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

 

Date:                      

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

 

Wednesday, 7 May 2014

3.00pm

Albert Eden Local Board Office
135 Dominion Road
Mt Eden

 

Albert-Eden Local Board

 

OPEN AGENDA

 

 

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Chairperson

Peter Haynes

 

Deputy Chairperson

Glenda Fryer

 

Members

Helga Arlington

 

 

Lee Corrick

 

 

Graeme Easte

 

 

Rachel Langton

 

 

Margi Watson

 

 

Tim Woolfield

 

 

(Quorum 4 members)

 

 

 

Michael Mendoza

Democracy Advisor

 

2 May 2014

 

Contact Telephone: (09) 623 6090

Email: Michael.Mendoza@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

 

 


 

 

 


Albert-Eden Local Board

07 May 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

8.1     Sam Trowsdale - Pine Street Residents Association                                      5

9          Public Forum                                                                                                                  6

9.1     Nivedita Paul - Epsom Community Centre                                                       6

10        Extraordinary Business                                                                                                6

11        Notices of Motion                                                                                                          6

12        Taylors Park Lighting                                                                                                    7

13        Re-allocation of Albert-Eden Stream Enhancement budget                                  15

14        Financial Planning for Extreme Weather Events                                                     19

15        Auckland Transport Monthly Update Report – April 2014                                     27

16        Local Board Transport Capital Fund – Overview of Total Programme for the Current Local Boards                                                                                                                35

17        Chamberlain Park                                                                                                        49

18        Bylaw review programme update - April 2014                                                         51

19        Chairperson's Report                                                                                                  69

20        Board Members' Reports                                                                                           71

21        Governing Body Members' update                                                                           79

22        Albert-Eden Local Board Workshop Notes                                                              81

23        Reports Requested/Pending                                                                                      89  

24        Consideration of Extraordinary Items 

 

 


1          Welcome

 

 

2          Apologies

 

An apology from Member MJ Watson has 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 Albert-Eden Local Board:

a)         confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Wednesday, 2 April 2014 and the extraordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Wednesday, 16 April 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

 

8.1       Sam Trowsdale - Pine Street Residents Association

Executive Summary

1.       Sam Trowsdale, Pine Street Residents Association, will be in attendance to present a Deputation presentation to the Albert-Eden Local Board on the Dominion Road Upgrade project’s proposed traffic calming measures.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a)      thanks Sam Trowsdale, Pine Street Residents Association, for his Deputation presentation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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.

9.1       Nivedita Paul - Epsom Community Centre

Executive Summary

Nivedita Paul, Epsom Community Centre, will be in attendance to present to Albert-Eden Local Board members a Public Forum presentation on the Centre’s current work programme.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a)      thanks Nivedita Paul, Epsom Community Centre, for her Public Forum presentation.

 

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.

 


Albert-Eden Local Board

07 May 2014

 

 

Taylors Park Lighting

 

File No.: CP2014/03925

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       To provide the Albert-Eden Local Board with sufficient background and information on the site and feedback from park users, major stakeholders and local residents for it to decide on the question of whether to renew park lighting in Taylors Park.

Executive Summary

2.       The semi-amphitheatre shape of Taylors Park, its limited street frontage and small size combine to present some challenges in making the park safe at night, while deterring antisocial behaviour. There are five lights in the park, four of which are aligned with the footpath connecting Mount Pleasant Road with Mont Le Blanc Road and one by the top of the playground slide.

3.       In July 2013, the lights and underground cables were found to be in poor condition and were recommended for renewal in the 2013-14 year. In August 2013, the Albert-Eden Local Board agreed to conduct a six-month trial with the park lights switched off while the situation was monitored, and to decide whether to reinstate the lights at the end of that period.

4.       At the end of the trial period, a survey to gauge the views of the local community produced a roughly even split in viewpoints towards reinstating lights in the park.

5.       Several respondents thought that controls on lighting in the park could be an effective solution. Renewing four of the lights with controls on timing would deter antisocial elements, while providing a safe night environment.

 

 

Recommendations

That the Albert-Eden Local Board resolve:

a)      that four park lights between Mount Pleasant Road and Mont Le Grand Road be renewed as part of the current park renewals programme, and that the remaining light at the top of the slide on the eastern side of the park be removed

b)      that the park lights be placed on a timer that will switch them off at 9pm each night and on for two hours each morning before sunrise.

 

Discussion

6.       Background

Taylor’s Park is a small neighbourhood park that was purchased by the council in 1945. It has sloping terrain from the northern, western and eastern boundaries down to a low point at the south-eastern corner behind Dexter Avenue properties. There is 36m of road frontage on Mont Le Grand Road and 18m on Mount Pleasant Road, which ends at a cul de sac at the park. These site attributes make the park a dark, somewhat enclosed environment at night, even when the park lights alongside the footpath that connects Mount Pleasant Road with Mont Le Grand Road, are on. They also tend to amplify any noise in the park for some adjoining residents. The barrier formed by a grove of mature trees near the western boundary, aggravated by a sudden drop in level to the footpath, tends to reduce passive surveillance into the park from neighbouring properties at the end of Mount Pleasant Road.

Fig. 1- Locality and aerial plan of Taylors Park. Mount Pleasant Rd on left, Mont Le Grand Rd above and Dexter Ave. below.

 

7.       In July 2013, the four park lights alongside the sealed concrete footpath between Mont Le Grand Road with Mount Pleasant Road and one beside the top of the playground slide were found to be in poor condition, requiring renewal. These lights are connected to the street light circuitry and are not separately metered. A specialist lighting assessment was undertaken on 27 August 2013, which found the existing lights did not meet current lighting standards. Most light throw was skywards which produced glare and poor illumination of the path. However the cables were found to be serviceable. The cost of renewal of the park lights was estimated to be $20,000 plus professional fees and consenting costs.

Trial

8.       The board’s decision to conduct the six month trial had been initiated by requests from two residents adjacent to the park to leave the lights off. However, another resident in Mount Pleasant Road requested that the lights be switched on again, and followed this up by appearing at the Public Forum of the 2 April local board meeting. The board decided that the lights would remain off for a six month period commencing in early August 2013, during which the level of reported complaints would be monitored and assessed to discover if the level of antisocial activity increased or decreased while the lights were switched off. Signs were put up at each entrance, advising that the lights needed substantial repairs and would be switched off for six months while the incidence of antisocial behaviour in the park was monitored. At the end of the period, a decision would be made to either reinstate the lights, using the parks renewals budget, or leave them off permanently.

Some residents have reported a decline in the incidence of antisocial behaviour during the trial period, the inference being that turning off the lights has deterred antisocial behaviour and hence reduced damage to park assets. However, of the total 39 logged requests/complaints about the park from February 2010 to 26 March 2014, only eight were concerned with the lack of lighting. Of those, two were received since September 2013. This would indicate that provision of lighting may not be the determining factor in the decline of reported incidences, and other factors could be responsible.

Survey

9.       It has been necessary to try to establish whether the small sample of responses received could be increased and hence made more meaningful as a basis for reaching an informed decision. Also the effect if any, of location with respect to the park could only be explored with a larger sample, in order to evaluate and compare these viewpoints before a decision is made. A quick email and phone survey was carried out on park users, neighbours and the Police on 10, 11 and 12 March 2014.

The survey consisted of emailing the 31 people who had responded to the playground survey in 2012, explaining why the lights had been switched off and asking them if they thought they should be made operational again. Seven phone calls were made to random properties in Dexter Avenue, Mount Pleasant Road and Mont Le Grand Road, and 10 responded to the email survey. Five residents adjacent to the park on the western and southern sides favoured no lights, According to some residents, several lights had been out of action for some time before July 2013. Most of those wanting lights and some who were not so keen preferred that lighting were controlled in some way, e.g. by restricting the hours of operation. These views were added to those of the residents who had already made their views known and the Police, producing a total of 21 responses, 10 for lights and 11 against. Please refer to Appendix 1 for a list of responses.

Analysis

10.     The lack of consensus reveals an even split in opinion on park lighting, and suggests that whatever decision is reached, it will not satisfy everyone. It also suggests a certain apprehensiveness, based on an experience of poor performance of the Taylors Park lights in the past, and that this could be alleviated by:

·    designing replacement LED lights that provide good targeted illumination without unnecessary spill on to neighbouring properties or glare;

·    a timer installed in a Montrose Box, to restrict hours of operation.

11.     Therefore there may be a way of reconciling both viewpoints so that antisocial elements are not attracted to the park while providing for safe thoroughfare at night and would require that the light at the top of the playground slide not be renewed since it is not essential for safe thoroughfare through the park at night.

12.     While the lack of consensus from the survey does not offer a clear direction on whether to renew some or all of the lights, a solution that provides confidence to walk under lighting between Mount Pleasant Road and Mont Le Grand Road, while at the same time deterring antisocial behavior, appears to be achievable. This option is therefore recommended.

Options

 

Options

Advantages

Disadvantages

Est.cost

1

Renew all lights

·      Path and top of slide area illuminated

·      Use of high quality luminaires direct light where required

·      Timer to restrict hours of operation

 

·      Additional cost with no benefit from lighting

$ 30-35K

2

Remove all lights

·      Antisocial behaviour may reduce at night, thereby reducing noise nuisance

·      Least expensive option

 

·      Local residents presented with unwelcome alternative between an unlit park and using surrounding streets

·      Some antisocial behaviour may occur anyway in unlit park

$3-5K

3

Renew 4 lights, remove light by top of slide

·      Path better illuminated

·      High quality LED luminaires eliminate glare and reduce light spillage

·      Area by top of slide less attractive to antisocial elements

·      Timer to restrict hours of operation

 

 

$25-30K

 

Consideration

 

13.     In general, council does not light parks at night unless there is a clear expectation of night time use (for example a street to street accesway, or between a shopping centre and a car park). Lighting implies that parks may be used safely after dark, when in reality, this may not be the case. The council generally does not want to encourage people into parks where they can become isolated from public view at night, or where light may create an impression they are entering a safe environment.

