I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Auckland City Centre Advisory Board will be held on:

 

Date:                      

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

 

Wednesday, 23 July 2014

3.00pm

Committee Room
Level 15, 1 Greys Avenue, Auckland

 

Auckland City Centre Advisory Board

OPEN AGENDA

 

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Chairperson

Dr Lucy Baragwanath

University of Auckland

Deputy Chairperson

Earl Gray

Partner, Simpson Grierson, Committee for Auckland

Members

Dick Ayres

CBD Residents Advisory Group

 

Mayor Len Brown, JP

Auckland Council

 

Shale Chambers

Waitemata Local Board, Auckland Council

 

Tim Coffey

CBD Residents Advisory Group

 

John Coop

Warren and Mahoney, NZ Institute of Architects

 

Jillian de Beer

de Beer Marketing & Communications

 

Kate Healy

Ngati Whatua o Orakei Corporate Limited

 

Barbara Holloway

Karangahape Road Business Association

 

Councillor Mike Lee

Auckland Council

 

Nigel Murphy

University of Technology

 

Alex Swney

Heart of the City

 

Connal Townsend, JP

Property Council of NZ

 

(Quorum 7 members)

 

 

 

Tam White

Democracy Advisor

18 July 2014

Contact Telephone: (09) 307 7253

Email: tam.white@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

 

 


Auckland City Centre Advisory Board

23 July 2014

 

 

ITEM   TABLE OF CONTENTS                                                                                        PAGE

1          Apologies                                                                                                                        5

2          Declaration of Interest                                                                                                   5

3          Confirmation of Minutes                                                                                               5

4          Extraordinary Business                                                                                                5

5          Auckland Transport's Parking Discussion Document                                             7

6          Draft Auckland Council Arts and Culture Strategic Action Plan (ACSAP)          21

7          Projects Progress report for Auckland City Centre Advisory Board for period 1 June to 30 June 2014                                                                                                                 45

8          Update on the Implementation of the Myers Park Development Plan                  49

9          City Centre Integration update                                                                                   65 

10        Consideration of Extraordinary Items 

PUBLIC EXCLUDED

11        Procedural Motion to Exclude the Public                                                                 67

C1       Draft Hobson Ridge Street Design Framework                                                       67  

 


1          Apologies

 

Apologies have been received from Members Holloway and Gray.

 

2          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.

 

3          Confirmation of Minutes

 

That the Auckland City Centre Advisory Board:

a)         confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Wednesday, 25 June 2014, including the confidential section, as a true and correct record.

 

 

4          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.”

 

 

 


Auckland City Centre Advisory Board

23 July 2014

 

 

Auckland Transport's Parking Discussion Document

 

File No.: CP2014/15874

 

Purpose

1.       The purpose of this report is to update and receive feedback from the Auckland City Centre Advisory Board on Auckland Transport’s Draft Parking Discussion Document as it relates to the City Centre and to clarify the links between a parking strategy, land use and the broader outcomes of the Auckland Plan.

Executive summary

2.       Parking provision is a significant component in the shaping of urban form, at the nexus of both land use planning and transportation.  A comprehensive parking strategy is an important tool to manage parking to achieve transport objectives, desired land use and a compact city as well as the broader outcomes of the Auckland Plan.  

3.       Auckland Transport’s Draft Parking Discussion Document (Attachment A) sets out a framework for the provision, management and pricing of public parking (on-street and off-street) and park and ride facilities in Auckland, and outlines nine main policy approaches. Auckland Transport is seeking submissions and feedback to inform the development of a parking strategy.

4.       The high level direction for parking comes from the Auckland Plan, together with the regulatory approach to off-street private parking in the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan. The Draft Parking Discussion Paper is not a statutory document and is separate from the Resource Management Act and the hearing process regarding the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan. 

5.       Initial council feedback is set out in Attachment B.  The feedback is supportive of the general policy approach as aligned with the outcomes sought in the Auckland Plan, a much-needed integration of myriad legacy policies and a strong step forward in optimising parking’s contribution to Auckland as the world’s most liveable city. Council feedback includes suggestions for incorporation into a final parking strategy, such as optimising park and ride, further evaluating off-street facility ownership by Council/AT and clarifying replacement mitigation of on-street arterial removal.

6.       The Auckland City Centre Advisory Board has a range of perspectives in relation to the City Centre which may be useful for Auckland Transport in the development of a final Parking Strategy.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Auckland City Centre Advisory Board:

a)      receive this report, including Auckland Transport’s Draft Parking Discussion Document.

b)      provide feedback relating to Auckland Transport’s Draft Parking Discussion Document on issues relating to the City Centre.

 

Comments

Strategic Context

7.       Parking management is a major influence on transport mode choice and a strong determinant of land use and quality compact city and, as such, underpins the strategic direction and successful implementation of the Auckland Plan and the delivery of its outcomes, especially in the City Centre.

8.       The City Centre is expected to see a significant increase in employment and residential growth over the coming decades, with an estimated 128,000 to 140,000 workers and up to 45,000 residents by 2032 (City Centre Master Plan).  Maintaining access to and within the City Centre while accommodating growth will be a challenge and a comprehensive parking strategy plays a key role in ensuring success.

9.       The Auckland Plan signals the need for high-quality urban design, borne by flexibility and appropriate regulation, with an intent to review the approach to parking as part of the development of the Unitary Plan.  The Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan (PAUP) requires that car parking be managed to support intensification, economic activity of businesses, the safe and efficient operation of the transport network and efficient use of land, among other things.

10.     The PAUP proposes maximums (in and around the city centre fringe area, centres zones, mixed-use zone and terraced housing and apartment buildings zone) and removes minimums (from town centres) as a way to support intensification and public transport as well as mitigate some of the potential for parking oversupply, poor land use and negative impacts on housing costs.  The Draft Parking Discussion Document proposes a parking management approach which supports the PAUP’s regulatory approach.

11.     The Auckland Regional Public Transport Plan 2013 (RPTP) provides additional strategic direction regarding integration of public transport with parking policies and park and ride.

