I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Puketāpapa Local Board will be held on:

 

Date:                      

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

 

Thursday, 27 February 2014

6.00pm

Waikowhai Meeting Room
Fickling Convention Centre
546 Mt Albert Road
Three Kings

 

Puketāpapa Local Board

 

OPEN AGENDA

 

 

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Chairperson

Julie Fairey

 

Deputy Chairperson

Harry Doig

 

Members

David Holm

 

 

Ella Kumar

 

 

Nigel Turnbull

 

 

Michael Wood

 

 

(Quorum 3 members)

 

 

 

Brenda  Railey

Democracy Advisor

 

20 February 2014

 

Contact Telephone: 021 820 781

Email: brenda.railey@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

 

 


 


Puketāpapa Local Board

27 February 2014

 

 

 

ITEM   TABLE OF CONTENTS                                                                                        PAGE

1          Welcome                                                                                                                         5

2          Apologies                                                                                                                        5

3          Declaration of Interest                                                                                                   5

4          Confirmation of Minutes                                                                                               5

5          Leave of Absence                                                                                                          5

6          Acknowledgements                                                                                                       5

7          Petitions                                                                                                                          5

8          Deputations                                                                                                                    5

9          Public Forum                                                                                                                  5

10        Extraordinary Business                                                                                                5

11        Notices of Motion                                                                                                          6

12        Albert-Eden-Roskill Councillors Update                                                                    7

13        Puketāpapa Local Board Performance Report, December 2013                             9

14        Three Kings Precinct Plan: Support in Principle for Land Exchange                  55

15        Auckland Transport Monthly Update Report – February 2014                              63

16        Puketapapa Youth Action Plan budget allocation                                                   73

17        Allocation of 2013/14 Oakley Creek Restoration Budget                                        95

18        Lapsing of Auckland City Council Hazardous Substances Bylaw                        97

19        Hearing dates for the Puketāpapa Local Board hearings for the Annual Plan 2014/2015                                                                                                                                     109

20        Resolutions Pending Action Schedule                                                                   113

21        Record of Puketapapa Local Board Workshops                                                   123

22        Board Member Reports February 2014                                                                   127

23        Chairperson's Report February 2014                                                                      135  

24        Consideration of Extraordinary Items 

 

 


1          Welcome

 

Mr Smith will lead the meeting in prayer – or whatever set text we decide will appear here.

 

2          Apologies

 

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

 

3          Declaration of Interest

 

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

 

4          Confirmation of Minutes

 

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a)         confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Thursday, 30 January 2014 and the extraordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Monday, 10 February 2014, including the confidential section, as a true and correct record.

 

 

5          Leave of Absence

 

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

 

6          Acknowledgements

 

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

 

7          Petitions

 

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

 

8          Deputations

 

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

 

9          Public Forum

 

A period of time (approximately 30 minutes) is set aside for members of the public to address the meeting on matters within its delegated authority. A maximum of 3 minutes per item is allowed, following which there may be questions from members.

 

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

 

10        Extraordinary Business

 

Section 46A(7) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:

 

“An item that is not on the agenda for a meeting may be dealt with at that meeting if-

 

(a)        The local authority by resolution so decides; and

 

(b)        The presiding member explains at the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public,-

 

(i)         The reason why the item is not on the agenda; and

 

(ii)        The reason why the discussion of the item cannot be delayed until a subsequent meeting.”

 

Section 46A(7A) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:

 

“Where an item is not on the agenda for a meeting,-

 

(a)        That item may be discussed at that meeting if-

 

(i)         That item is a minor matter relating to the general business of the local authority; and

 

(ii)        the presiding member explains at the beginning of the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public, that the item will be discussed at the meeting; but

 

(b)        no resolution, decision or recommendation may be made in respect of that item except to refer that item to a subsequent meeting of the local authority for further discussion.”

 

11        Notices of Motion

 

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

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

27 February 2014

 

 

Albert-Eden-Roskill Councillors Update

 

File No.: CP2014/02493

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       The purpose of this report is to provide the Albert-Eden-Roskill Councillors to provide a verbal update to the Board.

Executive Summary

2.       The Albert-Eden-Roskill Councillors will provide a verbal update to the Board.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Puketapapa Local Board:

a)         Thank Councillors Casey and Fletcher for their update.

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Signatories

Authors

Brenda  Railey - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Karen Lyons - Manager Local Board Services

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

27 February 2014

 

 

Puketāpapa Local Board Performance Report, December 2013

 

File No.: CP2014/02089

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       To update the Puketāpapa Local Board members on progress towards their objectives for the year from 1 July 2013 to 31 December 2013 as set out in the Local Board agreement.

Executive Summary

2.       See attached report.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a)      receive the Performance Report for the period ending December 2013.

 

 

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Puketāpapa Local Board Performance Report, December 2013

11

     

Signatories

Authors

Sugenthy  Thomson - Lead FInancial Advisor, Local Boards

Authorisers

Christine Watson - Manager Financial Advisory Services - Local Boards

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

27 February 2014

 

 













































Puketāpapa Local Board

27 February 2014

 

 

Three Kings Precinct Plan: Support in Principle for Land Exchange

 

File No.: CP2014/01127

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       This report seeks support in principle by the Puketapapa Local Board for staff to formally investigate exchanging portions of council owned/managed land with adjoining landowners in the Three Kings Precinct Plan area to facilitate an improved open space configuration in the Three Kings area.

Executive Summary

2.       The Puketapapa Local Board is currently working with council staff to develop a precinct plan for the Three Kings area. Stage one focused on the redevelopment of the quarry site. Stage two continues the work begun in stage one but with a stronger focus on the town centre.

3.       One of the issues identified early in the development of the precinct plan is that, while there is a large total area of open space in the precinct, the existing configuration means that much of it is poorly connected or low quality.

4.       In May 2013, a discussion document was released for public consultation which included options for the reconfiguration of land to achieve improved open space outcomes. Public feedback did not indicate a preference for any one particular option however there was a general level of support for the concept of land exchange to achieve better integration between the town centre, open space and neighbouring residential development.

5.       As a result of feedback on the discussion document, Fletcher Development, as a private land owner, has released a concept proposal for the quarry site that includes reconfiguration of some of their land and council owned/managed land. The Fletcher Development concept provides for two sports fields in a side by side configuration allowing for summer and winter sports use and improved connections to Te Tatua a Riukiuta (Big King) on the northern edge of the quarry land.

6.       Staff have worked through the land exchange issues with local board members throughout the precinct plan process noting that the concept proposed by Fletcher could potentially improve the current open space configuration in the area.

7.       The next step is for staff to formally investigate the merit of the land exchange proposal and the board is being asked to support this work. No endorsement is sought for the draft Fletcher Development proposal.

 

 

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board provides in principle support for:

a)      Land exchange as one method to improve the quality and location of usable open space within the Three Kings Precinct Plan Area.

b)      Staff to formally investigate the merit of an exchange of portions of council owned or managed land, identified as Areas C, D, G and F in Attachment A with land located at 985 Mt Eden Road (Winstone’s quarry site) as shown in the concept master plan in Attachment B.

 

Discussion

8.       In early 2013, staff began working with the Puketapapa Local Board to create a precinct plan for the Three Kings area that will establish a 30-year vision for how the area may change. The precinct plan was endorsed to be developed in two stages. Stage one focused on the Winstone quarry site and its integration with the town centre and adjacent open spaces.  Stage two is currently underway and is continuing the work started in stage one but with an added emphasis on the town centre.

9.       As part of establishing the project, the Puketapapa Local Board endorsed a series of high-level principles (‘the principles’) to guide development of the precinct plan. The principles state that the design and location of open space should be compatible with surrounding land uses and arranged for logical and coherent use. These also identify the potential for reconfiguration and land exchange as a mechanism for improving the open space network.

10.     In terms of land area, the precinct is well served for open space (Three Kings Reserve, Big King Reserve, Robinson Reserve). However, while part of Three Kings Reserve is used for active recreation and community uses, some of this reserve is of poor quality, unusable (e.g. the quarried area north of Grahame Breed Drive) and disconnected to other spaces within the precinct. Also, there is currently a shortfall of sports fields in the Three Kings area and the current configuration of open space in terms of its location and topography presents considerable constraints to developing sports fields or improving connections between spaces

11.     Attachment A shows the location and details of ownership of open space zoned land within the Three Kings precinct area.

12.     An issue raised at community stakeholder workshops was that redevelopment should achieve good levels and quality of open space that connects important land uses. In the Precinct Plan Discussion Document that went out for public feedback in May 2012, it was noted that there is potential for the open space land owned or managed by council to be reconfigured to improve open space outcomes and connections and that an exchange of land could be explored to achieve this.

13.     The Discussion Document presented a series of high-level development options exploring a range of possible land exchange scenarios. Feedback on the Discussion Document did not indicate a strong community preference for any one particular option however there was a general level of support for land exchange to achieve better integration between the town centre, open space and neighbouring residential development.

14.     Fletcher Development, the owners of the quarry site, have participated in the precinct planning process and have developed a concept plan for the development of the quarry. The Fletcher Development concept incorporates various elements from the discussion document development options and community feedback on the options. Fletcher Development publically released this concept at an open day on 1 February 2014. 

15.     The Fletcher Development concept illustrates a proposal to exchange portions of council owned/managed land for land located within the quarry site. The concept provides for two rugby sized sports fields in a side by side configuration located in approximately the centre of the southern portion of the quarry site. This arrangement would allow for summer and winter sports use and potentially provide for improved connections within the precinct area to Te Tatua a Riukiuta (Big King) on the northern edge of the quarry land.

16.     The portions of council managed or owned land that could be considered in any land exchange with open space land identified in the Fletcher concept are marked in Attachment A as Area C, D, F and G to the north of Grahame Breed Drive.