14.     Taylors Park has not come to the attention of the community safety team, and it does not appear in Police statistics as a ‘hot spot’.  The Police Acting Area Crime Prevention Manager-West, Peter Pedersen, is that as a rule, lighting improves visibility in a park and discourages offending. Conversely, reduced lighting tends to deter law abiding people. The Police view is otherwise in agreement with the council perspective and aligned with CPTED principles.

15.     The existing lights that are in place would throw light up into the sky and the design could be improved from a safety perspective.  Renewing the lights would bring the type and spread of illumination and safety up to current standards.

Local Board Views

16.     The Albert-Eden Local Board is keen to make Taylors Park as safe as possible and an open space asset the local community can use safely. Anecdotal evidence from neighbours suggests that the park has been more popular since the playground was upgraded in October 2012, thereby creating better passive surveillance within and over the park.

17.     The local board decided to switch off the lights in Taylors Park for a six month period while the park was monitored for complaints and requests for service and public feedback was sought. Its final decision on whether to renew the lights will depend on whether it believes it can reconcile the requirement to provide for safe thoroughfare at night with the expressed concerns of close park neighbours to be free of noise and antisocial activity in the park.

            Maori Impact Statement

18.     Parks and open spaces contribute significantly to Maori well-being, values, culture and traditions.  Where any aspects of the proposed work programme are anticipated to have a significant impact on sites of importance to Tangata Whenua, appropriate consultation will follow.

General

Implementation Issues

19.     A decision not to renew the lights would have minimal impact on the park renewal budget. The 2013-14 parks renewals programme budget has allowed for the renewal of park lights in Taylors Park. The project, which has been designed to concept stage and costed to include replacement of all 5 lights, has been placed on hold pending the outcome of the trial. Scheduling of the work and final costs would be determined by further detail design work and the requirements of the resource consenting process.

20.     Should the Local Board decide not to renew the lights, there will be a operational cost for removal.

21.     The design and placement of the lights will comply with CPTED (Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design) principles, and would be undertaken in consultation with the Community Development and Safety team and the Police to provide safe pedestrian thoroughfare while deterring antisocial behavior.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Lighting Survey - Taylors Park

13

      

Signatories

Author

Graham Marchant - Parks Advisor

Authorisers

Ian Maxwell - Manager Parks, Sports & Recreation

Adam Milina - Acting Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards

 


Albert-Eden Local Board

07 May 2014

 

 



Albert-Eden Local Board

07 May 2014

 

 

Re-allocation of Albert-Eden Stream Enhancement budget

 

File No.: CP2014/08790

 

  

 

Purpose

1.      To seek approval from the Albert-Eden Local Board to reallocate a portion of the Albert Eden stream enhancement budget as detailed in this report.

Executive summary

2.      The Albert-Eden Local Board has a budget of $30,000 for the 2013/14 financial year for stream enhancement works with a particular focus on supporting community stream projects relating to Meola and Oakley Creeks.

 

3.      In December 2013 the board agreed to fund the following projects from this budget (Resolution number AE/2013/12).

 

Project

Cost

Moa Reserve (delivered by St Lukes Environmental Protection Society (STEPS))

$6,000

Oakley Creek – Harbutt Reserve (delivered by Friends of Oakley Creek)

$9,450

Upper Meola Creek – Roy Clements Treeway (delivered by STEPS)

$5,000

Lower Meola Creek – Pasadena and Motions Road Reserves (delivered through Wai Care groups)

$10,000

 

 

 

4.      To date work is underway to successfully deliver the works detailed above in Oakley Creek and Upper Meola. However due to resource requirements, work in the lower Meola  Creek and Moa Reserve cannot be delivered in the 2013/14 financial year.

 

5.      A total of $16,000 was allocated to projects in the lower Meola creek catchment community restoration along Motions Road and Pasadena walkway and Moa Reserve.  Of this $16,000, $2,500 has been already allocated for signage, which will proceed as planned.

6.      This will leave approximately $13,500 unspent from the total stream enhancement 2013/14 budget.

7.      This report seeks approval to reallocate this $13,500 budget allocation to the development of a restoration plan and pest management control for the reserve at Almorah Road rock forest park, as detailed in the comments section of this report.

8.      Pest control at Almorah Road rock forest will protect the vegetation in a reserve which contains a threatened ecosystem of rare rock forest in the Auckland region. This area of reserve land is ranked as local board park priority for protecting and enhancing biodiversity within the Albert-Eden Local Board area.

9.      These proposed works do not directly contribute to stream enhancement and therefore requires a reallocation of part of the stream enhancement budget.

10.    The proposed works do contribute to protect and enhancing biodiversity and help to provide natural corridors and stepping stones across the urban landscape.

 

 

Recommendation

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a)      agrees to re-allocate $13,500 from the Stream Enhancement budget lineto ecological restoration of a priority local park, specifically to write a management plan for the Almorah Rock Forest reserve and implement pest control.

b)      requests that officers seek the approval of the Albert-Eden Local Board Environmental portfolio holder for any substantial variations to the agreed project, if required during implementation.

 

 

Comments

 

11.    In December 2013 the Albert-Eden local board agreed to fund the following projects from its 2013/14 stream enhancement budget (Resolution number AE/2013/12)

 

Project

Cost

Moa Reserve (delivered by St Lukes Environmental Protection Society (STEPS))

$6,000

Oakley Creek – Harbutt Reserve (delivered by Friends of Oakley Creek)

$9,450

Upper Meola Creek – Roy Clements Treeway (delivered by STEPS)

$5,000

Lower Meola Creek – Pasadena and Motions Road Reserves (delivered through Wai Care groups)

$10,000

 

 

 

12.    To date work is underway to successfully deliver the works detailed above in Oakley Creek and Upper Meola within the 2013/14 period. However, due to resource consent requirements, work in the Lower Meola Creek and Moa Reserve (totaling $16,000) cannot be delivered in the 2013/14 financial year.

 

13.    Lower Meola Creek has been designated as an outstanding natural feature within the proposed Unitary Plan and, subsequent changes to earthworks rules in the proposed Unitary Plan has meant that planned works (weed control and planting) in the Lower Meola Creek have been delayed pending a resource consent. 

14.    The sustainable catchments team is working on obtaining a resource consent to cover all weed control and planting projects in the Lower Meola.  Unfortunately, the resource consent will not be obtained by the end of the financial year. Therefore, we are unable to spend the budget currently allocated to Lower Meola Creek (Moa Reserve and Motions Rd projects) in the stream enhancement budget.

 

15.    Due to the amount of regional funding for stream enhancements being spent in the Oakley and Meola creeks much of the stream enhancement opportunities are already planned and budgeted for within other programmes.

Options

16.       A number of options for this budget underspend have been considered as follows:

a.   Do nothing and note that there will be an underspend in this budget line

b.   Approach community groups already working in these catchments to allocate funding to stream restoration work

c.   Reallocate the stream enhancement budget to a prioritised environmental outcome.

 

17.    Option A has been discounted as it does not give effect to the outcomes sought by the Albert-Eden Local Board and its communities.

 

18.    Option B, working with existing community groups has been discussed. STEPS and Friends of Oakley Creek groups in the Upper Meola and Oakley Creek have received funding this year and have advised they are already at capacity in terms of work they can manage. It is therefore not feasible to suggest additional spend on community projects in Upper Meola or Oakley Creek.

19.    Option C has been investigated and it is recommended that the Albert-Eden Local Board change the focus of the remaining stream enhancement to an ecological restoration outcome. This would mean reallocating the remaining budget of $13,500 to ecological restoration of a priority local reserve, as outlined in the Albert-Eden Local Parks Prioritisation Plan 2013, namely the Almorah Drive rock forest.

 

20.    Almorah Rock Forest at Almorah Drive is the second highest ecological ranked local park in the Albert-Eden Local Board area.  This local reserve contains a threatened ecosystem of rock forest which is now very rare in the Auckland region. It is the largest remaining area of native rock forest on the Auckland isthmus and is an important remnant of Auckland’s original forest cover. The reserve has no currently pest animal or weed management and it subsequently would benefit from pest control to protect the vegetation.  Pest control at Almorah Rock Forest would also complement ecological protection work being undertaken by council at nearby Withel Thomas and Mt Eden Reserves.

 

21.    It is recommended that the $13,500 be used to write a management plan for the reserve and implement pest control.  This could be achieved before the end of the 2013/14 financial year.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

22.      This option has been informally discussed with the Albert-Eden Local Boar Environmental portfolio holder and the initial response is that the local board would be supportive of utilising this budget for this project.

Maori impact statement

23.    It is recognised that environmental management and land management has integral links with the mauri of the environments and concepts of kaitiakitanga.

Implementation

24.    As the project would need to be completed by the end of the financial year, contractors would need to be engaged as soon as possible to carry out the works.

 

25.    These plans would need approval by local parks, however, initial inquires with parks staff indicate support for the project.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.    

Signatories

Author

Miranda Bennett - Senior Biodiversity Advisor

Authorisers

Adam Milina - Acting Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards

John Dragicevich - Manager Infrastructure and Environmental Services

 


Albert-Eden Local Board

07 May 2014

 

 

Financial Planning for Extreme Weather Events

 

File No.: CP2014/08824

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       This report provides an overview of the current financial management practice for dealing with extreme weather events in local parks assets across the region.  There are a number of issues and inconsistencies with the current practice and therefore it is recommended that a new and consistent approach be adopted. 