12.     The Auckland Regional Parking Strategy 2006 is the legacy parking strategy produced by the Auckland Regional Council.  Some aspects of that strategy are out of date but the broad approach to parking management flows through to the Draft Parking Discussion Document.

Current Situation

13.     The need for a comprehensive parking strategy is underscored by a variety of emerging conflicts, including conflicts between residents, businesses and commuters over limited parking spaces; conflicts between long stay commuter parking and short stay parking, generally for business or shopping; conflicts between on-street parking and public transport and conflicts between the general public and permit holders using available parking for non-essential purposes.

14.     A suite of recent trends, including, for instance, changes in travel preferences (an increase in public transport and active modes), driving distance (a decline in vehicle kilometres travelled per capita), demand for public road space and land prices also adds pressure for changes to the current approach.

Draft Parking Discussion Document

15.     Auckland Transport’s Draft Parking Discussion Document contains an overview of key issues associated with parking in Auckland and seeks feedback on nine main policy approaches.  Its comprehensive approach by Auckland Transport to on- and off-street parking provision, management and pricing strives to address current problems with parking in Auckland.  Auckland Transport’s objectives are to support economic development, good urban design, public transport patronage and the efficient movement of people, goods and services throughout the city.

Auckland Council Feedback

16.     The Auckland Development Committee provided high level feedback at a workshop on 1 June 2014.  There was a high level of support for more comprehensive parking management and the range of tools identified in the overall approach.

17.     Council staff are generally supportive of the policy approach outlined in the document.  Establishing a comprehensive parking strategy by bringing multiple policy approaches into one streamlined, consistent and comprehensive parking strategy, delivered and overseen for the first time by an amalgamated local government for Auckland, will enable parking to contribute to a variety of long-term land use, economic, health and liveability outcomes for Auckland. 

18.     The proposed parking management approach will help shape quality compact urban form, enable economic development and support increasing public transport and active modes.  It will help solve emerging conflicts between users, respond to changing travel demand and demographic trends, increase predictability for consumers and prepare Auckland to meet the challenges and opportunities borne by a growing and maturing city.  The policy response is consistent with many of the recommendations made by Todd Litman of the Victoria Transport Policy Institute at an Auckland Conversation presentation on 16 May 2013.

19.     For instance, demand responsive parking pricing has been successful at increasing turnover and availability of parking in the City Centre; a sensible and coordinated roll-out of demand responsive pricing in other centres will provide likely benefits to users and help achieve broader outcomes.   Likewise, the shifting focus of off-street public parking facilities from commuter parking to short-term casual parking for visitors wanting to shop or do business, will help increase public transport patronage and active modes and encourage a more economically prosperous city. 

20.     Council staff have made three main suggestions to Auckland Transport:

·    Optimise investment in park and ride facilities.  Remove the target number of “up to 10,000 spaces over 30 years,” since such a number sets a possible expectation for provision and may undermine optimisation of park and ride, value for money and broader outcomes.

·    Additional analysis of off-street facilities in the City Centre.  Determine whether Council/Auckland Transport should consider transitioning off-street facilities to better public/commercial uses with higher revenue return and/or greater alignment with broader outcomes (e.g., land use and economic outcomes).  More information regarding the benefits and dis-benefits of transitioning to better uses or divesting from parking provision may assist council in making budget decisions that result in better economic, land-use, transport and liveability outcomes.

·    Clarify alternative parking provision where on-street parking is removed.  Remove reference to a policy approach to “provide alternative parking where on street parking is removed.”  Such a policy sets potentially unrealistic expectations that might not be able to be met.  Officers request clarity to ensure that alternative parking provision does not mean Council/Auckland Transport construction of additional off-street facilities. Officers suggest using side-streets for mitigation.

21.     The Council feedback on the Draft Parking Discussion Document is contained in Attachment B.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

22.     Local Boards have been consulted by Auckland Transport in the development of the Draft Parking Discussion Document through three consolidated Local Board workshops in May.  

23.     Based on the information supplied at those workshops, there was a general level of support for the proposed approach to parking.  There were suggestions that parking revenue from centres are put back into local improvements, that feeder buses may provide better patronage outcomes than park and rides in more central locations, and that local businesses need to better understand the benefits of arterial parking removal.  The feedback was mixed and wide-ranging and was recorded by Auckland Transport.

24.     Auckland Transport and council staff presented to the Waitemata Local Board at a workshop on 7 July, where discussion focused mainly on residential parking schemes.

Maori impact statement

25.     The Independent Māori Statutory Board’s Schedule of Issues of Significance to Māori in Tāmaki Makaurau, Principle Seven (Mutual Benefit), Issue #14 relates to access to infrastructure services, with Māori “empowered, enabled, respected and recognized as requiring ongoing access to safe, operational and reasonably priced infrastructure services by a council that recognizes the importance of infrastructure services as a core council activity.”  To those ends, the Draft Parking Discussion Document and subsequent Parking Strategy would deliver infrastructure services benefits like improving public transport frequency and reliability and the safety of active modes.  An 85% occupancy policy approach to on-street parking, for instance, would deliver convenience, time-saving and predictability benefits.  Using price over time restrictions in some areas would also reduce the likelihood of parking infringements. There would also likely be adverse social impacts from paid parking which may create financial hardship or discourage vehicle trips to centres by lower income households.

26.     Māori impacts are being considered as part of Auckland Transport’s wider consultation process.

Implementation

27.     The Draft Parking Discussion Document will progress into a Parking Strategy, which is proposed to be incorporated into Auckland Transport’s Integrated Transport Programme (ITP).  Funding constraints and new funding assumptions will likely play a role in determining the package of investments in parking, including park and ride provision and comprehensive parking management plans.  The effects of policies in a Parking Strategy would need to input to Auckland Council’s Long Term Plan 2015-2025, since the first decade of the ITP will likely form the basis for transport investments in the Long Term Plan. 

28.     Comprehensive Parking Management Plans will need to be prepared, the roll out of paid parking will need to occur when triggers are met and parking removal on arterials will be addressed on a case-by-case basis as guided by a final parking strategy.  There may be opportunities to reinvest revenue from demand responsive parking pricing back into centres and/or to use it as a source for Business Investment Districts.

