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

 

Date:                      

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

 

Thursday, 31 July 2014

6.00pm

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

 

Puketāpapa Local Board

 

OPEN AGENDA

 

 

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Chairperson

Julie Fairey

 

Deputy Chairperson

Harry Doig

 

Members

David Holm

 

 

Ella Kumar

 

 

Nigel Turnbull

 

 

Michael Wood

 

 

(Quorum 3 members)

 

 

 

Brenda  Railey

Democracy Advisor

 

23 July 2014

 

Contact Telephone: 021 820 781

Email: brenda.railey@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

 

 


 

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

31 July 2014

 

 

ITEM   TABLE OF CONTENTS                                                                                        PAGE

1          Welcome                                                                                                                         5

2          Apologies                                                                                                                        5

3          Declaration of Interest                                                                                                   5

4          Confirmation of Minutes                                                                                               5

5          Leave of Absence                                                                                                          5

6          Acknowledgements                                                                                                       5

7          Petitions                                                                                                                          5

8          Deputations                                                                                                                    5

9          Public Forum                                                                                                                  5

9.1     Campbell Greer, Local Resident.                                                                       5

10        Extraordinary Business                                                                                                6

11        Notices of Motion                                                                                                          6

12        Albert-Eden-Roskill Governing Body Members Update                                           7

13        Local Alcohol Policy Project - Draft Policy for Local Board Feedback                  9

14        Keith Hay Park car park redevelopment budget requirements                            149

15        Auckland Transport Report, July 2014                                                                   153

16        Draft Allocation of Decision Making Review                                                          163

17        Local board role in alcohol licence applications                                                   205

18        Resolutions Pending Action Schedule, July 2014                                                 213

19        Record of Puketāpapa Local Board Workshop Proceedings                              219

20        Board Member Reports July 2014                                                                           227

21        Chairperson's Report July 2014                                                                              251  

22        Consideration of Extraordinary Items 

 

 


1          Welcome

 

2          Apologies

 

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

 

3          Declaration of Interest

 

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

 

4          Confirmation of Minutes

 

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a)         confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Thursday, 26 June 2014, 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

 

Standing Order 3.20 provides for deputations.  Those applying for deputations are required to give seven working days’ notice of subject matter and applications are approved by the Chairperson of the Board.  This means that details relating to deputations can be included in the published agenda.  Total speaking time per deputation is ten minutes or as resolved by the meeting.

 

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

 

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

 

9          Public Forum

 

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

 

9.1       Pulbic Forum Campbell Greer, Local Resident.

Purpose

1.       To discuss flooding issues with the Board.

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a)      Thank Campbell Greer for his 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.

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

31 July 2014

 

 

Albert-Eden-Roskill Governing Body Members Update

 

File No.: CP2014/15073

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       The purpose of this report is for the Albert-Eden-Roskill Governing Body Members to provide a verbal update to the Board.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Puketapapa Local Board:

a)         Thank Governing Body Members for their update.

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Signatories

Authors

Brenda  Railey - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

31 July 2014

 

 

Local Alcohol Policy Project - Draft Policy for Local Board Feedback

 

File No.: CP2014/13525

 

  

Purpose

1.       To request formal feedback from local boards on the draft Auckland Council Local Alcohol Policy.

Executive summary

2.       The purpose of this report is to provide local boards with a copy of the draft Auckland Council Local Alcohol Policy (LAP) and to request formal feedback by resolution. 

3.       On 13 May 2014, the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee adopted the LAP Project: Statement of Proposal (Attachment A), which includes the draft Auckland Council LAP, for public consultation (resolution number REG/2014/60(a).  Following this decision, the council commenced public consultation (using the special consultative procedure), on 16 June 2014. 

4.       In addition to the public consultation process, council staff are seeking feedback from local boards on the draft LAP.  Throughout June 2014, staff have facilitated workshops with local boards to discuss the content of the draft LAP.  This report is a follow up to those workshops and provides local boards with an opportunity to pass formal feedback on the proposals.  A list of key topics for local boards to consider passing resolutions on is included as Appendix D.

5.       The draft LAP includes proposals relating to the following:

·    location of licensed premises by reference to broad areas

·    location of licensed premises by reference to proximity to premises or facilities of a particular kind or kinds

·    whether further licences (or licences of a particular kind or kinds) should be issued for premises in the district concerned or any stated part of the district

·    maximum trading hours

·    the issue of licences, subject to discretionary conditions.

6.       The details of these proposals are outlined in the body of this report.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a)      provide formal feedback (by passing resolutions) on the draft Auckland Council Local Alcohol Policy, noting that the resolutions will be included in the officers’ report to the Local Alcohol Policy Project Hearings Panel.

Comments

Legislative framework

Background: law reform

7.       In December 2012, Parliament enacted the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012 (the Act).  The Act introduced a new national framework for regulating the sale and supply of alcohol.

8.       One of the key policy drivers behind the new legislation was an increased focus on local decision-making.  In line with this, the Act removed the ability for council staff to consider alcohol licence applications under delegation and instead established new, strengthened local decision-making bodies (district licensing committees; “DLCs”).  The Act also introduced the ability for local authorities to tailor some of the new national provisions (such as maximum trading hours) to their own local circumstances and to create additional regulations (such as the regulation of licence density) through the development of local alcohol policies (“LAPs”).

9.       Whilst LAPs are not mandatory, the Act specifically empowers local authorities to develop them.  The Act also explicitly requires licensing decision-makers, including DLCs and the new appellate body, the Alcohol Regulatory and Licensing Authority (“ARLA”), to have regard to the content of LAPs when making decisions under the Act.  This statutory recognition represents a significant change from the previous system and allows local authorities, in consultation with their communities and stakeholders, to have greater influence over their local licensing environments.

Scope of LAPs

10.     The Act restricts the scope of LAPs to the following licensing matters (section 77 of the Act):

·    location of licensed premises by reference to broad areas

·    location of licensed premises by reference to proximity to premises or facilities of a particular kind or kinds

·    whether further licences (or licences of a particular kind or kinds) should be issued for premises in the district concerned or any stated part of the district

·    maximum trading hours

·    the issue of licences, subject to discretionary conditions

·    one-way door restrictions.

11.     Rules relating to each of these matters can be applied to: on-licences (e.g. bars, restaurants, taverns); off-licences (e.g. bottle stores or supermarkets) and club licences (e.g. sports clubs, RSAs) through the LAP.  For special licences, a LAP can only include rules on hours, discretionary conditions and one-way door restrictions. 

Effect of LAPs

12.     The Act specifies when a LAP must be considered by licensing decision-makers (i.e. the DLC and ARLA).  It also stipulates the effect that LAPs can have on the outcomes of different types of applications.  The provisions of the Act relevant to these matters are summarised in the table below.

Table 1. Application of a LAP in licensing decisions

 

Summary

When LAP to be considered

·      The Act requires the DLC and ARLA to “have regard to” the LAP when deciding whether to issue or renew a licence. 

Effect of LAP on applications for new licences

·      The Act provides that where issuing a new licence would be inconsistent with the LAP, the DLC and ARLA may refuse to issue the licence (section 108)

·      Alternatively, the DLC or ARLA may issue the licence subject to particular conditions to address the inconsistencies with the LAP (section 109)

Effect of LAP on existing licences

·      For applications to renew a licence, the DLC and ARLA cannot refuse to issue the licence on the grounds that it is inconsistent with the LAP.  They can however, impose conditions on the licence to reduce the inconsistency (section 133).

o   The main implication of this is that location and density policies contained within a LAP will not apply to existing licences, meaning it will take time to give effect to the intention of location and density policies. 

·      Provisions of a LAP relating to maximum hours and one-way door policies will apply to all licensees at the time that those provisions come into force (section 45).

o   This cannot be less than three months after public notice of adoption of the LAP, providing all appeals have been resolved.

o   The effect of this is that licensees with longer hours will have to revert to the maximum trading hours stated in the LAP, while licensees with shorter hours will not be affected.

 

 

Statutory process for developing LAPs

13.     The Act prescribes the process for developing a LAP.  In particular, it:

·    outlines the matters that local authorities must have regard to when developing a LAP (section 78(2))

·    requires local authorities to consult with the Police, inspectors and Medical Officers of Health before producing a draft LAP (section 78(4))

·    requires local authorities to develop a draft LAP (section 78(1)), to give public notice of the draft LAP and to use the special consultative procedure to consult with the public (section 79(1)).  (The draft policy then becomes the provisional policy.)

·    requires local authorities to publicly notify the provisional policy and to allow submitters to appeal against the provisional policy (section 80).

14.     The Act also sets out an appeal process and states that:

·    only those who have made a submission on the draft LAP may appeal

·    the only ground on which an appeal can be lodged is that the provisional LAP (or a part thereof) is unreasonable in light of the object of the Act.

15.     The object of the Act (section 4) is that:

a)   the sale, supply, and consumption of alcohol should be undertaken safely and responsibly; and

b)   the harm caused by the excessive or inappropriate consumption of alcohol should be minimised.

16.     The Statement of Proposal (Attachment A), as well as the sections below, provide information on the process Auckland Council has followed in developing its draft LAP, in line with the statutory requirements.

Auckland Council’s Local Alcohol Policy Project

Council’s decision to develop a LAP

17.     In 2012, in anticipation of the new Act, Auckland Council completed the LAP Research Project, which focused on gathering and analysing information to support the development of a LAP. In May 2012, staff presented the Regional Development and Operations Committee (RDOC) with a copy of a research report, which was structured around the information requirements as set out in the then Alcohol Reform Bill (and that were later carried through into the final legislation). 

18.     After considering the research report, the RDOC approved the development of an Auckland Council LAP, subject to the passing of the Bill (resolution number RDO/2012/78(d)).  This decision was later confirmed by the Governing Body in January 2013, after the new Act received Royal assent on 18 December 2012.

19.     Project plan: key steps for developing council’s LAP

20.     Auckland Council has followed an extensive process in preparing its draft LAP.  The key steps are outlined in the table below.  (Step 8 onwards will occur after the consultation process).