Executive Summary

2.       Auckland is prone to a range of extreme weather events including tornadoes, high tides, high winds, high rainfall and drought, all of which can contribute to sudden erosion, plant loss, tree fall, fixed asset damage and land slips.  12 local boards have some funding to deal with land slips and other effects from extreme weather but it is rarely sufficient when serious issues arise.  Nine boards have no inbuilt financial capacity to cope with the impact of weather events.

3.       Council has an obligation to plan for extreme weather events.  There is a legal and moral obligation to ensure that some rates funding is set aside for this purpose given that weather damage, while unpredictable in timing and location, is none-the-less a constant in the Auckland region as a whole. 

4.       Three options are considered in this report.  This first is to continue with the ad-hoc funding arrangement i.e. do nothing.  The second is to pool local board funding to essentially develop a regional self-insurance fund (local unallocated budget).  The third is to seek a regional fund, controlled by the governing body, which is applied for on a case by case basis.  The second approach is recommended.  The current arrangement will result in the need for local boards to cut existing budgets from time to time to react to weather events and overspend or approach the governing body regarding unforecast over expenditure.    The second option, which involves funding moving to the area of greatest need, is likely to cover most weather events, without changing existing regional expenditure, and minimizes the time delays/bureaucracy involved.

5.       In 2011, storms affected many areas and resulted in a number of severe slips on Waiheke Island.  In 2012 the Upper Harbour Local Board was hit by a major cyclone event and dealt with the extensive damage via cuts in their current work and over expenditure.  In 2013 all boards were affected by drought and a number of local boards have been affected by slips and erosion.  The Hibiscus and Bays Local Board and the Waitemata Local Board, in particular, are finding their current liabilities well beyond their individual ability to fund the remedies.  In general terms, extreme weather events affect coastal areas and older suburbs more than rural, flat or inland areas however all areas are prone to wind, drought and flooding.

6.       The financial information relating to events that have occurred in the last three years is poor due to the fact that funds were taken from a variety of Auckland Council sources and expenses were not labelled consistently.  As such the average financial risk for the region over the last three years is not specifically known.  While it is possible for damage to be catastrophic and incalculable (if there is a regional disaster) it is only the common weather occurrence that is contemplated in this report.  Over the last three years costs have been in the realm of six figures every year and the burden has traversed local boards. 

7.       Current budgets are operational.  Damage from extreme weather events often results in the need for the development of new retaining or structures to protect existing assets from ongoing slips or similar.  There is currently no capital funding sitting with local boards specifically tagged for storm damage remediation.  It is recommended that a portion of the existing funding be allocated to capital budgets to provide for this eventuality.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a)      agrees to allocate the current (less expenses to date) and future “storm damage” budget of $77,558 per annum to a local unallocated “extreme weather event” self-insurance budget, which can be utilised by the board for repair or rehabilitation of areas affected by extreme weather events on an as required basis.

b)      supports a portion of the pooled operating budgets being allocated to local unallocated capital funding.

c)      notes that expenditure against the local unallocated operational and capital storm damage budgets will be reported to all local boards annually.

 

Discussion

8.       Auckland is prone to a range of extreme weather events including tornadoes, high tides, high winds, high rainfall and drought all of which can contribute to sudden erosion, plant loss, tree fall, fixed asset damage and land slips. 

9.       The scale or impact of extreme weather events is particularly felt in urban parks where space is at a premium and landscapes are heavily developed.  Although weather events still have an impact on regional parks the scale of the regional park landscapes and the management of those landscapes (i.e. a lot more fully restored streams and coastal dunes) means the impact of extreme weather events can usually be tolerated without affecting the day to day use of the park.  In general terms, extreme weather events also affect coastal areas and older suburbs more than flat or inland areas however all areas are prone to wind, drought and flooding.

10.     The financial impact of managing damage associated with extreme weather events in the urban park environment has historically been dealt with in three ways:

·    Self-insurance – a fund is kept to call on for unforeseen damage

·    Reforecasting – no funds are set aside for unforeseen damage and as a result current projects and operational expenses are put on hold while funding is diverted to managing the impact of extreme weather events.

·    Overspend – where neither of the two options above are possible then some costs have been worn as an overspend

11.     Auckland City Council held specific “storm damage” budgets for parks and other Council’s had a level of self-insurance against unforeseen damage.  Others had nothing.

12.     Upon amalgamation the funding pool held by Auckland City Council was divided amongst the local boards in those areas. Local boards in the old Manukau City had some funding allocated to cater for this possibility in their local budgets.  This resulted in very small buckets of money being allocated to 12 local boards. 

13.     This local board budget allocation has largely defeated the purpose of the self-insurance fund as extreme weather events do not happen regularly in any given area. They can affect a localised area or a large scale area that has no correlation to local board boundaries.  This means that individual local boards can go many years without an extreme weather event while its neighbor or another local board may have several events in short succession.  This random occurrence is normal and the current budget allocation does not befit this natural phenomenon.

 

 

 

 

14.     The current operational “storm damage” budgets held across the region are:

 

YTD Actual (Feb)

 Budget

 Albert-Eden

 

                       $77,558

 Maungakiekie-Tamaki

 

                       $96,947

 Orakei

                       $13,101

                    $109,874

 Puketapapa

                          $2,197

                       $64,632

 Waiheke

 

                       $19,389

 Waitemata

                          $7,508

                    $102,894

 Franklin

 

                       $20,371

 Howick

 

                       $30,451

 Mangere-Otahuhu

 

                       $15,515

 Manurewa

 

                       $16,926

 Otara-Papatoetoe

 

                       $16,715

 Papakura

 

                       $11,158

Total

               $22,806

             $582,431

 

Note: there are a number of commitments or costs expected in Waitemata and Orakei that are not yet shown in the these budgets

Consideration

15.     Council has an obligation to plan for extreme weather events.  Under property law there is term known as lateral support which is about the right of a landowner to have their land physically supported in its natural state by both adjoining land and underground structures. There are around 4000 local and sports parks and each of these parks have neighbours.  Any excavation or alteration council makes to park land may, at a later time, damage and affect a neighbour and leave council liable. Our neighbours have a right to enjoy their land in its natural condition.  This includes the right to have their land held in place from the sides by the neighbouring land unless both are subject to unforeseen natural events.

16.     In addition to this legal obligation to neighbours, some extreme weather events come at such a substantial cost that the budget available to an individual board is either unable to wear the cost of the recovery or the cost of recovery affects a range of other activities within a local board area.  This budget shortfall creates a liability and its own set of risks for council and the community.

Options

17.     The following options have been considered for ongoing/future management of storm damage:

 

Option

Pro’s

Con’s

1

Do nothing:

Some boards have limited funds available, others have nothing

·   No change to boards budgets.  A small contingency fund remains available for those boards with funding.

·   No boards have sufficient funding to deal with medium size weather event – this exposes council to a range of risks

2

Create local unallocated fund (self-insurance):

This would be a ring fenced fund for all boards to access allocated to the local and sports parks activity.  It would be established from existing storm damage budgets held by some local boards. 

·   Funding is accessible across the region i.e. funds go where the storm goes

·   The size of the fund, pooled across the region, is more likely to accommodate regional extreme weather events than current arbitrary and small funding base available to those boards that have funding

·   Can be established immediately (providing all the boards agree) thereby helping with current liabilities

·   Risk of the fund being inappropriately used for day to day weather events.  This is a current risk and can be more readily mitigated as a local unallocated fund.  It is recommended that there would be a single Tier 4 manager with a regional view determining a consistency of approach.

·   Some boards contribute to this solution while others benefit without contribution – may be seen as inequitable

3

Ask governing body to cater for most impacts of extreme weather events on a case by case basis.

·   No change needed and governing body would pick up costs of damage (if agreed/funding found).  Local boards that have existing funding would potentially need to show expenditure of current budgets before being eligible.

·   The time delay and bureaucracy involved in making this happen means that most applications will be retrospective and expose the Council to financial risk

·   No funding is currently available at a governing body level.  May take time to advocate for/secure

 

Local Board Views

18.     This report is being circulated to all local boards to canvas their views on this issue.

Maori Impact Statement

19.     In many cases extreme weather events can damage archeological sites or sites of significance to Tangata Whenua. This can trigger the need for cultural impact assessments and more careful/expensive restoration works to protect the values of the site.  Without a fund to support rehabilitation or restoration work recently discovered or damaged sites of significance cannot be attended to as there are no funds.  A regional self-insurance fund would help to mitigate risk for council.

General

20.     As previously mentioned a variety of extreme weather events have affected parks over the years.  For instance in 2011 storm damage caused extensive slips across Waiheke.  Repair work is ongoing and existing storm damage funding has been insufficient to cope. In 2012 a tornado hit Hobsonville causing widespread damage to trees and houses.  The arboricultural and general cleanup was unforeseen and no budget for this kind of work was available to the Upper Harbour Local Board.  In this case the cost of repair was funded by savings in the local board budget combined with a budget overspend. 

21.     During September last year, a major storm event hit the east coast beaches, particularly in the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board area but also affecting Rodney, Orakei and Howick Local Boards.  A storm surge of 0.8 metres on top of high tide caused substantial erosion. Orewa Beach was hit the hardest with significant sand loss and coastal structure damage. 

22.     Weather events are part of the life of Auckland.  The current inconsistent, and in many cases non-existent, planning for extreme weather events is a risk and exposes council to a high likelihood of budget blowout in any given year and local board area. 

23.     The unpredictable nature of extreme weather events means that we cannot anticipate what portion of funding is needed for capital and operational funding.  However, based on the last three years weather events, we know that there is a need for both operational and capital funding.  It is therefore recommended that a portion of the current operational funds be allocated to capital funding to offset these costs.

