingemploymentinothercentresaroundtheregionandtherefore reducetheneedandcostofpublictransportimprovements.Severalsubmittersalsowarnedthat investmentinthenetworkwouldbesuboptimalunlessaccessibilitytotransportservicesisimprovedfor manymoreAucklanders. TS4 Radicallyimprovethequalityofurbanliving Thefocusonimprovingurbanliving(TS4)wasalsowidelyendorsed.TheFamiliesCommissionpointedto thefactthatfamilyandcommunitycohesionisespeciallyimportantasurbandensityisincreased.Several submitterssupportedbetterurbandesignbutquestionedhowcommittedcouncilwastoitgiventhepoor qualityofanumberofrecentdevelopments.Onesubmitterdescribedthequalityofthebuiltenvironment asasecondaryissueandlargelyaproductofpoorlanduseplanning.Inthissubmittersviewthemarket willdeliverqualitymixeduseoutcomesifthecouncilproperlyundertakesitsroleofprovidingappropriate infrastructureandanappropriateregulatoryenvironment.Severalsubmittersarguethatboththetitle andtheaccompanyingnarrativeofTS4needtomakemoreexplicitreferencetotheimportanceof heritageprotection. TS5 SubstantiallyraiselivingstandardsforallAucklandersandfocusonthosemostinneed SeveralsubmittersfeltthatratherthannarrowlyfocussingonGDPTS5(raisinglivingstandards)should insteadtakeamoreholisticapproachtoimprovingqualityoflifeinAuckland.Attheveryleast,several submittersargue,TS5needstobemoreexplicitabouttheneedtoclosethegapbetweenrichandpoor. ThetextintheAucklandPlanrelatedtoTS5(paragraphs144147)doesmakereferencetotheseissues
Page 65
Attachment F
Item 9
Auckland Future Vision Committee 17 February 2012 howeverthereisscopefortheadditionofasentenceortwoexplainingthelinkbetweeneconomic performance,reducinginequalitiesandoverallqualityoflife.TheRodneyLocalBoardhasrequestedthat TS5(paragraph144)beamendedtorecognisethedeprivationinpartsofitsarea.TheStevensonGroup supportedTS5butarguesthatmorerecognitionoftheongoingimportanceoftheexistingmanufacturing andindustrialsectorsisrequired.
Attachment F
Item 9
Page 66
0.7
StrategicDirections
106submissioncommentedonthestrategicdirectionslistedonpage28oftheAucklandPlan. Nokeyissueswerearosefromthesecommentsbutanumberofsmallerpointsarenotedbelow. Considerationshouldbegiventoamendingstrategicdirection3byincludingthewordssport,recreation, intotheheading. Areasofsupport,plusfurthersuggestions AllsubmitterssupportedthevariousstrategicdirectionsofthePlan,butsomewantedtheplantogo further.Forexample: Strategicdirection3(or12)InclusionofSportandrecreationThirteenregionalsportsgroups hadastandardsubmissionthatexpresseddisappointmentthatsportandrecreationdoesnot featureinanyoftheelevenstrategicdirections.Theynotethattheprovisionofrecreational facilitiesisdefinedinsection11A(e)oftheLocalGovernmentAct2002asacoreroleofalocal authorityandtheythereforewantmoreprominencetosportandrecreationintheAucklandPlan. Toaccuratelyreflecttheimportanceofsportandrecreation,theysuggesteither: o Creatinganewand12thstrategicdirection,suchas,ensureallAucklanderscan participateinqualitysportandrecreationopportunities,or, Amendingstrategicdirection3to,integratesport,recreation,arts,culture,heritageand lifestyleintoourdailylives.
SPARCbelievesthatsportandrecreationshouldberecognisedexplicitlyinthesectionCoutcomes andvisionforthecity.Theybelievethissectionshouldacknowledgetheimportanceofsportand recreationincontributingtoAucklandersbeinghealthyandactive(paragraph111)andhowyoung peoplesparticipationinsportandrecreationcontributestotheirleadinghealthy,activelivesand providesanavenueforpositivesocialandpersonaldevelopment.Thiscouldbeacknowledgedin paragraphs129131. AchievinggreengrowthnotdefinedParagraph137statesthat,TheDevelopmentStrategyand otherchaptersthroughoutgivefurtherdirectionongreendevelopmentandactions.TheAlbert EdenLocalBoardbelievesthatdespitethepromiseinfurtherdirectionelsewhereintheDraft Plan,themeaningofthisterm,andhowthatshiftisencouraged,remainsobscure.Nothingin subsequentsections,forexample,SectionDAucklandshighlevelDevelopmentStrategy, Chapter4AucklandsEconomy,especiallyparagraph363(p74),directive4.5(p7475),the4.5 Actions,directive6.1(p98),ortheassociatedDraftEconomicDevelopmentStrategy,addanything ofsignificancetothisstatement. HeritageSubmittersuggeststhatheritageisincludedinFigureC.1B. RequestformoredetailAnumberofsubmitters(mostlycorporates)notedthattheAuckland Planwaslightondetailandthatfurtherworkwasneeded.Forexample:
Page 67
Attachment F
Item 9
Auckland Future Vision Committee 17 February 2012 o TheBNZBanksuggesteditwouldbehelpfulifthecouncilstatedtherationalandnet benefitsofthepreferredstrategicopinionsincomparisontocompetingoptions(e.g. Greenfield/brownfielddevelopment). Explicitacknowledgementisneededofthetradeoffsrequiredbetweendifferent aspirationaltargets.Detailedcost/benefitanalysisisrequiredtodemonstratethat deliveryoftheaspirationaltargetsispossible,includingadetailedoutlineofthebasic fundingprinciplesaswellastheotherprinciplestheCouncilwilladhereto.(CarterHolt Harvey).IncludingtradeoffswasalsosuggestedbytheAucklandRegionalPublicHealth Services. Thereisalackoffocusonthecosts,sotheAucklandPlanreadsmorelikeadream.
Item 9
Attachment F

NeedtoincreasetheimportanceofpeoplewithineachstrategicdirectionAucklandCommunity Developmentsuggeststhatcommunitydevelopmentbeelaboratedineachofthe11strategic directions.TheysuggestthataCommunityDevelopmentStrategyiscodevelopedwithAucklands communitiestoclearlycommunicatehowAucklandspeopleandtheircommunitiesareintegrated acrossthekeyareashighlightedwithintheDraftAucklandPlan.BothdiagramsC.1AandC.1B recognisepeopleasthecentreoftheapproachproposedbuttheactualrolesofpeople, communitiesandcommunityleddevelopmentisnotelaboratedinthisdocument. ExplicitlyincludedisabilitiesTheAucklandDisabilityLawsupportsthestrategicdirectionsbut notesthattheinclusionofdisabledpeopleisrarelyachievedunlessspecificconsiderationof accessibilityisbuiltinattheplanningstage.Thereforeinclusionofdisabledpeopleshouldbe statedexplicitlyinallaspectsoftheAucklandPlan.Theinclusionofblindpeopleinthe developmentofsharedspacesinAucklandisagoodexampleofthis.TheAssociationofBlind CitizensofNZ(ABC)alsosoughtanexplicitcommitmentinthePlantoprovideabarrierfree environmentthatenablesinclusionofdisabledpeopleintheeverydaylifeofthiscity.Without specificexplicitconsiderationofdisability,inclusionisnotinevitable.*CouncilControlled Organisationssimilarlyneedtohavemeasurabletargetsaboutdisabilitythatalignwiththe AucklandPlan Explicitlyconsidertheeffectsofalcohol.AlcoholHealthwatchsuggeststhatalcoholrelatedharm impactsoneachoftheoutcomes/strategicdirectionsthathavebeenspecifiedandthoseimpacts shouldbesuccinctlyincludedintheplan.AsimilarsubmissionwasreceivedfromHapaiTeHauora Tapui,whosuggestedthattoachievethetargetsinStrategicDirection1Councilshouldconsider thedensity,marketing,priceandamountofliquoroutletsinlowsocioeconomicareas.
Page 68
File No.: CP2012/01424
Executive Summary
Formal consultation on the draft Auckland Plan took place between 20 September 2011 and 31 October 2011 in accordance with the special consultative procedure. The proposed changes to the draft Auckland Plan are detailed in a series of chapter reports which will be presented to the Auckland Future Vision Committee over several meetings scheduled in February 2012. The key components of the draft Development Strategy are to be presented to the Committee at its meeting on 17 February 2012 for initial discussion and consideration. The draft maps associated with the Development Strategy will be tabled at the meeting. The proposed structure for the revised development strategy for committee consideration is as follows: 1. Introduction Objectives Outline of the Development Strategy 2. A commitment to a quality compact Auckland A description of the key elements of a quality compact Auckland, including what quality means at different scales 3. Structural shapers and enablers A description of the key elements that shape Auckland, such as Aucklands geography, major open space, international gateway and the port 4. Two big initiatives for Auckland Overview of the city centre masterplan and The Southern Initiative 5. Delivery A revised version of Section D: Development Strategy and Development Strategy maps is scheduled to be considered by the Committee at two further meetings, to be held on 27 February and 1 March 2012. At these meetings officers will be seeking Committee direction on the proposed changes relating to Section D: Development Strategy.
Recommendation/s
a) b) That the report be received. That the proposed structure for the Auckland Development Strategy be endorsed in principle.
Background
N/a
Decision Making
N/a
Auckland Plan Deliberations Report Section D Aucklands Development Strategy
Page 69
Item 10
Item 10