Table 2. Project plan overview

Step

Description

Timeframe

1.   Project organisation / governance

·      Established stakeholder reference groups and Joint Political Working Party

Complete

2.   Issues analysis

·      Reviewed, updated and analysed information gathered as part of Local Alcohol Policy Research Project in accordance with statutory requirements

Complete

3.   Options analysis

 

·      Identified assessed options available, within the parameters of the Act, to the council for addressing the issues identified at step 2.

·      Develop an issues and options paper with input from political working party and stakeholder reference group

Complete

4.   Initial engagement period

·      Initial engagement with internal, external and political stakeholders on issues and options paper

Complete

5.   Engagement on staff position

·      Developed a position paper with staff recommendations based on issues and options analysis, and feedback received through initial engagement period

·      Reported position back to internal, external and political stakeholders involved in the initial engagement period for further feedback

Complete

6.   Develop and gain approval of draft policy

·      Analysed outcomes of steps 2 to 5, completed detailed impact assessment, completed final engagement with elected members and developed draft policy

·      Present draft policy to the Committee for approval

·      Publicly notify draft policy

Complete

7.   Special consultative procedure

·      Follow special consultative procedure as set out in the Local Government Act 2002, which includes receiving written submissions, holding hearings and deliberating in public (i.e. full public consultation)

·      Parallel process for local boards and council advisory panels to provide feedback on the draft LAP

Current – September 2014

8.   Provisional policy

·      Work with Hearings Panel to report back to Governing Body with Provisional LAP

·      If the Governing Body endorses the provisional policy, give public notice of:

the provisional policy

rights of appeal against it

the ground on which an appeal may be made.

October / November 2014

9.   Appeals

·      Appeals will be dealt with in accordance with the Act

TBC

10.  Adopt final policy

·      Adopt final policy in accordance with the Act

·      Timing will depend on whether appeals have been lodged and if so, when they are resolved.  

TBC

11.  Implementation

·      Work with officers from Licensing and Compliance and other relevant areas of council on the implementation of the policy.  Officers will also develop a monitoring and evaluation framework. 

TBC

Auckland Council’s draft Local Alcohol Policy

Council’s decision to adopt the draft Auckland Council LAP for public consultation

21.     On 13 May 2014, the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee adopted the Local Alcohol Policy Project: Statement of Proposal (Attachment A), which includes the draft Auckland Council LAP, for public consultation (resolution number REG/2014/60(a); a full copy of the resolutions is provided in Attachment B of this report).

22.     Following this decision, the council commenced the public consultation process (using the special consultative procedure), on 16 June 2014.  The key consultation dates are summarised in the table below:

Table 3. Key consultation dates

Date

Milestone

16 June 2014

Written submission period opened

16 July 2014

Written submission period closes

July/August 2014

·      Officers will review and analyse all submissions and report to Hearings Panel.

·      This report will include all resolutions passed by the local boards and council advisory panels with feedback on the draft policy.

Late August/ September 2014

·      Public hearings will be held

·      Local Boards will be invited to attend a meeting with the Hearings Panel.

October 2014

Hearings Panel will report back to Governing Body with a provisional LAP

Background to draft LAP: stakeholder feedback

23.    The following paragraphs provide an overview of the feedback received on the key issues associated with the project.  A detailed summary of the feedback received from different feedback groups on the specific policy levers and proposals outlined in the staff position paper is provided in Attachment C. 

24.    There was a reasonable level of agreement across the different feedback groups on the following matters:

·       Variation by licence – That the draft LAP needs to set different rules for different kinds of licences (i.e. on-licences, off-licences, club licences and special licences).

·       Local variationThat given the size and diversity of the Auckland region, the draft LAP should provide a degree of local variation.  Most agreed that at least the Central City should be treated differently, particularly in relation to on-licence hours.

·       Club licences Staff received very little feedback on how the LAP should regulate club licences, at both the issues and options stage and in response to the position paper.  Of those that did comment, most agreed that issues with club licences are typically related to the operation and management of the premises, rather than location or density.  Feedback also focused on wider issues beyond the scope of the LAP, such as the interrelationship between alcohol and sport. 

·       Discretionary conditions There was strong support for the LAP to specify a range of discretionary conditions, even from industry groups, provided the conditions are clear (both in terms of compliance and the rationale), practical and reasonable.

25.    Feedback varied across the different groups on most other matters, particularly the following: 

Off-licence density

·       Most agreed that the proliferation of off-licence premises across Auckland is one of the most pressing issues to be addressed through the LAP.  Statutory stakeholders, public health sector stakeholders, community groups, residents and local boards (especially the southern boards) were all particularly concerned with this issue and wanted to see strict density controls through the LAP.  The on-licence industry also expressed concern about clusters of off-licences within close proximity to on-licences and the issues this can create with pre- and side-loading. 

·       The off-licence industry however, opposed the use of density controls.  Supermarkets in particular, argued that whilst density and clustering of premises may be an issue for other types of off-licences, it is not a concern for supermarkets. 

·       Other off-licensees (such as bottle stores), as well as umbrella organisations representing different retailers (e.g. business associations) acknowledged that there are issues with off-licence density in some parts of Auckland, but suggested that blanket rules would not be appropriate.  These groups argued that the issues associated with off-licence clusters would be better managed through policy approaches designed to improve compliance combined with greater monitoring and enforcement of the Act.  The main concern here was that blanket (‘umbrella’) rules penalise ‘good’ operators rather than targeting those with poor compliance.

On-licence density

·       By contrast, most feedback groups seemed supportive of on-licence clustering, although comments tended to focus on positive notions of vibrancy and economic development associated with clusters of restaurants and cafes.

·       Statutory stakeholders expressed concerns that the clustering of other types of on-licences (particularly late night bars) can have negative amenity effects and cumulative impacts on an area, ultimately leading to increased alcohol-related harm.  The Police and Medical Officer of Health advocated for strong regulation of on-licence density.

·       Licence inspectors acknowledged there can be issues with on-licence clusters but also suggested concentrating on-licences in certain areas can allow for easier enforcement. 

 

 

Off-licence opening times

·       Most stakeholders, community groups and residents were supportive of the LAP reducing off-licences hours across the region.  Statutory stakeholders and public health sector stakeholders were particularly supportive, and some wanted to see trading hours even further restricted than those recommended by staff.

·       The off-licence industry (with the exception of supermarkets) were also generally supportive of reduced trading hours for off-licences, provided that all types of premises were treated the same (i.e. that restrictions should be applied to bottle stores and supermarkets).

·       Representatives for the supermarkets were strongly opposed to any restrictions on off-licence hours provided under the Act.  They were especially opposed to the proposed opening time of 9am.  The supermarkets argued that alcohol sales between 7am and 9am are minor and that this would inconvenience their shoppers.

·       Other stakeholders, members of the community and elected members had mixed views on whether supermarkets should be treated separately. 

On-licence closing times

·       The topic of on-licence closing times has been the most contentious issue throughout the policy development process.  Almost all groups (except the hospitality industry) were supportive of the shift away from 24 hour licensing that the Act has provided.  However, in terms of ‘which parts of Auckland should close when’, the feedback was very mixed.

·       The Police argued strongly for 3am closing in the Central City with 1am closing everywhere else.  The Medical Officer of Health also shared these views, although on occasion suggested even more restrictive hours. 

·       Public health sector stakeholders were mixed.  Some supported the Police recommendations, others suggested very strict closing times  and others still, supported the staff position paper recommendations.

·       The on-licence industry’s feedback was that ideally the LAP would override the 4am default position set in the Act, but if not, then no further restrictions to the default hours are required.  The on-licence industry was also opposed to the idea of restrictions based solely on location as this fails to take account for the quality of individual operators (in terms of host responsibility etc).

·       Community views were very mixed.  Staff met with some community groups that wanted to see certain types of premises open late, whereas other groups were comfortable with 3am or 4am closing. 

One-way door policy

·       Throughout the initial engagement period, there was some support for the use of the one-way door policy.  However, other stakeholders raised concerns about the practicality of this tool and the potential for other unintended consequences such as:

Risks to individual safety (e.g. if an individual is separated from their group of friends)

Increased drinking in public places

Higher risk of conflicts for security staff (e.g. large queues just before one-way door commences, issues with outside smoking etc.)

 

Background to draft LAP: local board feedback

26.     Throughout the development of the draft LAP, staff regularly engaged with, and considered the views and preferences of local boards.  In particular, staff:

·    reported to the Alcohol Programme Political Working Party, which included local board membership

·    provided local boards with individualised research summaries on alcohol-related issues within their local board areas

·    held workshops with local boards on the issues and options paper

·    reported to local boards to gather feedback on the position paper.

27.     Table 4 below summarises the feedback received from local boards on the position paper, which was released prior to the development of the draft LAP.  (Note: This summary represents an overview of the feedback received.  Some individual boards may not have agreed with the majority views). 

28.     Feedback received specifically from this local board is included, along with a response from officers, in the “Local board views and implications” section of this report (below). 

Table 4. Summary of local board feedback

Position paper proposal

Summary of Feedback

Policy lever 1 – Location: Broad Areas

Establish six broad policy areas; five based on zoning in the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan and a sixth “high stress/high risk” overlay.

Mixed views.

·      Some supported in principle

·      Others preferred a regional approach

·      Some suggested that some areas needed to be shifted between areas 2 and 3 (e.g. Devonport/Takapuna re-categorised as Area 3)

·      Some wanted local boards to be able to make rules in their area.

Use of a high stress overlay to identify problem areas or vulnerable communities

Mostly very supportive.

Policy lever 2 – Location: Proximity

Indirectly regulate the location of off-licences in relation to schools:

·      through the cumulative impact process

·      by delaying off-licence opening times until 9am

·      by regulating advertising through the signage bylaw

Mixed views.

·      Most supported the cumulative impact assessment including this as a consideration.

·      Southern boards supportive of buffer zone, others happy to rely on discretionary conditions

·      Concern around advertising

Policy lever 3 – Density

Allow clustering of on-licences in urbanised/ business focused areas (Broad Areas A and B)

Unclear.

·      General agreement that there is a case to treat the CBD differently, less certain on metropolitan centres

·      Some local boards considered that clusters of on-licences (e.g. restaurants) could be beneficial from an economic perspective and in terms of creating vibrancy etc.

Temporary freeze on off-licences in the CBD and high stress areas

 

Mostly supportive.