Implementation Issues

24.     If a regional self-insurance fund, initially created from existing local board funds, is universally supported by formal resolution from all local boards then this fund can be created in the current 2013/14 financial year.

25.     The expenditure against the local unallocated operational and capital storm damage budgets will be reported to all local boards annually.

26.     There are currently several areas affected by storm damage that have projected funding shortfalls that could benefit from immediate implementation of the regional solution. The beneficiaries from this fund will change from year to year. Some recent historical events and current events and associated funding requirements are detailed in Attachment A.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Historical and current events and associated funding requirements

25

     

Signatories

Author

Jane Aickin, Manager Local and Sports Parks Central

Authorisers

Ian Maxwell, Manager Parks, Sports and Recreation

Karen Lyons, Manager Local Board Services

 


Albert-Eden Local Board

07 May 2014

 

 



Albert-Eden Local Board

07 May 2014

 

 

Auckland Transport Monthly Update Report – April 2014

 

File No.: CP2014/08800

 

  

 

Purpose                                                                                                               

1.       This report provides an update on local transport matters over the last month for the Albert-Eden Local Board.

Executive summary

2.       This report contains a general monthly update on transport matters both locally and from across Auckland and a list of issues currently being addressed by Auckland Transport for the Albert-Eden Local Board.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a)      That the report be received.

b)      That Auckland Transport investigate and provide a Rough Order of Cost for the installation of cycle racks at the following railway stations:

i)        Kingsland;

ii)       Mt Eden;

iii)      Greenlane;

iv)      Mt Albert; and

v)      Baldwin Ave

 

c)      That Auckland Transport investigate and provide a Rough Order of Cost for the installation of ‘count down’ timers on pedestrian crossings at the following intersections:

i)        Near 552 Mt Eden Road near Greyfriars Church;

ii)       100 Balmoral Road;

iii)      234A Balmoral Road;

iv)      734 New North Road Mt Albert;

v)      1057 Great North Road, Pt Chevalier; and

vi)      Numbers 388, 510, 644, 762 Dominion Road.

d)      That Auckland Transport investigate and provide a Rough Order of Cost for installing advisory signs and/or road markings on Balmoral Road to slow traffic down near the crossing point outside 100 Balmoral Road.

 

 

Responding to Resolutions

Resolution Number: CP2014/02752

 

g.         The Albert-Eden Local Board request that Auckland Transport engage with the Board regarding the use of its matrix as early as possible in order to define the Board’s requirements for information on projects in its area.

 

The Local Board Engagement Plan has been forwarded to the Transport Representatives who will develop a ‘first cut’ that can be circulated to other Local Board members by the June 2014 Albert-Eden Local Board meeting.

 

h.      The Albert-Eden Local Board request Auckland Transport officers to attend a local board workshop to update members on the Dominion Road upgrade.

This request is under action and the briefing is being scheduled. 

Resolution number AE/2014/50

c.       That the Albert Eden Local Board request Local and Sports Parks to work with Auckland Transport to investigate traffic calming measures and pedestrian crossing points on the road through Fowlds Park.

This resolution has been noted and Auckland Transport awaits an approach from Auckland Council Parks about this matter.

Corridor Management Plans

Auckland Transport is currently developing five, Corridor Management Plans (CMP) in the Albert-Eden Local Board’s area and sixth is planned to start in May or June 2014:

·          Great North Road from Karangahape Road to Ash Street;

·          Manukau Road from Broadway to the Royal Oak roundabout;

·          Mt Albert and Carrington Roads;

·          Greenlane West;

·          New North Road Mt Eden Road to Blockhouse Bay Road; and

·          Great South Road from Broadway to Otahuhu is planned to start soon.

CMPs are strategic documents designed to provide a 30 year framework for agencies working to maintain and improve transport along broad ‘corridors’ of movement.  A CMP is not a detailed plan but outlines the types of planning that may be needed so that agencies can start planning budgets and work programmes in a coordinated way as early as possible.

The Albert-Eden Local Board has been asked to participate in the development of these plans and the following opportunities for discussion have and are being provided:

·        On 12 March 2014 the Albert-Eden Local Board Transport Relationship Manager briefed the Board about the CMPs at a workshop and Members were asked to feed ideas through to the Transport Portfolio Leaders;

·        On 16 April 2014 the team developing the Great North Road CMP met with the Albert-Eden Local Board and workshopped this plan. The team also took the opportunity to briefly introduce the other proposed CMPs and discuss initial feedback from stakeholders; and

·          The other CMPs will be workshopped with the Albert-Eden Local Board in May 2014.

Information provided by Local Board members will be collated by the Transport Portfolio Leaders and provided to the CMP teams prior to the scheduled workshops.

Dominion Road Update

The project will provide continuous bus lanes along Dominion Road from SH 20 to View Road that will improve bus travel times down this important route.  The upgrade will also include upgraded footpaths through the three Dominion Road ‘villages’, safety improvements for pedestrians and improved optimisation of traffic signals.

Well-attended public open days were conducted on 10 and 12 April 2014 to inform local people about the project.

Construction of the parallel cycle routes is planned to start in early May 2014.

Construction is planned to start on the main corridor in August 2014.

Local Board Workshops – Pre-engagement on Transport Long Term Plan

Auckland Transport has now conducted an initial series of workshops for Local Board members to provide early feedback about transport issues that will help develop input into Auckland Council’s 2015-25 Long Term Plan (LTP) and, by extension, the Regional Land Transport Plan (RLTP).  The key aims of the workshops were to:

 

·        Help Local Boards develop the Transport Advocacy component of their Local Board Plans by providing information about Auckland Transport’s current priorities and plans; and

 

·        Help Auckland Transport to understand community preferences and look for opportunities to improve the alignment of Auckland Transport and Local Board priorities.

 

Both Albert-Eden Local Board Transport Representatives attended.

 

Public consultation about the transport component of Auckland Council’s LTP, and Auckland Transport’s RLTP, will be in January and February 2015.

 

Albert-Eden Local Board Transport Capital Fund

The Albert - Eden Local Board has $ 664,933 per annum of discretionary funding for transport-related capital projects.

 

Albert – Eden Local Board can either spend $ 664,933 per annum or may use up to three years’ worth of funding i.e. $1,994,799.

 

The uncommitted $ 119,016 from the previous electoral term is also able to be rolled over, giving the Albert – Eden Local Board a total pool of approximately $ 2,113,815 available in this electoral term to spend on transport projects.

 

This money can be used for projects identified by the Local Board, the principal constraints being that the project:

 

1.         Will not compromise transport safety;

 

2.         Is transport-related;

 

3.         Is in the ‘road corridor’; and

 

4.         Does not compromise the efficiency of the road network.

 

In its first electoral term the Albert Eden Local Board requested that the following projects (in the Figure 1.) were investigated and progress is summarised below.

 

Figure 1: Table Outlining Local Board Transport Capital Projects Committed to in the 2010-2013 Electoral Term 

Serial

Project

Approx. Potential Commitments to Date

Status Update

1.

Traffic Calming - Mont Le Grand, Mewburn, Dexter

 

$ 1,040,000

 

Monte Le Grande

 

Planning is finished and construction is planned to start in mid-May 2014.

 

Balmoral North and South

 

In November 2012 a ROC for these projects was provided. The Albert-Eden Local Board then passed resolution AE/2012/272 that noted the ROC and authorised construction of these projects if costs were “in line” with the ROC.

 

On 22 August 2013 consultation on the plan was undertaken with the Albert-Eden Local Board and in late 2013 consultation with local residents was conducted. Generally, feedback was supportive but some residents have raised concerns.

 

In early 2014 a period of technical discussion was undertaken to resolve issues identified during public consultation and the technical aspects of the non-standard layout proposed.

 

This process has now been completed and a final round of public information and feedback is due to finish on 2 May 2014

 

The tentative timeframe for delivery is June – July 2014.

 

Morningside Drive

 

Consultation is still taking place.  Feedback has been negative about the centre island and when the input has been reviewed the new proposed plan will be circulated to the Albert-Eden Local Board. 

 

 

2.

Traffic Calming - Balmoral North and South

 

3.

Morningside Drive Pedestrian Refuges

 

4.

Valley Rd Pedestrian Crossing Smartstuds Installation

 

$ 38,000

Completed.

 

5.

Carrington Road

 

$28,000

Construction of this project has been authorised and the date for delivery has changed and it is now planned for late - May 2014.

 

6.

School Travel Zone in The Drive

$ 17,000

Construction of this project has been authorised and a date for delivery is now estimated as late - May 2014.

 

7.

Pedestrian Crossing Signals - installation of Countdown Timers (Various locations)

 

$ 7,850

Project completed.

8.

Wheturangi Road

$20,000

This project is still undergoing detailed design.

 

It is taking longer than it should and it has been escalated to the Programme Manager who is following the team responsible up and we will report back as soon as there is more information.

 

9.

Walters Road

$30,000

It has been reported that the technical considerations of this project (i.e. the installation of non-standard speed humps) were under consideration and it was useful to understand the situation with the Balmoral LATM projects before this one was finalised.

 

With the technical consideration of the Balmoral LATM complete the project has been followed up and the Programme Manager is currently liaising with Auckland Transport’s Managers of Special Events and Road Safety.  These two managers were involved in developing the original proposal and their input to the Road Corridor Operations Team will be useful.

 

We expect that with better clarity about policy regarding non-standard traffic calming and this input that we will have a Final Cost Estimate soon.

 

10.

Milton Road

$30,000

The technical considerations of this project (i.e. the installation of non-standard speed humps) were under consideration and it was useful to understand the situation with the Balmoral LATM projects before this one was finalised.