29.     It may not be possible, particularly in the first decade, to include a comprehensive list of park and ride facilities that Auckland Transport will invest in.  Some park and rides may require alternative approaches, including commercial partnerships and/or lease of pre-existing spaces.  Limited funding will also place park and rides under particular scrutiny, especially those that are not aligned with existing land uses (e.g. higher value land in centres or the isthmus) or the local transport network (e.g. on existing feeder routes). 

30.     Funding pressure during the development of the Auckland Council Long Term Plan 2015-2025 will also raise the issue of whether to retain, divest from or repurpose existing Council-owned off-street parking facilities in the city centre, especially given the current land value.  Exiting off-street parking would result in lost revenue but may be balanced by repayment of debt or an opportunity for redevelopment. 

31.     Joint sign off of a parking strategy by Auckland Council and Auckland Transport is required because it will involve both off-street parking and impacts on land use.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Auckland Transport Draft Parking Discussion Document (Under Separate Cover)

 

bView

Council staff feedback on Draft Parking Discussion Document

13

      

Signatories

Authors

John Mauro - Principal Transport Planner

Authorisers

Kevin Wright - Manager: Transport Strategy

 


Auckland City Centre Advisory Board

23 July 2014

 

 

12 June 2014

 

Auckland Transport

Auckland Transport Parking Review

Private Bag 92260,

Auckland 1142

 

Dear Sir/ Madam,

 

Please find attached Auckland Council feedback on the Draft Parking Discussion Document.  This incorporates the high level direction from the Auckland Development Committee and detailed comments from Council staff.

 

We look forward to working with you in the preparation of a final Parking Strategy which as indicated in our feedback we are seeking joint sign-off.

 

If you require any clarification on the submission please contact me by phone on 09 307 6063, or by email at roger.blakeley@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

 

 

Yours sincerely

 

 

Dr. Roger Blakeley,

Chief Planning Officer

 

 

 

 

Encl.


Feedback on Auckland Transport’s Draft Parking Discussion Document

The following feedback relates to Auckland Transport’s Draft Parking Discussion Document released on 28 May 2014.  The feedback includes the high level feedback from the Auckland Development Committee and detailed comment from officers from the Transport Strategy Unit, the Spatial & Infrastructure Strategy Unit, and the Regional & Local Planning Department.  [Further detailed comment to be included from staff in Economic Development, City Transformation and Built Environment.]

Summary

We are supportive of the general framework for the provision, management and pricing of parking and park and ride facilities.  The general approach to parking taken in the Draft Parking Discussion Document is more strongly aligned with the strategic direction of the Auckland Plan, including moving toward outstanding public transport within one network, improving the quality of urban living and fostering better economic outcomes.  The Discussion Document is well placed to form the basis of a Parking Strategy which supports the regulatory approach to parking outlined in the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan and provides guidance to a range of parking issues. 

 

It should be underscored that this is the first time that the one amalgamated city is proposing to manage parking across all of Auckland.  Change of any kind often elicits strong responses.  While many responses are likely to improve the document, we would suggest that AT (and the one Council family) focus on the benefits of such a ‘big picture’ approach across all of Auckland and an adherence to the broader strategic direction of the Auckland Plan.

 

Because of the impacts on land use and the interdependencies with Council’s planning, particularly outside the road corridor, the Council wishes to jointly sign off a Parking Strategy that arises out of the consultation on the Discussion Document. 

 

We are supportive of a number of approaches, including:

· Bringing all of these approaches into one streamlined, consistent and comprehensive parking strategy, delivered and overseen for the first time by an amalgamated local government for all of Auckland

· Demand responsive pricing and a target occupancy rate of 85% for on-street parking

· Development of detailed Comprehensive Parking Management Plans

· Residential zones and permits and/or time use restrictions to encourage short stays

· Shifting off-street parking in the city centre away from commuter parking to short stay parking

· Off-street parking investment criteria, including possible divestment when criteria are not being met

· Prioritisation of user groups for on-street parking access

· Phasing out of on-street parking on arterial routes, corridors serving the FTN and on-road cycling corridors with high current or future use and identified safety issues

· Clear and consistent on-street parking restrictions

· Streamlining legacy council permits and rationalising permits appropriately

· Park and ride investment in the right locations (e.g., at the urban fringe) guided by criteria in a Parking Strategy

· At a future time, using pricing to manage demand of park and ride spaces

 

We also have concerns about aspects of specific policy approaches, including:

· Introduction of a 10-minute grace period

· Introduction of a “congestion buster” product

· Provision of free parking for the Santa Parade event

· Proposing a targeted number (up to 10,000) of new park and ride spaces

· Providing replacement off-street parking when reducing on-street parking on arterials

 

We offer a number of suggestions, including:

· Enabling a more dynamic demand-responsive parking approach

· Review of whether Council should continue to own or manage off-street parking buildings

· Inclusion of greater detail on the provision of bicycle parking or integration at a later date

· Strong case-by-case consideration for the traffic calming and safety benefits of retaining parking, particularly for walking and cycling

· Mitigating impacts on businesses from removal of arterial on-street parking by incorporating the use of side streets for parking

· Removing reference to a 10,000 space park and ride target and replacing with clear guidance about appropriate public sector provision of park and ride facilities for cars and bicycles

 

We address our concerns and suggestions in greater detail below, concurrent with each of the nine sections in the document. 

 

5.1a: Managing demand for parking in the city centre, metropolitan & town centres

5.1b: Consistent approach to managing parking in centres

 

We support a peak target occupancy rate of 85% for on-street parking in town centres and using price to manage demand through ‘performance-based’ or ‘demand responsive’ pricing.  Research demonstrates that adjusting parking pricing (and/or timing restrictions) to achieve 85% occupancy has a number of benefits.  Demand responsive pricing reduces vehicle kilometres travelled (VKT) and congestion from circling cars searching for parking, particularly at peak times, resulting in better air quality, climate, and road safety outcomes, as well as improving frequency and reliability of public transport.  Pricing to achieve 85% target occupancy also provides better predictability and choice for consumers, especially for shorter trips, which delivers better economic development outcomes.  While parking pricing can be considered regressive, it is not necessarily more so than other means, particularly if revenue displaces general rates or improves public transport choices.  We support adoption of this approach as detailed in the Auckland Transport Price Adjustment Policies to ensure consistent and transparent parking management across Auckland.