·      Mostly concerned with density of off-licences

·      Support for combination of cumulative impact approach and area based temporary freezes

·      A minority did not like this approach

The use of cumulative impact assessments to limit the establishment of new licences in other areas

Mostly supportive.

·      Many supported in principle but requested more information

·      Some suggested this should be required across the whole region.

·      Others wanted stronger density controls such as a sinking lid or cap

Policy lever 4 – Maximum trading hours

Maximum hours of 9am to 10pm for off-licences across the region

 

Supportive

·      Some boards, especially Southern boards, would prefer even greater restrictions

·      The rest were generally supportive of the proposed regional approach

Maximum hours of 8am to 1am for club licences across the region

Negligible feedback on club hours.

Maximum on-licence hours varied across the region:

·      CBD: 8am to4am

·      Metro centres:8am to 3am

·      Rest of Auckland (including high-stress areas):8am to 1am

Mixed views.

·      Some were happy with the hours proposed

·      Some Southern boards wanted earlier closing but would be happy if this was picked up through the high stress overlay

·      There was reasonable support for having localised entertainment hubs (i.e. metropolitan centres) to reduce migration to CBD

Trial extensions for operators in Broad Area A and Broad Area B

Mixed.

·      Some supported extended hours based on good behaviour.

Policy lever 5 – One-way door

No one-way door

Very mixed.

Policy lever 6 – Discretionary conditions

A range of discretionary conditions based on licence type

 

Supportive.

·      General support for a range of conditions, especially those that support good host responsibility

Summary of draft LAP content

29.     This section of the report summarises the proposals contained within the draft LAP.  The proposals:

·        are evidence-based

·        align with the object of the Act

·        as far as possible, respond to feedback and concerns from elected members and stakeholders.

Purpose (section 1 of draft LAP)

30.     The purpose of the draft LAP is to provide guidance to the DLC and ARLA on alcohol licensing matters in a manner that:

·    is appropriate to the Auckland Council region

·    reflects the views and preferences of Auckland’s communities and stakeholders

·    is consistent with the object of the Act.

31.     Overall, the draft LAP aims to reduce Auckland’s issues with alcohol-related harm by:

·    prioritising areas where the LAP can have the greatest impact on harm reduction

·    controlling where new licences are allowed

·    controlling how many new licences are allowed

·    reducing the hours that licensed premises can sell alcohol

·    identifying additional conditions that the DLC can apply to licences to help improve the consistency of standards across Auckland’s premises.

32.     This purpose aligns with the object of the Act, the requirement for the LAP to be reasonable in light of this object and the policy intent of the Act to provide greater local input into licensing decisions.

Location and density of licences

33.     Auckland’s differing communities and areas means a blanket approach to policy provisions is not suitable. The draft LAP categorises the Auckland region into three broad areas each of which has different rules (reference to draft policy: Part B: Section 2 and appendices).

 

Table 5. Policy areas

Area

Overview

Broad Area A (City Centre, Ponsonby, Newton)

The three centres included in this broad area function as the region’s main entertainment hub.  However, these areas also experience high levels of alcohol-related harm, including crime and anti-social behaviour. 

Broad Area B (rest of the region)

The intended outcomes across the region are relatively consistent and therefore can be achieved through consistent policy tools.

A priority overlay which provides additional rules.

The priority overlay identifies areas that have high numbers of existing licences and communities that experience higher levels of alcohol-related harm. These are termed priority areas. The overlay will help protect these areas from further harm by imposing specific policies and rules.

34.    The draft LAP also proposes the following policy tools to manage location and density issues.

35.    Temporary freeze: The distribution of off-licences across Auckland is uneven and some areas have much higher licence density than others (e.g. the City Centre and many centres captured by the Priority Areas Overlay).  Evidence shows that these areas also tend to experience disproportionate levels of alcohol-related harm.  The draft LAP therefore, proposes that the DLC and ARLA should refuse to issue new off-licences in these specific areas for a period of 24 months from when the policy is adopted. 

36.    International case studies show that the temporary freeze is a useful policy tool, not only to allow time for saturated areas to recover but it can also lead to improved compliance.  These are both important in achieving the object of the Act. 

37.    Environmental and Cumulative Impacts Assessment Process: Staff are proposing that certain applications for new licences would need to undergo an Environmental and Cumulative Impacts Assessment (ECIA) to help the DLC or ARLA in determining a licence application.  Whether an ECIA is required would depend on the location of the proposed site and the risk profile of the premises under the Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Fees) Regulations 2013. 

38.    The process would build on the decision-making criteria under the Act to provide a more comprehensive framework for the assessment of new licence applications.  In particular, it would ensure that following matters were fully considered, in order to better manage location (including proximity to sensitive sites) and density issues arising from applications for new licences:

·    The risks associated with the location (including external and environmental risks such as the existing licence environment and the current levels of alcohol-related crime); and

·    The individual risks associated with the proposed licence (such as the type of premises, the risk profile etc).

39.    A key advantage with this approach is that rather than requiring absolute policy provisions (which would be very difficult to apply in an area as vast as Auckland), it allows the DLC and ARLA to exercise discretion and consider applications in the Auckland context, yet in a consistent and transparent manner. 

40.    The ECIA process is applied in the draft LAP in different ways, depending on the kind of licence and the location, but ultimately the process would assist the DLC and ARLA to determine which of the following outcomes is most appropriate:

·    That the licence should be issued

·    That the licences should be issued subject to certain discretionary conditions

·    That the licence should not be issued. 

41.    Rebuttable presumption: The rebuttable presumption is the most restrictive way that the ECIA process is applied through the draft LAP.  Staff have recommended that it be used in specific parts of the region where there is evidence that the alcohol licensing environment has a negative cumulative impact on the area (e.g. to restrict the establishment of new off-licences in neighbourhood centres).  The effect of the rebuttable presumption would be that applications for new off-licences would generally be refused, unless the DLC or ARLA was satisfied that the operation of the premises would not unreasonably add to the environmental and cumulative impacts of alcohol on the area. 

Maximum trading hours 

42.     The draft LAP proposes regional hours for club and off-licences, and hours based on location for on-licences.  The hours proposed are as follows (reference to draft policy: Part B: Section 3.4; and sections 4 to 7):

Table 5. Proposed maximum trading hours

Licence

Proposed hours

Off-licences

9am to 10pm

On-licences

·        Broad Area A: 9am to 3am

·        Broad Area B: 9am to 1am

·        Priority Overlay: Same as underlying broad area.

Club licences

9am to 1am

Special licences

Case by case, with consideration for location and nature of event/risks associated with event

 

43.     Restricting the hours that alcohol is available can help to decrease alcohol-related harm. The licensed hours proposed in the draft LAP:

·    represent a reduction from the national default hours (implemented in December 2013)

·    reflect the views of the statutory stakeholders (Police, medical officers of health and licence inspectors)

·    accommodate a majority of club and on-licence premises’ existing licensed hours

·    will help to decrease inappropriate consumption (e.g. “side-loading” – leaving a bar to purchase cheaper alcohol from an off-licence before returning to the bar).

Trial extensions of hours for on-licences

44.     The draft policy allows for on-licences (except those in the priority overlay) to apply for a two-hour maximum trial extension of hours.

·    These will be granted on a trial basis, at the DLC’s discretion and following the completion of an environmental and cumulative impact assessment.

·    Applicants will have a history of best-practice operation, and will need to continue to demonstrate high levels of compliance to keep the extension.

·    Trial extensions will be preferred in the city centre for Broad Area A and in the metropolitan centres for Broad Area B.

·    No extensions will be allowed in the priority areas.

 

Additional discretionary conditions

45.     The draft LAP recommends a range of discretionary conditions for the DLC to apply. These conditions strengthen provisions already in the Act, and will help minimise harm to individuals and the community from inappropriate and excessive drinking.

 

Table 6. Discretionary conditions

Conditions recommended for all licences

Conditions which can be applied on a case-by-case basis

Where in draft LAP

Includes:

·       an onsite incident register

·       host responsibility policies  for club and on-licences

·       prohibition on single unit sales for off-licences

 

Includes:

·       Restrictions on drinks prior to closing

·       Clean public areas outside

·       Certified manager to be onsite at BYO and club licences (already required for on- and off-licences)

·       CCTV

·       Monitoring of outdoor areas for late-trading premises (on-licences).

Part B: Sections 4 to 7

 

Summary of on-licence provisions

46.    The table below demonstrates how the policy tools described above are applied to on-licences within the draft LAP.  This on-licence policy package is designed to:

·    reduce alcohol-related harm by:

requiring greater scrutiny of new on-licence applications, taking into account not only the applicant’s proposals but also the surrounding environment and existing licences.

significantly reducing licence hours from the previous 24-hour licensing regime, and only allowing best practice on-licence operators to trade later.  These operators will also be subject to higher standards.

·       provide targeted policy interventions and additional protection for vulnerable communities from alcohol-related harm in Priority Areas

·    improved practices amongst the off-licence industry through a range of discretionary conditions.

Table 7. Summary of draft LAP provisions for on-licences

Policy lever

Policy tool

Risk profile

Broad Area A

Broad Area B

Priority Areas

Metro Centres

Neigh-

bourhood centres

Rest of Broad Area B

Location / density

ECIA

Very High

Required

Required

Required

Required

Required

High

Required

Required

Required

Required

Required

Medium

NA

NA

Required

Required

Required

Low

NA

NA

Required

NA

Required

Very Low

NA

NA

NA

NA

Required

Proximity to sensitive sites

ECIA

Risk profile is one of the triggers

DLC & ARLA directed to consider proximity to sensitive sites as part of ECIA

Hours

Standard maximum hours

-

9am- 3am

9am - 1am

·      Hours to align with underlying area

·      LAP encourages even more restrictive hours

Trial extension for best practice operators

Risk is a factor in considering applications for extensions

Up to 2 hours

Morning or evening (not both)

 

Preferred over other parts of Broad Area B

Directs DLC not to grant extensions in these areas

Up to 2 hours

Morning or evening (not both)

Centres preferred

Directs DLC not to grant extensions in these areas

Conditions

-

-

 

Range of conditions

 

Note: An A3 version of this table is provided in Attachment C.