 

With the technical consideration of the Balmoral LATM complete the project has been followed up and with better clarity about policy regarding non-standard traffic calming we expect to have a Final Cost Estimate soon.

 

11.

St Andrews Road

N/A

An initial investigation has now been completed and initial feedback is that:

 

·      There is a safety issue in this location; but

·      The geometry of the road makes it impossible to build a refuge.

 

A re-assessment and consideration of other options has been requested. 

 

Total - potentially committed in the previous electoral term

$1,210,850

Total funds potentially committed in the projects listed above

 

In this electoral term the Albert-Eden Local Board has requested that the following projects (in the Figure 2.) are investigated and progress is recorded and summarised below.

 

Figure 2: Table Outlining Albert-Eden Local Board Transport Capital Projects in the 2013-2016 Electoral Term 

Serial

Project

Approx. Potential Commitments to Date

Status Update

1.

Pedestrian Countdown Timers at Crossings in the Albert-Eden Local Board

 

Not known at this time.

This project involves the installation of countdown timers at the following sets of traffic lights in the Albert Eden Local Board Area:

 

·      Around 552 Mt Eden Road near Greyfriars Church

·      100 Balmoral Road

·      234A Balmoral Road

·      734 New North Road Mt Albert

·      1057 Great North Road, Pt Chevalier

·      388, 510, 644, 762 Dominion Road

 

The project will involve approx. nine pairs of countdown timers.

 

At this time a ROC is requested from Auckland Transport and a draft resolution has been drafted above.

 

2.

Cycle Racks at Rail Stations

Not known at this time.

This project involves installing cycle racks at the following rail stations:

 

·      Kingsland Train Station

·      Mt Eden Train Station

·      Mt Albert Train Station

·      Greenlane Train Station

·      Baldwin Ave Train Station

 

At this time a ROC is requested from Auckland Transport and a draft resolution has been drafted above.

 

3.

Speed Advisory Signage on Balmoral Road

Not known at this time.

This project involves installing speed advisory signage and/or a red ‘SLOW’ road marking designed to slow traffic down would help raise the awareness of the pedestrian crossing point near 100 Balmoral Road.

 

At this time a ROC is requested from Auckland Transport and a draft resolution has been drafted above.

 

Total - potentially committed in the previous electoral term

Nil

Total funds potentially committed in the projects listed above

 

Auckland Transport has started planning how it will deliver Local Board Capital Fund projects in a more sophisticated manner (i.e. more quickly and with greater certainty).  This will impose a degree of urgency on Local Boards because projects need to be identified early for them to be scheduled for delivery within the electoral term.  Auckland Transport has provided a detailed report on this agenda that outlines the issues and a plan for delivering these projects.

 

Issues Register

 

Description

AT Response

Cornwall Park Primary

The safety of making a right turn into Cornwall Park Primary parking area from Greenlane Road and of turning right out of the school has been raised.

 

Auckland Transport engineers have completed the investigation.

 

The initial investigations assessed the length or the Broken Yellow Lines and engineers confirmed that have enough length to allow visibility for exiting vehicles.

 

The team looked at the possibility of banning right turns but felt that this may create other safety issues if people ‘U’ turn further down the street.

 

There is further study and investigation being carried out but another update will need to be provided in May 2014.      

 

Parking in Epsom in vicinity of Queen Mary Avenue

Concerns have been raised about a lack of retail parking for the cinema and shops on Manukau Road, Queen Mary Avenue and in surrounding areas.

 

This issue is an ongoing matter that there have been considerable discussion over between Auckland Transport and the Albert-Eden Local Board’s Transport representatives. 

 

At the current time the Parking Team is heavily involved in the new Parking Strategy, but this issue will be addressed as soon as possible.

 

Owens Road Safety Issues

Residents have raised concerns about the curved section of Owens Road that extends from Epsom Ave to approx. Numbers 113/78.


Residents are concerned about speeding drivers ‘spinning out’ on the corners.

 

The Road Corridor Operations Team conducted investigations of this area and has made a number of changes to nearby signage but the area will continue to be reviewed.

Manukau Road Bus Stop Changes

Auckland Transport is currently proposing to re-assign a number of bus stops on Manukau Road.

 

 

The final plan has now been confirmed and work will start soon. Further reports will be provided as the project progresses.

Mountain Road Traffic Issues

Residents have raised concerns about the amount and behaviour of traffic on Mountain Road during school morning and afternoon peaks.

 

Of particular concern was the ability for traffic to negotiate the intersections of Mountain Road and:

 

·      Glenfell / Almorah Roads; and

·      Gilgit Road.

 

Auckland Grammar School is currently developing a School Travel Plan. The plan will address some of these concerns and will affect the development of operational solutions to issues in this street.

 

The initial ‘base line’ survey required for the school’s travel plan has now been completed.

 

The next step is to develop a safety plan and the initial technical discussions about potential engineering solutions have started.


Road Corridor Operations, Community Transport and the School will continue to work together to analyse the issues and develop solutions. When all parties are happy a report will be made to the Local Board.  This process will take about another 6-12 months.

Mount St John Ave

Currently there is a Kea crossing installed in front of Diocesan School for Girls in Margot Ave. 

 

It is requested that this crossing be moved from its current location in Margot Ave to Mount St John Ave and installed just east of the intersection of Margot and Mount St John Aves.

The reasons for this request are:

 

·      Margot Ave is quiet and has slow traffic;

·      The current crossing is under-utilised because the students normally cross Mount St John Ave east of the intersection of Margot and Mount St John Aves; and

·      Moving the crossing to the location in which the students actually cross would seem to be safer than retaining a crossing that is not well utilised.

 

Initial investigations of this issue have been undertaken and a report was made to the last Albert-Eden Local Board meeting.

 

Pedestrian counts at the existing Kea crossing indicated that it should be retained.

 

The team is investigating whether it is feasible to build a new crossing that will ‘capture’ the Margot Ave ‘desire line’( that is created when people cross Mt St John Road in a North/South direction to follow Margot Ave).

 

This process will take time some because working out if there is a suitable location for crossing on this ‘desire line’ is difficult. The crossing will need to take account of the behavior of traffic turning at the intersection of Margot and Mt St John Road.

 

Further study of the intersection and vehicle behavior is required before a decision about feasibility can be made.

 

 

Kingsland parking

The Kingsland Business Association, the Albert- Eden Local Board and Auckland Transport are working together to improve parking options in Kingsland.

 

The aim is to develop a parking regime that provides turnover for businesses and can be used without change during events at Eden Park.

 

All parties have engaged in a series of meetings and discussions and two potential options have been developed.

 

Public consultation started in November 2013 and was completed in January 2014.

 

The results have been collated and final options are being discussed with the business association.

 

Wheturangi Road Driveways

It is reported that some parents dropping off their kids at school in this street are blocking people’s driveways.

Auckland Transport has investigated installing both Broken Yellow Lines over the effected driveways and white ‘hockey sticks’. 

 

Neither option is supported because both are generally ineffective in modifying the behavior identified because they rely on enforcement to be effective. In this situation enforcement can already be effectively used without installing these measures therefore this should be the first step.

 

This matter has been referred to the Parking Enforcement Team, which has added this area to their list for extra attention.

 

Alford Street

It has been reported that there are issues with excessive speed in this street.

The issue has been logged and is being investigated.

 

Initial feedback is that the street has a history of complaints that are not substantiated by speed measurements that have been conducted in the street.

 

This matter will still be investigated and current speeds in the street and crash records re-assessed and report provided to the Albert-Eden Local Board about both the situation and possible steps that can be taken to address it.

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.    

Signatories

Author

Ben Stallworthy, Elected Member Relationship Manager, Auckland Transport

Authoriser

Roger Wilson, Council Engagement Manager, Auckland Transport

 


Albert-Eden Local Board

07 May 2014

 

 

Local Board Transport Capital Fund – Overview of Total Programme for the Current Local Boards

 

File No.: CP2014/08804

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       The purpose of this report is advise all twenty-one Local Boards of the current status of the Local Board Transport Capital Fund Programme, in particular the need to urgently identify new project proposals that will enable the total budget that needs to be spent in the electoral term of the current Local Boards to be spent by the end of June 2016.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a)      That the report be received.

b)      That all Local Boards urgently identify new project proposals for the Local Board Transport Capital Fund programme by 31 August 2014 so that subsequent initial assessment, detailed design including consultation and statutory approvals, and construction can be completed by 30 June 2016.

Discussion

 

2.       The total annual budget for the Local Board Transport Capital Fund is $10M. This was assigned to the twenty-one Local Boards based on population, except for the Waiheke and Great Barrier Local Boards who received nominated sums.

 

3.       The programme commenced in September 2012 following resolution of the use of the fund by the Auckland Council Strategy and Planning Committee in August 2012.

Budget Considerations

4.       One of the requirements of the Local Board Transport Capital Fund is that the budgets must be spent within the same electoral term. Budgets can be moved from year to year within the electoral term, subject to Auckland Transport having the ability to manage the cash flow, but carry forwards to subsequent political terms are not allowed.

 

5.       The total amount spent on Local Board Transport Capital Fund projects in the 2012-13 financial year was $1.3M. This was due to the late start of the programme in that year so Auckland Council was asked to relax the “no carry forward” rule in this inaugural year of the programme. This one-off carry forward of the unspent balance of $8.7M was subsequently approved.