Consultation
Local Board Views


Page 70

Attachments
There are no attachments for this report.
Signatories
Authors Authorisers David Clelland, Manager Spatial and Infrastructure Strategy Ree Anderson, Manager Regional Strategy, Community and Cultural Policy Roger Blakeley, Chief Planning Officer
Page 71
Item 10
File No.: CP2012/01428
Executive Summary
Formal consultation on the draft Auckland Plan took place between 20 September 2011 and 31 October 2011 in accordance with the special consultative procedure. The proposed changes to the draft Auckland Plan are detailed in a series of chapter reports which will be presented to the Auckland Future Vision Committee over several meetings scheduled in February 2012. The following chapter report is to be considered by the Committee at its meeting on 17 February 2012: Chapter 1 Aucklands People Proposed changes relating to The Southern Initiative are not included in this version of the chapter report. The text relating to The Southern Initiative will be presented to the Committee at its meeting on 27 February 2012. Officers are seeking Committee direction on a number of proposed changes detailed in this chapter report in order to prepare a revised/final version of the Auckland Plan. These proposed changes have resulted from the formal submission and hearings process, and additional research in response to issues identified in submissions. The chapter report includes a brief summary of feedback, recommended major changes to the chapter, a table listing minor changes along with potential implications for other chapters. A marked up version of the proposed changes is attached to the chapter report. The recommendations for this chapter are provided below. Further detail and reasons for the proposed amendments can be found in the chapter report (refer Attachment 1)
Recommendation/s
a) b) That the report be received. That greater acknowledgement of the contribution of older people and persons with disabilities, the prevention of family violence and youth transition pathways (from school to education, training or employment) is provided in chapter 1, with new directives, text and actions as outlined in Attachment 1. That additional text on social issues including alcohol, tobacco, gambling, bullying, suicide and self-harm as outlined in Attachment 1 is provided in chapter 1. That the targets relating to chapter 1 be amended as outlined in Attachment 1. That the Committee approve minor changes as outlined in the chapter report (Attachment 1). That the Committee approve the amendments to the text and visuals relating to chapter 1 (Attachment 1), subject to any necessary alignment and integration with other chapters.
c) d) e) f)
Background
n/a
Decision Making
n/a
Auckland Plan Deliberations Report Chapter 1 Aucklands People
Page 73
Item 11
Item 11

Consultation
Local Board Views


Page 74

Attachments
No. A B C Title APOG Chapter 1 Report DRAFT APOG Chapter 1 Word Copy DRAFT Summary of Submissions Page 77 81 99
Signatories
Authors Authorisers Abba Fidow, Team Leader Forums and Engagement Raewyn Stone, Manager Community and Cultural Strategy Ree Anderson, Manager Regional Strategy, Community and Cultural Policy Roger Blakeley, Chief Planning Officer
Page 75
Item 11

Auckland Plan Chapter Report Aucklands People (excluding The Southern Initiative section) 1. Summary This report provides a summary of the major and minor changes proposed to chapter one of the Draft Auckland Plan. The majority of submissions strongly agreed with the priorities of putting children and young people first, improving the education, health and safety of Aucklanders with a focus on those most in need and strengthening communities. The relationship of social issues to other parts of the draft plan was acknowledged, but greater emphasis was needed to communicate the plan as a plan for all of Auckland. The following bullet points outline the most common topics raised in submissions to Chapter 1: an increased focus on older people, and greater emphasis on persons with disabilities greater recognition of diversity (ethnic, cultural, lifestyle) in Auckland greater emphasis on addressing social issues, such as tobacco, alcohol, family/domestic violence and gambling addiction more emphasis on parents and/or families within the putting children and young people first priority importance of connecting young people to employment. Officers have also worked very closely with central government (through the Auckland Policy Office and the Auckland Social Sector Leaders Group) on further refining the priorities, directives, targets, and general text of the chapter. Central government is supportive of the proposed changes. The following bullet points outline the proposed major changes to Chapter 1: Insert new directive (Directive 1.8) and paragraphs (265-267) on family violence Insert new directive (Directive 1.12) and paragraphs (279-281) on older people Insert two new directive (Directive 1.5 and 1.6) on linking young people to education, training or employment, and supporting young people in tertiary education and sustainable employment Modify and insert additional text on social issues such as alcohol, tobacco, gambling, bullying and suicide and self-harm (258-262) Amend six current, retain one proposed, delete one existing, and insert five new targets for chapter one
Minor changes for the chapter are also proposed and included in this to improve clarity and address submitters concerns. Attached is a marked up version of the proposed changes to Chapter 1 (refer Attachment 1).
2. Major changes The following major changes are proposed to chapter 1: Major change 1 insertion of new directive and text on family violence A substantial number of submitters to the draft Auckland Plan strongly supported a new directive aimed at reducing family violence. A draft new directive (Directive 1.8) and accompanying paragraphs (paragraphs 265-267) on preventing family violence is a proposed major change for chapter one. The proposed directive is Support integrated measures to prevent family violence and create safe families and whanau. Feedback from central government agencies, particularly the New Zealand Police and the Ministry of Social Development, has been supportive of this new directive, and is in line with their existing priorities. It is recommended that this directive and text be approved and included within the Priority 2 (Improve the Education, Health and Safety of Aucklanders, with a focus on those most in need) section of Chapter 1.
Page 77
Attachment A
Item 11

Major change 2 insertion of new directive and text on older people
Item 11 Attachment A
A large number of submitters wanted greater recognition regarding the value and recognition of older peoples contribution (people 65 years and older) to Auckland in the draft plan. While there were a few references in the text of chapter 1, these did not reflect the contribution and role of older people in Auckland. Also, there was inconsistent referencing throughout the chapter in relation to older people (the terms elderly, ageing population and older people are all interchangeably used). A draft new directive (Directive 1.12) and accompanying paragraphs (paragraphs 278-280) recognising the diversity and contribution of older people to Auckland is proposed. The directive also recognises that the older people demographic itself will become more diverse over the life of the plan. The new directive is Recognise and value the contribution of older people to the community. It is recommended that this new directive and text be approved for inclusion within the Priority 2 (Improve the Education, Health and Safety of Aucklanders, with a focus on those most in need) section of Chapter 1. Major change 3 Insertion of new directives and text on education Most submitters talked positively about the draft plans commitment to young people, and noted the importance of education, particularly linking young people leaving secondary school to employment. Feedback from central government agencies also highlighted this area as one of key importance. As a result, two new directives (Directives 1.5 and 1.6) have been developed, emphasising the importance of linking young people to employment, training or further education, as well as supporting young people in tertiary education and employment. These directives align with the work priorities of central government agencies, namely the Ministry of Education. The proposed directives are Ensure all young people leaving school have a clear pathway to further education, training or employment and Support young people postsecondary school, to achieve success in tertiary education and in sustaining employment. It is recommended that these new directives be approved from inclusion within the Priority 2 (Improve the Education, Health and Safety of Aucklanders, with a focus on those most in need) section of Chapter 1. Major change 4 Increase reference to social issues such as alcohol, tobacco, gambling, bullying and suicide and self-harm A large number of submitters wanted greater recognition in the draft Auckland Plan of the impact of social issues, including tobacco, alcohol and gambling. Councillors also asked that the issue of suicide and selfharm needed greater recognition in the Plan. Existing text was amended (as outlined in paragraphs 257-260) to better identify issues such as tobacco, alcohol and gambling. New text (paragraphs 261-262) was inserted to discuss the issue of bullying and suicide and self harm. It is recommended that the new text be approved for inclusion within the Priority 2 (Improve the Education, Health and Safety of Aucklanders, with a focus on those most in need) section of Chapter One.
Major change 5 changes to Chapter 1 targets While few submitters commented on the targets associated with Chapter 1, much of the feedback from central government agencies is towards the proposed targets. That feedback included that some targets be amended to align with existing government targets, while one be removed as it is unable to be measured. In addition, new targets are also proposed given the development of additional directives for chapter 1. The following table outlines the proposed changes to the targets: Targets in draft Auckland Plan By 2017 all pre-school children demonstrate at the B4 (Before) School check that they have strong family and whanau attachments and have the Proposed targets By 2017 all pre-school children receive all wellchecks, including B4 School check, and be up to date with childhood immunisation
Page 78

foundation for success in school and life By 2020 increase the number of early childhood education facilities by 100 (10 per year) in southwest and west Auckland (areas of highest need) By 2030, all school leavers will be achieving NCEA Level 2 By 2040 all young adults will complete a postsecondary qualification By 2020 reduce preventable housing-related hospitalisation by 35% (measure of meningococcal infection, rheumatic fever, respiratory infections etc) By 2040 80% of the population has a cardiovascular assessment (measure of obesity and onset of diabetes) by a primary care provider Rates of total criminal offences per 10,000 population reduce from 939 in 2010 to 900 in 2040 Perception of safety in the community, in Quality of Life Survey, increase from 49% in 2010 to 70% by 2040. By 2020 all 3 and 4 year olds will have access to quality, culturally appropriate Early Childhood Learning Service By 2020 all school leavers will achieve at least NCEA Level 2 and have a career plan By 2030 all young adults will complete a postsecondary qualification By 2020 reduce preventable housing-related hospitalisation by 35% Note: there may be a case for moving this target to the Housing Chapter Propose removing this target as this target is unable
to be measured
By 2020 the amount of trauma from road crashes caused by alcohol, speeding or lack of restraint will be in line with nationally set targets By 2020 levels of injury to children will be dramatically decreased By 2040 gaps in life expectancy between different ethnic groups will be substantially diminished By 2020 the number of breeches of the Domestic Violence Act will have stabilised and by 2040 it will have diminished significantly By 2020 all public spaces including schools will be smokefree. Changes to targets are proposed as: new targets are required to align with new directives and text within the chapter timeframes are now consistent with central government targets and activities some targets could not be measured as proposed. It is recommended that changes to targets be approved for inclusion within Chapter One. 3. Minor Changes As well as the above changes, the public consultation process has resulted in a range of minor wording changes to improve clarity and address submitters particular concerns. The following table sets outs these minor changes. Minor change Standardise use of terms throughout Chapter One (and across the entire plan) Older people rather than aged population, elderly Persons with disabilities to replace disabled communities, people with disabilities Pacific peoples rather than Pacific islanders, Pacific communities. Inclusion in text of references to Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual,
Suggested change to Auckland Plan References to Older people, Persons with disability and Pacific peoples should be consistently used throughout the entire plan
Page 79
Attachment A
Rates of total criminal offences per 10,000 population reduce from 939 in 2010 to 800 in 2040 Target unchanged
Item 11

Transsexual and Intersex (GLBTI) communities Removal of MELAA from text explaining Middle Eastern/Latin American and African population in Auckland Maintain use of Middle Eastern, Latin American and African population as a title, but remove use of the MELAA abbreviation, and note footnote which outlines issues related to collection of MELAA statistics Minor changes to all Chapter one maps (sourcing of all maps to Census 2006)
Item 11
Changes to maps
4. Potential Implications for other chapters Older people/Persons with disability/Pacific peoples terminology needs to be consistently used by all chapters (replacing terms such as ageing population, elderly, disabled communities etc) Ensure connection between health and environment and urban Auckland and housing chaptersnote may move target on preventing housing related hospitalisation to housing chapter
Attachments 1. Marked up version of proposed changes to Chapter 1, Auckland Plan. 2. Chapter 1: Summary of Written Submissions
Attachment A
5. Recommendations 1. That the proposed major changes to Chapter 1 be approved 2. That the proposed minor changes to Chapter 1 be approved
Page 80
Page 81
Attachment B
Item 11
Attachment B
Item 11
Page 82
Page 83
Attachment B
Item 11
Attachment B
Item 11
Page 84
Page 85
Attachment B
Item 11
Attachment B
Item 11
Page 86
Page 87
Attachment B
Item 11
Attachment B
Item 11
Page 88
Page 89
Attachment B
Item 11
Attachment B
Item 11
Page 90
Page 91
Attachment B
Item 11
Attachment B
Item 11
Page 92
Page 93
Attachment B
Item 11
Attachment B
Item 11
Page 94
Page 95
Attachment B
Item 11
Attachment B
Item 11
Page 96
Page 97
Attachment B
Item 11
Attachment B
Item 11
Page 98