17.     Areas C and D, currently contain a single football playing field. Area G, to the north of Grahame Breed Drive, is of adequate size to develop one sports field but has a 10m grade change between the northern portion of the site and the existing car park and is currently poorly connected to the town centre. Area F is currently used by the council as a depot facility.  A reconfiguration of these parcels of land could improve the current usability and connectivity of open space in the area.

18.     Staff are seeking the in principle support of the Puketapapa Local Board for:

·    the concept of land exchange as a method to improve the connectivity and usability of  open space

·    staff to investigate the merits of the land exchange proposal shown in Attachment B.

Consideration

Local Board Views

19.     This report seeks support for officers to formally investigate the merit of exchanging portions of council owned/managed land indicated by area C, D, F and G on Attachment A, with suitably located land within the Winstone’s quarry site.

20.     As any land exchange is technically an acquisition or disposal, a council committee will make the final decision on whether or not officers undertake this work. The Local Board views will form part of that report.

Maori Impact Statement

21.     Mana Whenua who have interests in the Puketapapa area are Ngāti Whātua, Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara, Ngāti Whātua o Orakei, Te Kawerau a Maki, Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki, Ngāti Tamaoho, Te Akitai Waiohua, Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua, Ngāti Paoa, Ngāti Whanaunga, Ngāti Maru, Ngāti Tamaterā and Te Patukirikiri.

22.     Big King Reserve is due to transfer to the Tūpuna Maunga o Tāmaki Makaurau Authority following the enactment of the Ngā Mana Whenua o Tāmaki Makaurau Collective Redress Bill. Iwi will have a strong interest in any proposals that have any impact on Big King Reserve and other open space in the immediate vicinity.

23.     The Ngā Mana Whenua o Tāmaki Makaurau Collective Redress Bill provides for the offer back of surplus Crown land to iwi. Further investigation is required to determine what impact the provisions of this Bill will have when enacted.

24.     Fletcher Development have been working with iwi and the chair of the Tamaki Collective. Should a land exchange proposal be progressed in the future, council will work with Maori interests at that time.

General

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Land Ownership and Legal Description

59

bView

Fletcher Development Concept Masterplan

61

     

Signatories

Authors

Peter Cooper - Planner

Authorisers

Penny Pirrit - Regional & Local Planning Manager

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

 



Puketāpapa Local Board

27 February 2014

 

 



Puketāpapa Local Board

27 February 2014

 

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

27 February 2014

 

 

Auckland Transport Monthly Update Report – February 2014

 

File No.: CP2014/02296

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       The purpose of the report is to respond to local board requests on transport-related matters and to provide information to Elected Members about Auckland Transport (AT) activities in the local board area over the last month.

 

Monthly Overview

2.          The Transport Portfolio lead was briefed on transport matters in the Puketapapa area on January 31 and 24 February 2014.

3.          A meeting of the Village Design Group was held in late January to consider design treatments for the three villages on Dominion Road affected by the upgrade. This meeting  was attended by the Chair and Board Member Holm.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a)      receives the report.

b)      notes that the Dominion Road Extension safety improvement is likely exceed the approved budget spend by $30,000, and agrees that this extra cost be released from the Local Board’s transport capital fund to cover this extra cost.

c)      confirms its resolution of December 2013 for a rough order of costs to be prepared for the installation of flashing warning lights at Waikowhai School, taking into account that the position of the signs could possibly need adjustment when the Mt Roskill Safe Routes Scheme is delivered.

 

 

Reporting Back

Resolution (PKTPP/2013/1) Berm Mowing

4.       Auckland Transport (AT) and Auckland Council prepared a report for Auckland Council’s  4 February 2014 Regional Strategy and Finance Committee regarding grass and vegetation management. 

5.       The report states that grass mowing in the road corridor is undertaken by AT road corridor maintenance contractors and that AT is progressively letting new road corridor maintenance contracts.  The new central area contracts commenced in July 2013.

6.       At this time, and in line with the 2013/2014 Annual Plan, the mowing of grass berms ceased in the urban areas of the former Auckland City Council. The cost saving was projected at $3m per annum.

7.       Most landowners within the central area have taken responsibility for mowing the grass berm outside their property. Where landowners are not able or are unwilling to do this, the report states that AT will periodically mow these areas to prevent them becoming overgrown and unsightly; however this will be to a lower standard than previously delivered by the Council.  

8.       In November 2013 the Puketapapa Local Board requested Auckland Transport to work with the Local Board to develop a register of berm sites that are overgrown so that an appropriate means of addressing each site can be developed.

9.       Since that time, Auckland Transport has identified berms and unmown areas in the Puketapapa Local Board and is preparing a schedule to ensure that these areas will be mown in the near future, in line with the guidelines presented in the 4 February 2014 referenced above.

December Resolutions (PKTPP/2013/298)

10.     Puketapapa made further resolutions in December 2013 in relation to the proposed capital projects for Halsey Drive School and Waikowhai School.  These will be addressed under those headings.

Consultation Report

11.     Consultations forwarded to the local board for comment are attached for board members’ information (Attachment A). 

Local Board Capital Projects

Hillsborough Road/Dominion Road Extension

12.     This safety improvement project to square off the slip lane from Hillsborough Road into Dominion Road Extension to provide better sight lines for drivers has been delivered in conjunction with a maintenance road rehabilitation project for Hillsborough Road now approaching completion.

13.     Regular progress reports on the project were provided to the transport portfolio leader by the contractor and the road rehabilitation along with the safety improvement are due for completion in the first half of February.

14.     It is noted that the final cost for this project is now likely to exceed the approved budget by $30,000.

Mt Albert Road Pedestrian Crossing Facility

15.     The aim of this project is to improve crossing opportunities on Mt Albert Road at the Three Kings Village Centre by building a controlled (zebra crossing) where the current refuge island is and an uncontrolled facility (refuge island) on Mount Albert Road to the west of the controlled crossing.

16.     Public consultation is now expected to proceed in February 2014.  Dependent on the outcome of the consultation, detailed design and construction will follow shortly after the consultation process.

17.     The expectation is that the final costs of this project will be under the approved budget.

Richardson Road/Oakdale Intersection improvements

18.     The project will improve pedestrian accessibility across Oakdale Road by reducing the width of the crossing by extending the kerb line as this will slow left turning traffic.  Also planned is an uncontrolled crossing point (pedestrian refuge island) outside the BP service station to aid crossing across Richardson Road.

19.     Public consultation is now expected to proceed in February 2014.  Dependent on the outcome of the consultation, detailed design and construction will follow shortly after the consultation process.

20.     The expectation is that the final costs of this project will be under the approved budget

Hillsborough Road Cycleway SH20 to Monte Cecilia

21.     Auckland Transport has responded that this project cannot be progressed as an upgrade that will meet minimum width standards consistently along the road corridor is not able to be provided. 

22.     There are many driveways and the sub-standard widths would compromise sight-lines, adding further safety concerns. The initial evaluation identified some of these issues, and these have been confirmed through a site visit and desk-top study.

23.     Property purchase would be required to provide a cycle path that would comply with AT standards.

24.     Auckland Transport recommends that the Local Board host a workshop with appropriate Auckland Transport officers to determine where the Local Board might invest in cycle links that are within the cycling programme but where they have not been able to be included in the Long Term Plan.  This will help to achieve strategic goals by supplementing the cycling programme and improving cycling links in the board area.

Waikowhai School Travel Plan

25.     At its December meeting, the Puketapapa Local Board requested Auckland Transport to prepare a rough order of costs for flashing warning signs for Waikowhai School, to be considered for funding through the Local Board’s capital works programme.  The school has been assessed and approved for this safety improvement but Waikowhai School is not included in AT’s programme for delivery of this improvement in this financial year.

26.     Discussions at AT have included consideration of the Mt Roskill Cycle Safety Scheme and its possible impacts on this area of Hillsborough Road.  The Mount Roskill Cycle Safety Scheme has been through public consultation and will soon enter the detailed design stage.  It is possible that the delivery of this scheme could require some adjustment of the placement of any flashing warning signs at the school. However the Mt Roskill Cycle Safety Scheme is not due for delivery in this financial year.

27.     Consequently, it is thought prudent to ask the Local Board if it is committed to proceed with the project on this basis.

Halsey Road School Travel Plan

28.     The gateway treatments proposed by the Local Board have been taken up by the Road Safety team to progress.  If the firm estimates are more than the estimate of $32,000, this project will come back to the Local Board for budget approval.

 Financials

29.     These are included as Attachment B.

Mt Roskill Safe Routes Scheme Update

30.     A briefing was held in November 2013 with the Local Board to present the scheme assessment and discuss the preferred route for the cycle scheme. The draft scheme went out to public consultation in December and the results of the consultation are currently under analysis.

31.     The results of the consultation will be discussed with the Local Board in a workshop in early March.  Depending on the findings of the consultation, the draft scheme is likely to go on to the detailed design phase in March/April.

Dominion Road Update

32.     Detailed design work on the upgrade to Dominion Road continues.   The project will provide continuous bus lanes along Dominion Road from SH 20 to View Road in an effort to improve bus travel times down this important route and include necessary road widening between Mt Albert Road and SH 20. 

33.     Other features include the removal of indented bus bays, replaced by in line stops to allow bus passengers to board efficiently and buses to continue their journey without having to merge with general traffic. The upgrade will see footpaths upgraded and widened through the three villages, safety improvements for pedestrians and improved optimisation of traffic signals.

34.     The Village Design Group with representatives from the Local Boards, iwi and business community have met on several occasions to provide input into appropriate designs and street furniture for the village centres.