 

6.       Therefore the total budget that must be spent on Local Board Transport Capital Fund projects in the current political term is as follows:

·           The carry forward from 2012-13 = $8.7M

·           The 2013-14 Budget = $10M

·           The 2014-15 Budget = $10M

·           The 2015-16 Budget = $10M

 

This is a total of $38.7M

 

7.       In order to fully spend this amount by 30 June 2016 the following spending profile will be required.

·   2013-14 Forecast =   $8.6M (actual current forecast)

·   2014-15 Forecast = $10.1M (latest forecast)

·   2015-16 Forecast = $20.0M (latest forecast)

 

8.       The 2013-14 figure is the currently expected end of year result for 2013-14. The end of the 2013-14 financial year is the end of the second year of the four year Local Board Transport Capital Fund programme that needs to be completed by 30 June 2016, and only $9.9M of the $40M will be spent. i.e. only 25% spent in half the available time.

 

9.       Conversely, the required spend in the last two years (2014-15 and 2015-16) is $30.1M, being a threefold increase in the spend compared to the first two years. At the current rate of spending this $30.1M target will not be achieved.

 

10.     In addition, the current Local Boards are allowed to spend some or all of the 2016-17 Local Board Transport Capital Fund budget as their elected term finishes three months into this financial year on approximately 30 Sept 2016. This means there is an additional $10M available that could also be spent.

Value of Projects

11.     Of the 228 proposals submitted to date 64 are not proceeding (not meeting criteria, funded elsewhere, deferred to future years, or not chosen by Local Boards). The total value of the remaining 164 projects that range from being in the initial assessment phase to having the construction fully complete is $14.9M

12.     Assuming that all of these projects are completed they represent only 37% of the total Local Board Transport Capital Fund programme that needs to be delivered in the current electoral term.

13.     Conversely an additional $25.1M worth of projects need to be identified in order to deliver the programme by 30 June 2016.

Forward Planning to Ensure Programme Delivery

14.     Additional project proposals need to be identified urgently by ALL Local Boards in order for the programme to be delivered on time.

15.     As the spending of the budget is heavily weighted towards the 2015-16 financial year and to a lesser extent the 2014-15 financial year, the issue of Auckland Transport being able to manage the work in those years and the contracting industry being able to carry out the large volume of work become factors in the overall delivery of the programme.

16.     Accordingly construction approval will be required for all projects in the programme by 30 May 2015 at the latest so that the last of the physical works construction of the works (in fact half of the whole programme) can be spread out over the entire 2015-16 financial year. Many of these approvals will be required much earlier in order to deliver $10M of work in the 2014-15 year.

17.     In order to achieve the 30 May 2015 construction approval date, detailed design approval will need to be provided for all projects no later than 30 November 2014 in order to allow six months for detailed design including consultation and statutory approvals to be completed so that construction approval can be provided on time.  As with the construction approvals, much of this detailed design has to happen much sooner in order to deliver the 2014-15 programme.

18.     Accordingly the identification of new projects by ALL Local Boards to the total value of at least $25.1M needs to happen by 31 August 2014 at the latest in order for them to be assessed and project scopes and rough orders of cost provided back to the Local Boards for their consideration for detailed design approval.  Ideally more projects need to be identified in case some don’t meet the necessary criteria.

19.     As the four year programme budgets for each Local Board can be considered as a single budget there is opportunity for Local Boards to consider larger projects that can be funded over more than one year, or that are funded jointly between more than one Local Board. A fewer number of larger projects will be easier to manage and will make delivery of the programme much easier.

20.     If the above programme timing is not met Auckland Transport cannot guarantee that the Local Board Transport Capital Fund programme will be able to be fully delivered in the current electoral term

Value of Projects

21.     The time required for managing the various stages of a project can vary significantly depending on the nature and size of the project.

22.     Initial assessments of project proposals including the development of Rough Orders of Cost can be relatively quick in the case of simple projects such as new footpaths or the installation of new bus shelters where the work is straight forward and is carried out on a regular basis under other Auckland Transport work streams. In these cases typical costs are known and a turn-around of a few weeks can be achieved.

23.     However other one-off projects that may have safety implications that require the gathering of data (site specific surveys, and information such as traffic counts) to determine whether or not the project meets traffic warrants, standards or regulatory requirements, or projects that require initial community input can take up to three months to assess.

24.     Detailed design and the development of Firm Estimates of Cost can also vary significantly in terms of the overall time required. Some simple projects require very little design and can take a matter of a few weeks.

25.     Other more complex projects require time to gather detailed site information, to carry out consultation with stakeholders, to carry out design including inputs from specialists, to apply for resource consents, and to obtain regulatory approvals such as traffic resolutions or speed limit changes. These projects can take more than six months to design.

26.     Construction timeframes can vary significantly depending on the size of the project. Lead time to supply specialist materials for construction, often from overseas, can delay projects. Timing of works to avoid the wetter winter months can also impact on when tenders are let. Delaying of weather sensitive works to construct them at the right time of the year can impact on the overall timing of project delivery.

27.     In addition, spreading out the delivery of the construction of works over the whole year can provide a more even workload to the contractors which can result in more favourable overall costs to AT and the Local Boards.

28.     All of the above highlights that the timing of the various stages of projects can vary significantly. Straight forward projects can be delivered in a single year; whereas it is not possible to deliver more complex projects within a single year. Many of the Local Board projects fall into this second category.

Auckland Transport Programme Management Process

29.     A review of the internal Auckland Transport processes has highlighted a number of improvements that will be made in order to assist with the delivery of this programme of work.

30.     Timing of responses back to the Local Boards on initial assessments and on the completion of detailed designs will be monitored more closely to ensure there is no slippage in these approval processes.

31.     Rough Orders of Cost and Firm Estimates of Cost will be provided in ranges of price rather than a single dollar figure because of the uncertainty of providing exact figures in the early stages of projects. Rough Orders of Cost carried out at the start of the project can vary by up to 30%, whereas Firm Estimates of Cost carried out in the detailed design phase can vary by 15%.

32.     There are examples where previous estimates that have been provided have been too low and additional approvals have been required from the Local Boards. This has caused problems with the Local Board expectation of project costs. More care will be taken in future to provide accurate estimates.

33.     It should be remembered that these figures are still estimates and the true cost of the work will only be known when the construction is complete. The reason for this is that there are many factors that can affect the final cost of a project compared to the Firm Estimate of Cost. Three of these are the tendered price from the contractor, unforeseen ground conditions, and relocation/protection of underground services. Every endeavour will be made to keep project costs within the approved budgets.

Consequences of not Delivering the full Programme

34.     Auckland Transport CAPEX underspend including from within the Local Board Transport Capital Fund remains under sustained scrutiny by Auckland Council.

35.     Auckland Transport is accountable for the current underspend on this significant budget allocation, and reports every quarter to Auckland Council on the accuracy of its CAPEX spend forecasts.

36.     It is important that this fund is fully spent each year to ensure that neither its amount nor its process are put at risk when consistently reporting underspends to Council.

Summary of the Budgets and Project Values by Local Board

Local Board

Total Budget 2012-13 to 2015-16

(four years)

Total Value of all Approved Projects and Proposals Being Assessed

Value of New Projects Still to be Identified

Albert Eden

$2,659,732

$1,302,567

$1,357,165

Devonport Takapuna

$1,540,120

$1,104,960

$435,160

Franklin

$1,739,864

$946,555

$793,309

Great Barrier

$400,000

$278,476

$121,524

Henderson Massey

$2,993,512

$1,012,988

$1,980,524

Hibiscus and Bays

$2,399,540

$763,330

$1,636,210

Howick

$3,487,612

$1,147,000

$2,340,612

Kaipatiki

$2,318,064

$1,244,711

$1,073,353

Mangere Otahuhu

$2,071,016

$609,364

$1,461,652

Manurewa

$2,373,256

$472,116

$1,901,140

Maungakiekie Tamaki

$1,979,028

$800,000

$1,179,028

Orakei

$2,199,796

$852,633

$1,347,163

Otara Papatoetoe

$2,197,168

$1,098,584

$1,098,584

Papakura

$1,224,736

$904,747

$319,989

Puketapapa

$1,526,468

$373,000

$1,143,468

Rodney

$1,477,044

$733,000

$744,044

Upper Harbour

$1,348,264

$674,132

$674,132

Waiheke

$800,000

$211,943

$588,057

Waitakere Ranges

$1,324,608

$140,000

$1,184,608

Waitemata

$1,879,156

$192,470

$1,686,686

Whau

$2,071,016

$0

$2,071,016

TOTALS

$40,000,000

$14,862,576

$25,137,424

37.     It should be noted that the possible spend of the 2016-17 budget is not included in the above figures.

Suggestions of Projects to be funded from the Local Board Transport Capital Fund

38.     Attached is the Pick List of the types of projects that could be funded from the LBTCF programme that has previously been circulated to Local Boards for their information. This list will assist Local Boards to identify potential projects in their areas

General

The activities detailed in this report do not trigger the Significance Policy, all programmes and activities are within budget/in line with the Council’s Annual Plan and LTP documents and there are no legal or legislative implications arising from the activities detailed in this report.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Projects that could be considered by Local Boards

41

bView

Financial Updates for the individual Local Boards

47

     

Signatories

Author

Phil Donnelly, Team Leader East, Road Design and Development, Capital Development Division, Auckland Transport

Authorisers

Andrew Scoggins, Group Manager Road Design and Development, Capital Development Division, Auckland Transport

Jonathan Anyon, Elected Member Relationship Team Manager, Auckland Transport

 


Albert-Eden Local Board

07 May 2014

 

 






Albert-Eden Local Board

07 May 2014

 

 



Albert-Eden Local Board

07 May 2014

 

 

Chamberlain Park

 

File No.: CP2014/08849

 

  

 

 

Purpose

1.       The report is to be tabled at the meeting.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a)      receive the report.

 

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.    