Summary of Submissions received for Chapter 1 (Aucklands People)
Introduction 227 submitters made 1036 submission points relating to the Aucklands People (Chapter 1) chapter. This report outlines an overall summary of feedback for the area in its entirety, as well as an overview of key themes by priority. The vast majority of submission points supported Chapter 1 of the draft Auckland Plan. Many submission points noted agreement and/or support with the general direction of this topic, or of the Strategic Direction or Priorities underpinning the chapter. However, while a large number of submission points noted support, some also raised additional points for consideration and/or possible amendment (e.g. support focus on children, but also consider older people). Other submissions did not state a preference, but added an additional area or topic that the plan should reflect or acknowledge (e.g. older peoples, diverse communities). It is therefore difficult to be explicit about the number of submission points that clearly support or do not support specific views. Support The majority of submissions strongly agreed with the priorities put forward in the draft plan, namely: Put Children and Young People First Improve the education, health and safety of Aucklanders, with a focus on those most in need, and Strengthen Communities.
A number of submitters raised new priority areas for consideration. It is not clear in the submissions whether these new priorities were to replace the draft priorities, or were in addition to the draft priorities, but they include: an increased focus in the chapter (and the plan) on older people and persons with disabilities (through a new priority/directive in chapter one) recognition of the role of parents, and addition of parents and/or families to the Putting Children and Young People First priority ensuring major social issues (alcohol harm, tobacco harm, gambling addiction, and reducing family violence) are incorporated into the chapter and plan the importance of ensuring that young people are connected through education on to employment.
Additional issues that arose in regards to submissions on this chapter included: confusion regarding the role that Auckland Council plays in this chapter (and the role played by other stakeholders, particularly central government) whether the proposed targets in the chapter (namely health-specific targets) best align to the outcomes sought in the chapter recognition and expression of the interrelatedness of these issues with other parts of the draft plan (e.g. housing, transportation, and environment can impact on social issues) acknowledgement of the role that sports and recreation can play in delivering the strategic direction and priorities of the chapter.
Page 99
Attachment C
Item 11

Older people2
Item 11 Attachment C
As noted earlier, a large number of submitters commented that there was little profile of issues affecting older people in the draft Plan. While the demographic of older people was not identified as a specific topic area, there were approximately 70 submission points (and appropriately 20 key submitters) that commented on increasing the profile of older people in the draft Plan. Submitters reinforced that Auckland has a growing demographic of older people which is due to rapidly increase as the baby boomers reach 65 years and older. By 2031 it is projected that there will be approximately the same percentage of children under 14 years of age (18.4) as there is for adults 65 years and older (17.1) in Auckland. Specific key issues identified were that: many key submitters commented on the lack of discussion on the needs of older people and the recognition of their contribution to Auckland several submitters recommended the option of Auckland Council adopting the Global Age-Friendly City model promoted by the World Health Organisation. This model would enable the benchmarking of progress towards improving social cohesion, reducing social isolation, implementing urban design principles and ensuring Auckland is a liveable city for older people. there is a lack of recognition of the roles of older people and their contribution to the community in nurturing, volunteering and advocacy. many submitters commented on the need to ensure that housing is accessible to all people, including older people council should continue the rates rebates policy for people on low incomes and in particular, older people. Submitters also supported other housing options such as the regulation of housing equity schemes which enable older people to undertake home modifications equitable access to services is ensured for older people (e.g. rural older people). This includes access to health services and transport options council developed a comprehensive older peoples strategy.
2 The generally used term, as outlined in the New Zealand Positive Ageing Strategy, is older people. However, within the submissions, multiple terms (elderly, kaumtua, matua, old people) are used.
Page 100

Code Analysis Theme 2.0 Aucklands People 137 submission points relating to this theme Summary comment There was strong support for Chapter ones strategic directive and priorities ensuring and supporting community-led development Areas of opposition/seeking change better recognition for all diverse communities, just diverse ethnic communities (e.g. older people, disability, sexual orientation) a large number of submitters propose increased recognition and reference for older people, as well as disability communities throughout the chapter (potentially through a new strategic direction specific to the elderly) some submitters want focus on reducing serious social issues, such as alcohol, tobacco and gambling harm, and suicide key health stakeholders oppose the current health-related targets specified for Chapter one, and propose changes to draft targets Directives to give a better idea of what council will undertake (e.g. role and initiatives) and how these are integrated with key strategic directions Better linking of this section to environmental and economic outcomes (e.g. There was strong support for the proposed focus on children and young people (e.g. accelerating the prospects of children and young people in this city) ensuring the Children and Young People were involved in progressing this priority (with all stakeholders) development of a childrens plan or policy for council (to be led by a specific Children and Young People unit)
2.1 Putting Children and Young People First 227 submission points relating to this theme
2.2 Improve the
Areas of opposition/seeking change consider additional directive in this topic on children/young people safety (e.g. family violence/violence to children; bullying; suicide and self harm) consider expanding focus to include parents, families (and at a wider sense, communities) submitters that disagree believe that: o it is not right to put one group ahead of another o should focus on older people population (age friendly cities) o focus on children/young people are central government responsibility (dont replicate what is already being done by government) council needs to clearly organise itself to meet these objectives (e.g. CBD is child-friendly - link to City Centre Master Plan) some groups flagged the need for planning restrictions to be considered around schools (e.g. no fast food outlets nearby, Smokefree parks and reserves, free swimming pools for children) number of key children stakeholders recommend implementing the UNCROC and UNICEF Child-Friendly Cities framework reflect that new Early Childhood Education (ECE) facilities should be focused within neighbourhood and residential settings There was strong support for
Page 101
Attachment C
Item 11

Education, Heath and Safety of Aucklanders 292 submission points relating to this theme the plans focus on education, health and safety and for the four directives within this topic ECE focus
Item 11
Attachment C
2.3 Strengthen Communities 164 submission points relating to this theme
Areas of opposition/seeking change Of submissions that opposed this priority, a key comment was that involvement in education was a core role for central government (and not a role for council) Consider separating safety from education and health to give better recognition/priority around areas such as Family Violence, Injury Prevention and suicide and self harm Amend targets for early childhood education and health Increase environmental education as well as recognise other cultural conceptual models regarding education, health and safety Ensure that Directive 1.4 (tackle low levels of literacy and numeracy) specifically includes language (e.g. english language provision) and financial literacy within its scope There was strong support for the Strengthening Communities priority, as well as the underpinning directives in this area: o support community-led development and work with communities to develop leadership, skills and capacity o promote inclusion, reduce discrimination and remove barriers to opportunity and participation, particularly for disadvantaged groups acknowledging that a wide range of stakeholders play a role in strengthening communities (e.g. NGOs, community groups, religious bodies, sports and recreation groups, Arts and Culture groups) ensuring a community-led ('by community for community') development approach more community festivals in varied locations, promoting opportunities for people of different cultures to interact with each other, celebrate diversity at a local, regional and national scale, local neighbourhood support groups bi/multilingual diversity (e.g. support programmes, ensure appropriate signage)
Areas of opposition/seeking change a substantial group of submissions clearly identified reduction of social issues (alcohol, tobacco, gambling) as a way of strengthening their communities some submitters seeking to include physical regeneration of communities (e.g. town centres) as a way of revitalising and strengthening communities some submissions also noted the role that arts and culture play in strengthening communities recognise older people and disability communities within this section and ensure support and resources specifically for developing these (and other) communities recognise arts experiences and opportunities to those parts of Auckland beyond the boundaries of the city centre is important for strengthening communities and creating enduring neighbourhoods
Page 102
File No.: CP2012/01426
Executive Summary
Formal consultation on the draft Auckland Plan took place between 20 September 2011 and 31 October 2011 in accordance with the special consultative procedure. The proposed changes to the draft Auckland Plan are detailed in a series of chapter reports which will be presented to the Auckland Future Vision Committee over several meetings scheduled in February 2012. The following chapter report is to be considered by the Committee at its meeting on 17 February 2012: Chapter 10 Aucklands Infrastructure Officers are seeking Committee direction on a number of proposed changes detailed in this chapter report in order to prepare a revised/final version of the Auckland Plan. These proposed changes have resulted from the formal submission and hearings process, and additional research in response to issues identified in submissions. The chapter report includes a brief summary of feedback, recommended major changes to the chapter, a table listing minor changes along with potential implications for other chapters. A marked up version of the proposed changes is attached to the chapter report. The recommendations for this chapter are provided below. Further detail and reasons for the proposed amendments can be found in the chapter report (refer Attachment 1).
Auckland Plan Deliberations Report Chapter 10 Aucklands Infrastructure
Page 103
Item 12
Item 12
Recommendation/s
a) b) c) d) That the report be received. That the water, energy, and telecommunication sections are combined into a single new section entitled network utilities. That the plan includes additional text relating to resilience and hazards affecting infrastructure sectors. That the connections between Chapter 7 and Chapter 10 (Aucklands Infrastructure) are strengthened, giving greater reference in Chapter 10 to rural Aucklands infrastructure needs. That the existing definition of critical infrastructure be reviewed and amended as appropriate so it is clear to infrastructure providers and other stakeholders what the Council expects in relation to this. That the list of critical infrastructure assets supplied by submitters (e.g. NZ Defence Force) be reviewed and modifications as outlined in Attachment 1 be made to Table 10.2 and Map 10.3 Critical Infrastructure Networks. That the plan include text in relevant sections emphasising Aucklands interdependence with other regions within New Zealand, and in particular the upper north island, particularly to support Map B1 (Interregional Connectivity) in Section B Auckland Now. That the changes to the Chapter 10 targets be made in accordance with the specific list of changes set out in out in Attachment 1 to this report. That the Committee approve minor changes as outlined in the chapter report (Attachment 1). That the Committee approve the amendments to the text and visuals relating to chapter 1 (Attachment 1), subject to any necessary alignment and integration with other chapters.
e)
f)
g)
h) i) j)
Background
N/a
Decision Making
N/a