35.     It is likely that the detailed design of the main corridor of Dominion Road will be ready for public consultation in March/April.  This can be presented to a Local Board workshop in early March if required although local board members attend the village design groups and may feel they are up to speed on issues.

36.     The project team also went out to public consultation in December on the safe cycling routes running parallel to Dominion Road.

37.     The parallel routes link to reserves in Puketapapa Local Board area and to the proposed Mt Roskill Safe Routes scheme. The parallel routes will need to be in place to provide an alternate route for cyclists before the work on Dominion Road commences. 

38.     The results of the public consultation on the parallel routes will also be discussed with the Local Board in early March.

39.     Depending on the analysis of the consultation, Ii is expected that construction of infrastructure required for the parallel routes will begin in April 2014.

AMETI East West Link

40.     Auckland Transport and NZTA have announced that the focus for the East West improvements will be on the north side of the Manukau Harbour for at least the next decade.

41.     This announcement emphasised the industrial nature of the Onehunga/Penrose area and its importance as an employment hub and the need to improve efficient and safe access in the area for freight movements.

42.     Improvements being considered for the area include better access for freight and commercial vehicles as well as maximizing opportunities for public transport improvements.

Auckland Transport Code of Practice (ATCOP)

43.     The Auckland Transport Code of Practice (ATCOP) is currently open for formal stakeholder consultation and an email was circulated to Local Board Chairs in December 2013 with details. Consultation has now been extended until 31 March 2014.

44.     ATCOP is intended to be a guide for anyone involved in developing and maintaining transport infrastructure in Auckland, ranging from small housing developments to complex public infrastructure. It represents a step change in how transport infrastructure will be delivered in Auckland. It will no longer be about a singular modal choice, but a complete and sustainable transportation network that can be used equally by everyone to get where they want, when they want.

45.     AT has reviewed the existing transport-related infrastructure standards of the previous councils that were amalgamated to form Auckland Council and its related Council Controlled Organisations. The previous councils’ infrastructure standards varied across the Auckland region. These inconsistencies have caused confusion and uncertainty in the application of Auckland-wide transport-related infrastructure standards.  ATCOP will provide the much needed consistency for all of Auckland.

46.     While ATCOP generally provides consistent region-wide standards, it also acknowledges the unique characteristics of recognised special environments such as heritage areas and special identity areas.

47.     ATCOP seeks to promote the transport aspirations of the Auckland Plan, supports the Auckland Unitary Plan and is to be used in harmony with the Auckland Design Manual currently being compiled by Auckland Council.  

48.     More details about the document and how to provide feedback can be accessed by the following link on AT’s website www.aucklandtransport.govt.nz/improving-transport/have-your-say/Pages/ATCOP.aspx.

Auckland Transport News

HOP Card Roll Out Update

49.     AT HOP cards will able to be used on Ritchie’s and Northern Express buses from 2 February, 2014.

50.     AT HOP cards will be able to be used on Howick and Eastern buses from 16 February 2014.

Electric Train Testing

51.     Testing of Auckland’s new electric trains was stepped up over the holiday period.  Commuters who use the Onehunga line will be the first to ride the trains which are due to go into service at the end of April.

52.     Testing and driver training has been carried out, mainly at night and on the weekends and has even involved loading a train with sand bags. Some 1776 sandbags on board, each weighing 20 kilograms, simulate the train close to full weight. The trains are reaching speeds of 110km/h which is the maximum speed allowed on the Auckland rail network.

53.     The overhead electric wires for the trains are now live across Auckland and carry a significant voltage.

Issues Raised through/ by Board Members

Location or Name of Issue

Description

 

AT Response

Gardens on SW Cycleway

 

The south western cycleway and walking routes runs parallel to SH20 and links walkers and cyclists from Puketapapa with SA via Mangere Bridge and Onehunga.  Some untidy gardens in this area including an untidy patch on Melrose Place.

 

Work began in the area on Melrose Place in the week of 18 November.  The area is to become grass verge.

In terms of the vegetation on the “corkscrew” of the SW cycleway and nearby, the maintenance work that needs to be done here is considered to be significant. Discussions are still on going between NZTA, Auckland Council Parks and Auckland Transport as to whose responsibility it is to carry out the works.

A further update will be given next month. 

Hillsborough Cemetery Gate

The cemetery is bisected by Clifton Road which provides access to the residential properties behind the cemetery.  There are issues with people using the road for inappropriate purposes at night and a request was made as to whether the installation of gate to be shut at night can be investigated.

The gate cannot be installed as it is a public road and it needs to be able to be accessed by emergency vehicles at all times.  The police have declined to support the proposed curfew from 9pm to 4am.  Their records show that only three incidents have been reported in the cemetery in the last two years and these were of a minor nature.  

Mount Roskill Medical Centres

The request is for improved pedestrian facilities to cross Richardson Road at this intersection on the southern side of the intersection.  There are medical facilities one side and another doctors surgery on the other side of the road and its difficult to cross the road here.  A slip lane allows vehicles travelling along Richardson and turning left into White Swan Road to travel quickly around this corner aided by the very quick right turn phasing from the lights for vehicles turning right into White Swan.  Could some consideration be given to the improvement of pedestrian facilities here such as a zebra across the slip lane or a signalised crossing?

This intersection is to be upgraded and this request will be taken into consideration for the proposed improvements at this intersection.  The detailed design is being undertaken and is in the process of review from internal parties.

 

Overgrown Roundabout

Please investigate the over grown roundabout on Denbigh Avenue and Dominion Road.

This location has been added to the maintenance mowing list.  An initial mow is to be carried out over January 2014.

Utility Lids on Pah Road

Customer has reported noisy utility lids on Pah Rd.

The noisy lids are Wastewater lids assets.  Watercare have undertaken to look into and remedy the problem.

Olson Avenue

A complaint has been received that vehicles travel down the hill on Olson avenue very fast.  The request is for some traffic calming.  Can this be investigated to see if traffic speed is an issue on this street?

 

In investigating concerns about Olsen Avenue AT has found that there is already traffic calming measures on the avenue consisting of side-islands, coloured road surfacing and "SLOW" road markings. Also, the crash record for the last five years for Olsen Avenue is not considered adverse. Olsen Avenue is not a high priority for further traffic calming; however it will remain on the request list for future consideration.

Signatories

Authors

Lorna Stewart, Elected Member Relationship Manager, Auckland Transport

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon, Elected Member Relationship Team Manager, Auckland Transport

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Consultation Update

69

bView

Financial Report for Local Board Capital Works Programme

71

    

Signatories

Authors

Brenda  Railey - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Karen Lyons - Manager Local Board Services

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

27 February 2014

 

 

Attachment A – Consultations on Roading and Parking Changes (December 2013 to January 2014)

Business Unit

Location

Description

Date

Comment

Road Safety

O’Donnell Avenue

Proposal to install speed tables to reduce speeds, upgrade the existing zebra crossing to a raised pedestrian facility, relocate the 40km/hr variable speed signs and improve street lighting at the proposed speed table locations.

Circulated 5 December 2013

 

 

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

27 February 2014

 

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

27 February 2014

 

 

Puketapapa Youth Action Plan budget allocation

 

File No.: CP2014/02457

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       To request approval from the Puketāpapa Local Board for the allocation of their Youth Development Effectiveness budget to key initiatives identified in the Puketāpapa Youth Action Plan (PYAP).

Executive Summary

2.       Officers have now completed the development of the Puketāpapa Youth Action Plan in collaboration with multiple agencies and local youth. This is an initiative started in 2012 with a request from the Puketāpapa Local Board to officers to develop youth initiatives that will address the results of a local board-funded youth needs assessment.

3.       The Puketāpapa Youth Action Plan is a work programme of initiatives based on the Youth Development Strategy of Aotearoa which focuses on the development of young people. This was developed using a community partnership approach.

4.       The Puketāpapa Youth Action Plan encompasses a series of initiatives that will be delivered by the partners. Officers are requesting the Puketāpapa Local Board to fund some of these initiatives from its Youth Development Effectiveness budget which was earmarked for this purpose.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a)      approves the allocation of its Youth Development Effectiveness budget to implement the following initiatives in the Puketāpapa Youth Action Plan

i)        Employment programming $20,000

ii)       Aspirational Adolescence Programming $10,000

iii)      Young Enterprise $10,000

iv)      Youth summit $5,000

v)      Youth Caucus $2,000

vi)      PAYD-UP Grants and UP Grants for individuals $20,000

vii)     PUKE-ON-UP Awards $5,000

b)      Connect-Ed UP Youth Media Campaign $2,000

 

 

Discussion

5.       In financial year 2012/2013 the Puketāpapa Local Board allocated money towards youth development and instructed officers to develop programmes that will deliver the following objectives:

a)   Increase opportunities for youth-led community development – this has led to the development of a community-owned Youth Action Plan in partnership with youth providers, various organisations and local youth.

b)   Address negative stereotypes of young people by celebrating their strengths and contribution to the community – this has led to the establishment of a leadership programme for the Puketāpapa Youth Caucus & Sportzlife youth development programme

c)   Support youth providers to act as a hub for collaboration, partnerships and information sharing – this has led to the development of the Central West (C Dub) youth providers training plan and monthly hui

d)   Increase access to youth employment opportunities – this is being delivered mainly through Youth Connections, Migrant Action Trust (MAT) youth employment clinic and Dreamweavers aspirational career programme.

6.       This Puketāpapa Local Board 2013 youth budget was spent primarily on the development of the Youth Action Plan. The plan was developed in 2013 by a network of organisations which included representatives from Auckland Council and the local youth caucus. The organisations involved have given their commitment to work together on the joint implementation of this plan by owning and mainstreaming key initiatives into their individual work programmes. Officers have identified a range of key initiatives that require financial support and are in line with the Puketāpapa Local Board Plan and and are proposing these to be funded from the Puketāpapa Local Board budget.