 

We are also supportive of providing a consistent approach to managing parking in centres.  Recognising the importance of building in some flexibility to reflect the unique circumstances of each centre, we support the development of sequenced Comprehensive Parking Management Plans for each centre that analyse current and future issues, supply and demand and provide implementation plans.  Not only will this enable both flexibility and consistency, it will better link future parking demand to land use planning and travel demand.

 

While we are very supportive of the general approach, we would encourage future investigation into a more dynamic demand-responsive approach, which allows parking rates to vary in real time by the block, time of day or day of week.  Success in other cities (e.g., San Francisco’s SFpark) highlights the use of technology to monitor and adjust parking price, as well as allowing customers to check price and availability and pay for parking with mobile apps.  Payment integration with the AT HOP card may be a future opportunity, both to increase user convenience and to promote greater public transport patronage by increasing use and familiarity with AT HOP.

 

We have concerns that the introduction of a 10-minute grace period is an unnecessary step that may encourage additional car use and have impacts on encouraging PT patronage growth.  While useful in substituting for dedicated taxi and loading zone spaces (and adding to simplicity and on-street legibility), a 10 minute grace period may encourage drop offs/pick-ups throughout the city, likely inducing additional peak-time congestion. We suggest removal of the 10-minute grace period so that it does not appear in the parking strategy.

 

5.2: Balancing competing demands for parking in residential streets

 

We are supportive of appropriate use of residential zones, permits and/or time use restrictions to encourage short stays and to reduce conflicts between commuters and local businesses and residents.  This is particularly important in supporting the regulatory approach outlined in the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan (PAUP), which introduces maximum parking requirements and reduces some minimum requirements.  Aside from managing current conflicts, such an approach will encourage a shift toward public transport and improve the safety of residential streets.

 

5.3: Managing off-street parking facilities in the city centre

 

We support shifting the focus away from off-street commuter parking in public car parking facilities in the city centre to better align with the strategic direction of the Auckland Plan, including increasing PT patronage and active modes and encouraging a more economically prosperous city.  This means reducing and phasing out AT-owned/managed commuter parking in favour of prioritising short-term casual parking for visitors wanting to shop or do business in the city centre.  We suggest further review of whether Council should continue to own or manage off-street parking buildings in the city centre, as described in more detail below.

 

We have concerns that a potential ‘congestion buster’ product would work against the policy to focus on short-stay casual parking for visitors wanting to shop or do business in the city centre.  Such a product seems generally similar to the current early bird product.  While a congestion buster that focuses outside of the peak may alleviate some congestion by better distributing peak car trips to centres, it may also encourage more commuting by car instead of shifting some trips to public transport, a key focus of the Auckland Plan.  Furthermore, while car trips to the CBD are projected to fall somewhat over the next 30 years, all-mode trips will increase, so inter-peak congestion will be an issue.  Adding a product that may need to be removed later seems an unproductive strategy.

 

5.4: Investing in off-street parking facilities

 

We are supportive of not providing off-street parking to expand the supply of free or low cost parking.  We also support the off-street parking business case investment criteria, including considering divestment when the criteria are not being met.  Along these lines, we would encourage further analysis of whether or not Council-owned off-street parking buildings provide sufficient investment return to justify continued Council ownership or use—as the Discussion Document states, “In larger centres, it is expected that off-street parking will be provided by private developers.”  Given high and increasing land value, the potential to transition to better commercial uses or to divest may provide better revenue opportunities for Council/AT and would likely align better with the desired strategic direction, including encouraging greater PT patronage and active modes.  A similar exit approach should be considered for park and rides when they no longer deliver the desired outcomes or where the land use (and value) has changed substantially over time (see 5.9a, below).

 

5.5: Prioritising access to on-street parking

 

We support the approach to prioritising user groups for on-street parking access and the associated hierarchy, which enables better clarity, transparency and consistency.  While bicycle parking shows up on the hierarchy and is meant to be provided in accordance with existing AT guidelines and plans, greater clarity is required about the extent of the bicycle parking policy.  The Discussion Document has a focus on car parking and is light in relation to bicycle parking.  We suggest either further expansion of bicycle parking in the Parking Strategy or integration at a later date of future work into clarifying Council/AT’s role in the supply of bicycle parking facilities.

 

5.6: Reducing parking on arterial roads

 

We generally support phasing out on-street parking on arterial routes, corridors serving the FTN and on-road cycling corridors with proven safety issues to encourage more frequent and reliable PT service, increased PT patronage and increased walking and cycling.  As noted in the Discussion Document, this is dependent on specific context, as in some cases, parking provides traffic calming and safety benefits to pedestrians and cyclists.  We recommend focussing on the guidance provided by Auckland Plan Directive 10.6, which calls for parking standards and innovative parking mechanisms to take into account the promotion of public transport and the fostering of safe, convenient and attractive walkable neighbourhoods.

 

We support mitigating impacts on businesses by incorporating the use of side streets for parking instead of a policy of replacement provision, since such a policy creates expectations that Council is unlikely to be able to afford to meet.

 

5.7: On-street parking restrictions and events

 

We are supportive of clear and consistent on-street parking restrictions and promotion of PT and active modes for events.  Our only concern is with the mention of ‘historical arrangements that the public expect’ around the Santa Parade event.  Since both historical and current public expectations are likely to be wide-ranging for a variety of parking-related issues, we would suggest eliminating this one exception for better policy consistency.

 

5.8: Allocation of parking permits

 

We are supportive of streamlining previous legacy council permits and rationalising permits appropriately to enable priority access by priority users (like emergency services) and equitable access by the general public. 