Consultation with Maori on the draft Auckland Plan occurred over 2011 beginning with 2 mayoral hui held in January. These were followed up with 8 sub-regional hui, 4 technical workshops and an additional 2 mayoral hui. All matters in relation to Maori content in the plan have been either drafted or reviewed by the Maori Strategy and Relationship Department. To assist the Auckland Council during the preliminary stages of drafting, the Maori Strategy and Relationship department identified significant issues concerning Maori in May 2011 and subsequently presented a supporting technical paper in August 2011 as part of a suite of papers that informed the draft. The department led the consultation process prior to adoption of the draft Auckland Plan and during the special consultative procedure. Iwi have made contributions through direct face to face engagement, submissions and values and issues papers. Engagement and consultation with the Independent Maori Statutory Board has also been undertaken. Significant matters affecting Maori arising from the special consultative procedure were presented to the Committee through the chapter report on Aucklands Maori on 3 February 2012, with cross-references to other chapters of
Auckland Plan Deliberations Report Chapter 10 Aucklands Infrastructure Page 104
Consultation
Local Board Views



Attachments
No. A Title Chapter 10 - Auckland's Infrastructure Page 107
Page 105
Item 12
the plan as appropriate. Further detail and recommendations, including a summary of iwi feedback, has been provided to the Committee through the chapter report Aucklands Maori.
Signatories
Item 12
Authors
Timothy Hegarty, Principal Infrastructure Planner Rob Bates, Acting Manager Infrastructure Strategy David Clelland, Manager Spatial and Infrastructure Strategy Ree Anderson, Manager Regional Strategy, Community and Cultural Policy Roger Blakeley, Chief Planning Officer
Authorisers
Page 106
Page 107
Attachment A
Item 12
Attachment A
Item 12
Page 108
Page 109
Attachment A
Item 12
Attachment A
Item 12
Page 110
Page 111
Attachment A
Item 12
Attachment A
Item 12
Page 112
Page 113
Attachment A
Item 12
Attachment A
Item 12
Page 114
Page 115
Attachment A
Item 12
Attachment A
Item 12
Page 116
Page 117
Attachment A
Item 12
Attachment A
Item 12
Page 118
Page 119
Attachment A
Item 12
Attachment A
Item 12
Page 120
Page 121
Attachment A
Item 12
Attachment A
Item 12
Page 122
Page 123
Attachment A
Item 12
Attachment A
Item 12
Page 124
Page 125
Attachment A
Item 12
Attachment A
Item 12
Page 126
Page 127
Attachment A
Item 12
Attachment A
Item 12
Page 128
Page 129
Attachment A
Item 12
Attachment A
Item 12
Page 130
Page 131
Attachment A
Item 12
Attachment A
Item 12
Page 132
Page 133
Attachment A
Item 12
Attachment A
Item 12
Page 134
Page 135
Attachment A
Item 12
Attachment A
Item 12
Page 136
Page 137
Attachment A
Item 12
Attachment A
Item 12
Page 138
Page 139
Attachment A
Item 12
Attachment A
Item 12
Page 140
Page 141
Attachment A
Item 12
Attachment A
Item 12
Page 142
Page 143
Attachment A
Item 12
Attachment A
Item 12
Page 144
Page 145
Attachment A
Item 12
Attachment A
Item 12
Page 146
Page 147
Attachment A
Item 12
Attachment A
Item 12
Page 148
Page 149
Attachment A
Item 12
Attachment A
Item 12
Page 150
Page 151
Attachment A
Item 12
Attachment A
Item 12
Page 152
Page 153
Attachment A
Item 12
Attachment A
Item 12
Page 154
Page 155
Attachment A
Item 12
Attachment A
Item 12
Page 156
Page 157
Attachment A
Item 12
Attachment A
Item 12
Page 158
Page 159
Attachment A
Item 12
Attachment A
Item 12
Page 160
Page 161
Attachment A
Item 12
Attachment A
Item 12
Page 162
Page 163
Attachment A
Item 12
Attachment A
Item 12
Page 164
Page 165
Attachment A
Item 12
Attachment A
Item 12
Page 166
Page 167
Attachment A
Item 12
Attachment A
Item 12
Page 168
Page 169
Attachment A
Item 12
Attachment A
Item 12
Page 170
Page 171
Attachment A
Item 12
Attachment A
Item 12
Page 172
Page 173
Attachment A
Item 12
Attachment A
Item 12
Page 174
Page 175
Attachment A
Item 12
Attachment A
Item 12
Page 176
Page 177
Attachment A
Item 12
File No.: CP2012/01488
Executive Summary
The New Zealand Productivity Commission is completing its inquiry into the economic efficiency of international freight transport services in New Zealand. The Inquirys mandate covers legislation and regulation regarding competition and objectives, ports ownership issues, border-control processes, domestic logistics, and technology and market trends. An Issues paper was published as a first step in the inquiry process to which Council submitted feedback. A draft report was subsequently published by the Commission (on 12 January 2012 see Attachment A for a summary of the draft report) and this report covers a proposed further final submission to the Commission (see Attachment B for the proposed submission). In summary, the proposed submission generally supports the draft reports findings and recommendations with some exceptions (see the Decision Making section below for key points from the submission). Where appropriate, the proposed submission re-emphasises earlier views from the Councils submission on the Issues paper. The submission is due to the Commission on 27 February 2012.
Recommendation/s
a) b) That the report be received. That the Auckland Future Vision Committee approves the proposed submission to the New Zealand Productivity Commission on its draft report on International Freight Transport Services.
Background
The New Zealand Productivity Commission is an independent Crown entity that began operating on 1 April 2011. It was established to advise Government on improving productivity and efficiency (and the overall wellbeing of New Zealanders) of various industries and issues. The Commission is presently inquiring into New Zealands international freight transport services and opportunities to improve the economic efficiency of these services. The Commissions mandate covers the laws, regulations, institutions and policy choices that guide and incentivise the industry, which in the case of this inquiry includes legislation and regulation regarding competition and objectives, ports ownership issues, border-control processes, domestic logistics, and technology and market trends. An Issues paper was published as a first step in the inquiry process to which Council submitted feedback (dated 23 September 2011). A 315 page draft report regarding the Commissions findings, recommendations and further questions was subsequently published (12 January 2012) which is the subject of this submission. Submissions on the draft report close on 27 February 2012. The Commission will present its final report to the Government on 1 April 2012.
Auckland Council's Submission to the Productivity Commission's Draft Paper on International Freight Transport Services
Page 179
Item A.1
Item A.1
New Zealand is a remote developed country relative to its international markets and so the cost of freighting is significant and applies to both importers and exporters and thus producers and consumers. As such, the Commission believes that maximising the economic efficiency of international freight services will in turn maximise the wellbeing of New Zealanders. International cargo ships make around 3,300 calls per annum to New Zealand ports. In 2010, Ports of Auckland Limited (POAL) handled approximately 40% of New Zealands imports and 21% of its exports (by value), which makes it New Zealands largest port. Most flights to and from New Zealand also carry freight (of relatively higher value than sea freight) and Auckland International Airport Limited (AIAL) is New Zealands second-largest port by freight value. Given their scale, scope and relative importance to the functioning of the City (and its economy), these institutions are of particular import to the Council. Given the time constraints faced by the Council in developing this submission, a focused approach has been taken to providing feedback. The scope of the proposed submission is focused to commenting on findings and recommendations relating to the Councils role as: Owner of POAL and shareholder in AIAL; Strategic planner through processes such as the Auckland Plan and the Economic Development Strategy; Regulator through the Resource Management Act (RMA) 1991; and Funder/provider of a wide range of public services (particularly transport) across Auckland. Applying this lens, the proposed submission provides feedback on chapters 8-11 of the draft report. A section at the end of the submission has comments regarding other findings and recommendations of relevance from other chapters. Where appropriate, the submission reemphasises earlier views from the Councils first submission on the Commissions Issues paper.
Decision Making
This reports recommendations fall within the delegated authority of the Auckland Future Vision Committee. In summary, the proposed submission covers the following key points:
A more collaborative and strategic approach to port operation and investment is critical. There is a lack of a rational planning approach regarding which ports should expand or be divested of to maximise economic efficiency and minimise public expenditure on supporting transport infrastructure and other services. This absence of a strategic approach creates risks of under or over-investment (amongst other things) and can result in uncoordinated decisions by various parties which do not make New Zealand more internationally competitive. Central Government must play the important and necessary role of facilitation, coordination and leadership, to develop a strategic approach to ports that improves outcomes for New Zealand as a whole. A long term view of efficiency needs to be taken, especially given the lumpy nature of ports investment. Furthermore, efficiency in one part of the economy (e.g. the freight system) may not improve overall welfare when externalities are present. While commercially focussed, it is rational for ports to have supplementary objectives from their shareholder(s), as any other profit-maximising business might have. Given this, we disagree with the Commissions recommendation to change the objectives of Council-owned port and airport companies to align with the objectives for state owned enterprises. Ports are not isolated entities and operate within a wider city environment with various supporting networks and challenges. The best outcomes for both POAL and Auckland will come from optimising the synergy between these institutions, to better integrate Council activities, POAL operations, transport infrastructure investment, and spatial planning.
Page 180

The Councils holding company Auckland Council Investments Limited (ACIL), successfully mitigates political influence on POALs operations, which allows the port to run on a commercial basis. The current public ownership model for POAL is efficient and delivers a good balance between commercial focus and restraint of market power. A review of sections 5 and/or 6 in regards to clarifying the role socio-economic outcomes in the RMA is supported in principle. A review of section 166 of the RMA receives qualified support. The Council does not support classifying ports as Network Utility Operators, but does support a more restrictive classification for ports as Limited Requiring Authorities, whereby Council would retain final rights over decisions regarding land-side expansion, etc. The proposed National Policy Statement (NPS) on transport infrastructure is supported and should provide much needed guidance on ports and their supporting infrastructural requirements. The Council wishes to be closely involved in the development of such a NPS. The Commissions draft report does not explore Aucklands transport funding gap, which is an impediment to improving the efficiency of the overall transport system and of freight transport in particular. The Cost Benefit analysis prescribed by Treasury for transport projects needs to be reviewed to ensure that it includes all relevant externalities, including the flow-on effects from land use changes, a lower social discount rate (currently 8%), and a longer appraisal period (currently 30 years). These improvements should refocus transport investment decisions on the longerterm transformational projects in which New Zealand needs to invest.
This report does not trigger the Significance Policy.

