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

 

Date:                      

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

 

Thursday, 10 July 2014

6.30 pm

Waitakere Ranges Local Board Office
39 Glenmall Place
Glen Eden

 

Waitākere Ranges Local Board

 

OPEN AGENDA

 

 

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Chairperson

Sandra Coney, QSO

 

Deputy Chairperson

Denise Yates, JP

 

Members

Neil Henderson

 

 

Greg Presland

 

 

Steve Tollestrup

 

 

Saffron Toms

 

 

(Quorum 3 members)

 

 

 

Glenn Boyd

(Relationship Manager)

Local Board Services (West)

 

 

 

Tua Viliamu

Democracy Advisor

 

4 July 2014

 

Contact Telephone: (09) 440 7704

Email: tua.viliamu@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

 

 


 

 

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

10 July 2014

 

 

ITEM   TABLE OF CONTENTS                                                                                        PAGE

1          Welcome                                                                                                                         3

2          Apologies                                                                                                                        3

3          Declaration of Interest                                                                                                   3

4          Confirmation of Minutes                                                                                               3

5          Leave of Absence                                                                                                          3

6          Acknowledgements                                                                                                       3

7          Update from Ward Councillors                                                                                    3

8          Deputations                                                                                                                    3

8.1     Waitakere Festival                                                                                                3

9          Public Forum                                                                                                                  3

10        Extraordinary Business                                                                                                3

11        Notices of Motion                                                                                                          3

12        Local Alcohol Policy Project - Draft Policy for Local Board Feedback                  3

13        Chairperson’s Report                                                                                                    3

14        Portfolio update: Member Neil Henderson                                                                 3

15        Portfolio update: Member Denise Yates                                                                     3  

16        Consideration of Extraordinary Items 

 

 


1          Welcome

 

2          Apologies

 

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

 

3          Declaration of Interest

Members were 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.

Specifically members are asked to identify any new interests they have not previously disclosed, an interest that might be considered as a conflict of interest with a matter on the agenda.

At its meeting on 28 November 2013, the Waitakere Ranges Local Board resolved (resolution number WTK/2010/5) to record any possible conflicts of interest in a register. 

            Register

Board Member

Organisation / Position

Sandra Coney

·       Waitemata District Health Board – Elected Member

·       Women’s Health Action Trust – Patron

Neil Henderson

·       Portage Trust – Elected Member

·       West Auckland Trust Services (WATS) Board – Trustee/Director

·       Weedfree Trust – Employee

Greg Presland

·       Portage Trust – Elected Member

·       Lopdell House Development Trust – Trustee

·       Titirangi Residents & Ratepayers Group – Committee Member 

Steve Tollestrup

·       Waitakere Licensing Trust – Elected Member

·       Community Waitakere – Trustee

·       West Auckland Trust Services (WATS) Board – Trustee/Director

·       Henderson Valley Residents Association – Committee Member

Saffron Toms

       No current conflict of interest.

Denise Yates

·       Ecomatters Environment Trust – Deputy Chair

·       Keep Waitakere Beautiful Trust – Board Member

·       Huia-Cornwallis Ratepayers & Residents Association – Co-chairperson

·       Charlotte Museum Trust – Trustee                                 

 

Member appointments

Board members are appointed to the following bodies. In these appointments the board members represent Auckland Council.

Board Member

Organisation / Position

Sandra Coney

·       Friends of Arataki Incorporated – Trustee

Neil Henderson

·       Friends of Arataki Incorporated – Trustee

·       Living Cell Technologies Animal Ethics Committee – Member

Saffron Toms

·       Ark in the Park – Governance Group Member

 

4          Confirmation of Minutes

 

That the Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

a)         Confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Thursday, 26 June 2014, including the confidential section, as a true and correct record.

 

 

5          Leave of Absence

 

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

 

6          Acknowledgements

 

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

 

7          Update from Ward Councillors

 

An opportunity is provided for the Waitakere Ward Councillors to update the board on regional issues they have been involved with since the last meeting.

 

8          Deputations

 

8.1       Waitakere Festival

Purpose

1.   To thank the Waitakere Ranges Local Board for their support in the year 2013 and to share the successes of the 2013 Waitakere Festival and plans for 2014.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

a)      Receives the presentation from Waitakere Festival.