Summary of off-licence provisions

47.    The table below demonstrates how the policy tools are applied to off-licences within the draft LAP.  This off-licence policy package recommended is designed to achieve the following:

·    Enable the direct consideration of proximity issues by ensuring that the DLC and ARLA are made aware of any sensitive sites and existing premises relevant to an application, allowing them to make an informed decision as to what is appropriate

·    Reduced access to alcohol from off-licences and reduced issues with pre and side-loading, especially in the Central City

·    Strong regulation of off-licence density in areas with the greatest density and greatest levels of alcohol-related harm (e.g. the Central City and Priority Areas) and in neighbourhood centres, to align with feedback that ‘bottle stores on every corner’ are not appropriate or desirable

·    Improved practices amongst the off-licence industry through a range of discretionary conditions.


 

Table 8. Summary of draft LAP provisions for off-licences

Policy lever

Policy tool

Risk profile

Broad Area A

Broad Area B

Priority Areas

First 24 months

After 24 months

At all times policy in force

First 24 months

After 24 months

Neigh-

bourhood centres

Rest of Broad Area B

Location / density

ECIA

Very High

 

 

Temporary freeze

 

ECIA required

 

Presumption against approval

 

ECIA required

 

Presumption against approval

 

 

 

 

 

ECIA required

 

DLC to “take into account

 

Temporary freeze

 

ECIA required

 

Presumption against approval

High

 

 

Medium

 

 

Low

 

 

Very Low

 

 

NA

Proximity to sensitive sites

ECIA

Risk profile is one of the triggers

DLC & ARLA directed to consider proximity to sensitive sites as part of ECIA

Hours

Reduced hours

-

 

9am to 10pm regional maximum

6am to 10pm remote sales by off-licence (e.g. online sales)

(Note: transaction can occur at any time but delivery times restricted)

Condition

-

-

Range of conditions

 

Note: An A3 version of this table is provided in Attachment C.

Special licences

48.    The draft LAP proposes the following for special licences:

·    Maximum hours should be determined on a case-by-case basis but should generally be in accordance with the policies that would apply to the Broad Area within which the event will be held

·    A range of discretionary conditions designed to improve host responsibility and to reduce the overall alcohol-related harm associated with events.

Other options considered

49.     Staff have not recommended the use of the one-way door policy, as overall, there is insufficient evidence to show its effectiveness in reducing alcohol-related harm.  Key points from the research are summarised as follows:

·    Some studies report displacement of patrons from area to area as an unintended consequence of the one-way door policy.  This could result in increased drink driving if patrons then travelled across the city. 

·    When looking at case study examples, staff found that Melbourne has experienced issues with two ‘swills’ due to the one-way door approach: one as people leave one area to get to another area with longer hours before the one-way door commences; and then a second at closing time. Other research has even shown that the one-way door approach may increase some types of alcohol related harm such as damage to licensed premises, and vehicle-related offences.

·    In areas where there was a decline in harm following the implementation of a one-way door, this tended to be for a short period before behaviours adjusted and incidence of harm returned to previous levels or increased.

50.     Staff considered a range of other options throughout the development of the draft LAP.  These are detailed in the attached Statement of Proposal. 

Consideration

Local board views and implications

51.     The table below outlines the feedback received from the Puketāpapa Local Board in 2013 on the Issues and Options paper and/or the Staff Position Paper and provides a response from officers to show how the feedback has informed the draft LAP, or if not, why this is the case.

Table 9. Puketāpapa Local Board feedback

Topic

Local Board feedback

Officer response

Location

·      Concerned about supermarkets – volume of sales at an off-licence can be a problem

·      The draft LAP directly addresses this feedback. Evidence does not suggest that there is any difference in the harm caused by alcohol sold at different types of off-licences, and one study particularly points to the volume of alcohol sold at off-licences in an area as a predictor of alcohol-related violence, as opposed to the total number of off-licences.

·      The Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012 also does not distinguish between different types of off-licences, and the Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Fees) Regulations 2013 gives bottle stores and supermarkets the same risk scoring.

·      For these reasons, the draft LAP does not differentiate between different types of off-licences.

Location

·      Suggested that rather than applying specific location controls, the policy should consider location as factor under the other policy mechanisms i.e. density, hours and discretionary conditions

·      The draft LAP addresses this feedback. The policy applies different density rules and different maximum trading hours across the region, depending on location (i.e. different rules based on different broad areas). In addition, the Environmental and Cumulative Impact Assessment can be used to suggest licence conditions that are appropriate, based on the environment surrounding the proposed premises.

·      Note that the original six broad areas have been simplified to three: Broad Area A (the central city and Ponsonby); the Priority Overlay (areas experiencing high levels of alcohol-related harm); and Broad Area B, which is the rest of Auckland. Within Broad Area B some additional policies do or do not apply depending on Unitary Plan zoning (in particular, metropolitan centres and neighbourhood centres).

Proximity

·      Allow proximity control – e.g. Mt Roskill has added a couple of new big supermarkets – may have reached saturation point.

·      Ensure people can object to a licence application on the basis of its location (e.g. a premises close to a mosque)

·      The draft LAP directly incorporates this feedback. It proposes that, for all licence applications required to undergo the Environmental and Cumulative Impact Assessment process, the council will prepare a report (including maps) which identifies whether there are any existing licensed premises and/or “sensitive sites” (including schools, treatment facilities, etc.) within 500 metres of the proposed premises. This report would be provided to the District Licensing Committee.  The draft LAP then explicitly directs the DLC to consider the matter raised in the report when making a decision about whether to issue a licence.  

·      Note that grounds for objections to licences are dealt with under the Act and are not a part of what the LAP can address.

 

Density

·      Interested in temporary freeze

·      The draft LAP incorporates this feedback.  It includes a temporary freeze on the issuing of new off-licences in Broad Area A and Priority Overlay areas for two years from the date that the policy comes into force.

·      These areas have been targeted as Police data shows they experience disproportionate levels of alcohol-related crime and most also have greater licence density than other parts of the region.

Density

·      Would like to see a localised cap

 

·      Staff carefully considered the use of a cap.  However, the temporary freeze approach was preferred for the following reasons:

the freeze, as currently proposed in the draft LAP, would achieve very similar outcomes to a cap but is more likely to be considered reasonable in light of the object of the Act (grounds for appeal).

the freeze has been implemented successfully overseas with positive results.

there was strong support for the temporary freeze across multiple stakeholder groups.

Density

·      Suggested that different options could be used across different areas depending on the issue – case by case

·      The draft LAP directly addresses this feedback. Stronger density controls, that is, the temporary freeze and the presumption against new off-licences, have been recommended for areas with high levels of alcohol-related harm, areas with high density of off-licences and areas where new off-licences are inappropriate (i.e. the Priority Overlay, Broad Area A and neighbourhood centres).

·      In other areas, the Environmental and Cumulative Impact Assessment process will be used to vet licence applications depending on the proposed site and the risk associated with the proposed premises.

Hours

·      Model options – look at impact of hours on licensed premises

·      As part of the research component of this project, staff commissioned Market Economics Ltd. to model the expected changes in spend as a result of changes in hours. These reports have been published online and have informed the recommendations regarding hours made in the draft LAP.

 

Hours

·      In terms of setting hours that premises can be licensed for, the board considered that community impact statements would be good for self-reflection.

·      Staff carefully considered the idea of incorporating community concerns into the Environmental and Cumulative Impact Assessment process.  However, legal advice indicated that the matters included within the scope of that process must be as objective as possible (i.e. data driven/evidence based).  For this reason, the use of community impact statements has not been recommended for the draft LAP.

·      However, the Environmental and Cumulative Impact Assessment, which includes an assessment of what effect the premises is likely to have on the community, will be used to help identify cases where exceptions to the standard hours are needed.

Discretionary conditions

·      The board considered that conditions should include considerations like public transportation, reducing the number of smashed bottles on footpath/road, and restricting the sale of single serves.

·      The draft LAP directly incorporates this feedback. It recommends that all on-licences are required to display information around transport, that selling single serves of beers and RTDs be prohibited (except for craft beer and cider, which retails at a much higher price), and that the DLC consider a condition requiring licensees to be responsible for cleaning any alcohol-related litter from around their premises (to be applied to both on- and off-licences).

Maori impact statement

Research and data on Maori and alcohol

52.     Where possible, staff have gathered data on alcohol-related issues by ethnicity.  For example, data collected from the three Auckland-based district health boards (2012) showed that for the 2010/11 fiscal year, Maori had proportionately higher rates of alcohol-related emergency department presentations.

53.     Throughout the initial engagement phases of the project, staff worked with the Policies and Bylaws team, Te Waka Angamua (Maori Strategy and Relations Department), policy advisors at the Independent Maori Statutory Board (IMSB) and Hapai Te Hauora to deliver a program for engaging with Maori on alcohol issues. 

54.     As part of this, staff ran a workshop with rangatahi (youth), organised a rangatahi engagement session as part of the Atamira event and held a hui with mana whenua and mataa waka to discuss both the LAP Project and the Alcohol Control (Liquor Ban) Bylaw Project. 

55.     The IMSB was represented on the Political Working Party.  Hapai Te Hauora Tapui was represented on the Public Health Sector Reference Group.

56.     There are no specific references in Iwi Management Plans to alcohol or alcohol policy, other than a statement about general health and well-being.

 

Implementation

57.     Community Policy and Planning staff have worked closely with Licensing and Compliance Services throughout the development of this draft LAP. 

58.     As part of the options analysis, staff carefully considered practicality and ease of implementation.  The proposals included in the draft LAP meet these criteria. 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Draft Local Alcohol Policy 2014: Statement of Proposal

27

bView

Regional Strategy and Policy Committee meeting May 2014 - Resolutions on draft Local Alcohol Policy

143

cView

A3 Copies of Tables 7 and 8 from report

145

dView

Key Topics for Feedback from Local Boards

147

     

Signatories

Authors

Belinda Hansen - Principal Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Penny Pirrit - Regional & Local Planning Manager

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

31 July 2014

 

 




















































































































Puketāpapa Local Board

31 July 2014

 

 



Puketāpapa Local Board

31 July 2014

 

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

31 July 2014

 

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

31 July 2014

 

 

Key topics for local board feedback

 

1.   Proposed broad areas

2.   Priority Overlay

3.   Temporary Freeze in Broad Area A

4.   Temporary Freeze in the Priority Overlay

5.   Presumption against new off-licences in neighbourhood centres and in former freeze areas after two years

6.   Use of the Environmental and Cumulative Impact Assessment (ECIA) tool based on location and risk of premises

7.   Matters to be covered within the ECIA

8.   Proposed maximum hours for off-licences

9.   Proposed maximum hours for club licences

10. Proposed maximum standard hours for on-licences

11. Ability for best practice on-licences to apply for trial extended hours

12. Assessment process for trial extended hours

13. Proposed discretionary conditions for on, off and club licences

14. Proposal for special licence hours to be determined on a case by case basis

15. Proposed discretionary conditions for special licences


Puketāpapa Local Board

31 July 2014

 

 

Keith Hay Park car park redevelopment budget requirements

 

File No.: CP2014/15132

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       To seek approval for additional funding to complete the redevelopment and extension of the Keith Hay Park Arundel Street car park.