Because of time constraints Maori have not been consulted with directly. We do not believe there are any significant issues with the Commissions draft report that directly impact their interests.
Consultation
This submission was developed in partnership with the Mayoral Office, the Environmental Strategy & Policy, Regional & Local Planning, Economic Development, Spatial & Infrastructure Strategy, Transport Strategy, CCO Monitoring, Maori Strategy & Relations departments. Officers from Auckland Transport also provided input. A presentation was made to the Auckland Future Vision Committee (on 7 February 2012) where initial feedback on the submission was provided by elected members.
Local Board Views

Shale Chambers, Chair of the Waitemata Local Board was consulted with on this submission (on 31 January 2012) as POAL is located within its area. Because of time constraints other Local Boards were not directly consulted with in the development of the submission. All elected members were however sent a memo (dated 19 January 2012) which outlined the approach, process and timings for the development and approval of the Councils submission on the draft report. Local Boards will be provided a copy of the Councils final submission.

This report has no financial and resourcing implications.
Page 181
Item A.1
Item A.1
There are no legal issues in respect of the proposed submission. The Productivity Commission is contemplating various changes to legislation relating to the international freight industry, including the Resource Management Act 1991, Local Government Act 2002, Commerce Act 1986, etc. The submission generally supports these proposed changes, but does not support a proposed change to align the goals of CCOs with the commercial-only focus of State Owned Enterprises. A proposed amendment to section 166 of the RMA regarding making POAL a Network Utility Operator receives qualified support only, as further work to appreciate the significant tradeoffs involved with this amendment is required.
There are no issues in implementing the recommended decision.
Attachments
No. A B Title Summary of the Productivity Commissions draft report. Auckland Counci's draft submission Page 183 185
Signatories
Authors Authorisers Gavin Millynn, Policy Advisor Harvey Brookes, Manager, Economic Development
Dr. Roger Blakeley, Chief Planning Officer
Page 182
Page 183
Attachment A
Item A.1
Attachment A
Item A.1
Page 184
Auckland Councils Response to the New Zealand Productivity Commissions Draft Report on International Freight Transport Services (January 2012)
22 February 2012
Summary
1. Auckland Council (the Council) welcomes the New Zealand Productivity Commissions investigation into the international freight system and the release of its draft report. The Council plays a critical role in New Zealands freight system through our ownership of Ports of Auckland Limited (POAL) and 22.5% shareholding in Auckland International Airport Limited (AIAL), and our ownership of local roads and transport infrastructure. We recognise the vital importance of an efficient logistics chain to New Zealand. Given the time constraints faced by the Council in developing this submission, a focused approach has been taken to our feedback. The Councils feedback focuses on findings and recommendations relating to its role as: 3. Owner of POAL and shareholder in AIAL; Strategic planner through processes such as the draft Auckland Plan and Economic Development Strategy (EDS); Regulator through the Resource Management Act (RMA) 1991; and Provider of a wide range of public services (particularly transport) across Auckland.
2.
Applying this lens, we provide feedback primarily on chapters 8-11 of the draft report. We also include a section at the end of this submission where comments on findings and recommendations from other chapters can be found. In summary, the Council submits the following key points to the Commission: A more collaborative and strategic approach to port operation and investment is critical. There is a lack of a rational planning approach regarding which ports should expand or be divested of to maximise economic efficiency and minimise public expenditure on supporting transport infrastructure and other services. This absence of a strategic approach creates risks of under or over-investment (amongst other things) and can result in uncoordinated decisions by various parties which do not make New Zealand more internationally competitive. Central Government must play the important and necessary role of facilitation, coordination and leadership, to develop a strategic approach to ports that improves outcomes for New Zealand as a whole. A long term view of efficiency needs to be taken, especially given the lumpy nature of ports investment. Furthermore, efficiency in one part of the economy (e.g. the freight system) may not improve overall welfare when externalities are present. While commercially focussed, it is rational for ports to have supplementary objectives from their shareholder(s), as any other profit-maximising business might have. Given this, we disagree with the Commissions recommendation to change the objectives of Councilowned port and airport companies to align with the objectives for state owned enterprises. Ports are not isolated entities and operate within a wider city environment with various supporting networks and challenges. The best outcomes for both POAL and Auckland will
4.
Page 185
Attachment B
Item A.1

come from optimising the synergy between these institutions, to better integrate Council activities, POAL operations, transport infrastructure investment, and spatial planning. The Councils holding company Auckland Council Investments Limited (ACIL), successfully mitigates political influence on POALs operations, which allows the port to run on a commercial basis. The current public ownership model for POAL is efficient and delivers a good balance between commercial focus and restraint of market power. A review of sections 5 and/or 6 in regards to clarifying the role socio-economic outcomes in the RMA is supported in principle. A review of section 166 of the RMA receives qualified support. The Council does not support classifying ports as Network Utility Operators, but does support a more restrictive classification for ports as Limited Requiring Authorities, whereby Council would retain final rights over decisions regarding land-side expansion, etc. The proposed National Policy Statement (NPS) on transport infrastructure is supported and should provide much needed guidance on ports and their supporting infrastructural requirements. The Council wishes to be closely involved in the development of such a NPS. The Commissions draft report does not explore Aucklands transport funding gap, which is an impediment to improving the efficiency of the overall transport system and of freight transport in particular. The Cost Benefit analysis prescribed by Treasury for transport projects needs to be reviewed to ensure that it includes all relevant externalities, including the flow-on effects from land use changes, a lower social discount rate (currently 8%), and a longer appraisal period (currently 30 years). These improvements should refocus transport investment decisions on the longer-term transformational projects in which New Zealand needs to invest.
Item A.1
Attachment B
Introduction
5. Thank you for the opportunity to submit on the New Zealand Productivity Commissions draft report on international freight transport services. This submission represents the views of the Auckland Council, but has been developed in consultation with Auckland Transport. We note that POAL intends to make a separate submission on the draft report. The Council made an earlier submission (dated 23 September 2011) to the Commission in response to its Issues paper, which outlined the Councils views on a range of questions posed by the Commission. Where appropriate, this submission re-emphasises those earlier views. The Council is currently in the process of finalising its draft Auckland Plan and draft EDS. As outlined in our earlier submission, the draft Auckland Plan identifies the Councils desire for Auckland to become an internationally-connected and export-driven city (i.e. Economy Priority 3). Related to this focus, we believe achieving the vision of the draft EDS is contingent on international trade, export growth and efficient infrastructure. As with other international cities, Aucklands connectivity is a key determinant of its advantage, competitiveness and export potential. Given our relative geographical remoteness it is critical that we reduce our transport costs where possible. The efficient operation of Aucklands air and seaports (and the supply chains to and from these), which are our gateways to the global economy, is critical for both Aucklands and New Zealands prosperity.
6.
7.
8.
Key findings and recommendations Auckland Councils response

9. The draft report includes a number of findings and recommendations that are of interest to the Auckland Council, which we address below.
Page 186
10.
The Council wishes to emphasise comments from its earlier submission about coordinated future investments in port infrastructure and the potential benefits from a more collaborative and strategic approach to port operation and investment. As previously submitted by the Council (pp.9 and 10 of our earlier submission), the substantial financial demands required to service ever larger vessels with larger volumes of containers in an environment where international container shipping lines have strong bargaining power and the ability to shift operations between ports creates an environment of uncertainty. This uncertainty creates significant risks for ports (and others), in particular those of over or underinvestment and short-term pricing decisions, which may lead to returns that are insufficient to meet shareholder expectations and support necessary investment in future capacity. From feedback received in response to the Auckland Plan Discussion Document from Smartgrowth (Environment Bay of Plenty, Tauranga City Council, Western Bay of Plenty District Council and Northland Regional Council) there was consensus that New Zealand will need the port capacity of both Auckland and Tauranga to handle the growing freight task. Even if both ports complete all envisaged expansion plans, and significantly improve current productivity levels, by 2040 there is expected to be insufficient capacity between them to meet freight demand in the upper north island, which may necessitate further development at Northport, Whangarei. Given this situation, we wish to reinforce our support for Central Government to take a leading role in creating a more strategic approach to port operations and development in New Zealand (p.14 of our earlier submission). A planned and efficient network would reduce duplicative investment and therefore bring considerable savings to New Zealanders, as most of this infrastructure is publicly funded. Council would support an overall strategic plan for ports being developed by the public and private sector with the focus on making New Zealand internationally competitive rather than the status quo of interregional competition. The Council is not advocating for the nationalisation of ports, but would like to see a higher level of facilitation, coordination and leadership from the Government on the future of this sector. To that end, the Council supports Finding 13.2 of the draft report for instance, which suggests the Government should develop a proposal to extend the Freight Information Gathering System and subject it to a regulatory impact analysis efficiency test to determine whether it would deliver net benefits beyond existing information collection and dissemination.
11.
12.
13.
14.
Governance and ownership (chapter 10)

Governance
F2.1 The Commission views economic efficiency (broadly defined) as the key yardstick of performance for the international freight transport system. An efficiency approach will take account of harmful effects of freight transport on the environment and of other market failures. 15. With respect to the concept of efficiency the Council fully endorses the intention of improving productivity in a way that supports the overall wellbeing of New Zealanders. However, we would like to re-emphasise from our earlier submission the need to take a long term view of efficiency. Related to this, we note the importance of understanding that efficiency in one part of the economy (e.g. the freight system) may not improve overall welfare when externalities are present. While economic efficiency is important, we believe that the breadth of the definition of efficiency used by the Commission should be expanded to include other factors as there is a risk that
Page 187
16.
Attachment B
Item A.1
Importance of coordinated future investment