7.       The key initiatives in the Puketāpapa Youth Action Plan that officers recommend for funding from the Youth Development Effectiveness budget are:

·           Employment programming $20,000

This includes the creation of an accessible mobile hub or network of services all committed to the transition of youth into employment opportunities or further education. This funding will also go towards strategic initiatives such as subsidized learners driving licence to address a key barrier to youth employment, homework centres and Project P.E.T.E.R. (Puketāpapa Education Training and Employment Readiness)

·           Aspirational Adolescence Programming $10,000

This initiative funds a collaboration with Youth Action Plan partners Dreamweavers and Sportzlife to continue at-school and afterschool programmes aimed at nurturing leadership qualities, developing resilience and helping young people identify their aspirations and dreams. These programmes are currently happening at Wesley Intermediate and Waikowhai Intermediate over Terms 2 and 3

·           Young Enterprise $10,000

Professional development and business support for youth in social enterprises

·           Youth summit $5,000

A youth summit is being planned for September 2014 but requires a financial commitment to enable early planning and venue booking.

·           Youth Caucus $2,000

Administration needs for meetings, promotion of activities, events and training.

·           PAYD-UP Grants and UP Grants for individuals $20,000

This initiative is a grant to empower youth to develop projects that enhance their skills and develop leadership abilities. A full proposal is included as Attachment B. The Ministry of Youth Development (MYD) will be contributing $3,000 towards this initiative which will be used to support the administration of the grant.

·           PUKE-ON-UP Awards $5,000

This is an initiative of the Youth Caucus and C-Dub to recognize and encourage achievements by youth.


 

·           Connect-Ed UP Youth Media Campaign $2,000

Creation of a website which can be used to communicate activities and initiatives being offered by different partners, achievements and other information for youth.

·           C-Dub Training $3,000

The initiative has attracted funding from the Department of Internal Affairs (DIA) Youth Development Fund and wont be requiring funding from the Puketāpapa Local Board

8.       The groups that developed and will support the implementation of this action plan include Refugee Youth Action Network (RYAN), Roskill Youth Zone (RYZ), YMCA, Youthtown, YWCA, SENZ, Momentum Creators and the Puketāpapa Youth Caucus.

Consideration

Local Board Views

9.       This project was started with seed funding from the Puketāpapa Local Board and is in line with its objectives in their local board plan.

10.     It has developed into a community plan that is owned by multiple partners and local youth. This is in line with the Puketāpapa Local Board and Auckland Council’s aspirations for creating a sense community ownership over key initiatives that improve the community.

Maori Impact Statement

11.     The Puketapapa Youth Action Plan is designed to support local youth, including youth of Maori descent.

Implementation Issues

12.     The Puketāpapa Youth Action Plan is a work programme that will be delivered by multiple partners. The Puketāpapa Local Board is a key partner and has already signaled a commitment to youth initiatives in their annual budget. Other partners have committed time and some are still in the process of committing resources to the implementation Puketāpapa Youth Action Plan.

13.     Allocating the Youth Development Effective budget to the proposed initiatives of the Puketāpapa Youth Action Plan will aide confidence building amongst the partners and local youth. It will also send a strong signal that the Puketapapa Local Board is committed to a partnership approach for the benefit of local youth.

 

Authors

Roger Earp – Senior Community Development Facilitator

 

Luke Thomas – Community Development Facilitator

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Puketapapa Youth Action Plan Summary

77

bView

Information on PAYD-UP Funding

87

     

Signatories

Authors

Shirley  Atatagi-Coutts - Senior Local Board Advisor

Authorisers

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

27 February 2014

 

 











Puketāpapa Local Board

27 February 2014

 

 

Puketapapa Local Board Youth Funding

The Puketapapa Local Board provides a platform for young people in Auckland by providing young people with opportunities for development and growth. There support has been integral to the development and resourcing of the Puketapapa Youth Action Plan and the establishment of the Puketapapa Youth Board.

The Puketapapa Youth Board has been established to get youth opinions heard, organise “by youth / youth led events” and be active in local youth issues. 

Puketapapa Local board and Young people

 

The local board has given young people an opportunity to access funding, for youth led projects. To access the funding grants, there are 2 main criteria areas:

·      Young people must be between 12 – 24 years of age

·      Young people must live in local board areas of; Mt Roskill, Three Kings, Hillsborough and Lyn field.

PAYD-UP Grants

PAYD is an acronym for Projects About Youth-Led Development, which describes the purpose of this funding. This funding is set up for young people to lead and deliver projects that will benefit young people and or the wider community. Young people are encouraged to be creative with their projects examples are; art projects, sporting tournaments, “48 hour famine awareness” and Homework clubs for intermediate students. 

UP Grants

UP stands for Unbelievable Potential, this describes young people in the Puketapapa Local Board. This funding is specific to the individual personal development, of a young person aged between 12 – 24 years of age. This fund is to enable young people to engage with hobbies, interests or activities that they are passionate about.     

How funding decisions are made

Funding applications will be assessed by the Puketapapa Youth Board. The Puketapapa Youth Board members are young people trained in funding decision making and supported by Auckland Council.

 

PAYD-UP GRANTS

What is PAYD-UP Grants

PAYD stands for Projects About Youth Led Development, which will enable young people to lead projects that will develop new skills and leadership.   

 

PAYD-UP projects are designed to be lead by young people (aged 14 to 24) years old that develop Active Youth Development. See attachment for more information.

Expected outcomes of the fund are:

·      young people having the skills to influence/make decisions

·      young people participating in decision making opportunities at a local level

·      young people participating in leadership roles

·      young people leading community events and activities

·      young people participating in voluntary activity.

 

Criteria

 

Projects need to:

·      develop young people’s skills and knowledge in decision-making and leadership

·      involve young people in decision-making and taking leadership responsibility

·      respond to a need in the community identified by young people

·      support young people to be engaged in and contribute to their community

·      benefit young people aged 12 to 24 years old or creating positive change in the wider community

·      An adult sponsor to offer on-going support, where needed for the project  

·      Start from 1 January 2014 and be completed by 30 December 2014.

Who can apply?

·      Individuals or groups of young people aged 12 to 24 years old who have the support of a legal entity, for example a school or youth organisation who will hold the fund in their bank account.

·      Organisations working in partnership with young people.

·      NB: Partnering organisations can be found for individuals or groups by Auckland Council officers to support applications

Note: Organisations supporting young people or applying for funding need to be a legal entity, eg an incorporated society or charitable trust (and registered with the Companies Office).

Fund size

The funding available for each project will be up to $2,000

What we cannot fund

·      projects involving young people below the age of 12 years or over the age of 24 years

·      projects that have already been started or completed

·      young people without the support of a legal entity

·      contribution to current on-going costs i.e. rent or salaries.

When funding is available

There will be one funding round for 2014. The round will open on 17 March and close on 11 April 2014. There will be a 1 week turn around to inform all applicants of funding decisions. 

How funding decisions are made

·      Funding applications will be assessed by members of the Puketapapa Youth Board. Puketapapa Youth Board are young people trained in funding decision making and supported by Auckland Council.

·      If your application meets the criteria for the fund and the board requires more information regarding your application, a Puketapapa Youth Board member may contact you.

The Puketapapa Youth Board will make funding recommendations to the Auckland Council for approval.

Reporting requirements

If your application is successful in receiving funding you will need to submit a final report at the conclusion of your project that includes:

 

·      the number of young people participating in decision-making and leadership roles

·      the number of young people supported to be connected and contributing to their wider community

·      the number of young people involved in/directly benefiting from the project

·      a list of any equipment purchased with project funds

·      a breakdown of how project funds were spent.

·      Photos of your event or programme

·      What did you learn through the project

·      What has changed as a result of your project.

 

 

 

Fund guidelines

The following are taken into account when assessing applications:

·      the fund is intended to support youth sport and recreation, aspiration,    education, cultural, art or wellbeing activities

·      Project should be supported by an adult from a supporting organisation or someone 

·      the programme should attract significant numbers of youth on a regular basis or one off event

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

UP Grants for individuals

The Puketapapa Youth Board is offering UP Grants for individual young people aged 12 – 24 years of age and living in the Puketapapa Local board area (Mt Roskill, Three Kings, Hillsborough and Lynfield.

UP Grant funding is there to help young people in the Puketapapa Local Board area to reach their potential, develop skills and follow their dreams.

How much can an individual apply for?

Individual applications can be made for any amount up to $300 (Group applications can made to PAYD-UP grant for larger projects)

All applicants must be aged between 12-24 years old.

Application criteria for UP Grants

·      It's only for individuals or groups of young people, no organisations can apply.

·      It can't be used for tertiary study.

·      Applicants must live in the Puketapapa Local Board.

·      All applicants must be aged between 12-24 years old.

·      It must go towards the applicant’s personal development.

·      Applicants need to and demonstrate their commitment to their chosen application area.

·      Applicants have to show how they have personally tried to raise funds their by fundraising

·      A letter with your address will need to be provided 

Please note: If a group is applying for UP Grant funding, individual applications will not be accepted for PAYD UP Grants for the same thing.

The kinds of things you could use UP Grant funding for...

UP Grants are designed to support young people in the Puketapapa Local Board.  You don't need to be top of your field, just passionate about your interests and wanting to go further and reach your potential in anything you are involved in.  Funding can be used for things such as Leadership camps, overseas school trips, sports equipment, Outward Bound or any other personal development opportunities.

 

How funding decisions are made

Funding applications will be assessed by the Puketapapa Youth Board. All the Puketapapa Youth Board members are young people trained in funding decision making and supported by Auckland Council.