Executive summary

2.       The car park redevelopment and extension in progress at Keith Hay Park has been affected by a number of unforeseen issues that have resulted in increased costs.  These increased costs have predominantly related to the unanticipated service relocations, weather delays and the need for additional traffic management.

3.       For the construction to continue to completion further budget will need to be allocated to the project. It is expected that up to $100,000 of additional funding may be required to complete the construction. Two potential sources of budget to top up this project have been identified; either the capital works (capex) budget for Molley Green Reserve or the SLIPs (Small Local Improvement Projects) discretionary fund.  The potential to reduce the scope of the project to keep costs within the available budget is not considered a feasible option.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a)      Approve the reallocation of funds, up to the value of $100,000, as a contribution to the Keith Hay Park car park redevelopment project, from either:

i)        the capex budget for Molley Green Reserve, or

ii)       the SLIPs discretionary funds

b)      That in the event not all the $100,000 is required to complete the car park redevelopment that the balance of this funding will be returned to the respective budget.

 

Comments

4.       In August 2012 the Puketapapa Local Board approved the final concept plan for Keith Hay Park and confirmed the staging of the initial implementation of the plan over the 2012/2013 and 2013/2014 financial years. The first stage has involved the following components:

·   Removal of the Arundel St playground and development of a new playground north of the car park.

·   Installation of way-finding signage in and around the park.

·   Planting on the northern motorway embankment.

·   Reconfiguration and extension of the Arundel St car park, including construction of a new toilet and plaza in front of and between Tristar Gymnastics and the Cameron Pool facilities.

5.       Funding for this first stage of the implementation was approved from a variety of sources, including: capex, renewals and SLIPs as outlined in the following table:

Source

Financial year 2012/2013

Financial year 2013/2014

Financial year 2014/2015

Total

Capex

$371,160

$1,031,000

$1,048,075

$2,450,235.00

Renewals - playground

$100,000

$80,000

 

$180,000.00

Renewals – car park

$50,000

$550,000

 

$600,000.00

SLIPs

$50,000

 

 

$50,000.00

Total

$3,280,235.00

 

6.       The first three components in the first stage were completed in 2013. Construction of the Arundel St car park commenced in January 2014 and was originally due to be completed by end of June 2014. A number of unforeseen issues have arisen during the construction period that have resulted in delays to the construction programme and increased costs. These include the following:

·   Unanticipated service relocations as a result of services not shown on any plans or known services being located at shallow depths and/or being in poor condition necessitating replacement.

The Arundel St car park was last upgraded at least 30 years ago and many of the water, power, gas and telecommunications services underlying the area were either not marked on any plans or were at a shallow depth that did not allow car park or plaza construction. In addition both the main water line and the high voltage electricity main were found to be at the end of their useful life and replacement was required by Watercare Ltd and Vector Ltd, respectively. These replacements by other agencies led to significant delays in the programme. Replacing these services during the construction period, however, has meant that future failures requiring excavation of the newly completed car park are likely to be avoided.

·   Delays due to inclement weather.

Wet weather conditions, mainly during June, have resulted in additional delays in the construction programme of about two weeks. These delays result in additional costs to the project, due to extensions of time clause in the contract.  These extensions of time clauses are customary in construction contract conditions.

·   Additional traffic management.

While signage and other physical traffic management measures were included in the construction contract and at least 100 car parks have been retained throughout the construction period, these measures have proved insufficient to deal with parking pressure during busy times. A traffic controller has therefore been provided between 4pm and 7pm weekdays and on Saturday mornings during the contract period and this has resulted in significant additional costs.

7.       While allowances for service relocations were included in the construction contract and a contingency was provided for unforeseen site conditions and design variations, the issues above have meant that the contingency has been expended. Additional contingency is currently being sought to cover any additional weather delays, services relocations and contract variations through to the end of construction (currently anticipated by end August). 

8.       The remaining budget from the sources identified in paragraph 5 is insufficient to cover the anticipated additional costs of the project. It is expected that up to $100,000 of additional funding may be required to complete construction if there are further delays and unforeseen issues.

9.       The options for the Local Board include the following:

(a)  Reduce the scope of works to ensure that the project is completed within the available budget.  Unfortunately there are no obvious parts of the works that could be deleted without significantly affecting the operation of the new car park and plaza. While tree planting in and around the car park could potentially be delayed, the cost savings from this change are not likely to be sufficient to bring the project within budget.

(b)  Additional budget could be sourced from the local board’s capex budget for Molley Green Reserve.  While the board has earmarked these funds for the continuation of Greenways on either side of the reserve, detailed scoping of this has not yet been confirmed, and at this stage the funds have been deferred to FY16.

(c)  Additional budget could be sourced from the local board’s SLIPs discretionary fund.  The local board is currently in the process of allocating this fund to specific projects.

10.     At this stage it is not easy to assess the final costs involved, particularly in regard to further weather delays.  It is recommended that in the event not all the $100,000 is required to complete the car park redevelopment that the balance of this funding will be returned to the respective budget.   

Consideration

Local board views and implications

11.     The recommendations contained within this report fall within the Local Board’s delegated authority.

Maori impact statement

12.     Ngati Whatua o Orakei, Ngati Te Ata, Te Akitai and Ngati Tamaoho were involved in the development of the concept plan and supported the car park extension. No further consultation has been undertaken over this report seeking further budget for the project.

Implementation

13.     This report is seeking the allocation of further budget for the car park project to enable its completion.  The reallocation of budget from elsewhere will have an impact on the implementation of projects this funding would have otherwise contributed to.

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.    

Signatories

Authors

Annette Campion - Project coordinator

Authorisers

Ian Maxwell - Manager Parks, Sports & Recreation

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

31 July 2014

 

 

Auckland Transport Report, July 2014

 

File No.: CP2014/16084

 

  

Purpose

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

Executive summary

2.       The Transport Portfolio Lead briefing on transport matters in the Puketapapa area took place on July 21st . Transport matters in the Local Board areas were discussed as well as updates on outstanding matters.  Community Transport officers briefed the transport portfolio holder on the school travel wise programme.

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a)      receive the report.

Comments

 

Reporting Back

Consultation Report

2.       Road changes that have been forwarded to the Local Board for comment are shown in Attachment A.

Local Board Capital Projects

Auckland Transport acknowledges the June resolutions of the Puketapapa Local Board requesting rough order of costs for various proposals for use of the transport capital  fund.  These can be progressed once the appropriate request forms have been completed by Local Board staff.

Waikowhai School Safety Improvements (Resolution CP2013/27880)

3.       Approval from Auckland Transport for the installation of the  Active Warning Signs for Waikowhai Primary School was been obtained and the school signed a Memorandum of Understanding with Auckland Transport, as the school will control the operation of the signs.  Installation has now been completed.

Halsey Drive School Safety Improvements

4.       The school expressed support for the amended design which minimizes parking loss. The improvements are now completed.

Mt Albert Road Pedestrian Crossing Facility

5.       Final approval for the improvements is being sought from Auckland Transport’s Traffic Control Committee. Construction of the pedestrian refuge is to expected to begin in late July or early August.

Richardson Road/Oakdale Intersection improvements

6.       Tender documents were prepared for this project in May.  The contract is now being set up and the contractor ready to begin. The improvements are expected to be commence construction in July.

Mt Roskill Safe Routes Scheme Update

7.       As reported last month, Auckland Transport has awarded the tender for the detailed design of the cycleway to GHD and the detailed design of the cycle routes is now  underway. Discussions with  Auckland Council officers and the design team have been held in to discuss the design of the Keith Hay Park lighting section.  It is expected that the detailed design phase will be completed by late November.

8.       After public engagement through information days, a tender will be let for construction. This is  programmed for 2015.

9.       A brief update on the detailed design is tentatively booked for discussion with the Local Board at a workshop in July.

Dominion Road Main Corridor Update

10.     The project aims to  provide continuous bus lanes along Dominion Road from SH 20 to View Road in an effort to improve bus travel times down this important route and include necessary road widening between Mt Albert Road and SH 20. 

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

12.     The design for the main corridor works went to tender in June and tenders close the on 31 July.

13.     The tenders will be evaluated and it is anticipated that a contract will be awarded by late August 2014.  If these dates are met, work on site should begin towards the end of September.

14.     Auckland Transport sent letters to the entire Dominion Road corridor in July regarding the upcoming work on the main corridor.  The letters highlighted all the features that owners/residents will encounter post-upgrade on their stretch of the Dominion Road.  Auckland Transport  enclosed relevant sections of the drawings along with a brief explanation of no stopping areas, clearway times, pedestrian crossings and other infrastructure.   Auckland Transport has requested any comments to be sent in to a newly set-up email address by 11 August (dominionroad.feedback@aucklandtransport.govt.nz).

Dominion Road Parallel Cycling Routes

15.     The parallel routes will provide a safer alternative for cyclists during the construction of the main corridor improvements on Dominion Road. They will also link to reserves in Puketapapa Local Board area and to the proposed Mt Roskill Safe Routes scheme.

16.     The safety works needed for the parallel cycle routes continue to be rolled out along both sides of Dominion Road.  Both Local Boards in the areas concerned have received complaints and enquiries from the public.

17.     Auckland Transport and the contractor aim to circulate letters immediately prior to any works commencing.  To keep Local Boards informed and enable them to answer any straightforward queries, the weekly programme of proposed works from the contractor will be circulated to the Local Boards.