overall wellbeing may not be correspondingly maximised with a singular focus on efficiency. From our last submission (p.5): 28. A further concern we have is the need to ensure that efficiency is defined sufficiently broadly to fully capture the sustainability and energy conservation impacts of any potential changes to international freight transport services. ...Therefore, a significant concern we have is that a focus on allocative efficiency, where important external costs and benefits are excluded from the analysis will not guarantee that the efficient solution is also the outcome which maximises social welfare. 29. Therefore, the risk of adopting an economic efficiency approach is that the outcome that could be overlooked is in fact overall wellbeing. This would be best served by promoting the economic efficiency of the logistics supply chain for New Zealand importers and exporters, only where all external costs and benefits are fully recognised. Where this is not the case a broader assessment is needed and an open mind kept as to whether efficiency is most likely to be achieved through markets or some form of intervention. F10.2 The Port Companies Act sets the principal objective of every port company as being to operate as a successful business. However, that objective is unclear. In the case of majority council ownership it may be supplemented with the objectives of a port companys owners. F10.3 The Airport Authorities Act requires airport companies to be managed as a commercial undertaking. In the case of majority council ownership, that requirement may be supplemented with the objectives of the airport companys owners. R10.1 The objectives of council-owned port and airport companies should be brought into line with the objectives for state-owned enterprises; ie, to be as profitable and efficient as comparable businesses that are privately owned. 17. We suggest many private companies do factor in more than a simple profit motive when making decisions and in fact may constitutionally have multiple objectives. Firms understand that customers and shareholders are increasingly concerned with wider issues, such as sustainable development, fair trade principles, etc. We appreciate that the Port Companies and Airport Authorities Acts aim to assign a greater commercial focus to such companies, however, we believe that it is rational for ports to have supplementary objectives from their shareholder(s), as any other profit-maximising business might have. As per POALs 2011/12 Statement of Corporate Intent (SCI) this includes: awareness of the impact it has on the economic wellbeing of the region and New Zealand; a commitment to ongoing consultation with the Council and the community; various targets in respect of its people, processes, customers, its business model and sustainability; and to provide an increased level of financial returns to its shareholder. The Council considers these objectives are not unreasonable nor should they negatively impact POALs commercial and efficiency incentives. Ports are not isolated entities. They operate within a wider city environment with various supporting networks and challenges. We see the Port and the City as part of the same ecosystem, both interdependent. Given this, we believe that the best outcomes for POAL and Auckland will come from optimising the synergy between these institutions and that this optimisation is most efficient with full ownership of the Port. A good example of this synergy in action was during the Rugby World Cup 2011, where Captain Cook Wharf had to be deployed for temporary public use because of insufficient capacity elsewhere on the Waterfront without effecting the commercial profitability of POAL. In respect of maximising this synergy, we reiterate the following point from our last submission (p.7):
Page 188
Attachment B
Item A.1
18. 19. 20.

38. ...the new council governance structure provides an opportunity to better integrate council activities, POAL operations, transport infrastructure, land use planning and spatial planning. The governance arrangements of the Auckland Council and full ownership of POAL enables the two entities to coordinate and take strategic and investment decisions that will be of benefit to the whole region. This balance is the best way of achieving an efficient port which is well integrated with the city. 21. In respect of the Commissions recommendation on the alignment of council-owned port and airport companies objectives with the objectives for State Owned Enterprises (SOEs), we consider this change as unnecessary. We note that the principal objective for SOEs also includes requirements related to b) being a good employer and c) exhibiting a sense of social and environmental responsibility by having regard to the interests of the community in which the SOE operates, and would assume the Commission was referring to the principal objective in its entirety in making this recommendation. We note requirements b) and c) are also shared by CCOs under the Local Government Act 2002. We suggest that companies must take a longer-term view of success, failure and efficiency, and take into account many other externalities to be successful. This does not necessarily mean they operate inefficiently; they simply take a wider view of efficiency. Furthermore, POAL already has a focus on increasing shareholder returns in its SCI making such a proposed change less relevant. ACILs role which is enshrined in legislation is to bring a strong commercial focus to the management of its investments. Even if the SOI for ACIL did not include profitability and return objectives, the Board of ACIL would still need to meet their statutory objective. 22. Finally, we note that there is no compelling evidence presented in the draft report to suggest that the directors of Council Controlled Organisations (CCOs) cannot balance multiple objectives and conduct an efficient business.
F10.4 A holding company can provide partial, but incomplete, insulation between the wider objectives of a council and the commercial objectives of a port or airport company. 23. ACIL is the holding company that acts as the firewall between the Council and POAL. ACIL is governed by an independent board with no elected representatives. ACIL in turn appoints the directors of POAL. While ACIL is designed to convey the wider objectives and expectations of Council to POAL (via annual SOI and SCI negotiations), we maintain that it successfully mitigates political influence on POALs operations, which allows the port to be run on a commercial basis. We further note that Councils current CCO structure was established by the Government (via the Auckland Transition Agency) as part of the Auckland governance reforms, which would suggest the holding company model was viewed as an effective one. ACILs current 2011/12 SOI requires it to develop a long term strategy for POAL which aims to (amongst other things) improve the productivity and profitability of POAL. The performance measures associated with this output include significant increases to POALs return on equity, crane rate and vessel rate.
24.
25.
Labour relations 26. In its role as owner (and not operator) of POAL, the Council will not comment on the findings and recommendations that relate to on-going operational matters of the port, as it is for POALs management to decide on the best way to achieve its objectives. In particular, the Council does not believe it is appropriate to comment on current labour negotiations between POAL
Page 189
Attachment B
Item A.1

and union employees, and POALs recent decision to explore contracting models. The Council acknowledges the points of view of both parties. R10.2 To maintain the separation between wider council objectives and the commercial objectives of port and airport companies, elected representatives and council staff should be precluded from being a director of council-owned port and airport companies. All relevant legislation should embody this provision. 27. As noted by the Commission, section 93 of the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 (the Act) prohibits elected representatives from appointment as directors of the Councils substantive3 CCOs. This is a requirement unique to Auckland local government. The exception is Auckland Transport, whereby section 43 of the Act provides that two members of the board can be councilors. The Councils current board appointments and remuneration policy also states that elected members should not serve on the boards of non-substantive CCOs unless there is a compelling reason to do so.
Item A.1 Attachment B
R10.3 In the interests of improved reporting and transparency, and the efficient use of capital in the freight transport system, EVA figures for port companies should be regularly published and reviewed, including disaggregated data for significant business segments. 28. The Council questions whether Economic Value Added (EVA) figures provide better information for decision making than the metrics currently used to monitor POALs performance. Under POALs 2011/12 SCI, key performance measures include, in addition to a higher return on capital: crane rate, vessel rate, container volume percentage on rail versus road (process goals); increase in revenue and interest coverage ratio (financial goals); improvement in customer surveys, truck turnaround time, average turn time (customer goals); improvement in staff engagement and culture surveys, number of lost time injuries (people goals); number of harbour spills caused by POAL, community reference group meeting, target timelines for acknowledgement of complaint and response timeframe to complaints, if required (environmental and social goals). We consider that EVA figures might be better suited as a complimentary measure in a multi-criteria measurement framework. POALs submission on the Commissions Issues paper (p.11) highlights the Australian Waterline programme which collects and reports data regarding both inputs and outputs via a Port Interface Cost Index, and suggests that port productivity is best understood as cost per container relative to vessel berth rate.
29.
30.
R10.4 A collective monitoring function should be established for port companies, to create independent information on comparative performance of ports for owners to consider. Q10.1 What agency would be best able to host the collective monitoring function for port companies? 31. We agree that collective monitoring function for ports would be beneficial to their owners and could drive fruitful competition in the sector. We note that as above it is likely that councils would find it most useful for a collective monitoring unit to develop measures to appraise overall performance of ports including their non-financial objectives. The Council does not have a view on the agency best able to host the collective monitoring function.
R10.5 Government should use the s.7 provisions in the State-Owned Enterprises Act (providing for SOEs to receive direct payments for non-commercial activities) with KiwiRail to transparently identify expectations around public-good delivery and the costs incurred in their provision.
3 A substantive CCO is a CCO that is either responsible for the delivery of a significant service or activity on behalf of Auckland Council, or owns or manages assets with a value of more than $10 million.
Page 190

32. The Council supports this recommendation and considers such consistency desirable. Ideally, section 7 should also require planning decisions to account for the wider outcomes sought by Government to better enable the SOE to negotiate such payments.
Ownership
F10.1 Effective governance is ensuring that the organisation makes value-maximising decisions across all of its functions and activities. The governance arrangements for publicly owned enterprises need to be of high quality because publicly owned enterprises face less discipline from other sources than comparable privately owned enterprises. F10.5 One option for public owners seeking to improve governance is to opt out of the relevant publicsector governance regime and into the stock-exchange regime. A stock market listing offers significant potential governance improvements for larger companies with partial council ownership. These benefits arise from an observable share price, reporting and continuous disclosure rules, and external analysis of management decisions. R10.6 To improve the efficiency of ports, councils should consider increasing the degree of private ownership in them. Councils should evaluate whether they can still achieve important community aims with lower ownership stakes. 33. We respect the Commissions findings and recommendation on this matter and agree that there are potential benefits to a part or full listing on the stock exchange, under the right circumstances. Any decision to sell down a portion of the Councils ownership in POAL is a choice for the Council, subject to the provisions around the transfer of ownership or control of strategic assets in the Local Government Act 2002. As noted in our earlier submission, these assets provide an ongoing income stream to the Council, which reduces the level of operating expenditure that requires rates funding, and allows increased investment in other areas, or a reduced requirement for further rates increases. Ownership of POAL also provides a degree of strategic influence over this important area of the CBD. Paragraphs 31 to 41 of our last submission set out the Councils view on full public ownership of POAL. In summary, our view remains unchanged and we believe that: The evidence in respect of negative economic returns for New Zealand ports and on the efficiency implications of public ownership is mixed.4 The current public ownership model is efficient and delivers a good balance between commercial focus and restraint of market power. The current governance model also provides a good balance between commercial freedom and the wider planning and policy objectives of the Council. NZIER (2010) found that there is no evidence to suggest that the current governance arrangements negatively influence investment decisions or the exercising of market power by ports. This suggests that port companies can make efficient decisions under public ownership. The new Council governance structure provides an opportunity to efficiently align Council activities and objectives, POAL strategic goals, transport, and spatial planning.
34.
35.
36.
We note that in terms of average container productivity across selected New Zealand ports and Australia (p.37 of the Commissions draft report), POAL (and indeed New Zealand) compares favourably. Finding 3.2 in the draft report states available indicators suggest that New Zealands container port performance is no less and possibly better than in Australia. This
4 For example: Port Performance and Ownership. An assessment of the evidence, Report to the Local Government Forum, New Zealand Institute for Economic Research, 2010.
Page 191
Attachment B
Item A.1

again indicates the relative efficiency of POAL. We conclude that both private and publiclyowned firms can be inefficient under certain conditions, but that POAL is an exemplar of public arms-length ownership.
Item A.1
R10.7 Councils in particular those with interests in ports occupying large blocks of central city waterfront land should consider landlord port models in which land ownership is separated from port operations. This may be an efficient mechanism for maintaining control over port land use while benefiting from the efficiency improvements resulting from increased private involvement in port operations. 37. We note that separating land ownership from ports operations (i.e. the landlord model) is an option that could be considered by Council. However, in its earlier submission the Council noted that while the landlord model is typically used offshore, its effectiveness may be limited in New Zealand, due to a lack of scale and the fact that current ownership and operational arrangements essentially provide port management with full operational responsibility and clear performance targets, including profitability.
Attachment B
F10.6 While central government ownership of rail has relatively poor incentives for improved efficiency, history suggests that rail (at least at the current network extent) is unlikely to pay its way under any ownership arrangements. 38. The Council suggests that this finding is based on metrics which do not fully estimate the wider economic benefits of public transport to supply chain efficiency. AIAL has previously submitted to the Commission that (p.15) ...if roads in Auckland could be freed up by removing/reducing the number of commuters on them, thereby allowing freight to be transported more easily/quickly, this would be beneficial for [New Zealand]. POAL also noted in their submission (p.11) the importance of getting cargo to the port on time: What matters most to our shipping line customers (in addition to cost) is, ...getting their ships out on window (i.e. on time) so they can make their next port of call in time for their berth window there. Arguably, peak hour congestion in Auckland is a considerable risk to just-intime delivery of goods to port in time to meet that window'. Effective public transport in Auckland would mitigate the growing burden of peak hour congestion.
39.
Investment, innovation and dynamic efficiency (chapter 8)