 

5.9a: Investment in park and ride facilities 

 

We support “park and ride facilities in the right places,” as stated in the Discussion Document, in accordance with the criteria in the RPTP, including:

 

· Park-and-Ride is planned as an integral part of the public transport network, extends the public                                                  transport customer base and encourages public transport patronage

·  Potential sites are located to intercept commuter trips from catchment areas that have high      Park--and-Ride potential, based on assessed demand

·  Park-and-Ride facilities are located to relieve congestion by intercepting commuter traffic, and to ensure that vehicles accessing the facilities do not worsen local traffic congestion

·  New Park-and-Ride facilities are focused on outer areas where public transport services are limited, or to serve areas that are beyond the walk-up catchment of the rapid and frequent service network

·  Park-and-Ride provision is avoided in metropolitan and town centres, except as part of a staged transition to other uses

·  Park-and-Ride locations take fare zone boundaries into account

 

We support a Parking Strategy confirming the criteria for consideration in identifying park and ride sites for Council investment.  We support a Parking Strategy noting the potential role of the private sector in providing park and ride facilities at locations, where allowed under the PAUP; and the potential role of informal park and ride on surrounding streets which may be managed.

 

As noted in the Discussion Document, additional analysis is necessary, particularly around land value, availability, commercial development opportunities, construction and operating costs, consenting, and details around the public transport network and feeder services. We advise extending the range of interventions beyond investment, so that it is clear where park and rides investment should be high, where it should be minimal, where park and rides should be retained and where park and rides should be exited, e.g.:

 

                                       

 

Park and Ride Intervention

Criteria

Med-High Growth

Small Growth

Retention

Exit

Existing Land Use (Primary)

· Rural

· Urban periphery

· Greenfield short term

· Non centres outside isthmus

· Non centres

· Centres

· Isthmus

PT/Active Networks

· Not on FTN

· Not on FTN

· On FTN

· Otherwise poor access options

· On FTN w/ direct competition to feeder networks

· Creates congestion issues

Value for Money

· Commercial opportunity not contradictory to strategic direction

· Commercial opportunity not contradictory to strategic direction

 

· Higher investment return from other aligned uses

 

Our most serious concern in this section is that the policy approach leads with meeting an arbitrary target of new park and ride spaces (“up to 10,000”) based on comparison with other cities.  We consider this approach to be unwise since a) there may be less expensive opportunities to achieve patronage gain, like feeder bus services and walking and cycling infrastructure, b) park and rides located where there are feeder bus or active mode choices may discourage those modes, c) locating park and rides in town centres identified for growth may have negative unintended land-use impacts, including undermining transit oriented development and d) caution may be required to avoid too great a subsidy for drivers and do not reflect the true costs of using park and ride (although we are generally supportive of temporary arrangements with minimal investment that, for instance, could be leased and then transitioned to other uses, such as transit oriented development).  We suggest removing reference to a 10,000-space target.

 

The RPTP, referenced in Section 3 (page 8), mentions criteria to guide investment, including: “New Park-and-Ride facilities are focused on outer areas where public transport services are limited, or to serve areas that are beyond the walk-up catchment of the rapid and frequent service network.”  Not mentioned in the Discussion Document is another criterion in the RPTP that is particularly important: “Park-and-Ride provision is avoided in metropolitan and town centres, except as part of a staged transition to other uses.”  We have concerns that the location of park and ride facilities at town centres (including Sylvia Park, Panmure, Avondale, Mt Albert and Papatoetoe) would undermine planned intensification at those centres and the bus feeder services.  A stronger case could be made for location of park and ride facilities in the periphery of the metropolitan area, in accordance with the criteria in the RPTP and which supports the Discussion Document’s suggested approach to “avoid locating park and ride facilities in metropolitan and town centres except as part of a stage transition to other uses.”

 

5.9b: Pricing of park and ride spaces

 

We support the approach to price park and ride facilities to manage demand at an appropriate time in the future. While there may be potential equity impacts of pricing, a demand-responsive price may help mitigate such impacts, which would reflect geographic differences in park and ride pricing.  Pricing park and rides would not only help recover some of the potential costs of facility construction, lease and/or operation, it would make best use of current facilities before investing in additional facilities and deliver better predictability to users. 


Auckland City Centre Advisory Board

23 July 2014

 

 

Draft Auckland Council Arts and Culture Strategic Action Plan (ACSAP)

 

File No.: CP2014/16156

 

Purpose

1.       The Manager Community and Cultural Strategy Unit will provide a presentation regarding the Draft Arts and Culture Strategic Action Plan for the Auckland City Centre Advisory Board’s information. Staff will also seek feedback from the Board on the document. The Public consultation is open from Monday 23 June to 4pm Thursday 24 July 2014.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Auckland City Centre Advisory Board:

a)      provide feedback to the Draft Arts and Culture Strategic Action Plan.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Draft Auckland Council Strategic Action Plan (ACSAP) Summary document

23

bView

Draft Full Plan Arts and Culture Strategic Action Plan (ACSAP) (Under Separate Cover)

 

     

Signatories

Authors

Tam White - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

John Dunshea – Manager Transformation Projects

 


Auckland City Centre Advisory Board

23 July 2014

 

 























Auckland City Centre Advisory Board

23 July 2014

 

 

Projects Progress report for Auckland City Centre Advisory Board for period 1 June to 30 June 2014

 

File No.: CP2014/16118

 

Purpose

1.       To update the Auckland City Centre Advisory Board of progress on City Transformation led projects underway in the city centre between 1 June 2014 to 30 June 2014.

Executive summary

2.       Lorne Street shared space upgrade

·    A new location for the Reo Seat, adjacent to Esquires café in Library has been agreed with Auckland Transport and Waitemata Local Board representatives

·    Seat to be installed by August 2014

·    Staff also scoping potential for more oversize pots to be put into Lorne Street and other opportunities for activation initiatives.