 

The Puketapapa Youth Board will make funding recommendations to the Auckland Council for approval.

 

When funding is available

There will be one funding round for 2014. The round will open on 17 March and close on 11 April 2014. There will be a 1 week turn around to inform all applicants of funding decisions. 

 

Reporting requirements

If your application is successful in receiving funding you will need to submit a final report at the conclusion of your UP Grant that includes:

 

·      a list of any equipment purchased with project funds

·      a breakdown of how project funds were spent.

·      Photos of your event/programme attended

·      What did you learn through your UP Grant funding

·      What has changed for you as a result of your UP Grant funding.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Principles of Youth Development

The principles outline what the youth development approach is all about. They can be used as a checklist and a tool for developing youth policies and programmes and in working alongside young people.

The principles are:

1. Youth development is shaped by the 'big picture'

By the ‘big picture' we mean: the values and belief systems; the social, cultural, economic contexts and trends; the Treaty of Waitangi and international obligations such as the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.

2. Youth development is about young people being connected

Healthy development depends on young people having positive connections with others in society.  This includes their family and whānau, their community, their school, training institution or workplace and their peers.

3. Youth development is based on a consistent strengths-based approach

There are risk factors that can affect the healthy development of young people and there are also factors that are protective.  ‘Strengths-based' policies and programmes will build on young people's capacity to resist risk factors and enhance the protective factors in their lives.

4. Youth development happens through quality relationships

It is important that everyone is supported and equipped to have successful, quality relationships with young people.

5. Youth development is triggered when young people fully participate

Young people need to be given opportunities to have greater control over what happens to them, through seeking their advice, participation and engagement.

6. Youth development needs good information

Effective research, evaluation, information gathering and sharing is crucial.

Together, these six principles can help young people to gain a:

·      sense of contributing something of value to society

·      feeling of connectedness to others and to society

·      belief that they have choices about their future

·      feeling of being positive and comfortable with their own identity.

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

27 February 2014

 

 

Allocation of 2013/14 Oakley Creek Restoration Budget

 

File No.: CP2014/01552

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       To seek approval from the Puketapapa Local Board for allocation of the Oakley Creek restoration budget ($10,482) to a pollution prevention project in the Oakley Creek catchment area, for implementation by the Environmental Services Unit, in the Infrastructure and Environmental Services Department.

Executive Summary

2.       Through the aspirations in their local board plan and subsequent allocation of budget, the Puketapapa Local Board have demonstrated their commitment to environmental enhancement and protection for the Oakley Creek catchment in the local board’s area. In FY 2012/2013 the local board allocated budget to a riparian planting project for a portion of Oakley Creek which was delivered by the Friends of Oakley Creek.

3.       Officers from Auckland Council met with the environmental portfolio holders for the Puketapapa Local Board, along with a representative for the Friends of Oakley Creek, to discuss the allocation of the $10,482 Oakley Creek restoration budget for the current financial year.

 

Recommendations

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a)      agrees to allocate the $10,482 Oakley Creek restoration budget to an industry pollution prevention programme in the Stoddard Road and Carr Road business areas for the 2013/2014 financial year.

b)      requests that any significant changes identified during project delivery be brought to the Puketatpapa Local Board for approval.

 

Discussion

4.       The Puketapapa local board plan includes a key project to implement restoration planting and renaturalisation projects along Oakley Creek as part of the Puketapapa Greenways initiative.

5.       Officers discussed options for the Oakley Creek restoration budget for the current financial year at a meeting with the environment portfolio holders for the local board and a representative of the Friends of Oakley Creek on 5 December 2013. A pollution prevention project was recommended by officers at that meeting to improve water quality in Oakley Creek and to prevent pollutants entering the creek from businesses in the Stoddard Road and Carr Road areas.

6.       Officers investigated and conducted a walkover of both areas and determined that some businesses in both areas discharged directly into Oakley Creek. A pollution prevention project in these areas would seek to work collaboratively with businesses to assist them to manage their sites more effectively and reduce the pollution leaving the site.

7.       Pollution prevention projects have been undertaken in other local board areas and the positive outcomes have included an increased connection between the local board, local businesses and industry, and the support of businesses to adopt practices to minimise pollutant discharges to waterways in the area.

8.       This project would also complement the restoration work and riparian planting being funded by the local board in the Oakley Creek catchment.

Consideration

Local Board Views

9.       Members of Puketapapa Local Board met with Council officers at a meeting on 5 December 2013 to discuss proposed projects for the local board Oakley Creek restoration 2013/2014.

Maori Impact Statement

10.     This report provides information for anticipated environmental programmes. It is recognised that the issue of water quality has integral links with the Mauri of waterways and harbours and concepts of Kaitiakitanga.

11.     Many of the identified activities are of interest to Maori and provisions for mana whenua participation, contribution, and consultation will be incorporated.

General

12.     Responsibility for decision making and allocation of this budget is the delegation of the Puketapapa Local Board.

Implementation Issues

13.     Implementation of the projects will be regularly reported to the Puketapapa Local Board via the Infrastructure and Environmental Services Quarterly reports. A more detailed report will be presented to the local board at a workshop at the end of the financial year.

14.     There are no known additional financial or implementation issues arising from this report.

 

Authors

Dr Viv Heslop, Environmental Programmes Advisor, Environmental Services Unit

 

Robbie Sutherland, Manager Local Environmental Programmes

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.    

Signatories

Authors

Theresa Pearce - Relationship Advisor

Authorisers

John Dragicevich - Manager Infrastructure and Environmental Services

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

27 February 2014

 

 

Lapsing of Auckland City Council Hazardous Substances Bylaw

 

File No.: CP2014/00315

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       The purpose of this report is to recommend that the Auckland City Council Hazardous Substances Bylaw 2008, which is now an Auckland Council bylaw, be allowed to lapse, because the provisions of this bylaw are adequately dealt with by a number of pieces of national legislation.

Executive Summary

2.       In 2008 Auckland City Council made a Hazardous Substances Bylaw.  This bylaw:

a)      Requires an application to be made to the council whenever it is intended to install, alter, remove, examine or relocate any tank or pipeline used for storing or transferring of various classes of hazardous substances;

b)      Requires underground storage tanks to be installed in accordance with a 1992 Department of Labour code of practice or in a manner that prevents the contamination of underground water sources;

c)      Requires the storage, use and disposal of any chemical or contaminant to be in such a way that this does not result in a nuisance or risk to public health and safety.  The word contaminant is defined by the bylaw and covers any type of substance that, when discharged to water or land can damage the physical, biological or chemical condition of that water or land. 

3.       Since the bylaw was made there have been a number of legislative changes that have reduced the need for the bylaw.  The council retains its role under section 15 of the Resource Management Act 1991 to manage discharges of contaminants into the environment and it will continue to exercise this function through the proposed Unitary Plan.  However under the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act 1996 the council’s role is only to enforce this act in public places and in places other than work places. 

4.       If the council does not revoke the bylaw prior to 31 October 2015 (i.e. it allows the bylaw to lapse) it will not have to go through the time and expense of revoking the bylaw through the special consultative process of the Local Government Act 2002. 

 

Recommendation/s

That the Puketapapa Local Board:

a)      Recommends to the Regulatory and Bylaw Committee that the Auckland City Council Hazardous Substances Bylaw 2008 not be confirmed, amended or revoked so that on 31 October 2015 the bylaw is revoked by section 63 of the Local Government (Auckland Transitional Provisions) Act 2010. 

 

Discussion

5.       The current bylaw regulates three general areas:

·        The bylaw requires an application to and approval from council to install, alter, remove, examine or relocate any tank or pipeline used for the storage or transferring of hazardous substances.  This enables the council to monitor sites where hazardous substances are stored and check the contamination of those sites especially when underground tanks or pipes are removed. 

·        The installation, construction and operation of underground storage tanks holding hazardous substances. 

·        Standards for the storage of chemicals or contaminants so that any use, disposal or spillage of those chemicals or contaminants does not create a nuisance and there is no risk to public health and safety.  These provisions also allow council officers to take water or soil samples to determine whether or not a site is polluted. 

6.       Staff considers that the bylaw topics are now adequately covered by national legislation which are discussed in detail below.

A.      Approval to install, alter, remove, examine or relocate any tank or pipeline used for storing or transferring of hazardous substances

7.       This part of the bylaw is dealt with in part by the Resource Management (National Environmental Standard for Assessing and Managing Contaminants in Soil to Protect Human Health) Regulations 2011 (the NES). The NES applies to land that has or had an activity or industry on the site that is listed on the Hazardous Activities and Industries List (HAIL) published by the Ministry for the Environment (MfE) and is therefore considered potentially contaminated. If however a detailed site investigation demonstrates that any contaminants in or on the site are below background (naturally occurring) concentrations then the site is not considered contaminated. 

8.       The NES sets permitted activity standards for the removal or replacement of a fuel storage system (storage tanks and ancillary equipment), including the removal or replacement of an underground part of the system and putting back or taking away soil from the site, subject to a number of conditions.  The conditions include that the activity is done in accordance with MfE guidelines, the council is notified on where, when and for how long the activity will be taking place and where any removed soil will be disposed of.  Limits are also set on the amount of soil that can be taken away and a requirement that council will receive results of the investigation done on the site.

9.       The NES also has permitted activity standards for sampling soil, disturbing soil (such as might occur if an underground tank was removed and the hole filled in) and for the subdividing or changing the use of HAIL land.  None of these permitted activities have conditions which require the council to be notified when the activity takes place, but the conditions applied to these activities prevent any danger to the public. Appendix B of the NES includes soil contaminant standards (SCSs) for human health for inorganic and organic compounds for five types of land use scenarios: rural/lifestyle blocks, residential, high-density residential, parks/recreational land and commercial/industrial land. SCSs represent a human health risk threshold above which the effects on human health may be unacceptable over time.