18.     Any enquiries that have come to Auckland Transport have been addressed as soon as possible by the stakeholder liaison team.

 

 

Corridor Management Plan Update

19.     Auckland Transport is progressing two Corridor Management Plans (CMP) which cross into the Puketapapa Local Board area.  Corridor Management Plans attempt to identify issues along transport corridors and plan for improvements over a 30 year period. The CMPs being undertaken are for Mt Albert Road and Manukau Road plus Pah Road stub.  These were discussed with the transport portfolio lead in March and the recommendations of the draft corridor management plan for Mt Albert Road will be shared with the Local Board for feedback in a workshop session in July.

20.     The Manukau Road CMP has been delayed and will come to the Local Board once the draft report is completed.

21.     A Corridor management plan for Mt Eden Road is due to begin in this financial year.  Officers have requested workshop time with the Local Board in October to discuss issues and opportunities.

East West Connections

22.     Auckland Transport and NZTA have agreed on a  programme name change from East West Link to East West Connections. This is to better reflect that the programme will be made up of different projects to improve the transport network across the area. The word link implied that the programme was one project on a single road.

23.     The public communications and engagement on the East West Connections  programme will be carried out between 11 July and 1 August this year. The aim of the engagement is to communicate to the wider public the aim of the East West Connections programme and make sure transport issues in the area are fully understood before work is done on options.

24.     The engagement will include:

 

·    Information in local media and on NZTA and AT websites

·    Online feedback and telephone and focus group research

·    A facilitated workshop with those who have strong local knowledge and represent business and community interests in this area.

·    Three community days in July/August at Mangere, Onehunga and Sylvia Park to get feedback on the transport issues and the priorities identified.

 

Auckland Transport Parking Strategy Discussion Document

25.     This discussion document is the first to comprehensively review issues associated with parking region-wide.  Key elements of the discussion document include an analysis of issues associated with the city centre, the city fringe, metropolitan and town centres and residential streets across the region.  There is a clear link to the region’s public transport strategy through consideration of the role of park-and-rides, and the needs of the forthcoming (bus) Frequent Transport Network, and the possibility that the AT HOP card may be able to be used for payment for parking, in some situations.

26.     The discussion document is now publicly available on-line and the  period of public consultation has been extended until 31 July.

 

Hillsborough Road Cemetery “Carfew”

27.     The Hillsborough cemetery is bisected by Clifton Road which provides access to the residential properties behind the cemetery.  There are issues with the road being accessed for inappropriate purposes at night and a request was made from the Local Board to Auckland Transport as to whether the installation of gate to be shut at night could be investigated.

28.     Auckland Transport reported back that a gate cannot be installed as Clifton Road is a public road and it needs to be able to be accessed by emergency vehicles at all times.  AT then proposed a “carfew” which is a ban under clause 15 of the AT Traffic Bylaw 2012 that prohibits people who are not going to specific premises adjoining a specified road from being there between 9pm and 4am in light vehicles.

29.     This matter was reconsulted on recently after NZ Police agreed to support the restriction.  No comments were received during the consultation phase and as the proposal has Local Board support it will now proceed to resolution stage.  The resolution will come before the Traffic Control Committee once it is drawn up.

Auckland Transport News

Auckland Transport re-tendering public transport contracts

30.     Auckland Transport has begun a two-year-long process of seeking operators interested in tendering for Auckland’s rail, bus and ferry services, when current contracts expire.

31.     Auckland Transport  extended an invitation to interested public transport service providers from around the world, to attend a market soundings event in which was held in Auckland on 2 July 2014.

32.     Auckland Transport conducted soundings across all three Public Transport modes at one time, even though their respective agreements expire at different times. It’s doing this because it is much more efficient to hold one event, rather than three, and it enables operators to consider tendering for more than one of the services.  It also ensures that Auckland Transport’s processes are going forward together and potentially adding value to each other.  

33.     Re-tendering out contracts to a competitive market will ensure Auckland ratepayers receive the best value for money for public transport services. This process is part of a wider Auckland Transport objective to enhance public transport operations in Auckland, as proposed in the Auckland’s Regional Public Transport Plan. 

34.     It is being planned to ensure that the transition between old and new agreements is seamless and the successful tenders are able to start operations without affecting either customers or the service.

Public transport fare changes from 6 July

35.     Auckland Transport has completed its Annual Fare Review which saw ticket prices on buses, trains and ferries change on 6 July. Now date adults who use the AT HOP card for their travel will receive a 20% discount off the single trip adult cash fare (excluding NiteRider, Airbus Express and Waiheke ferry services). Child and tertiary AT HOP users continue to receive discounts on most services, when compared to the equivalent cash fares. In contrast most cash fares for bus and train and some cash fares for ferry have increased (some AT HOP fares for ferries have also increased).

36.     The annual review takes into account operator cost increases (e.g. fuel and wages), revenue and patronage movements.  Auckland Transport is also undertaking a strategic review of all public transport costs and pricing and this is due to be completed towards the end of the year.

37.     Auckland Transport believes that Public transport must be seen as a viable alternative to the car if Auckland is to even begin to resolve its transport problems and by making travel even more attractive on the AT HOP card it is hoped that more people will switch to public transport.

38.     In addition to an increased discount on AT HOP Auckland Transport hs removed the 25 cent top-up fee and reduced the minimum top-up amount on the card from $10 to $5, both from 6 July. The card itself will also remain at $5 until at least 31 January 2015.

39.     The new cash fares will be in 50 cent multiples which will reduce cash handling on buses in particular (with the exception of the City LINK child cash fare which remains at 30 cents). Auckland Transport is hoping to move to implementing an exact fare/no change given policy in the future and will investigate the potential of removing cash fares altogether, as has recently been introduced in Sydney.

Wiri Depot wins award

40.     The Wiri Electric Train Maintenance and Stabling Facility (Wiri Depot) building was entered for the Warren and Mahoney Special Purpose Property Award and received an ‘Excellence’ Award in that category. Auckland Transport was presented with the award at New Zealand's prestigious Property Industry awards on Friday.

41.     Evaluation criteria included economic and financial factors, project vision and innovation (including degree of difficulty), design and construction, owner and user satisfaction, sustainability and efficiency of operation.

42.     The Wiri Depot is considered a state of the art facility and one of the very best anywhere in the world. It was delivered on time and on budget. 

Manukau MIT Campus Opens

43.     The public opening of the new $100 million Manukau Institute of Technology Campus in June show cased another step forward in transport improvements.  Since the railway station opened in 2012, comuters have been using a temporary entrance AS the MIT Tertiary Hub wa completed.

44.     The railway line to Manukau was specially built by Kiwirail and approaches the station in a trench up to seven metres below ground level. It was the first new rail connection to be built in Auckland in 82 years and is ready for the introduction of electric trains.

45.     Commuters and students can now access the station through an atrium the size of a rugby field with soaring views through six floors of the education facility above.

46.     The Manukau Station and Hub complex will be complemented with a bus interchange, parking improvements and access to the Manukau City Centre.  Apartment buildings and shops are being built near the new building and changes to the surrounding parks and car parks have been made to accommodate the expected surge in commuters. The university will attract around 120 staff and 6000 students, many of them will use public transport to bring them to the door.

47.     A 250 seat auditorium and theatre in the complex will also be available for community activity.  These will boost use of the transport interchange and the businesses on the ground floor of the building.  Estimates of passenger numbers suggest that the Manukau Station and bus interchange will grow to be one of the busiest in Auckland.

Travelwise Awards

48.     The annual Travelwise awards ceremony was held recently at Eden park where participating schools were presented with certificates by Mayor Len Brown.  This programme aims to encourage schools and students to travel more actively, safely and sustainably to and from school.  It aims to raise road safety awareness and to improve the overall health and well being of the school community.

49.     Since last year’s awards, 75 new schools have joined Travelwise bringing the total number of participating schools in Auckland to 400. School travel plans have helped:

·    Reduce car travel by taking 12,736 car trips off the road in the morning peak.

·    Save 2,596 kms in car travel, about $20.35m a year on congestion, and about 150,000 litres of fuel.

·    Reduce CO2 emissions by 735 tonnes each year.

·    Improve safety around Auckland schools – crashes involving pedestrians and cyclists aged 5-13 have reduced by 58% at Safe School Travel Plans.

·    To date, more than $132 million has been spent on safety infrastructure such as pedestrian crossings and cycle lanes around schools.

50.     A total of 241 awards were presented to schools, including 13 special awards.  The ultimate Travelwise WOW school award was won by Hillsborough School.

 Design Progress for the City Rail Link

51.     Design of the Britomart end of the City Rail Link is being progressed with Auckland Transport asking the construction industry to register its interest in the work. The focus of the design work will be on the downtown section of the City Rail Link, from Britomart through Queen, Customs and Albert Streets to Wyndham Street.

52.     It is the area that most affects other planned and proposed inner city development by Auckland Council and private developers.  Auckland Transport wants to be in a position to progress work in the downtown area so other city development can proceed without unnecessary delay, once CRL construction funding is approved.

53.     Auckland Transport says engaging early with the construction industry in this way is routine on major projects to ensure a cost effective design that minimises adverse effects.

          For more information: https://at.govt.nz/projects-roadworks/city-rail-link

Issues Raised through/ by Board Members

Location or Name of Issue

Description

 

AT Response

5-9 Glenveagh Rd

 

Chipseal has failed on corner causing safety concerns Question raised as to whether trucks from a recent roading job in the area have caused the damage.

 

Photos from 2012 show chip seal damage on this corner. AT considers that chip seal is the right treatment for Glenveagh Road but acknowledge there may be a benefit in asphalting this corner.  This is with the area engineer to remedy.

385 Hillsborough Road

 

Flooding into the garage reported since the works on Hillsborough Road were completed.

 

The road works on Hillsborough Road did not extend to this address but finished at Quona Road.  AT suggests that this be referred to AC stormwater for comment.

Mt Eden Road

Leaf litter is very apparent on Mt Eden Road near Three Kings.  A request that this be cleaned up and this area added to the leaf litter list for more frequent  sweeping next season.

This has been referred to the maintenance manager who has lodged a request for the leaf litter to be cleaned up.

Mt Albert Road/Dominion Road

Request for the pedestrian phase on the lights to be extended.