3.       O’Connell Street Shared Space

·    Project on programme and on track to be finished in August 2014

·    Weekly updates to business owners along the street are helping to address some of their concerns regarding the project

·    The installation of the proposed art work (O for O’Connell) has been delayed to end of 2014 due to building owners not providing their consent to hang the art work from their buildings

·    Staff have scoped other locations towards Shortland Street end of O’Connell and have now working with those building owners

·    Scoping an opening event at the end of the project in August to help attract pedestrians into the new space

4.       Freyberg Square and Ellen Melville Hall

·    City Centre Advisory Board confirmed allocation of additional targeted rate funds to Freyberg Square development

·    Staff have now begun appointment process for design team for both the Ellen Melville hall upgrade and improvements to Ellen Melville Hall

·    Developed design for both Hall and Square due to be completed by December 2014.

5.       Myers Park

·    Council staff scoping what elements of the Development Plan (2012) can be implemented within the remaining budget, including targeted rate allocation, and which elements require additional funding

·    Staff will report the outcome of this scoping exercise to the Waitemata Local Board and City Centre Advisory Board in July for support.


6.       Upper Khartoum Place

·    Project is tracking on programme

·    Ongoing construction activities being communicated to stakeholders to help minimize disruption to neighbouring businesses

·    Pedestrian access through from Lower Khartoum Place to Art Gallery being maintained at all times

·    Project to be completed and on programme in August 2014

·    Initial feedback has been positive, particularly in relationship to opening up the views to the Art Gallery.

7.       Federal Street shared space upgrade

·    Project ahead of programme with an estimated completion of mid July 2014.

·    Discussions ongoing regarding outdoor dining locations and consents ongoing with SkyCity and Bylaw team

·    Joint opening event with Auckland Council and SkyCity Open Day programmed for August/September 2014.

8.       Quay Street

·    Early initiatives progressing on programme

·    Ongoing design and implementation of streetscape project governed by City Centre Integration Group (CCIG)

·    Expression of Interest issued to the market for design services to develop a concept for Quay Street

9.       Bledisloe House Customer Services Centre and Bledisloe Lane Upgrade

·    The Bledisloe Lane works form part of the Customer Services Centre as the Façade for the Services Centre is part of the Bledisloe Lane works

·    Construction contract awarded to Fletcher Construction as a variation to Customer Services Centre

·    Due to need to manage public health and safety issues through construction, the works will mean changes to pedestrian access to the lane during construction. Designated pedestrian route to be provided at all times at the rear of Bledisloe House as an alternative

·    Work to begin on site first week of June 2014, with project to be completed in November 2014, when Customer Service Centre opens.

10.     Hobson and Nelson Street upgrade

·    Project objectives and feasibility currently being agreed between Auckland Transport  and Auckland Council

·    Initial concept design report is being developed by Auckland Council Built Environment Unit, which will inform final scope of the project, outline of which will be reported to the July meeting of the City Centre Advisory Board

·    Funding and timing to be agreed through the 2015-2025 LTP process to support the opening of the NZICC in late 2017.

11.     Aotea Precinct Plan (Framework)

·    Scope of Aotea Precinct Plan being developed, within input from CRL team and planning team

·    Presentation of the initial-thinking to the Auckland City Centre Advisory Board and Waitemata Local Board, to seek initial input in August  2014.


12.     Victoria Street Linear Park

·    Concept design report completed and presented to City Centre Advisory Board who were supportive of project in principle

·    Progress on the project is subject to agreeing how it is integrated with the CEWT Study, the City Rail Link (CRL) and Learning Quarter Framework and the 2015-2025 Long Term Plan

·    It is has been recommended that the project be deferred to 2019/20 as part LTP process to align with CRL timings. This will be confirmed by CCIG.

13.     Grafton Gully Cycleway, Upper Queen Street Bridge and Beach Road

·    Delivery of Beach Rd and Queen Street Bridge Cycleway projects integrated  with Grafton Gully cycleway (NZTA project) to ensure delivery is aligned with cycleway completion in Sept 2014

·    Developed design completed and construction currently underway

·    The City Centre Advisory Board confirmed allocation of $1.5m of city centre targeted rate for improvements to the public realm enhancements alongside Beach Road cycleway due to be completed by February 2015

·    Auckland Transport has advised that ‘vertical separators’ are now required to delineate the cycleway on both Beach Road and Upper Queen Street Bridge. Further design work is required to understand the visual and physical impacts of such interventions.

 

 

Recommendation/s

That the Auckland City Centre Advisory Board:

a)      receive the projects progress report for the period of 1 June to 30 June 2014.

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.    

Signatories

Authors

Team Leader - City Transformation - Central/Islands

Authorisers

John Dunshea Manager City Transformation Projects

 


Auckland City Centre Advisory Board

23 July 2014

 

 

Update on the Implementation of the Myers Park Development Plan

 

File No.: CP2014/16123

 

Purpose

1.       To update the City Centre Advisory Board on the implementation of the Myers Park Development plan and seek endorsement of the proposed approach for the ongoing implementation of the plan.

Executive summary

2.       At the June 2014 meeting, the Auckland City Centre Advisory Board considered projects in Auckland City Centre that could be funded from currently unallocated City Centre Targeted Rate.

3.       The City Centre Advisory Board indicated support in principle to allocate targeted rate to ongoing improvements of Myers Park, particularly around the northern entrances and underpass. It was requested that staff provide more detail of the ongoing strategy and costs associated with the implementation of the Development Plan for Myers Park, prior to the City Centre Advisory Board supporting allocation of additional targeted rate funds.

4.       The improvements to the park are guided by the Myers Park Development Plan (Attachment A) which was adopted by Waitemata Local Board in 2012. The focus of the improvements is to attract more people and families to use the park by providing improved facilities, improving park entrances and addressing issues of safety. There are 22 elements identified for implementation in the development plan.

Funding the implementation Myers Park Development Plan

5.       There is $3.5m allocated to the implementation of the development plan in financial years 2013/14 and 2014/15.

6.       A total of $1.6m of general rate is allocated in the 2012-2022 Long-Term Plan (LTP). This includes $600,000 from Waitemata Local Board budget to go towards the development of a new playground in the park. The remaining budget is allocated to improving lighting, providing infrastructure to enable events, providing improved signage throughout the park and new planting. 