10.     If the owner of a piece of contaminated land or potentially contaminated land (e.g. land on the HAIL list) wishes to subdivide or change the use of a piece of land, it is usually in the best interests of that land owner to decontaminate that land or prove that the land meets the standards of the NES so that the land can be sold.  If however, an owner of a contaminated site or potentially contaminated site does not wish to subdivide or change the use of that site they are still required to meet the proposed Unitary Plan rules for the discharge of contaminates to land and water from that site. 

B.      Requiring underground storage tanks containing hazardous substances to be installed in accordance with a 1992 Department of Labour code of practice or in a manner that prevents the contamination of underground water sources;

11.     These provisions have been superseded by a number of pieces of legislation:

a)      The Hazardous Substances (Emergency Management) Regulations 2001 which came into force in July 2001 require the secondary containment of any liquid hazardous substance that is kept in quantities that exceeds the thresholds outlined in schedule 4 of these regulations.  The regulations apply to both surface containers and below ground containers holding liquids or substances likely to liquefy in a fire. 

b)      Schedule 8 of the Hazardous Substances (Dangerous Goods and Scheduled Toxic Substances)Transfer Notice (2004 and amendments) places obligations and restriction on stationary container systems (tanks and associated fittings and pipe work) that contain or are intended to contain a hazardous substance that is described in schedules 1 (dangerous goods) and 2 (toxic substances) of the notice.  Part 2 of schedule 8 requires all parts of a stationary container system to be designed, constructed, installed, operated, maintained, tested and repaired so that the system contains any hazardous substance that is put into it without any leakage of that substance when subjected to expected operating temperatures, pressures and stresses, loadings and environmental conditions.

Parts 5 and 6 of schedule 8 specifies standards for both above ground stationary tanks and below ground stationary tanks for hazardous liquids.  Various standards are specified for their design and construction and for the installation and operation of tanks to prevent their damage.  Part 8 has standards for disused below ground tanks.  Part 14 has requirements for pipe work conveying hazardous substances.  Part 17 has standards for the marking of stationary tanks and requirements to have a plan available for inspection which describes the physical position of stationary container systems.  Part 18 includes requirements for the repair, alteration, maintenance and inspection of above ground and below ground tanks to ensure that they continue to meet the standards and codes to which the tank was designed and constructed.  The maintenance requirements for below ground tanks include requirements to undertake inventory control checks and leak-testing. 

c)      The Code of Practice for the Management of Existing Stationary Container Systems up to 60,000 litres Capacity.  This was approved in April 2008 by the Environmental Risk Management Authority as an approved code of practice under the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act 1996.  This code of practice applies to stationary tanks used to contain hazardous liquids that were in use at the commencement date of the Transfer Notice and:

•        do not fully meet the requirements of schedule 8 of the Transfer Notice, and/or 

•        do not meet the requirements for secondary containment of the Hazardous Substances (Emergency Management) Regulations 2001.

 

C.      Requiring the storage, use and disposal of any chemical or contaminant to be in such a way that this does not result in a nuisance or risk to public health and safety. 

The word contaminant is defined in the bylaw and covers any type of substance that, when discharged to water or land can damage the physical, biological or chemical condition of that water or land. 

a.       Storage

12.     As noted above the Hazardous Substances (Emergency Management) Regulations 2001 which came into force in July 2001 requires the secondary containment of any liquid hazardous substance that is kept in quantities that exceeds the thresholds outlined in schedule 4 of these regulations.  The regulations apply to both surface containers and below ground containers for liquids or substances likely to liquefy in a fire.  Schedule 9 of the Hazardous Substances (Dangerous Goods and Scheduled Toxic Substances) Transfer Notice which regulates the storage of dangerous goods and toxic substances, also has requirements for secondary containment systems for the storage of class 3.1 (flammable liquids) as does the Code of Practice for the Management of Existing Stationary Container Systems up to 60,000 litres capacity. 

b.         Use

13.     The use of chemicals or contaminants in a way that does not result in a nuisance or risk to public health and safety is controlled by a number or instruments:

•        The Resource Management Act e.g. section 15: discharges of contaminants into the environment.

•        The proposed Auckland Unitary Plan e.g. Chapter H section 4.6: Managing hazardous substances and section 4.8: Industrial and Trade Activities.

14.     The chief executive of a local authority is only required to ensure that the provisions of the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act 1996 are enforced in public places and in places other than work places.  He/she can however enforce the provisions of the Act in other places for the purpose of enforcing the provisions of the Resource Management Act. 

c.       Disposal

15.     The disposal of chemicals and contaminants is controlled by instruments such as:

The Hazardous Substance (Disposal) Regulations 2001.

16.     These regulations which came into force in July 2001 have disposal requirements for hazardous substances, packages and containers for class 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8 and 9 substances.  For each class of substance the regulations describe what are suitable means of treatment for disposal, and what is not.  Note that class 7 is an unallocated class.  These regulations also require any one who manufactures, imports or supplies a hazardous substance to another person in a quantity that exceeds that of schedule 1 of the regulations to provide that person with information on the appropriate method of disposal of that substance in accordance with the regulations. 

The Resource Management (National Environmental Standard for Assessing and Managing Contaminants in Soil to Protect Human Health) Regulations 2011.

17.     The provisions/requirements of this standard are discussed above. 

National Environmental Standard for Air Quality

18.     This standard bans the burning of tyres, copper wire and oil in the open air, the burning of bitumen used in road maintenance, the deliberate use of landfill fires and controls the use of school and healthcare incinerators.  The standard also bans the construction of new high temperature hazardous waste incinerators.  

The Auckland Council Trade Waste Bylaw 2013

19.     The Trade Waste bylaw seeks to protect people and the environment from the adverse effects of harmful substances discharged to the wastewater system.  

The Auckland Council Solid Waste Bylaw 2012

20.     The provisions of this bylaw prevent the disposal of prohibited waste in a public place for collection.  Prohibited waste in this bylaw includes any hazardous waste that contains hazardous substances at sufficient concentrations to exceed the minimum degrees of hazard specified by the Hazardous Substances (Minimum Degree of Hazard) Regulations 2000 or meets the definition for infectious substances included in the Land Transport Rule: Dangerous Goods 1999 and NZ Standard 5433:1999 – Transport of Dangerous Goods on Land.

Consideration

Local Board Views

21.     The views of all local boards that are within the legacy Auckland City Council area, where the Auckland City Council Hazardous Substances Bylaw 2008 applies, will be sought before a recommendation is made to the Regulatory and Bylaws Committee to let this bylaw lapse.

Maori Impact Statement

22.     Consultation with Maori occurred during the development of the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan and resulted in a new set of standards for the management of hazardous substances in Auckland.  Analysis of the current bylaw, national environmental standards and other legislation, relevant iwi management plans and consultation indicates that the revoking of this bylaw will not have any impact on the way that hazardous substances are managed by Auckland Council.  

General

23.     The chief executive of a local authority is only required to ensure that the provisions of the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act 1996 are enforced in public places and in places other than work places.  Despite the lapsing of this bylaw the council can however enforce the provisions of the Act for the purpose of enforcing the provisions of the Resource Management Act.  Section 15 of the Resource Management Act allows the council to manage discharges of contaminants into the environment and the council will continue to exercise this function through the proposed Auckland Unitary Plan. 

Implementation Issues

24.     There are no implementation issues if this bylaw is allowed to lapse. 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Auckland City Council Hazardous Substances Bylaw 2008

103

     

Signatories

Authors

Colin Craig - Principal Policy Analyst – Planning Policies and Bylaws

Authorisers

Penny Pirrit - Regional & Local Planning Manager

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

27 February 2014

 

 







Puketāpapa Local Board

27 February 2014

 

 

Hearing dates for the Puketāpapa Local Board hearings for the Annual Plan 2014/2015

 

File No.: CP2014/02472

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       To approve the Puketāpapa Local Board hearing dates for the Annual Plan 2014/2015.

Executive Summary

2.       The Local Government Act 2002 and the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 require Council to use the special consultative procedure to adopt the Annual Plan, and to ensure any person submitting on the Annual Plan is given reasonable opportunity to be heard.

3.       The Governing Body agreed the approach to submissions and hearings at its meeting on 19 December 2013.  It was agreed that local hearings use the traditional style hearings process, with a forum option being assessed if a local board has a large volume of submissions. The Governing Body also agreed that submissions containing both regional and local content will default to the local hearings panel to be heard.

4.      The Puketāpapa Local Board needs to approve the dates for the local hearings and deliberations.

 

 

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board Local:

a)      Approves the Puketāpapa Local Board Annual Plan hearings to take place on Wednesday, 19 March 2014 at 10.00am at the Fickling Centre, 546 Mt Albert Road, Three Kings, with an overflow date of Thursday, 20 March 2014 at 5pm.

b)      Approves the Puketāpapa Local Annual Plan deliberations to take place on Wednesday 16 April 2014 at 10.30am at the Fickling Centre, 546 Mt Albert Road, Three Kings

c)      Approves the Puketāpapa Local Board adopts its Local Board Agreement at a meeting held on Wednesday, 11 June 2014 at 10.30am at the Fickling Centre, 546 Mt Albert Road, Three Kings.

 

Discussion

5.       The Local Government Act 2002 and the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 requires Council to use the special consultative procedure to adopt the Annual Plan, and to ensure any person submitting on the Annual Plan is given reasonable opportunity to be heard.

6.       The Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 also requires each local board to complete a local board agreement with the governing body, for each financial year. The Annual Plan must include the local board agreement for each board.