F8.8 There appears to be ambiguity around the interpretation of the purpose of the RMA and the extent to which the Act allows the balancing of socio-economic aspirations with environmental outcomes. R8.1 Section 5 of the Resource Management Act 1991 should be reviewed to clarify (and elevate) the consideration of net social benefits and costs (including those accruing at a national level). Should the Government decide not to review s.5, s.6 of the Resource Management Act 1991 should be amended to include specific reference to the development and operation of regionally and nationally significant infrastructure. R8.3 Section 166 of the Resource Management Act 1991 should be modified to include port companies as network utility operators. 40. We believe there is merit in the Commissions statement (p.109) that: ...a strict environmental bottom-line interpretation appears at odds with the efficient use of societys natural and physical resources. So the Council supports a review to clarify the role of socio-economic costs and benefits in sections 5 and 6 of the RMA.
Page 192

41.
42.
In respect of amending section 166 of the RMA, the Council in its submission to the Ministry for the Environment on its discussion paper5 regarding potential changes to the RMA, stated that it would like Requiring Authorities to be consistent with the Auckland Plan. From pp. 12 and 13: 56. Auckland Council does not support broadening the eligibility of full requiring authority status to include private providers (including ports and electricity generators). Full requiring authority status should not be extended to private providers, but retained for the public sector. The Council does support a new "limited requiring authority" category which could be conferred on private providers (either for all projects or limited types of projects) to enable new procurement mechanisms. This will facilitate greater investment in infrastructure. However, decision-making on projects that are not of national importance should be made by the Council and not an independent decision-maker recognising that Council has responsibility to deliver on the outcomes of the Auckland Plan.
43.
44.
46.
The Council would welcome an opportunity to provide input to these proposed reviews.
R8.2 The Minister for the Environment should commence development of a National Policy Statement for transport infrastructure, which would provide central government recognition of the importance of New Zealands transport infrastructure. 47. A NPS for transport infrastructure, which ideally aligned with the National Infrastructure Plan, could potentially provide much needed guidance on ports and their supporting infrastructure. The Auckland Plan has received significant input from central government, port providers and a wide variety of stakeholders, and consistency between the Auckland Plan and a NPS would be desirable. In the case of Auckland, there are likely to be parts of the transport network which are regionally significant, but may not be roads of national significance. A NPS could provide central government support for regionally significant transport infrastructure, which would benefit the delivery of important projects. The Council would again welcome the opportunity to assist with the development of such a NPS.
48.
49.
F8.5 Other than the possible effect of heavy vehicle regulations on the uptake of higher productivity vehicles (discussed in Chapter 13), there do not appear to be any impediments to investment and innovation in road freight. 50. We consider there are impediments associated with the uptake of Higher Productivity Motor Vehicles (HPMV). There are significant infrastructure improvement costs required to cater for HPMV in Auckland. These truck and trailer units can weigh up to 62 tonnes, and only limited sections of the state highways and strategic freight network have been certified to full HPMV standards in Auckland, with most of the infrastructure bottlenecks being bridges that are not rated for the full load. Because of limited funding in the National Land Transport Fund, it is appropriate to determine the costs and benefits of particular HPMV routes and the extent to which HPMV users are paying their fair share in terms of specific and general transport improvements.
51.
Building competitive cities: reform of the urban and infrastructure planning system: a discussion document, Ministry for the Environment, 2010.
Page 193
Attachment B
45.
The Council would support an in-depth review of the Commissions proposal.
Item A.1
Officers agree on the importance of a balance between economic, social and environmental outcomes. Clarity around this issue would be of great benefit to the Council and New Zealand planning practice in general.

52. Additional costs (such as maintenance of local roads) are required to be borne by the Council and the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA). Consideration is needed on how HPMV users might contribute to these additional costs and how this revenue is allocated between NZTA and the Council.
Item A.1
Aucklands transport funding gap 53. The Council is concerned that the Commissions Report does not explore Aucklands transport funding gap, which is an impediment to improving the transport system and the efficiency of freight transport. The Draft Auckland Plan identifies possible alternative transport funding mechanisms which could enable transport infrastructure improvements that would significantly contribute to efficient freight transport. Road pricing has the potential to reduce unnecessary trips on congested parts of the road network. While trucks might bear an additional cost, if time savings result in a greater overall net benefit, there are potential efficiency gains here which should be explored. In 1997 a report from Ernst & Young6 on the cost of congestion identified potential costs to the freight industry of $100 million per annum as a result of congested roads in Auckland.
54.
Attachment B
Infrastructure coordination and planning (chapter 9)

R9.1 A full cost benefit analysis (i.e., including all externalities) should be published for government investments in rail infrastructure, including further investment in the KiwiRail Turnaround Plan. These analyses should be directly comparable to those produced for major road projects. Proposals for investment in road and rail should be subject to rigorous investment screening in a coordinated way, which enables the best projects to selected be they road, rail, or a combination of the two. Without this level of transparency, the public cannot be confident that scarce resources are being allocated to the most beneficial projects. 55. In principle, the Council agrees with a comprehensive Cost Benefit analysis approach to transport projects. However, we believe the Cost Benefit analysis prescribed by Treasury needs to be reviewed to ensure that it includes all relevant externalities, including those from land use change, a lower social discount rate (currently 8%), and longer appraisal period (currently 30 years) to ensure that the focus of investment decisions is not on short term infrastructure projects and at the expense of economic transformation projects in which New Zealand must invest.
Land use change 56. The causal relationship between transport infrastructure and economic growth is well established in the economic literature, yet it is not fully accounted for in Cost Benefit analyses because of measurement difficulties (including concerns around double counting and data availability). The imminent addition of wider economic benefits into the economic evaluation manual, as administered by NZTA, is a considerable improvement on past practice. However, we believe the methodology remains unable to account for the full extent of economic development effects, such as those that come from land use change.
57.
Discount rate and appraisal period

6 Alternative Transport Infrastructure Investments and Economic Development for the Auckland Region, Ernst & Young, 1997.
Page 194

58. The social discount rate currently used in the assessment of transport projects is 8% (real and net of general price inflation) and the appraisal period is 30 years. We would like to see a lower social discount rate and longer appraisal period in Central Governments cost-benefit framework. At 8%, New Zealand policy makers equate a dollar of benefit received in 30 years time, with 6 cents received today. The official government policy is to disregard all benefits after a 30-year appraisal period because they are so insignificant (once applying an 8% discount rate). In comparison, at a discount rate of 4% (roughly in line with the United Kingdom and the European Commission), policy makers would equate a unit of benefit received in 30 years time with 31 cents received today (so benefits in the future are given a higher value). New Zealands current social discount rate policy attempts to solve two distinct problems. The first is to take account of an infrastructure projects wider economic investment effects. This means ensuring that public projects do not crowd out even more profitable private sector projects as well as taking account of how productivity improvements stimulate more private investment. These wider investment benefits and opportunity costs can differ significantly between projects. Taking account of these features is critical to ensure value for money.
59.
60.
62.
This has important implications for Cost Benefit Analyses and the type of infrastructure projects that are approved for funding. A lower discount rate improves the case for transport projects that have benefits further into the future. In line with recommendations to the Council from NZIER8, we recommend that: independent research is commissioned on the social discount rate for public projects, which would include identifying an appropriate social rate of time preference and further research on the Shadow Price of Capital approach; and central government should adopt an internationally-comparable, evidence-based, transparent, whole-of-government approach to discount rates and appraisal periods in the public sector.
63.
Q9.1 Are there any specific examples of impediments to the optimal coordination of freight infrastructure planning between central and local governments, or between adjacent local governments? 64. The Council considers that there are freight infrastructure planning issues between central and local government. The following examples relate to planning for port expansion and rail freight in Auckland. There is a lack of a rational planning approach regarding which ports should expand/contract to maximise economic efficiency and minimise public expenditure on supporting infrastructure. The responsibilities for planning ports and transport infrastructure are split among various organisations, which makes coordination difficult.
65.
Valuing the future appropriately. Case for using the shadow price of capital in social discount rate policy, NZIER, August 2011. 8 Ibid. Auckland Council's Submission to the Productivity Commission's Draft Paper on International Freight Transport Services Page 195
Attachment B
61.
The second problem is determining the social rate of time preference. Individuals and society in general place a higher value on short-term benefits rather than those that occur further into the future. The social discount rate makes a judgement on the value of benefits received in the future. NZIER7 estimates a figure for this rate of approximately 3%. The Council considers something in this order is more appropriate.
Item A.1