7.       In addition, in 2013 the City Centre Advisory Board resolved to allocate a total of $1.9m of City Centre Targeted Rate (CCTR) to further assist with the implementation of the Development Plan. The CCTR was allocated to the following elements:

Development Plan element

Description

City Centre Targeted Rate allocation

New playground 

Additional funding to create a unique destination playground, designed to draw families into the park. It features bespoke play features which reference the special cultural and physical context of the park (see Attachment B)

$505,000

Park furniture

Providing new furniture at strategic locations, including seats, water fountains, litter bins and new toilet facility.

$100,000

Poynton Terrace

Improving the area between St Kevin’s Arcade and the park entrance to strengthen the pedestrian link and calm traffic (see Attachment C). 

$280,000

Water feature

A new water play feature (Splash pad) next to the former changing sheds

$190,000

Mayoral Drive/Queen Street Entrance upgrade

Improvements to address safety, anti-social behaviour and accessibility issues, including the provision of a seating plaza area on Mayoral Drive.

$425,000

CCTV cameras and security lighting

The introduction of CCTV into the park was not part of the original scope of the development plan. However, following some significant safety issues in the park in late 2013, the City Centre Advisory Board allocated CCTR to the provision of CCTV in July 2013.

 

$400,000

 

Total City Centre Targeted Rate allocation

$1,900,000

 

Work currently being constructed

8.       The first phase of the implementation of the development of the park is currently underway. Construction began on 14 July 2014 and is due to be completed by January 2015 in time for the Myers Park Centennial in February 2015.

9.       The elements which are being delivered in this phase of work include:

·        new playground

·        new park lighting and provision of event infrastructure

·        improved signage at the park entrances and throughout the park

·        new planting

·        CCTV and security lighting

·        traffic calming features between St Kevin’s Arcade, across Poynton Terrace into Myers Park

·        installation of park furniture and interpretative features.

Improvements to Mayoral Drive Entrance and provision of a water feature

10.     It should be noted that $615,000 of the $1.5m CCTR was allocated to the provision of a water feature and improvements to Mayoral Drive entrance. The development plan suggests that the water feature is a ‘splash pad’ for children located next to the changing sheds in a corner of the park. Improvements to Mayoral Drive entrance included replacing narrow timber steps and creating a seated plaza on Mayoral Drive.

11.     Through the design process for these features, which included a Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) assessment, staff have recognised that further work is required to agree the appropriateness of a splash pad in the park and that the Mayoral Drive entrance, due to its narrow and sheltered configuration, would require significant investment to address the existing safety and anti-social behaviour issues.

12.     Council staff have held a number of workshops the Waitemata Local Board and Parks Portfolio holders to work through the above issues.

 


13.     Following these discussions, it is recommended that the splash pad is delivered once the former changing sheds have been renovated and given a new purpose as identified in the development plan.  It is also recommended that improvements to the Mayoral Drive entrance be considered as part of other improvements to the northern entrance of the park including proposals to improve the underpass and links from Myers Park to Aotea Square. Such improvements may result in this entrance no longer being needed and therefore able to be closed.

14.     Staff therefore propose that, as an alternative to delivering the splash pad and Mayoral Park entrance upgrade as part of the current construction phase, the $615,000 of CCTR is reallocated to the following elements:

 

Development Plan element

Description

City Centre Targeted Rate allocation

Queen Street Entrance and Kindergarten parking and surrounds

This element of the development plan is currently unfunded. It is recommended that it is delivered as part of the Mayoral Park entrance for the same cost and will help to improve access to the park and new playground. The removal of parking around the Kindergarten will also be explored as part of this work. (Attachment D)

$425,000

Interpretation features

The additional funding will enable the provision of interpretative elements within the park, including Maori, Mana Whenua and European histories and stories.

$90,000

Poynton Terrace entrance upgrade

The additional funding will help to achieve the objective of the development plan which is to make Poynton Terrace more pedestrian friendly and to address issues of pedestrian safety as they use Poynton Terrace to access Myers Park.

$100,000

City Centre Targeted Rate

$615,000

 

15.     Subject to City Centre Advisory Board approval to reallocate these funds, it is proposed that the existing construction contract be varied to include the above items. This will ensure that they are able to be delivered by January 2015.

Ongoing implementation of the Myers Park Development Plan

16.     There is currently no further funding allocated to the ongoing implementation of the Myers Park Development Plan either from general rate or targeted rate. However, at the July 2014 meeting of the City Centre Advisory Board, the Board supported in principle allocation of $2.3m of targeted rate to ongoing improvements of Myers Park.

17.     It was requested that staff provide more detail of the strategy and costs associated with the ongoing implementation of the Development Plan for Myers Park, prior to the City Centre Advisory Board supporting allocation of additional targeted rate funds.


 

18.     Following discussions with the Waitemata Local Board, staff recommends that the next stages of the implementation of the Myers Park Development Plan focus on continued improvements to the Northern entrances of Myers Park, further improvements to Poynton Terrace and the restoration of the heritage buildings within the park to accommodate new uses and activities.

Improvements to Northern Entrances

19.     The improvements to the northern entrances would include the implementation of the following elements of the development plan at an estimated cost of $2.3m:

·        $200,000 allocated to the improvements to Greys Ave/Mayoral Drive entrance

·        $400,000 allocated to improvements to the stormwater detention dam and bio filtration area adjacent the underpass to create a ‘natural’ and wildlife feature within the park.

·        $1.2m allocated to the upgrade of the Mayoral Drive Underpass to make it a safer and more inviting entrance to the park, including new lighting, art features, level changes and materials

·        $500,000 allocated to Queen Street and Mayoral Drive entrance to address safety, anti-social behaviour and accessibility issues, including the provision of a seating plaza area on Mayoral Drive.

20.     A critical part of the implementation of improvements to the northern entrances of Myers Park is addressing the issues with the car park at 34-38 Greys Avenue which is a critical pedestrian link between the park and Aotea Quarter.