7.      
The Governing Body agreed the approach to submissions and hearings at its meeting on 19 December 2013. It was resolved as follows:

That the Governing Body agree:

a)    that annual plan local hearings follow the traditional style hearing process, with the forum option to be assessed for Local Boards that have large volumes of submissions.

b)    that regional hearings predominantly use forum style hearings with very limited and tight criteria for selecting key stakeholders who will be heard in traditional style.

c)    that forum style regional hearings are divided into days which are allocated to business, community groups and individuals, with the individual hearing possibly having some topic-based tables.

d)    that the regional hearings panel divide into panels should the number of key stakeholders become too great for all to be heard in the time allowed for traditional regional hearings, thereby allowing more key stakeholders to be heard in the timeframe available.

e)    that submissions containing both regional and local content will default to the local hearings panel to be heard, noting that if a significant volume of regional submissions are received, they may also be allocated to local hearings.

f)     that the ward councillor(s) be part of the local hearings panel, with other councillors scheduled where appropriate to ensure a minimum of two councillors are present at each local hearing to hear regional issues.  Other councillors will attend voluntarily as schedules allow.

g)    that the following reporting requirements be approved:

i)     One regional hearing report and 21 local board hearing reports be prepared covering statistics on submissions received locally and regionally, with a brief high-level analysis of key themes and topics.

ii)    Analysis of submissions be provided for one regional deliberation report to the Budget Committee, and 21 local board deliberation reports to the relevant local boards.

h)    that subject matter expert comments are captured for inclusion in deliberation reports if requested from the hearings process.

i)     that response letters be provided as follows:

i)     Key stakeholders are provided with a customised response letter signed by the Chair of the Budget Committee.

ii)    Other regional submitters are provided with a generic response letter, which includes key issues and decisions.

iii)   Local boards will prepare their own responses to local submitters, via Local Board Services, with support from subject matter experts where required.

j)     that the Chair of each hearings panel decide on whether late submissions can be heard.

k)    that the Deputy Chair of the Budget Committee be delegated to work with officers to make further decisions on the operation of the hearings.

CARRIED

 

8.       The Puketāpapa Local Board needs to approve the dates for the local hearings, deliberations and adoption of the Local Board Agreement.

9.      
It is proposed that the local Annual Plan hearing, to hear the submissions for the Puketāpapa Local Board area are scheduled as follows:

· Wednesday, 19 March 2014 - Initial hearing date, commencing at 10am

·        Thursday, 20 March 2014 - overflow hearing day (depending on the number of submitters wishing to be heard), commencing at 5pm.

·        Wednesday, 16 April 2014 - deliberations meeting, commencing at 5.00pm.

10.     The hearing days will be treated as one meeting with one agenda.  The deliberations meeting will be an ordinary meeting.

11.     The adoption of the Local Board Agreement will be held on Wednesday, 11 June 2014.

Consideration

Local Board Views

12.     Local Board views will inform decision-making on this report.  Local Board Services will also further discuss the hearings options once the volume of local submissions is known.

Maori Impact Statement

13.     A submission form is available in Te Reo Maori. Translators will be available for submissions received in Te Reo Maori, or where a submitter wishes to speak Te Reo Maori at a hearing.

Implementation Issues

14.     Local Board Services will manage the local hearings process. No particular implementation issues are anticipated.

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.    

Signatories

Authors

Brenda  Railey - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Karen Lyons - Manager Local Board Services

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

27 February 2014

 

 

Resolutions Pending Action Schedule

 

File No.: CP2014/02078

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       The purpose of this report is to provide the Board with a schedule of resolutions that are still pending action.

Executive Summary

2.       Attached is an updated version of the Resolutions Pending Actions schedule for February 2014.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a)      receive the Resolutions Pending Action Schedule for February 2014.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Resolutions Pending Action February 2014

115

    

Signatories

Authors

Brenda  Railey - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Karen Lyons - Manager Local Board Services

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

27 February 2014

 

 









Puketāpapa Local Board

27 February 2014

 

 

Record of Puketapapa Local Board Workshops

 

File No.: CP2014/02079

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       The purpose of this report is to provide a summary of Puketapapa Local Board workshops.

Executive Summary

2.       The attached workshop summary provides a record of Puketapapa Local Board workshop held 22 January 2014.

These sessions are held to give an informal opportunity for board members and officers to discuss issues and projects and note that no binding decisions are made or voted on at workshop sessions.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Puketapapa Local Board:

a)      Receive the record of Puketapapa Local Board workshop report.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Workshop Summary January 2014

125

    

Signatories

Authors

Brenda  Railey - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Karen Lyons - Manager Local Board Services

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

27 February 2014

 

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

27 February 2014

 

 

Board Member Reports February 2014

 

File No.: CP2014/02080

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       The purpose of this report is to inform the Puketapapa Local Board on Board Members portfolio activities.

Executive Summary

2.       Attaching the Board Member reports for the month of February 2014, providing the Puketapapa Local Board members a chance to update each other on their portfolio work.

 

 

Recommendation/s

That the Puketapapa Local Board:

a)      receive the Board Member reports from H Doig, D Holm and N Turnbull for February 2014.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

H Doig Report, 23 January-16 February 2014

129

bView

D Holm Report, 23 January-17 February 2014

131

cView

N Turnbull Report, 1 January–19 February 2014

133

    

Signatories

Authors

Brenda  Railey - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Karen Lyons - Manager Local Board Services

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

27 February 2014

 

 

Report Name:  Board member report – Harry Doig

23 Jan – 16 Feb 2014

 

 

Board workshops, meetings, and briefings attended

 

23 Jan                        Briefing on Wesley Community Centre

24 Jan                        Briefing on Board finances

28 Jan                        Unitary Plan discussion

29 Jan                        Board agenda run through

29 Jan                        PLB Community Awards discussion

29 Jan                        Wesley Budget discussion

30 Jan                        Manakau foreshore hikoi and hui

30 Jan                        Three Kings Precinct Plan – Stakeholders reference group

30 Jan                        Board Business meeting

31 Jan                        Briefing on Local Government Act Amendment

04 Feb                        Puketapapa Garden Web future planning discussion

05 Feb                        Board workshop until 12:30

10 Feb                        Board Extraordinary Business meeting – Unitary Plan Submission

12 Feb                        Board Workshop

12 Feb                        Three Kings Precinct – Workshop planning

13 Feb                        Friends of maunga – planning meeting

13 Feb                        Special Housing Area – workshop

15 Feb                        Three Kings Precinct – public workshop

 

Other meetings/activities

 

23 Jan                        Roskill Together personnel subcommittee meeting

28 Jan                        Meeting with Auckland Brass Band

31 Jan                        Meet with Fletcher’s  Three Kings architect

01 Feb                        Attend Fletcher’s Open Day on Three Kings development plans

13 Feb                        Roskill Community Network meeting

13 Feb                        Roskill Together monthly meeting

 

 

Any other issues:               

 

Recommendation/s

 

a)    That the report be received.

 

 

Signatories

Author

Board Member Doig

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

27 February 2014

 

 

Report Name:  Board member report – David Holm

23 January – 17 February 2014

 

 

Board workshops and meetings attended

30 January        Attended Board Business meeting

5 February         Attended Board workshop sessions

10 February       Attended Board extraordinary meeting

12 February       Attended Board workshop sessions

 

Transport Portfolio

31 January        Attended Auckland Transport liaison meeting

                            Attended Dominion Road Upgrade meeting

7 February         Liaised with Auckland Transport on properties suited for Park and Ride Facility

10 February       Meeting with Richard Barter to discuss cycleways

 

Other Matters

1 February         Attended Fletcher Open Day on Three Kings Development

 

Any other issues:

Nil

 

Recommendation/s

 

a)    That the report be received.

 

Signatories

Author

David Holm

 

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

27 February 2014

 

 



Puketāpapa Local Board

27 February 2014

 

 

Chairperson's Report February 2014

 

File No.: CP2014/02082

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       The purpose of this report is to inform the Puketapapa Local Board on the Chairperson’s portfolio activities.

 

 

Recommendation/s

That the Puketapapa Local Board:

a)      receive the Chairperson’s Report February 2014.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Chairperson's February Report, 28 January - 17 February 2014

137

    

Signatories

Authors

Brenda  Railey - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Karen Lyons - Manager Local Board Services

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

27 February 2014

 

 

Report NameChair’s report

For period 28th January to 17th February 2014

 

 

Board workshops, meetings, and briefings

5th & 12th February  Participated in Board workshops

 

28th January             Met with Principal, May Road School: Ako Hiko Trust, community gardening, children’s panels. 

28th January             Unitary Plan submission discussion with Board member Doig and staff, to identify key points for draft to go to Board

29th January             Agenda run-through with Board members Doig, Holm, Kumar and Wood, and officers, followed by a Board business discussion.

29th January             Community awards meeting with Board members Kumar and Doig, and officers: the awards will be held in 2015 this term.

29th January             Wesley Community Centre and RYZ budget discussion with Board members Doig, Holm and officers

29th January             Attended part of Unitary Plan Committee workshop

30th January             Regular monthly Board business meeting

31st January             Regular meeting with Youth Advisory Panel rep for Puketapapa, Mosa Mafile’o: how the Board office can support his work, youth rep structures and action plan, connection with the Board, input to Local Board Plan

31st January             Mt Roskill Village Design Group – part of the Dominion Road project, attended with Board member Doig, iwi reps, officers from Auckland Council and Auckland Transport:  what could happen in Roskill Village above and beyond the AT spend (with our budget), points for collaboration such as noticeboard, canopies, raingardens, art; need for us to have input to the traffic management plans during the work; AT will not fund the art work aspect of the proposed Gifford Rd bridge, but will fund the bridge and retrofit it to be able to add the art work easily at a future point.