 

Attachments

a          Waitakere Festival - 2013 report.............................................................. 3

 

 

9          Public Forum

 

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

 

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

 

10        Extraordinary Business

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

11        Notices of Motion

 

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

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

10 July 2014

 

 

Local Alcohol Policy Project - Draft Policy for Local Board Feedback

 

File No.: CP2014/13521

 

  

 

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 Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

a)      Provides 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 Waitākere Ranges 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. Waitākere Ranges Local Board feedback

Topic

Local Board feedback

Officer response

General

·      No real issues in this local board area due to the trusts

Staff acknowledge that licence density is lower in West Auckland than in other parts of the region but raise the following points in response to the board’s feedback:

·      Throughout the policy development process, staff met with different West Auckland based community groups and held public meetings in the West where residents raised concerns about alcohol-related harm in their local communities.  Many of the workshop participants saw the LAP as an important ‘back stop’ in case the trusts were resolved.

·      Recent Police data shows that some parts of West Auckland are currently experiencing significant issues with alcohol-related harm.  As a result, staff are recommending the use of a Priority Overlay as part of the draft LAP to implemented stricter controls in areas that are most in need.  Glen Eden is one of the recommended Priority Overlay areas.

Location and proximity

·      Not supportive of high stress or high risk zones; labelling is inappropriate

 

·      Staff have taken this feedback on board and have renamed the overlay “Priority Overlay”, which is a term with positive connotations and that highlights Auckland Council’s commitment to addressing alcohol-related harm in these areas in particular.

Location and proximity

·      Acknowledge issues with buffer zones for proximity rules – however are still concerned with premises close to schools

 

·      The draft LAP directly addresses this feedback. Sensitive sites such as schools and rehabilitation centres will be considered as part of the Environmental and Cumulative Impact Assessment process, which looks at an assessment area of 500 metres in all directions from the proposed premises.

·      In line with the board’s feedback and to reduce the visibility of licensed premises to children, the draft LAP also recommends that licensed premises should not open until 9am (i.e. after school begins).

 

Discretionary conditions

·      Supports conditions for all licence types – would like to see a list for the DLC to select from

 

·      This feedback has been directly incorporated into the draft LAP.

·      The draft policy recommends certain discretionary conditions for certain licence kinds, and recommends that some are appropriate for all new licences and some are appropriate for the DLC to consider on a case-by-case basis.  The conditions are drafted in full so that the DLC can apply them as it sees fit. 

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

3

bView

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

3

cView

A3 Copies of Tables 7 and 8 from report

3

dView

Key Topics for Feedback from Local Boards

3

      

 

Signatories

Authors

Belinda Hansen - Principal Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Penny Pirrit - Regional & Local Planning Manager

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

10 July 2014

 

 




















































































































Waitākere Ranges Local Board

10 July 2014

 

 



Waitākere Ranges Local Board

10 July 2014

 

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

10 July 2014

 

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

10 July 2014

 

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

10 July 2014

 

 

Chairperson’s Report

 

File No.: CP2014/15014

 

  

 

The Waitakere Ranges Local Board has laboured long and hard to produce its draft Local Board Plan for the years 2015/16 to 2017/18.

 

This sets out how we plan to allocate our budgets over the next three years, and what our priorities are.

 

You’ll see more funds allocated for environmental purposes, including a person to work with our Ranges communities on kauri dieback, greater funding for weed control, a focus on Maui’s dolphins, and advocacy on water quality in our West Coast lagoons and Manukau Harbour.

 

We’ve also got money in the budget for improved community safety in Glen Eden, working with the Police and community patrols. We’re renting premises in Glen Mall as a base for these activities as well as for the local Business Improvement District.

 

Of course, there is much more and we valued input from meetings we had with constituents earlier in the year.

 

Now we want to hear back from residents about our priorities. Although we will be holding meetings at various locations, this will be a fairly formal process, with written submissions and hearings. Everyone is welcome to participate and as this is the first expression of where the new Local Board wants to work, we want to hear from you whether we have got it right, what we have missed, and what you’d like us to consider adding.

 

I talked in my last report about being serious about weeds. The Local Board has invested some “end of the year” money on some prominent weed removal projects. These are at Landing Road, Laingholm, Candia Road, and West Coast Road (Bush Road corner). We hope to show what can be done with weed removal and replanting at these sites which just a few of the many in our Local Board area.

 

We’re also working with other parts of Council, especially our biosecurity team to develop a “weed plan” for our Local Board area. This will identify “worst weeds” and “worst weedy places” and give us good advice about prioritising our efforts for the most effect.

 

We had good news about the Te Henga Quarry. A few months ago it was proposed that the old quarry, due to be closed in 2015/16, be extended by moving into new land, parkland that had every protection possible under the Heritage Area Act, the Regional Parks Management Plan, the current District Plan and the Proposed Unitary Plan.