21.     It is proposed that the improvements to Myers Park act as a catalyst to enable Auckland Council to work with Auckland Transport and Auckland Council Property Limited to agree a strategy for the future use and development of the car park, which will align with plans for the Myers Park northern entrances. The development of the strategy will be part of the wider Aotea Development Framework currently being developed by the City Centre Integration (CCI) team.

Improvements to Southern Entrances

22.     In addition to the improvements to the northern entrances the City Centre Advisory Board indicated support in principle to the allocation of $1m of City Centre Targeted Rate to provide street calming on Karangahape Road next to St Kevins Arcade. 

23.     Given that further work is required to scope how such a project will align with the implementation of the Karangahape Road Plan (2014) and wider transport plans for the area, it is proposed that $1m of City Centre Targeted Rate is allocated to improving the quality of pedestrian link from Pitt Street via Poynton Terrace.

24.     The improvements would make Poynton Terrace more pedestrian friendly, to become a safe and well used pedestrian route from the proposed City Rail Link Karangahape Road Rail Station in Beresford Square to the park.

Restoring and activating the heritage buildings within the park

25.     Activation and restoration of currently dilapidated heritage buildings in the park, including the former changing sheds and the Caretakers Cottage, is a key element of the development plan.

26.     The purpose of the improvements is to improve the perception of safety through surveillance, reducing anti-social behavior and improving public use and enjoyment. Feedback from the public the public consultation on the development plan proposed use of refurbished heritage buildings as community space, art space, heritage display, small museum or for coffee.

27.     There are a number of constraints to achieving these outcomes and further work is required to identify the viability of achieving these new uses including commercial activity and understanding the potential costs to Auckland Council.

Next steps

28.     It is proposed that council staff proceed with developing a concept design and detailed costs for the northern and southern entrances of Myers Park to inform the allocation of City Centre Targeted Rate to the Myers Park project. This exercise would also identify whether the Queen Street/Mayoral Drive entrance improvements would still be required.

29.     In tandem with the development of a concept design for the northern entrances, council staff will develop a strategy to guide the future use of buildings within the park and the future use of Grey’s Avenue car park area.

30.     Council staff will seek input from the Waitemata Local Board and the City Centre Advisory Board on the development of the concept design and costs for the northern and southern entrances and the strategies for the Grey Avenue car park and buildings on the park at a workshop in September 2014.

31.     Council staff will seek confirmation from the City Centre Advisory Board regarding the amount of City Centre Targeted Rate to be allocated to the ongoing implementation of the Myers park Development Plan in October 2014.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Auckland City Centre Advisory Board:

a)      note that there is currently $1.9m of City Centre Targeted Rate allocated to the implementation of the Myers Park Development Plan

b)      endorse that the $615,000 of City Centre Targeted Rate currently allocated to the water feature and improvements to Mayoral Drive entrance is reallocated to fund the Queen Street entrance improvements, provision of interpretation features in the park and improvements to Poynton Terrace

c)      support in principle the allocation of $3.3m of City Centre Targeted Rate funds to the next stages of the implementation of the Myers Park Development plan to be delivered by June 2016, focusing on the northern and southern entrances, including improvements to:

·        Greys Ave and Mayoral Drive stairs

·        Queen Street and Mayoral Drive entrance

·        stormwater detention dam and bio filtration area adjacent the underpass

·        Mayoral Drive underpass

·        the pedestrian link from Pitt Street via Poynton Terrace to Myers Park.

d)      endorse that council staff proceed with developing a concept design and detailed costs for the improvements to the northern entrances of Myers Park and Poynton Terrace to inform the allocation of City Centre Targeted Rate

e)      endorse that council staff develop a strategy for the future use of Grey’s Avenue car park area as part of the Aotea Framework to inform the development of the concept design for the northern entrance, including the design of the  Queen Street and Mayoral Drive entrance

f)       endorse that council staff proceed with the development of a strategy to guide the future use of buildings within the park, to include the former changing sheds and water feature

 

g)      request that council staff seek input from the Waitemata Local Board and the City Centre Advisory Board on the development of the concept design and costs for the northern entrances, Poynton Terrace and the strategy for the Grey Avenue car park and the strategy for the buildings in the park at workshops in September 2014.

h)      request that council staff seek confirmation from the City Centre Advisory Board regarding allocation of City Centre Targeted Rate to the ongoing implementation of the Myers park Development Plan in October 2014.

 

 

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Myers Park development plan 31

55

bView

Playground

59

cView

Poynton Terrace

61

dView

Queen Street Entrance and Kindergarten parking and surrounds

63

     

 

Signatories

Authors

Team Leader - City Transformation - Central/Islands

Authorisers

John Dunshea Manager City Transformation Projects

 

 

 


Auckland City Centre Advisory Board

23 July 2014

 

 


Auckland City Centre Advisory Board

23 July 2014

 

 


Auckland City Centre Advisory Board

23 July 2014

 

 



Auckland City Centre Advisory Board

23 July 2014

 

 


Auckland City Centre Advisory Board

23 July 2014

 

 


Auckland City Centre Advisory Board

23 July 2014

 

 


Auckland City Centre Advisory Board

23 July 2014

 

 

City Centre Integration update

 

File No.: CP2014/16147

 

Purpose

1.       The General Manager City Centre Integration will provide an update at the meeting.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Auckland City Centre Advisory Board:

a)      receive the City Centre Integration update.

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.    

Signatories

Authors

Tam White - Democracy Advisor

      

 


Auckland City Centre Advisory Board

23 July 2014

 

 

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

 

That the Auckland City Centre Advisory Board:

a)      exclude the public from the following part(s) of the proceedings of this meeting.

The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter, and the specific grounds under section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution follows.

This resolution is made in reliance on section 48(1)(a) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 and the particular interest or interests protected by section 6 or section 7 of that Act which would be prejudiced by the holding of the whole or relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting in public, as follows:

 

C1       Draft Hobson Ridge Street Design Framework

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Particular interest(s) protected (where applicable)

Ground(s) under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

s7(2)(h) - The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities.

In particular, the report contains commercial information.

s7(2)(i) - The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations).

 

s48(1)(a)

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.