66. In response to this situation, the Upper North Island Strategic Alliance (UNISA)9 for instance is presently sharing information and identifying common planning interests, including the planning and coordination of ports in the Upper North Island. KiwiRail was tasked with assessing the financial viability of selected rail lines that were considered unprofitable. Because KiwiRail is required in part to focus on financial return, it could not be expected to consider the costs and benefits that might arise to third parties (whether they be social, environmental or economic in nature) or the costs that might be imposed on NZTA as a result of increased truck volumes on the road network if a line is closed. In the case of the North Auckland Rail Line, the response from local government was to invest in low floor wagons to improve the viability of rail freight services in Northland, which would secure significant benefits for its communities. We would like to reinforce for the Commission that the focus on efficiency in one part of the economy (e.g. the rail freight system) which does not take into account external costs and benefits may not result in an efficient solution, as outlined earlier in this submission.
67.
68.
F9.1 Coordination failures may be exacerbated by the multiple objectives associated with public ownership. Such failures may be better addressed through governance and ownership changes rather than centralised strategic planning. 69. We do not believe a robust case has been made for finding 9.1, i.e. that governance and ownership changes may be the best strategies to address coordination failures. The draft report is not specific about what governance or ownership changes are required to improve coordination specifically, and the analysis is based solely on the efficiency of transport services. Changes in efficiency need to be considered along with the other impacts that come with governance and ownership changes.
F9.4 The designation of transport corridors can create valuable outcomes at a relatively low cost. Corridor designation is a worthwhile activity for central and local government. 70. Designation of transport corridors is a useful mechanism under the RMA and is supported by the Council. We note that strategic and regional arterial roads are defined in the Regional Arterial Road Plan (ARTA 2009)10 while the strategic freight network is defined in the 2010 Regional Land Transport Strategy (RLTS) (ARC 2010).11 Policies are in place to support these strategic corridors but they are not necessarily formally designated. The issues regarding designations that need to be worked through include: (a) the level of detailed analysis required to support a designation; (b) the length of time that a designation remains; and (c) the ability to use surplus land for purposes which are appropriate for its location next to a road, to ensure better integration of land use and transport. The Council notes that the utilisation of designations is not necessarily a low cost process, as it generally involves large-scale land acquisition programmes, which can take many years to complete and are likely to encounter opposition from affected local communities concerned about the projects impact. We note that freight-related designations may attract more objections than average from affected local communities, especially if there are sensitive land use activities located on the subject corridor.
71.
72.
Regulation of international sea freight competition (chapter 11)

UNISA membership comprises Auckland Council, Bay of Plenty Regional Council, Northland Regional Council, Waikato Regional Council, Hamilton City Council, Tauranga City Council and Whangarei District Council. UNISA is a collaborative body that may make recommendations to their respective councils and central government and has no decision-making authority. 10 Regional Arterial Road Plan, Auckland Regional Transport Authority, February 2009. 11 Auckland Regional Land Transport Strategy 2010-2040, Auckland Regional Council, April 2010. Auckland Council's Submission to the Productivity Commission's Draft Paper on International Freight Transport Services Page 196
9

F11.1 Cooperation agreements between international liner shipping carriers have historically been exempt from the full application of domestic competition laws. The policy rationale for these exemptions was that price/capacity fixing and revenue pooling etc. were needed to ensure reliable liner shipping operations. As such, the public benefits of the agreements were taken as so likely to outweigh any anti-competitive detriments that there should be no onus on carriers to prove that they do so. R11.1 Exemptions for the types of agreement with the higher risk of anti-competitive detriment ratemaking and capacity-limiting agreements should be removed. These arrangements should have access to the authorisation and clearance mechanisms in the Commerce Act. There should be a transitional period to allow the agreements in place at the time the exemption is repealed to continue until their compliance with the Commerce Act has been tested. 73. The Council supports the removal of exemptions for ratemaking and capacity-limiting agreements. Given the importance of trade to New Zealand, we believe it is appropriate to make these changes in order to better balance incentives for price and service stability against the benefits of competition. Related to this, the Council would also like to see further research into the relative market power between international shipping lines and ports (as noted in the Issues paper) and exploration of effective options for improving this situation. We noted in our earlier submission that reviewing the Commerce Act 1986 in respect of interport cooperation may be prudent in this respect, and would align well with current initiatives that are emerging like UNISA. We reiterate our concerns in respect of shipping lines market power in relation to hypercompetitive local ports, as per our earlier submission (p.8): 42. [The relative decline in the profitability of ports] is not a function of ownership arrangements. In our view the major contributing factor is the increasing market power of container lines and the constraints to port company co-operation inherent in the Commerce Act. Thus, a key area of concern is that the amalgamation of shipping lines has effectively reduced ports bargaining power with the result being a reduction in profitability for ports, an increase in profits for shipping lines and no cost savings being passed onto New Zealand importers and exporters. 43. Therefore, as a result of providing economical freight prices for the international shipping cartels New Zealand ports can actually be viewed as an interesting case of being too competitive, with New Zealand now having some of the lowest freight rates in the OECD. Ports of Auckland and Tauranga are good examples of this. The competition between these ports has led to the price of containers landed in Auckland being 40% lower than containers landed in the port of Melbourne or Botany Bay.
74.
Response to other key findings and recommendations relevant to Auckland Council

Other regulatory issues (chapter 13)
F13.6 A well-designed domestic Emissions Trading Scheme is likely to be an efficient mechanism to internalise the costs of greenhouse gases emitted by freight transport operators within New Zealand. International legs continue to be exempt pending the development of effective international arrangements. F13.7 The New Zealand ETS places coastal shipping at a competitive disadvantage against international ships undertaking coastal voyages since they are exempt from ETS costs. 75. The draft report explains that (p.206):
Page 197
Attachment B
Item A.1

coastal shipping has the least greenhouse gas emissions and is the most energy-efficient mode per tonne kilometre, rail lies in the middle and road freight has the highest environmental impact. However, coastal shipping does have some negative environmental impacts. For example, it emits sulphur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide. 76. The Council has evidence from its Air Quality Monitoring programme that indicates shipping activity may be leading to higher sulphur (and sulphate) and particle concentrations around POAL and the central business district. It is speculated that this is caused in large part by vessels (i.e. Cruise and freight ships) burning high-sulphur fuels while in port. This may be an issue for other ports in New Zealand but to our knowledge, little evidence regarding emissions has been collected nationally. To help mitigate such environmental impacts, we would like to see the implementation of Annex VI of the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, of the MARPOL regulations. This limits sulphur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide and particulate matter emissions from ship exhaust and prohibits deliberate emissions of ozone-depleting substances. The efficiency of the freight network (and its subsequent environmental impacts) depends on the efficiency and connectivity of all links that comprise the network (road, rail and sea). If increased international freight movements are achieved through addressing congestion and connectivity across the overall system and/or investment in cleaner vehicles, Aucklands air quality could vastly improve as a result. However if this approach is not followed, Aucklands air quality could degrade. It should be noted that the 2010 RLTS already has many relevant sub-policies related to the efficiency and connectivity of the transport system. Finally, from a policy and planning perspective the Councils earlier submission to the Commission signalled its support for coastal shipping given its wider transport and environmental benefits. This is outlined formally in policy 4.7 of the 2010 RLTS.
77.
78.
79.
Impediments to competition in international freight (chapter 5)

F5.1 Episodes of significant truck queuing at Auckland Airport suggest poor coordination, leading to low operational efficiency. There is scope for market participants to address this issue, through coordination mechanisms such as a slot booking system with variable charges. 80. The Commission notes in its draft report (p.73) The booking system encourages off-peak truck travel, with the aim of smoothing the workflow at the port to avoid bottlenecks at peak traffic times. The Council supports this statement and finding 5.1. The 2010 RLTS forecasts Auckland regional freight movements to grow by 68 percent between 2006 and 2031 (ARC 2009).12 Most of this increase is due to occur by road. Given the expected growth in international freight, the Council supports freight coordination to maximise freights productivity, and to minimise its congestive potential and environmental impact. We note that POAL already successfully uses a Vehicle Booking System that requires trucks to book slots in advance of picking up and dropping off containers.
81.
12 Current and Future Freight Movements in the Auckland Region and GPS Targets, WP2010/11, prepared by Auckland Regional Council to support the development of the 2010 Regional Land Transport Strategy, May 2009.
Page 198

Auckland Council Future Vision Committee Agenda 17/2

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Auckland Council Future Vision Committee Agenda 17/2

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Auckland Future Vision Committee will be held on:

Date: Time: Meeting Room: Venue:

Auckland Future Vision Committee OPEN ADDENDUM AGENDA

Auckland Future Vision Committee 17 February 2012

File No.: CP2012/01413

Auckland Plan Deliberations Report Sections A-C

Auckland Plan Deliberations Report Sections A-C

Auckland Future Vision Committee 17 February 2012

Maori Impact Statement

Local Board Views

Financial and Resourcing Implications

Legal and Legislative Implications

Auckland Plan Deliberations Report Sections A-C

Auckland Future Vision Committee 17 February 2012

Auckland Plan Deliberations Report Sections A-C

Auckland Future Vision Committee 17 February 2012

Auckland Plan Deliberations Report Sections A-C

Auckland Future Vision Committee 17 February 2012

Auckland Plan Deliberations Report Sections A-C

Auckland Plan Deliberations Report Sections A-C

Auckland Plan Deliberations Report Sections A-C

Auckland Future Vision Committee 17 February 2012

Auckland Plan Deliberations Report Sections A-C

Auckland Future Vision Committee 17 February 2012

WAHANGA A. TE MAHERE A TAMA KI MAKAURAU ME PEHEA TE WHAKAURU ATU A.1 Introduction

A.2 Why an Auckland Plan?

Auckland Plan Deliberations Report Sections A-C

Auckland Future Vision Committee 17 February 2012

A.3 Te Ti ri - ti o- Waitangi The Treaty of Waitangi

Auckland Plan Deliberations Report Sections A-C

Auckland Future Vision Committee 17 February 2012

Auckland Future Vision Committee 17 February 2012

A.4 Key implementation strategies and plans

Unitary plan [moved to reflect order of discussion in previous paragraph]

Auckland Plan Deliberations Report Sections A-C

Auckland Future Vision Committee 17 February 2012

Long Term Plan

Local board plans and agreements

Other key strategies and plans

A.5 How to be involved

Auckland Future Vision Committee 17 February 2012

By website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz Closing date: 4.00pm, Tuesday 25 October 2011

December 2011 February 2012

Auckland Plan Deliberations Report Sections A-C

Auckland Future Vision Committee 17 February 2012

Auckland Plan Deliberations Report Sections A-C

Auckland Future Vision Committee 17 February 2012

Auckland Future Vision Committee 17 February 2012

Figure A2 Treaty of Waitangi Framework

Auckland Plan Deliberations Report Sections A-C

Figure A1 Auckland Council Structure

Auckland Future Vision Committee 17 February 2012

Auckland Future Vision Committee 17 February 2012

What makes Auckland special?

Auckland Plan Deliberations Report Sections A-C

The vision for Auckland

Auckland Future Vision Committee 17 February 2012

The role of Auckland in New Zealand and the World

Auckland Plan Deliberations Report Sections A-C

Auckland Future Vision Committee 17 February 2012

Auckland Future Vision Committee 17 February 2012

Auckland Future Vision Committee 17 February 2012

What do these global trends mean for Auckland?

Auckland Plan Deliberations Report Sections A-C