 

When we debated this, our meeting room was packed with folk from Bethells/Te Henga and there were protests from groups who had participated in a quarry advisory group for years and from neighbours who were looking forward to the end of dust and vibration.

As it was not the Local Board’s decision to make, but that of the Governing Body, we were worried that despite our opposition, the proposal might gain favour higher up. We are pleased to say that the proposal was withdrawn, and the CEO of Auckland Council Property Ltd, said he had no idea how it got on our agenda.

 

I said in my last report that we were about to welcome some new staff members.

 

Tua Viliamu is not a stranger as she was previously the PA to our relationship manager, Glenn Boyd, and has now taken on the role of Democracy Advisor to the Board.

 

Catileya Parata has joined us as a Local Board Advisor. She has a background in resource management which will be a useful skill for us to have on board.

 

They are both very welcome to join our team.

 

 

Recommendation

That the Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

a)      Receives the Chairperson’s report.

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.    

Signatories

Authors

Tua Viliamu – Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

10 July 2014

 

 

Portfolio update: Member Neil Henderson

 

File No.: CP2014/14995

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       This report provides an opportunity for Member Neil Henderson to give an update with regards to activity within his portfolio areas.

2.       Portfolio holders are responsible for leading policy development in their portfolio area, proposing and developing project concepts, overseeing agreed projects within budgets, being active advocates, accessing and providing information and advice.

3.       Member Henderson has lead for the portfolios of Waitakere Ranges Heritage area including walkways and Greenways.

Executive Summary

 

The Foothills Walkway Update

4.       The following are notes taken from a recent letter sent out to residents and other affected parties.

5.       The Waitakere Ranges Local Board is working on the planning for a walkway through the Swanson Foothills .It will connect the Swanson Railway Station with Henderson Valley Road via Candia, Coulter and Perris Roads, Seibel Reserve and Seibel and Vineyard Roads. See the general overview map attached. This is the first stage in a long term walkway project which will eventually traverse the length of the Waitakere Ranges Foothills from the Swanson Railway Station in the north to the Arataki Visitor Centre and Titirangi in the south. Capital funding to complete the initial foothills walkways project has been set aside in the Waitakere Ranges Local Board budgets over coming years.

6.       The ground survey along the route of the Swanson Foothills Walkway has now been completed and more detailed plans of the walkway route developed. These were made available at the Open Day held on 2nd February at Swanson.

7.       The present focus is now on sections of the walkway route that need particular attention - especially the south end of Perris Road (safety and visual privacy issues) and the corner of Candia and Coulter Roads (where detailed stormwater design and boardwalks are required, subject to Auckland Transport approval).It is of note that the speed limit at the Northern end of Candia Rd has now been reduced to 50 kph,which will help mitigate some of the present safety issues for pedestrians along this stretch of road. Council is seeking to have more discussion with adjoining landowners in these areas.

8.       In addition, we are developing detailed design of those parts of the walkway alongside Coulter Road where retaining walls or boardwalks will be needed.

9.       This winter, we’re looking to capture all the information required to apply for the resource consents for the walkway, and to lodge the application. With this in mind, a lizard study has recently been completed to ascertain whether lizard colonies are present which need to be accommodated. None were found.

10.     This winter planting season we will be establishing some of the native planting to screen residential properties from the walkway route, as agreed with the landowners. The intention is to plant trees and shrubs of a good size, so that the screening will get a head start. Other native planting along the walkway route will be undertaken once the walkway is constructed. The remnants of the old scout den in Seibel Reserve, which was a safety hazard, has been removed.

11.     Finally, the Te Kawerau a Maki Deed of Settlement, signed on 22 February 2014, identifies the tribe’s interest in several areas along the route of the Swanson Foothills Walkway, particularly Seibel Reserve and ‘Opareira’ – the reserve on the corner of Candia and Vineyard Roads. Council will be seeking a meeting with Te Kawerau a Maki to discuss issues related to the walkway in these areas.

Bats out West

Results of the Auckland Region Bat report

 

12.     Earlier this year I attended a New Zealand bat Conference in the Marlbourough Sounds and although I was not there in my capacity as a local board member, the material presented and discussed was of particular relevance to the WRLB as we appear to have been getting significant reports of bat sightings and detection in the Waitakere Ranges over the last couple of years.

13.     As a result of this activity and responding to the keen interest of the public, an Auckland Regional Bat report was commissioned for this year. It is of note that the Waitakere Ranges Local Board already provides funding and support for the “bat inclined” via the Waitakere Ranges Heritage Area programme.