1st February              Attended most of Fletchers’ Three Kings open day on their redevelopment ideas.  Many community members were concerned that the plans presented represented an agreed concept that Council has signed off on, and this was unfortunate as not only is it inaccurate it is also unhelpful for the continuing Three Kings Precinct plan process that the Board is leading.  It was useful that Fletchers shared their ideas, and I look forward to seeing a copy of the feedback they received, as has been promised. 

1st February              Dropped in to the Roskill Together “Summer Slickers” event at Freeland Reserve: these “park party” community engagement events are going well, and will feed into the community action plan the group is working towards finalizing.

1st February              Visited Potters Park to see Albert-Eden’s splash-pad in action.  This is an innovative playground idea that has been very popular, and a more modest version could be considered for a “zeroed m” playground by Cameron Pools in the future.  The zoo also has a very popular water-based playground, which is more simple than the different bits of apparatus at Potters Park, consisting of a well designed stone cascade which has water running through it.

3rd February              Meeting with Mary Dawson and Anita Keestra of Auckland Regional Migrant Services Trust (ARMS): future of former Borough Council building, community capacity building workshop around having a premises/sharing a premises which could help to identify a group to work on a shared space, WISE collective work, more support from council facilities for registered kitchens, transport for the migrant community especially refugees.

4th February              Regular catch-up with Relationship Manager

4th February              First regular catch-up with Central Leader reporter Danielle Street

4th February              Meeting with Board member Doig and officer regarding future of Puketapapa Garden Web and hand-over of community garden work.

5th February              Board workshop, followed by briefing on Rec Centre contracts

7th February              First regular catch-up with Albert-Eden Chair and Albert-Eden-Roskill ward councillors: Dominion Road project, Three Kings, berms, Living Wage.  We have determined we shall continue these every two months.

8th February              Dropped in to Roskill Together “Summer Slickers” at Stranolar Reserve, checked on progress of fruit trees in the reserve.

10th February            Meeting with Karen Ramsey, Head Teacher at Roskill South Kindergarten: use of Bob Bodt Reserve, nightshade growing in park, community gardening.

10th February            Spoke at the Representation Commission hearing, examining electorate boundary changes for the 2014 general election, on communities of interest in the White Swan, Lynfield and Wesley areas.

10th February            Extraordinary business meeting to sign-off Unitary Plan feedback.

11th February            Meeting with Richard Barter of Puketapapa Active Transport Haven (PATH) and Board member Holm on local transport issues.

11th February            Attended most of Unitary Plan Committee workshop.

11th February            Met briefly with Mt Roskill Business and Community Groups Association (MRBCGA) to seek reps from their membership to the Village Design Group for the Dominion Road project, and request a Local Board Plan engagement session in partnership with them in March.  They have agreed that we can use their March networking session for this purpose, on March 11th from 6.30pm to 8pm, in the Lynfield Room at the Fickling Centre.

12th February            Regular catch-up with PA (these are now scheduled to take place weekly)

12th February            Board workshop, including Board Business session, briefings on Economic Development, Youth Development and Social Enterprise

12th February            Attended most of Unitary Plan Committee workshop, and spoke to several of the feedback items from our Board.

13th February            Attended part of regular Roskill Community Network meeting

14th February            Attended Local Alcohol Policy workshop: examining and giving feedback on officer advice regarding policy concepts such as using zoning and the Unitary Plan structure to categorise areas, identifying “high stress/risk” areas, location and proximity issues, hours of operation. 

14th February            Meeting with David Thorpe regarding future direction of Roskill Together

15th February            Attended most of Three Kings Precinct plan community workshop, along with Board members Doig and Wood, and officers.   This was a very successful way of engaging with our community on a difficult issue, and I hope that we can adapt this model for other issues in the future.

16th February            Walk along possible future path of boardwalk around the coast to Bamfield Place with Board member Wood.

17th February            Regular catch-up with a number of fellow Board Chairs

17th February            Regular catch-up with Board member Holm

17th February            Meeting about the future use of the former Mt Roskill Borough Council chambers with Board member Doig and officers.

17th February            Regular catch-up with PA

 

 

Areas of Activity/Projects:

 

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT HANDOVER

Puketapapa Garden Web (Community gardening network) -  Met with Ellen Schindler and Board member Doig about this work area (see above).  Ellen is to pick up the email communication, and liaison with comms to produce flyers etc for Web get-togethers.  Harry will take on community gardens within his community development portfolio.  I will likely continue with the Facebook page in the short term, and with garden projects already underway, but am actively looking for a community member to partner with and eventually take over the Web get-togethers and online presence. 

 

CHAIR’S ROLE

Community Events – Attended a number of community events (see above) and assisted with planning.  There remains a need for the Board to develop a more transparent and consistent approach to the Board’s presence at local events, in particular those funded or supported by the Board.  I hope that this is something we can work through over this calendar year, in time for the events season in summer 2014/2015.

 

Engagement with Mana Whenua – The Board is having some success building relationships around specific projects, eg Board member Wood’s work on the Manukau foreshore tracks, Board member Holm and I on the Dominion Road project.  I am meeting soon with the Chair of the Independent Maori Statutory Body to discuss how we can relate to each other and work together. 

 

Housing New Zealand – I contacted Brendon Liggett at Housing NZ in relation to the possibility of a precinct in the Unitary Plan around the Stoddard Road/Wesley area, and he has expressed some interest, which I will be following up.

 

Board member support – Work on finalizing a portfolio “specs” document drawn up by officers, with feedback from Board members.  Also working through with Board members to roles of different meetings to support our work.  I am meeting one-on-one with Board members each month.

 

Agenda preparation – Work with the Relationship Manager, Senior Local Board advisor and Democracy Adviser to ensure the reports we need are on the agenda, chair’s recommendations, and the like, including leading the agenda run-through for Board members to identify areas of disagreement, likely amendment, and questions.

 

CHILDREN

Auckland Sexual Abuse HELP “We Can Keep Safe” – Started work on draft letter to Auckland Kindergarten Association (AKA) regarding next steps for this project. 

 

Children’s Panels – Discussed concept with May Road School principal (see above) and heard about their children’s advocacy work where once a fortnight reps from each class meet with the principal to raise issues. Meeting soon with Kaipatiki Local Board members and staff regarding their children’s panels programme.

 

LOCAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT & TOWN CENTRES

Three Kings Quarry and Precinct Plan – A significant work area in the reporting period (see above), not least as a result of the release of Fletchers’ ideas and the community and council response to that..  I continue to be involved as one of the three Board members in the design working group, attending as many of the briefings and discussions as I am able to.  It is becoming clear that the process may take longer than we had hoped, but I hope that the Board will be committed to extending the timeframe if necessary, to get a better plan than we will if we rush.  While the Fletchers’ ideas have been dominating discussion, the community workshop on the 15th February allowed for some useful sharing on that topic and the process to date, as well as refocusing the efforts of the Board, officers and the community on creating a shared vision for the Three Kings precinct.

 

Mt Roskill Village (Dominion Road Project) – Attending the Village Design Group with Auckland Transport for this work, meeting with officers in other parts of Council supporting this work.  There will be at least two key work streams; 1. The ultimate shape of the town centre upgrade; and 2. Mitigitation/economic stimulation during and after the upgrade.

 I am seeking to involve the MRBCGA as much as possible in this work, as it will affect some of their members, and the re-creation of a town centre has clear economic development benefits for their individual members, their association, as well as the broader community.  I am aware that a project on a gateway sign from the previous term should be completed soon and am seeking an update on this project, to ensure that it can work in with the Dominion Road project and also involve the Business Association.

 

Social enterprises – Briefing with officers during a workshop, also discussions with interested community members including Mary Dawson (ARMS), Agnes Granada (MAT) and David Thorpe (Roskill Together).  One particular idea that has come up recently is the trend for “Repair Cafes”; a café which includes space for community members to share their fix-it skills with each other, eg how to fix your toaster. 

 

 

Any other issues

I am working on constituency issues in regard to plane noise and manhole covers.  I am receiving queries about berms also, to which I send an initial response and connect the constituent with Board member Holm as the relevant portfolio holder.  I have also had a small number of queries about the Unitary Plan process.

 

In this reporting period I have come across two instances of Council contractors not undertaking work they said they had; 1. In relation to the nightshade in Bob Bodt Reserve (as mentioned above in visit to Roskill South Kindergarten, and passed on to Board member Wood), and 2. Painting over graffiti on a bench in Molley Green Reserve (reported by me, but the graffiti is still visible, also passed on to Board member Wood).  I hope that these are isolated incidents.

 

 

Disclosures

In this reporting period I have attended a number of meetings as Auckland branch president of the National Council of Women, including branch and executive meetings for the branch, and a get-together with other Auckland-based branch presidents.  The branch is making a submission to the Unitary Plan process on the protection of the suffrage memorial at Khartoum Place (in Waitemata Local Board area), and also to the Annual Plan process in support of Council adopting the Living Wage.  The latter issue has been handled by another branch member, to avoid any perception of a conflict on my part.  I have also been working with other branch members on a fundraiser theatre night for the branch (to be held 20th February) and an event to mark International Women’s Day (8th March, but to be held 7th March) in the Waitemata Local Board area with some council assistance.  Finally, I have been contacted regarding how Council can mark Suffrage Day (19th September) this year, wearing both my hats, and will be meeting with officers regarding this in the next month (and clarifying how we will manage any possible conflict).

 

During this reporting period I was offered, and accepted, two VIP tickets to the GABA Glamzone at the Pride Parade, by the Pride Festival organisers.  I will be attending this on 22nd February with a friend.

 

Recommendation/s

 

a)      That the report be received.

 

Signatories

Author

Board Chair Julie Fairey