Signatories

Author

Georgina  Morgan - Democracy Advisor

Authoriser

Adam Milina - Acting Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards

 


Albert-Eden Local Board

07 May 2014

 

 

Bylaw review programme update - April 2014

 

File No.: CP2014/07965

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       This report provides an update on bylaw review (policy) and bylaw implementation (operations), covering June 2013 to April 2014. This joint approach to reporting ensures that local boards have a comprehensive overview of the end-to-end programme through to 2015.

Executive Summary

2.       Consultation on the proposed navigation safety bylaw closed on 17 March 2014. Staff are now preparing a summary of submissions alongside the full submissions to the hearings panel. The proposed cemeteries and crematoria bylaw was adopted by the Regulatory and Bylaws committee and Governing Body in March, and submissions opened from early April.

3.       Further proposed bylaws will be presented to the Regulatory and Bylaws committee shortly covering the next set of topics: Outdoor fires; Stormwater; Trading in public places; Alcohol controls and Animal management (covering animals other than dogs).

4.       The 2014 programme for review of local dog access rules is underway with the local boards that are proposing changes this year. Information about the proposed changes will be included with material provided as part of the annual dog registration cycle to minimise costs and ensure simplified communication with these customers.

5.       Implementation projects are well underway for the upcoming commencement of Health and hygiene (from 1 July 2014) and Public safety and nuisance (from 26 May 2014). Planning for the new Health and hygiene bylaw and associated licensing has included particular attention for operators where the rules have changed significantly. The majority of these newly registered premises will receive a visit from a member of the environmental health team, and a welcome pack that summarises the standards they are required to meet.

6.       The Alcohol licensing readiness project has now completed its key work relating to establishing the new licensing structures needed under the new alcohol act. These are running as intended from 18 December 2013.

7.       Review work is continuing on further topics to support completion of the review programme by October 2015, alongside implementation planning for the resulting changes.

8.       No formal requests for local board bylaws have been received over the period covered by this report.

9.       An investment proposal for the integrated programme is being progressed, to be submitted for consideration as part of preparing the draft 2015-2024 Long-term Plan.

 

 

Recommendations

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a)      Note the progress of bylaw review and implementation and the forward programme that will complete the review of the legacy bylaws by 2015.

 

 

Discussion

The bylaw review programme

10.     The bylaw review programme was originally endorsed by the Regulatory and Bylaws committee in December 2010 (refer CP2010/00962) and February 2011 (refer CP2011/00453). It will review the legacy bylaws (that is, the bylaws inherited from the former councils) across approximately 30 topics. A new bylaw will be prepared for each topic where appropriate, or a recommendation made that the underlying issue or outcome is better handled another way.

11.     The Regulatory and Bylaws Committee has ownership of the review and local boards are participating through individual workshops and reports. Local Boards are also able to propose that local bylaws are made, to apply only in their area (refer sections 24 to 28 of the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009). Any requests for local bylaws are reported to the Regulatory and Bylaws committee. As stated above, there have been no local board proposals for local bylaws over the last period. This report covers the period June 2013 to April 2014.

12.     As this is the first report on this programme since the 2013 local government elections, attachment A provides a brief background to bylaws, including an outline of each bylaw topic.

Update on review of bylaw topics

13.     The current state of the review work programme is presented in the table below and the detailed comments for several topics that follow. Attachment B provides an overview of the timeline for the programme.

14.     The table below includes reviews that have already been completed. It also covers bylaws that may be folded into other topics (Freedom camping; Arkles Bay Set Netting); the ongoing local boards’ review of dog access rules; and the review that must take place within five years of any bylaw’s adoption.

 

Table 1: Summary of status and next steps for review of bylaw topics

 

Topic

Status and Progress – 7 stages

Comments

 

Status

1-Preparation

2-Pre-consultation

3-Options

4-Write Bylaw

5-Adopt draft

6-Spec Cons Proc

7-Adopt final

 

Reviews completed

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dog management

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Completed

Election Signs

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Completed

Food safety

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Completed

General administration

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Completed

Health & hygiene

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Completed

Offensive trades

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Completed

Public safety and nuisance

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Completed

Solid waste (Waste m/ment)

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Completed

Trade waste

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Completed

Transport (Auckland Transport)

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Completed

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Work programme

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Navigation Safety

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

See below

Outdoor / Rural fires

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Trading in public places

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

See below

Stormwater management

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Signs

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

See below

Election signs (amend)

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

See below

Alcohol licensing fees

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Alcohol controls

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

See below

Animal management

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Air quality

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Boarding houses and hostels

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cemeteries and crematoria

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Commercial sex industry

A

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

On hold pending unitary plan outcomes

Construction and development

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Onsite wastewater

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hazardous Substances

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

See below

Orakei Basin

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Recreational and cultural facilities

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Transport (Parks / AC controlled land

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Water supply and wastewater (reticulation)

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wharfs & Marinas

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Other work

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Review - local dog access rules

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reviews by local boards - ongoing

Filming fee review

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

See below

Freedom camping

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Arkles Bay set netting

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Five year reviews

B

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Status summary codes

G

Green - Work is progressing as planned, due date will be met or any revised date will not have wider impacts

A

Amber – Original due date at risk of being missed and this may have wider impacts; or an issue has arisen.

R

Red - Due date has or will be missed and this will have wider impacts; or an issue has arisen that will have wider or significant impacts.

B

Blue - Not yet scheduled. However, background work is underway.

 

Table 2: Additional comments for particular topics in the bylaw review programme

 

Public safety & nuisance

On track

G

This bylaw topic crosses the jurisdiction of both Auckland Council and Auckland Transport (meaning there are two parallel bylaws). The new bylaws were adopted in 2013 and come into force in May 2014.

 

Navigation safety

On track

G

Public submissions were invited on this topic from 14 February to 17 March. Just under 400 submissions were received and are being reviewed. A range of communication approaches – including radio and attendance at relevant events – were used to help publicise the proposal and invite submissions. Hearings are expected in May.

 

Trading in public places (policy and bylaw)

On track

G

This review will deliver a single draft policy and two draft bylaws (for the council and Auckland Transport). Drafting of these is well underway. It is expected that these will be reported to the Regulatory and Bylaws committee and then the governing body in May. Any new bylaws could come into force for July 2015 (allowing any fee changes to also be put in place with the council’s long-term plan).

 

Signs

On track

G

Discussions with local boards are currently underway to identify their views on particular matters including local approaches to issues such as sandwich boards and cross-street banners. Comments from those discussions and other discussions with representatives of businesses and the signage industry will support the preparation of a draft bylaw later in 2014.

 

This project is also monitoring the progress of the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan, as this plan also includes signage provisions.

 

Election signs (amendment)

On track

G

The Election signs bylaw was adopted by Auckland Transport in May 2013, and was in place for the 2013 local government election. A number of operational issues arose during that election period, and the clarity of relevant clauses is planned to be addressed through a series of drafting amendments that will support a better democratic process. These improve clarity for issues including the use of candidate and “team” signs, signs on private property, the readability of authoriser statements and the display of signs promoting election issues rather than candidates or teams. The amendments also provide for the possible later addition of explanatory notes into the bylaw, where desirable to provide further guidance.

 

The proposed amendments are being reported to the Auckland Transport Board in April, to allow for consultation on the proposed changes. Local boards will receive further information then.

 

Changes are also being considered to remove or adjust some of the specified sign sites in the western area. These follow a review of sites against criteria including practicality and safety, and are intended to address issues that arose in 2013. Those local boards where changes are being considered will receive further information on this.

 

Alcohol controls

On track

G

Each of the legacy councils had adopted an Alcohol Control bylaw, and put in place a series of alcohol controls through that bylaw. Alcohol controls (previously called liquor bans) prohibit the consumption of alcohol within a specified place, during a specified time.

 

Legislative changes introduced alongside the government’s reform of laws relating to the sale and supply of alcohol provide the council and police with enhanced powers in relation to alcohol controls. Those changes also require the council to review its existing alcohol controls against a new threshold, as part of any decision to carry those controls forward past October 2015. Following a review of available data, the majority of existing controls across Auckland are considered to meet the new requirements.

 

A proposed bylaw is planned to be reported to the Regulatory and Bylaws committee shortly. The existing bylaws are broadly similar, and so the new proposed bylaw will largely seek to continue the current arrangements. In line with consultation with local boards from 2011 (alongside other alcohol-related matters), the new bylaw will facilitate local board involvement in decisions on alcohol controls and an improved community-based focus on alcohol issues.

 

Community-focussed approaches may include crime prevention through environmental design, local community initiatives, discussions with nearby licensees, youth and leadership development programmes, partnering with central government agencies including the Police and the Ministry of Justice, and partnering with local agencies including sports clubs and iwi and town centre / business associations.

 

These non-regulatory approaches can often lead to significant reductions in alcohol harm and have better long-term effects than regulatory approaches such as making an alcohol control.

 

Hazardous substances

On track

G

The former Auckland City Council had a hazardous substances bylaw. A review of this bylaw has indicated that the issues it covered are now addressed adequately through other means, including provisions in other bylaws, the Resource Management Act, National environmental standards, and regulations made under various acts.

 

Comment is being sought from the local boards where the legacy bylaw currently applies, following which a proposed approach (that could include allowing the bylaw to lapse in 2015) will be brought to the Regulatory and Bylaws committee.

 

Dog access review

On track

G

Local boards are able to review dog access rules for local parks and local beaches in their areas on an annual basis. This allows a better response to community views than was possible under the legacy councils’ approaches.

 

For 2014 selected dog access are being reviewed by the following local boards: Kaipatiki, Orakei, Maungakiekie-Tamaki, Puketapapa, and Hibiscus and Bays.