AT have investigated this and have extended the “green man” time during school hours.  The total crossing time is considered to be adequate.

Mt Eden Road/Mt Albert Road

A request for the right turning arrow to be lengthened as it appears to be very short phasing at this intersection.  Many trucks are using the right hand turn at the intersection and some concerns that trucks could run the red arrow in frustration putting them in conflict with a school crossing.

A traffic signal engineer has investigated the setting at this intersection and an operational adjustment has been implemented that will provide extra green time for the right turn movement.  This should alleviate the short phasing issues.

 

Dominion Road/Denbeigh Road

Request for the lane configuration to be looked at to allow two lanes to go through the roundabout to ease congestion.

This matter will be addressed by the Dominion Road improvement works due to begin later this year.

St Andrews Road

Request for street tree pruning in the vicinity of Gorrie Avenue and St Andrews Road.

Although street trees are in the road reserve their care and maintenance is looked after by Auckland Council arborists.  This matter has been referred to them for assessment.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Consultations on Roading and Parking Changes (June /July 2014)

161

     

Signatories

Authors

Lorna Stewart, Elected Member Relationship Manager, Auckland Transport

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon, Elected Member Relationship Team Manager, Auckland Transport

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

31 July 2014

 

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

31 July 2014

 

 

Draft Allocation of Decision Making Review

 

File No.: CP2014/14158

 

  

Purpose

1.       The purpose of the report is to seek local board input to a review of the non-regulatory allocation of decision making as part of the 2015-2025 Long-term Plan (LTP).

Executive summary

2.       The Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 (Act) sets out the functions and powers of the governing body and local boards.

3.       The governing body is reviewing the non-regulatory decision-making allocation as part of the development of the 2015-2025 LTP.  The review is based on the current allocation, with amendments proposed “by exception” where governance experience has demonstrated a need to amend the allocation.

4.       To inform the review, Local Board Services has drafted an issues paper for consideration by local boards. The issues paper will be updated to include formal feedback from local boards and reported to the Budget Committee in August 2014.

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a)      provide feedback on the allocation of decision making review issues paper and identify any additional issues relevant to the scope of the review.

Comments

 

5.       The Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 (Act) sets out the functions and powers of the governing body and local boards.  Local boards functions and powers come from three sources:

i.          those directly conferred by the Act;

ii.          non-regulatory activities allocated by the governing body to local boards;

iii.      Regulatory or non-regulatory functions and powers delegated by the governing body or Auckland Transport to the local boards.

6.       The initial decision-making allocation to local boards was made by the Auckland Transition Agency (ATA). The current decision-making allocation was determined as part of the 2012-2022 Long-term Plan (LTP) and was adopted by the governing body. These were both robust and extensive processes. A copy of the current allocation table is Appendix A of this report’s Attachment A.

7.       The governing body is reviewing the non-regulatory decision-making allocation as part of the development of the 2015-2025 LTP.  This review is based on the current allocation, with amendments proposed “by exception” where governance experience has demonstrated a need to amend the allocation.

8.       To inform the review, Local Board Services has drafted an issues paper which is attached at Attachment A. The issues paper sets out the approach and scope of the review and includes issues identified for consideration and feedback from local boards.

9.       Local board feedback is not limited to these issues, but should focus on governance rather than operational issues as the latter are out of scope of the review.

10.     The issues paper will be updated to include formal feedback from local boards and reported to the Budget Committee in August 2014. Changes to the allocation table will be part of the public consultation on the draft 2015-2025 LTP and any changes to the allocation will not come into effect until 1 July 2015.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

11.     Local board views are being sought via this report. Changes to the allocation of non-regulatory decisions could have implications for local board decision-making and budgets.

12.     There are no particular impacts on Maori in relation to this report, which are different from other population groups in Auckland.

Maori impact statement

13.     Local board feedback will be analysed and reported to the Budget Committee on 13 August 2014. Changes to the allocation table will be part of public consultation on the draft 2015-2025 LTP and any changes to the allocation would come into effect on 1 July 2015.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Allocation of Non-Regulatory Decision-Making Responsibilities - Issues Paper - Local Boards

165

     

Signatories

Authors

Alastair Child – Principal Local Board Advisor

Authorisers

Victoria Villaraza, Relationship Manager

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

31 July 2014

 

 









































Puketāpapa Local Board

31 July 2014

 

 

Local board role in alcohol licence applications

 

File No.: CP2014/15071

 

  

 

 

Purpose

1.       The purpose of this report is to seek local board feedback on the role local boards could play in alcohol licence applications, a process that was established by the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012.

Executive summary

2.       The Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012 (the Alcohol Act) establishes processes for alcohol licence applications.  Some local boards wish to have input into the application process, due to concerns about alcohol-related harm within some Auckland communities. 

3.       To inform the discussion about the role of local boards in alcohol licence applications, Local Board Services has drafted an issues paper for consideration by local boards. Local boards’ formal feedback is being sought on this issue. This formal feedback will inform a report to the governing body on this issue. The report will seek the governing body’s decision on the preferred option for local boards to provide input into alcohol licence applications.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a)      support local boards having continued input into the development of the Local Alcohol Policy.

b)      request that the chief executive be instructed to review the council’s processes to make it easier for the community to access information and receive advice and support on alcohol licence applications.

c)      support local board views on a particular licence application being attached to the inspector’s report to the District Licencing Committee.

d)      In recognition of specific community concern about alcohol-related harm, requests that the governing body delegates to the local board the power to make objections on alcohol licence applications under the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012.

 

Comments

 

4.       The Alcohol Act establishes processes for alcohol licence applications.

5.       The governing body has a number of roles under the Alcohol Act. 

·     It sets a local alcohol policy for the region, with input from local boards.  This establishes the overall policy framework, covering matters such as location of licenced premises and maximum trading hours.  The governing body has developed a draft local alcohol policy for public consultation.

·     It establishes District Licensing Committees (DLCs), which have responsibility for all uncontested and contested licensing applications.

·     It has the statutory power to object to licence applications (although it is unlikely that the governing body would exercise this power).

6.       Local boards provide input into the development by the governing body of the local alcohol policy.  Local board members can also be appointed to sit on DLCs.  Under current Auckland Council policy, they cannot hear applications relating to their local board area.  Local boards do not currently have the power to object to licence applications

7.       Local boards have standing under the Alcohol Act to object to licence applications, as a local board can be expected to have a greater interest in the issue than the public generally.  However, in order to exercise this, the governing body must first allocate or delegate the power to object to local boards.

8.       Given the role of local boards as advocates for their communities and the strategic importance placed on managing alcohol related harm by a number of them, it is reasonable to expect that at least some local boards will wish to express a view on alcohol licence applications.

9.       To inform the discussion about the role of local boards in alcohol licence applications, Local Board Services has drafted an issues paper which is attached at Attachment A. The issues paper sets out the role the governing body and local boards currently have under the Alcohol Act, the process for licence applications under the Alcohol Act and options for local board involvement in these.

10.     Feedback from local boards is being sought on the preferred option for local boards to provide input into alcohol licence applications. This formal feedback will inform a report to the governing body on this issue. The report will seek the governing body’s decision on the preferred option for local boards to provide input into alcohol licence applications. All formal local board feedback will be compiled into a report and included as an appendix to the governing body report.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

11.     Local board views are being sought via this report. An outcome of this process could see local boards playing a different role in alcohol licence applications to what they presently do.

Maori impact statement

12.     Māori are likely to be interested in and impacted by DLC decisions on alcohol licence applications.  This is an issue for the DLCs when considering alcohol licence applications.

Implementation

13.     Local board feedback will be analysed and will inform a report to the governing body. This report will seek a decision from the governing body on their preferred role of local boards in alcohol licence applications.

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Local board role in alcohol licence applications – issues and options

207

Signatories

Authors

Christine Gulik – Policy Advisor

Authorisers

Karen Lyons - Manager Local Board Services

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

31 July 2014

 

 

Local Board Role in Alcohol Licence Applications – Issues and Options

 

Introduction

The Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012 (the Alcohol Act) establishes processes for alcohol licence applications.  Some local boards wish to have input into the application process, due to concerns about alcohol-related harm within some Auckland communities.  This issues paper considers the options available for local board input for discussion.

Roles of the governing body and local boards

The governing body has a number of roles under the Alcohol Act. 

·    It sets a local alcohol policy for the region, with input from local boards.  This establishes the overall policy framework, covering matters such as location of licenced premises and maximum trading hours.  The governing body has developed a draft local alcohol policy for public consultation.

·    It establishes District Licensing Committees, which have responsibility for all uncontested and contested licensing applications.

·    It has the statutory power to object to licence applications (although it is unlikely that the governing body would exercise this power).

Local boards provide input into the development by the governing body of the local alcohol policy.  Local board members can also be appointed to sit on District Licensing Committees.  Under current Auckland Council policy, they cannot hear applications relating to their local board area. 

Local boards do not currently have the power to object to licence applications.  Local boards receive their powers from the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act in three different ways:

·    Statutory powers – these include providing input into governing body strategies and policies (such as the local alcohol policy), developing local board plans, and agreeing local board agreements with the governing body.  The Auckland Council Act does not provide local boards with the statutory power to make objections on licence applications.

·    Allocated powers – local boards are allocated non-regulatory decision-making powers for a wide range of local activities.  This allocation is set out in the Long-term Plan.  It does not include the power to make objections on licence applications.

·    Delegated powers – the governing body can delegate powers to local boards.  While it has done this for certain matters (such as swimming pool fencing), it has not delegated power to make objections on alcohol licence applications.

Local boards have standing under the Alcohol Act to object to licence applications, as a local board can be expected to have a greater interest in the issue than the public generally.  However, in order to exercise this, the governing body must first allocate or delegate the power to object to local boards.

Local boards are in many ways the face of local government in their communities.  They play an important role in understanding, representing and advocating for community priorities and preferences.  This includes providing the “community voice” on social issues.  While local boards cannot speak for all members of their communities, they have gained, through consultation on their local board plans, local board agreements, and other engagement activities, a good understanding of the significant community issues. 