14.     The Regional long-tailed bat monitoring was completed in March-April this year and the report on the findings of 29 recording locations across the Auckland region has now been finalized.  (For the full report, please contact ben.paris@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz.)

A summary of this report is:

·        No bat activity detected on Waiheke Island, or Woodhill Forest.

·        Low presence of bat activity in West Rodney (Kaukapakapa and Makarau), and Hunua edge/Southern Regional Parks (Ponga Rd, Tapapakanga and Waharau).

·        Medium presence of bat activity in Te Henga (Matuku, & Lake Wainamu and Kawaupaka).

·        High presence of bat activity in the Kokako Management Area (KMA) and buffer (910 bat passes/10 nights – the highest rate ever recorded by Council).

 

This has highlighted some important points:

·        Small relict bat populations persisting in forest fragments in the north and south, showing the benefit of ecological corridors along planted riparian margins.

·        Importance of wetland and stream habitat for bats in the Waitakere Ranges, requiring further study of eastern/western bat movements throughout the ranges.

·        Possible signs of secondary benefits of pest control for a large population of long-tailed bats in the KMA.

·        Further research and monitoring in the KMA to investigate how future tree-specific pest control could protect large populated roosts.

 

15.     Just going off these brief results, it is clear that the Te Henga wetlands and the Waitakere Stream are vital ecosystems, not just for birdlife but also our local bat populations. As for the Kokako Management Area, it seems to be a regular bat city. It is also clear that much more research is needed and this is something the WRLB will be looking into over the coming months.

16.     One last thing of note around the subject of bats that came out of the Bat Conference earlier this year. Currently we do not have any populations of short tailed bats in the Waitakere Ranges and in fact this species is in very serious decline throughout the country. One of the possible options for protecting this species is relocation from colonies outside the Auckland Region and the Ark in The Park site would be a likely choice if this was considered feasible or desirable. Short tail bats are associated with the strange and unusual parasitic ground dwelling plant Dactylanthus taylorii, one of our weirdest natives. Once wide spread throughout New Zealand forests, including the Waitakere Ranges, Dactylanthus is also in very serious decline .If we one day  take the steps to relocate short tail bats out West ,it is a sure thing that we would want to re-introduce colonies of Dactylanthus to provide a food source for them. As they say: Watch this Bat space.

 

Bethells Local Area Plan Update

17.     There was an excellent attendance at the first LAP workshop at Waitakere primary School on the 4th of June.  A special thanks to Colleen Pilcher, Mary Woodward, Trude Bethell and John Sumich for sharing their stories and knowledge of the area with us. Also thanks to Edward Ashby for attending and speaking as representative for Te Kawerau A Maki.

18.     The Local Board is now ready to take the discussion further to gradually develop a practical plan of action, based on a consensus around a long term (30 year) vision for the area.  We are organising the first batch of a series of Topic Group meetings and these are outlined in the attached PDFs with resource consent requirements were considered.

Update on Living Cell Technologies Animal Ethics Committee

 

19.     I am currently the Auckland Council Representative on the Living Cell Technologies Animal Ethics Committee.

20.     Living Cell Technologies Limited, a cell implant company, develops living cell products for the treatment of diabetes and neurological diseases primarily in New Zealand. The company’s technology, IMMUPEL, coats cells with protective capsules that prevent them from attack by the patient’s immune system. Its product pipeline includes DIABECELL, a porcine insulin-producing cell product for the treatment of type 1 diabetes; and NTCELL, a choroid plexus cell product to treat Parkinson's disease and other disorders, such as stroke, Huntington's disease, and hearing loss, as well as wound hearing. Living Cell Technologies Limited was founded in 1987 and is based in Auckland, New Zealand.

21.     At our last meeting in May, we were informed that LCT underwent a re-structure in that most of its staff were transferred to Diatranz Otsuka Limited (DOL),a subsidiary of Otsuka Pharmaceuticals Company.(Established in 1921, the names “Otsuka” and “Otsuka’s Intravenous Solutions” are widely recognized, and their products are highly trusted in Japan and other countries as a leading brand of intravenous solutions.)

22.     As a result of this the current approved code of ethical conduct will be transferred to Diatranz Otsuka Limited.L CT will still continue to receive Animal Ethics Committee services from DOL under this new arrangement.

23.     LCT is presently due to have its five yearly Animal Ethics audit and I am anticipating being part of a compliance visit to their animal facilities in early July. In addition I have recently been asked to complete a National survey on Training and Support for Animal Ethics Committee members.