 

To ensure that registered dog owners are advised of the proposed changes (as required by legislation) the local boards are including a joint notice within the dog registration package in June. This will reduce costs, and ensure that dog owners receive a single combined communication from the council, rather than multiple messages.

 

Filming fees review

On track

G

The Auckland Film Protocol was adopted in 2013, after wide consultation with local boards, the screen production industry, council-controlled organisations and other stakeholders. The protocol aims to create a film-friendly culture across Auckland, based on a two way commitment from the wider council organisation and from filmmakers. It also seeks to help deliver a customer driven service that provides certainty to filmmakers in a globally competitive market, and to enable public good will towards the film industry by setting out expectations of film crews when filming in public places.

 

Currently there is a range of filming fee structures in place, inherited from the former councils. A filming fees review is now underway to understand how this element of the filming process can be harmonised and improved. The Policies and Bylaws unit is working with ATEED on this project, and it is expected that local board input will be sought on this over the next few months.

 

 

Update on implementation of new bylaws

15.     Detailed implementation planning is developed by the responsible operations division alongside the process for reviewing each of the bylaws, through a cross council programme called the Integrated Bylaw Review and Implementation (IBRI) programme. Initial planning for implementation starts when the bylaw topic review identifies the issues and options related to each topic. This approach provides the operations division an early indication of the possible shape of the bylaw and its implementation considerations.

16.     This programme includes the main groups involved in operating bylaws and delivering the relevant services to our customers. The programme is also helping ensure bylaw reviews can be aligned to other related transformational changes such as the consolidation of information technology systems, customer service improvement programmes and the organisation’s capacity to implement those changes.

17.     Implementation of new bylaws will generally cover

·    ensuring that the council meets its statutory obligation;

·    ensuring that effective operational practices on the control and enforcement of the new bylaws are implemented consistently across the region, and are made available to the general public;

·    ensuring that communications to the general public and other stakeholders are well planned and implemented in a timely manner;

·    developing and implementing standard business rules and processes that help achieve the council’s customer service standards;

·    ensuring that internal services are planned and delivered when needed, and are in alignment with other transformation initiatives;

·    putting any changes to fees in place; and

·    ensuring that staff are informed throughout the process and are trained on delivering the new services.

18.     The table below shows the current status of implementation projects.

 

Table 4: Summary of status and next steps for implementation projects

 

Implementation project name

Status and Progress

Link to bylaw topics / Other comments

 

Status

1-Preparation

2-Planning

3-Implementation

4-Closure

 

Underway

 

 

 

 

 

 

Alcohol licensing readiness

G

 

 

 

 

Completed

Alcohol licensing fees

G

 

 

 

 

See below

Animals (Stage 1)

G

 

 

 

 

Completed

Dog access review

G

 

 

 

 

 

Electoral Signs 2013

G

 

 

 

 

Completed

Electoral Signs 2014

G

 

 

 

 

 

Environmental

G

 

 

 

 

 

Facilities

G

 

 

 

 

 

Food safety

G

 

 

 

 

Completed

Health protection

G

 

 

 

 

Health & hygiene bylaw and code of practice; See below

Marine

G

 

 

 

 

 

Public safety & nuisance

G

 

 

 

 

 

Revoked bylaws

G

 

 

 

 

General admin; Offensive trades; Others

Signage

G

 

 

 

 

 

Stormwater

G

 

 

 

 

 

Street trading / Trading in public places

G

 

 

 

 

Trading in public places policy and bylaw

Waste management

G

 

 

 

 

Solid waste bylaw

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Proposed future

 

 

 

 

 

 

Air quality

B

 

 

 

 

 

Alcohol controls (liquor bans)

B

 

 

 

 

 

Animals (Stage 2)

B

 

 

 

 

 

Construction

B

 

 

 

 

 

Transport (AC land)

B

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 5: Additional comments for particular implementation projects

 

Alcohol licensing readiness

On track

G

The alcohol licensing project has now completed successfully. This project set out to ensure that the council was able to implement the requirements of the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012, including the new licensing system and new fees that had to operate from 18 December 2013.

 

Alcohol licensing fees

On track

G

The Governing Body has resolved that the council adopt its own fees for licensed premises. This is provided for in the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012. The council can change the fee amounts, using the cost / risk fee categories that have been set by central government. Work is underway to capture actual information on costs, based on operating the new licensing system and the parts of those costs that can be recovered through licensing fees.

 

Health protection

On track

G

The Health protection project is implementing the new Health and hygiene bylaw and code of practice (which will come into force from 1 July 2014). A range of user-friendly brochures that summarise key provisions of the health protection code have been prepared to help communicate the requirements to all the people who operate these businesses.

 

A series of approaches are underway to help ensure operators are aware of the requirements to be followed. The new bylaw (with its risk-based approach) has resulted in some premises that are newly required to be registered, and the communication activities are focussed on these premises. Most of these will receive an individual visit, with an appropriate information pack.

 

There are also some premises that no longer need to be registered with the council, and this is also being communicated to them.

 

Funding for bylaw review and implementation

19.     The scope and scale of the expected changes mean that implementation requires significant effort and resources, and cost, for some topics. The Strategy and Finance committee made an initial provision for funding the IBRI programme at its meeting of 9 May 2013 (in part; refer item 16, SF/2013/67).

20.     As provided for in the resolution, a further investment proposal is being prepared for the 2015-2024 long-term plan. The programme continuously monitors its approach to each bylaw, and where possible captures any cost efficiencies and learnings for later bylaws.

 

Consideration

Local Board Views

21.     Local boards are involved in the review of each bylaw topic (consistent with the review’s principles). This report provides an update on the programme for local boards.

Maori Impact Statement

22.     This report does not raise any specific issues relating to Māori. The review of each topic includes considering whether that topic includes any elements of special interest to Māori, and if so the appropriate way to seek a greater level of engagement. Where appropriate, consultation with Māori (on a particular topic) may be linked to consultation on other related topics through the Unitary Plan or other initiatives.

General

23.     The recommendations in this report do not trigger the council’s policy on significance.

Implementation Issues

24.     Implementation issues are addressed as relevant to each topic, as noted above.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Background to bylaws

59

bView

Overview of the timeline for the programme

67

     

Signatories

Author

Andrew Simon Pickering - Manager, Planning, Policies and Bylaws

Authorisers

Penny Pirrit - Regional & Local Planning Manager

Adam Milina - Acting Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards

 


Albert-Eden Local Board

07 May 2014

 

 









Albert-Eden Local Board

07 May 2014

 

 



Albert-Eden Local Board

07 May 2014

 

 

Chairperson's Report

File No.: CP2014/00183

 

  

 

Executive Summary

The Chairperson will update the Board on projects, meetings and other initiatives relevant to the Board’s interests.

 

Recommendation

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

1)         Receives the Chairperson’s report.

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Signatories

Author

Michael Mendoza - Democracy Advisor

Authoriser

 

 


Albert-Eden Local Board

07 May 2014

 

 

Board Members' Reports

File No.: CP2014/00185

 

  

 

Executive Summary

An opportunity is provided for members to update the Board on projects/issues they have been involved with since the last meeting.

(Note:  This is an information item and if the Board wishes any action to be taken under this item, a written report must be provided for inclusion on the agenda).

 

Recommendation

That the Albert-Eden local board members’ reports be received.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Local Board Member Fryer - May 2014 Report

73

bView

Local Board Member Arlington - May 2014 Report

75

cView

Local Board Member Watson - May 2014 Report

77

    

Signatories

Author

Michael Mendoza - Democracy Advisor

Authoriser

Adam Milina - Acting Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards

 


Albert-Eden Local Board

07 May 2014

 

 



Albert-Eden Local Board

07 May 2014

 

 


Albert-Eden Local Board

07 May 2014

 

 



Albert-Eden Local Board

07 May 2014

 

 

Governing Body Members' update

File No.: CP2014/00186

 

  

 

Executive Summary

An opportunity is provided for Governing Body Members to update the Board on Governing Body issues they have been involved with since the last meeting.

 

Recommendations

a)      That Standing Order 3.9.14 be amended to allow Governing Body Members Cathy Casey and Christine Fletcher to have speaking rights.

 

b)      That Governing Body Members' verbal updates be received.

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.    

Signatories

Author

Michael Mendoza - Democracy Advisor

Authoriser

 

 


Albert-Eden Local Board

07 May 2014

 

 

Albert-Eden Local Board Workshop Notes

File No.: CP2014/00191

 

  

 

Executive Summary

Attached are copies of the Albert-Eden Local Board workshop notes taken during workshops held on the 9, 16 and 23 April 2014. 

 

Recommendation

That the Albert-Eden Local Board workshop notes for the workshops held on the 9, 16 and 23 April 2014 be received.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Albert-Eden Local Board Workshop Notes - 9 April 2014

83

bView

Albert-Eden Local Board Workshop Notes - 16 April 2014

85

cView

Albert-Eden Local Board Workshop Notes - 23 April 2014

87

    

Signatories

Author

Michael Mendoza - Democracy Advisor

Authoriser

Adam Milina - Acting Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards

 


Albert-Eden Local Board

07 May 2014

 

 


Albert-Eden Local Board

07 May 2014

 

 


Albert-Eden Local Board

07 May 2014

 

 


Albert-Eden Local Board

07 May 2014

 

 

Reports Requested/Pending

File No.: CP2014/00187

 

  

 

Executive Summary

Attached is a list of reports requested/pending as at May 2014.

 

Recommendation/s

1)         That the list of reports requested/pending be received.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Reports Requested and Pending - May 2014

91

    

Signatories

Author

Michael Mendoza - Democracy Advisor

Authoriser

 

 


Albert-Eden Local Board

07 May 2014