Concern about alcohol related harm is one such issue which has been raised in a number of local board areas, with harm minimisation a consistent strategic priority in a number of local board plans.  This is in many ways consistent with the alcohol reforms, as reflected in the Alcohol Act.  These reforms aim to improve New Zealand's drinking culture and reduce the harm caused by excessive drinking.  In doing so, the Alcohol Act also seeks to increase the ability of communities to have a say on local alcohol licensing matters, as well as providing for local-level decision-making for licence applications, through District Licensing Committees.

Given the role of local boards as advocates for their communities and the strategic importance placed on managing alcohol related harm by a number of them, it is reasonable to expect that at least some local boards will wish to express a view on alcohol licence applications.

Licence application process

The applicant for a licence is required to attach notice of the application to a conspicuous place on or adjacent to the site to which the application relates and give public notice of the application.  A person may object to the grant of a licence only if he or she has a greater interest in the application for it than the public generally. An objection must be in writing and filed with the licensing committee within 15 working days after the first publication of the public notice of the making of the application.

Once an application is made, an inspector makes inquiries and files a report with the District Licensing Committee.  The police and medical officer of health for the area also file a report if either has any opposition to the application.  Local board members receive a weekly list of applications for their local area, which is downloaded by democracy advisors from the Auckland Council intranet.

The District Licensing Committee determines whether a hearing will be convened.  If there are any objections to the application, a public hearing is required unless the objection is considered vexatious or outside the scope of the Alcohol Act, the objector does not require a public hearing, or the application is withdrawn.  If no objection is received, then the District Licensing Committee can consider the application based on the papers, without requiring a public meeting.

The Alcohol Act sets out the criteria to be considered by the District Licensing Committee when considering a licence application. Any objection to an application must also relate to these criteria, otherwise it will be outside the scope of the Alcohol Act.  A copy of the relevant section is attached.  As well as considering objections, a District Licensing Committee can seek views from other parties on a licence application (including local boards), if it is of the opinion that the information may assist it to deal with the application.  The Alcohol Act also provides for an appeal process to the Alcohol Regulatory and Licensing Authority.

Options for local board involvement

1.   Local board input into the development of the local alcohol policy

Local boards have had significant early engagement on the draft local alcohol policy and will now be providing formal feedback to the governing body.  Policy development is a key governance role and sets the framework for subsequent operational decision-making. The local alcohol policy is the appropriate place to address the broader concerns about alcohol-related harm and put in place measures to manage the impact on specific communities, through for example, more stringent controls for specific areas.  A well developed policy arguably avoids the need for political involvement in specific licence applications. 

2.   Local board views are provided to the District Licensing Committee

District Licensing Committees have broad powers to seek information on licence applications.  A committee can receive a local board’s views on a licence application if it is of the opinion that the information may assist it to deal with the application. There is no statutory obligation on a District Licensing Committee to seek out or to receive and take into account local board views. However, there has been an openness on the part of District Licensing Committees to obtain local board views.

One way to achieve this is to attach local board views on particular licence applications to the inspector’s report to the District Licensing Committee.  This is similar to the resource consent application process, where any local board views are appended to the officer’s report.  It is then up to the District Licensing Committee to determine whether it takes into account the local board views and the weight given to it.  This approach can lead to a situation where an inspector’s report attaches a contrary local board view, but it does provide an avenue for local boards to express a view on particular licence applications without the requirement for a specific allocated or delegated power from the governing body. 

3.   Local board are either allocated or delegated the power to object

The governing body could either allocate or delegate to local boards the power to object to licence applications.  While an express power contained in the allocation provides clarity and certainty to local boards and their communities, it is time consuming and requires the use of the special consultative procedure.  The allocation is reviewed as part of the long-term plan, meaning that local boards would not receive this power until 1 July 2015.   Alternatively, the governing body could delegate the power to object to licence applications to local boards.  A delegation can be put in place at any time by governing body resolution, but it can also be revoked at any time.

The resourcing implications for the Auckland Council organisation is an important consideration when weighing up the pros and cons of providing local boards with the power to object to licence applications. From 18 December 2013, there have been over 3,800 licence applications across the Auckland region and 26 hearings.  Of these licence applications, 119 were for off-licences, 387 for on-licences, and 1158 for special licences (with most of the remainder relating to managers certificates).  During this period only three local boards have sought to object to licence applications under the Alcohol Act (representing five objections in total).  While this small number of objections is unlikely to pose any significant resourcing issues for the organisation, this would change if there was a major increase in local board objections. Local boards will need to be resourced to prepare objections with appropriate supporting evidence.  Local board members will also need to prepare for and attend hearings.  Depending on the number of local board objections, this could require considerable officer and local board member time.

Another issue is the reputational implication for council if a local board inappropriately objects to licence applications.  This is likely to be an issue if a local board decides, as a matter of principle, to object to all licence applications, without appropriate evidence to demonstrate that the objection falls within the scope of matters that can be raised under the Alcohol Act.  Reputational issues also arise if local boards seek to appeal a decision by the District Licensing Committee, as effectively one arm of Auckland Council (the local board) is objecting to decisions made by another arm of Auckland Council (the District Licensing Committee). 

The Alcohol Act establishes a new regime, which is in its early stages of development in Auckland.  The local alcohol policy is not yet in place and the District Licensing Committee structure will be reviewed after its first year of operation.  If local boards were to be given the power to object to licensing applications, a delegation may be the better short-term option as it enables the implications to be tested alongside the monitoring and review of the District Licensing Committee structure.  A longer term approach can then be considered within the broader context of the alcohol management regime. Issues associated with appeal rights could also be considered at that time.

4.   Local boards supporting community involvement in licensing process

The Alcohol Act seeks to bring communities closer to decision-making around alcohol licensing.  The licensing processes need to be accessible to communities.  Currently there is little support available to empower communities to take an interest or participate in the process.  Further work is needed to make it easier for the community to access information and receive advice and support on alcohol licence applications. Local boards could focus on supporting and building the capability of community groups to object to licence applications, where appropriate, and to present to District Licensing Committees at hearings.  This can be done alongside any of the options raised above for local board involvement in the licensing process.

Text Box: Discussion questions:
Should the role of local boards extend beyond providing input into the development of the local alcohol policy by the governing body?  If so, in what circumstances and why?
If local boards are to have a greater role, should they 
(a)	provide views for consideration by the District Licensing Committee or
(b)	have the power to object to licence applications?
If local boards were to have the power to object to licence applications, should this be through a delegation from the governing body or through an amendment to the decision-making allocation?
What support do your communities need to enhance accessibility to the licensing processes?
To what extent does the current draft local alcohol policy provide you with confidence that it sets a robust framework to guide District Licensing Committee decisions on licence applications that affect your local communities? Are there any specific controls that would better guide licence applications within your local board area and if these were in place, would this avoid the need for local board involvement in specific licence applications?

 


 

Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012

Section 105 - Criteria for issue of licences

(1)  In deciding whether to issue a licence, the licensing authority or the licensing committee concerned must have regard to the following matters:

(a)             the object of this Act:

(b)             the suitability of the applicant:

(c)             any relevant local alcohol policy:

(d)             the days on which and the hours during which the applicant proposes to sell alcohol:

(e)             the design and layout of any proposed premises:

(f)    whether the applicant is engaged in, or proposes on the premises to engage in, the sale of goods other than alcohol, low-alcohol refreshments, non-alcoholic refreshments, and food, and if so, which goods:

(g)             whether the applicant is engaged in, or proposes on the premises to engage in, the provision of services other than those directly related to the sale of alcohol, low-alcohol refreshments, non-alcoholic refreshments, and food, and if so, which services:

(h)             whether (in its opinion) the amenity and good order of the locality would be likely to be reduced, to more than a minor extent, by the effects of the issue of the licence:

(i)    whether (in its opinion) the amenity and good order of the locality are already so badly affected by the effects of the issue of existing licences that—

(i)    they would be unlikely to be reduced further (or would be likely to be reduced further to only a minor extent) by the effects of the issue of the licence; but

(ii)   it is nevertheless desirable not to issue any further licences:

(j)    whether the applicant has appropriate systems, staff, and training to comply with the law:

(k)             any matters dealt with in any report from the Police, an inspector, or a Medical Officer of Health made under section 103.

(2)  The authority or committee must not take into account any prejudicial effect that the issue of the licence may have on the business conducted pursuant to any other licence.

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

31 July 2014

 

 

Resolutions Pending Action Schedule, July 2014

 

File No.: CP2014/15074

 

  

 

Purpose

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

Executive summary

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

 

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board receive the Resolutions Pending Action Schedule for July 2014.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Resolutions Pending Action Schedule, July 2014

215

     

Signatories

Authors

Brenda  Railey - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

 



Puketāpapa Local Board

31 July 2014

 

 





Puketāpapa Local Board

31 July 2014

 

 

Record of Puketāpapa Local Board Workshop Proceedings

 

File No.: CP2014/15076

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       The purpose of this report is to provide a summary of Puketāpapa Local Board workshop proceedings.

Executive Summary

2.       The attached summary of workshop proceedings provides a record of Puketāpapa Local Board workshops held in June 2014.

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

 

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board receives the Workshop Proceedings Report for June 2014.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Summary of Workshop Proceedings for June 2014

221

    

Signatories

Authors

Brenda  Railey - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

31 July 2014

 

 






Puketāpapa Local Board

31 July 2014

 

 

Board Member Reports July 2014

 

File No.: CP2014/16363

 

  

 

Purpose

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

Executive Summary

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

 

Recommendation/s

That the Puketapapa Local Board:

a)      receive the Board Member reports from DA Holm, E Kumar and MP Wood for July 2014.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

DA Holm report, 16 June to 23 July 2014

229

bView

E Kumar report, 17 June to 20 July 2014

231

cView

MP Wood report, 26 June to 31 July 2014

249

    

Signatories

Authors

Brenda  Railey - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

31 July 2014

 

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

31 July 2014

 

 



















Puketāpapa Local Board

31 July 2014

 

 



Puketāpapa Local Board

31 July 2014

 

 

Chairperson's Report July 2014

 

File No.: CP2014/16378

 

  

 

Purpose

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

 

Recommendation/s

That the Puketapapa Local Board:

a)      receive the Chair’s Report for July 2014.

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

J Fairey Chair's Report,  16 June - 16 July 2014

253

    

Signatories

Authors

Brenda  Railey - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

31 July 2014