 

Recommendation

That the Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

a)      Receives the portfolio update from Member Neil Henderson.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Consultation Map Swanson Walkway

3

bView

Waitakere LAP Newsletter_no2

3

cView

Photo of Neil capturing bats

3

     

Signatories

Authors

Tua Viliamu – Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

10 July 2014

 

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

10 July 2014

 

 





Waitākere Ranges Local Board

10 July 2014

 

 

 

 



Waitākere Ranges Local Board

10 July 2014

 

 

Portfolio update: Member Denise Yates

 

File No.: CP2014/15006

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       This report provides an opportunity for Member Denise Yates to give an update with regards to activity within her portfolio areas.

2.       Portfolio holders are responsible for leading policy development in their portfolio area, proposing and developing project concepts, overseeing agreed projects within budgets, being active advocates, accessing and providing information and advice.

3.       Member Yates has lead for the portfolios of Arts and Culture, Community Facilities, Libraries and Events.

Executive Summary                                                              

 

Arts & Culture

 

4.       I attended a meeting of the Governing Body Arts Culture & Event Committee at Lopdell House on 18 June. I welcomed Councillors, Statutory Maori Board members, Council Officers to the west and the Waitakere Ranges Local Board area, Titirangi and Lopdell House on behalf of our Local Board. I added an expectation and hope that the Governing Body will come west again in the spring for the blessing and opening of Lopdell House, Te Uru and the wider Lopdell House Precinct.

5.       It would be great if the new Titirangi toilets were ready by then, but that seems unlikely. The Board has looked at possible sites for a new toilet block and stressed to Council Officers our wish for a design in keeping with the Lopdell House precinct with the art incorporated in the design from the outset.

6.       The Utility Box Project was discussed at a cluster workshop recently, though the Waitakere Ranges Local Board had met with Council Officers prior to that and gained agreement that some of the very small amount of funding available could be spent on a mural in Bakers Lane in Glen Eden. A contractor has been appointed to manage the project and be the project curator. Local Boards will have a role to play in selection of design and artist. We have 3 possible sites of utility boxes where community has requested painting, but we may only be able to afford 2 before the end of this financial year.

7.       I recently attended Opening Night of the final production of Titirangi Theatre in the Portage Rd Theatre. They are looking forward to returning to Lopdell House to their new premises and I would urge my fellow board members to attend their Grand Opening production in a couple of months’ time. The production will be Faulty Towers.

8.       I also recently attended the Children’s Arts Day at Corban Art Estate. This is a great day and some of our primary schools were acknowledged for their contribution to the art programme there.

9.       The draft Regional Arts Strategy will be released for consultation within the next couple of weeks, and our Board will I am sure, want to submit on it!

 

Events

10.     Our High Tea to acknowledge Janet Clews’ 50 years in Local Government was a huge success. Many of Janet’s former colleagues (elected and officers) were there and it was like a big reunion of friends and colleagues. Janet was given various gifts and several poems were received from around the country and read out in fine humour.

11.     The local board held a most successful Volunteer Recognition event on Friday 27 June. We certainly appreciate our volunteers and if it were possible to put a financial component into the role volunteers’ play, the figure would be beyond belief. The community spirit and place making component is immeasurable. Here is a quote I rather like "So that's 1 part funding, 1 part asphalt, and 2 parts community spirit - now mix!"

12.     We have plans to work with the Auckland Peace Foundation to put on an event around Nuclear Free NZ and to launch a video and toolkit for groups setting themselves up around the region.

13.     We have made small financial contributions to community events including the Glen Eden Harriers.

14.     Planning around events for the rest of the year needs to be in place quite soon and decisions around funding for the 2014-15 year finalised.

 

Community Facilities

15.     Discussion are still happening around the new fees/rentals for Council facilities to achieve uniformity across the region. We have been asked to identify groups we may consider “priority” groups who we might charge a cheaper rate than others. The trend is towards lower rentals for youth activities and regular users. The way Council used to record rentals has made it hard to identify regular users and thereby set fair rates.

16.     New leases have been signed for Council owned but community operated premises but there are still many more leases to review. By and large cheaper leases but short terms and fewer rights of renewals are the order of the day.

17.     Expressions of Interest have been invited from local contractors wishing to win the contract to repair Laingholm Hall, while the Laingholm community still wait for their hall to be repaired 18 months after the first fire. Frustration has turned to resignation now and some community activities have lapsed. This is most disappointing.

 

Recommendation

That the Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

a)      Receives the portfolio update from Member Denise Yates.

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Signatories

Authors

Tua Viliamu – Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

     

  


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

10 July 2014

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

 

Item 8.1      Attachment a    Waitakere Festival - 2013 report                       Page 3


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

10 July 2014