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

 

Date:                      

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

 

Tuesday, 28 October 2014

9.30am

Local Board Chambers
Pukekohe Service Centre
82 Manukau Road
Pukekohe

 

Franklin Local Board

 

OPEN AGENDA

 

 

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Chairperson

Andrew Baker

 

Deputy Chairperson

Jill Naysmith

 

Members

Malcolm Bell

 

 

Alan Cole

 

 

Brendon Crompton

 

 

Angela Fulljames

 

 

Sarah Higgins

 

 

Murray Kay

 

 

Dr Lyn Murphy

 

 

(Quorum 5 members)

 

 

 

Gaylene Harvey

Democracy Advisor

 

20 October 2014

 

Contact Telephone: (09) 237 1310

Email: Gaylene.Harvey@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

 

 


 

 

 


Franklin Local Board

28 October 2014

 

 

ITEM   TABLE OF CONTENTS                                                                                        PAGE

1          Welcome                                                                                                                         5

2          Apologies                                                                                                                        5

3          Declaration of Interest                                                                                                   5

4          Confirmation of Minutes                                                                                               5

5          Leave of Absence                                                                                                          5

6          Acknowledgements                                                                                                       5

7          Petitions                                                                                                                          5

8          Deputations                                                                                                                    5

9          Public Forum                                                                                                                  5

10        Extraordinary Business                                                                                                6

11        Notices of Motion                                                                                                          6

12        Franklin Local Board Community Group Funding - Applications for Round One 2014/2015                                                                                                                                         7

13        Road Name Approval for a road within an approved subdivision at 59 Paparata Road, Bombay, by Paparata Limited (Reference S11086)                                                 13

14        July - Sept 2014 Quarterly Pukekohe Town Centre Revitalisation Project update to the Franklin Local Board                                                                                                   17

15        Auckland Transport Update – October 2014                                                            31

16        Rural Halls Project                                                                                                       51

17        Draft Community Facilities Network Plan                                                                59

18        Significance and Engagement Policy                                                                      137

19        Council Controlled Organisation Review, Progress Report to Local Boards   161

20        Franklin Local Board Workshop Notes                                                                   169

21        Chairman's Report on Haramura Trip                                                                    177  

22        Consideration of Extraordinary Items 

 

 


1          Welcome

 

The Chairman will open the meeting and welcome everyone present.

 

 

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 Franklin Local Board confirms the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Tuesday, 14 October 2014, including the confidential section, as a true and correct record.

 

 

5          Leave of Absence

 

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

 

 

6          Acknowledgements

 

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

 

 

7          Petitions

 

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

 

 

8          Deputations

 

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 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.

 

Dan Lynch and Barry Gibbon will be in attendance to outline the activities proposed for the World War I Commemorations at Waiuku during the week preceding Anzac Day 2015.

 

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.

 


Franklin Local Board

28 October 2014

 

 

Franklin Local Board Community Group Funding - Applications for Round One 2014/2015

 

File No.: CP2014/21030

 

  

 

Purpose

1.   The purpose of this report is to present applications received under round one of the 2014/2015 Franklin Local Board Community Group Funding programme and the 2014/2015 Franklin Local Board School Pool Capital Grants fund.  The Franklin Local Board is requested to fund, part-fund or decline these applications.

Executive Summary

2.   The Franklin Local Board has a total budget of $105,629 for the 2014/2015 financial year for the community grants programme and the 2014/2015 Franklin Local Board School Pool Grants fund.

3.   The board has approved a total of $4,619 for school holiday programmes running between 29 September 2014 and 17 July 2015, which leaves a balance of $101,010 for the year.

4.   The applications to be considered at this time are for round one which is the first of two rounds for this financial year.

5.   A total of 31 eligible applications have been received for round one of the 2014/2015 Franklin Local Board Community Group Funding programme and the 2014/2015 Franklin Local Board School Pool Capital Grants fund, requesting a total of $252,979.

6.    The Franklin Local Board considered these applications at a workshop on 14 October 2014.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board considers the applications listed below and agrees to fund, part-fund or decline each application in this round.

Fund Type

Applicant

Funds required for

Amount requested

Local Board Discretionary Community Fund

Adult Literacy Franklin

Towards venue hire at Franklin,  The Centre from 1 November 2015 to 31 October 2015

$6,896

Local Board Discretionary Community Fund

Beachlands Community Trust

Towards equipment and tools to resource the Log Cabin for groups using the facility

$12,494

Local Board Discretionary Community Fund

Clevedon Historical Society

Towards funding for security cameras to protect displays

$7,000

Local Board Discretionary Community Fund

Clevedon School Board of Trustees - Community Swimming Pool Sub Committee

Towards costs to renovate and upgrade the changing sheds within the school pool complex

$15,000

Local Board Discretionary Community Fund

Coastguard Maraetai Inc

Towards the cost of six personal location beacons (PLB’s) and 12 personal flotation devices (PFD’s)

$4,606

Local Board Discretionary Community Fund

 

Coastguard Maraetai Inc

Towards an upgrade of the Coastguard Maraetai tractor

$10,000

Local Board Discretionary Community Fund

Grandparents Raising Grandchildren Trust NZ

Towards a contribution to the Outreach worker salary and monthly newsletter

$1,040

Local Board Discretionary Community Fund

Karaka Cricket Club Inc

Towards the cost of repairs to the cricket nets

$4,025

Local Board Discretionary Community Fund

Kidz Social Services Charitable Trust

Towards the costs to provide Te Whariki Ora initiative

$7,100

Local Board Discretionary Community Fund

Knitting Grannies

Toward the purchase of good quality knitting wool

$2,000

Local Board Discretionary Community Fund

New Zealand Society of Genealogists Inc Franklin Branch

Towards promotion and marketing costs for the 150th year commemoration of the 13 Waikato Immigration Scheme ships that arrived in 1864 and 1865

$900

Local Board Discretionary Community Fund

Patumahoe Community Support Charitable Trust

Towards costs to collate and print the book ‘Patumahoe:  A Social History’ in 2016 to coincide with the 150th anniversary of Patumahoe School

$10,000

Local Board Discretionary Community Fund

Pukekohe Community Action Charitable Trust

Towards wages, room hire and resources to provide support programmes in the Franklin area

$25,000

Local Board Discretionary Community Fund

Pukekohe Croquet Club Inc

Towards the purchase of a new greens mower to replace the ageing and unreliable current model

$32,500

Local Board Discretionary Community Fund

Society for Community Development Support Inc t/a Pregnancy Options & Help

Towards costs to employ a support worker

$2,500

Local Board Discretionary Community Fund

Te Rongopai Ministries Pukekohe

Towards costs to promote and strengthen relationships with other marae and the local community

$760

Local Board Discretionary Community Fund

The Healing Group

Towards a Christmas luncheon with small gifts for local families who are needy or underprivileged

$2,250

Local Board Discretionary Community Fund

The Parenting Place - Attitude Youth Division

Towards subsidies to provide the Attitude programme in Franklin high school in 2014/2015

$3,694

Local Board Discretionary Community Fund

The Parenting Place - Toolbox Division

 

Towards subsidies to provide the Toolbox programme to parenting groups in the Franklin Local Board area

 

$2,222

Local Board Discretionary Community Fund

Wairoa River Landcare Incorporated

 

Towards short term funding costs for the eradication of crack willow and planting of native trees as part of the restoration of the Wairoa River Project

$15,398

Local Board Discretionary Community Fund

WaterSafe Auckland Inc

Towards costs to provide the Whanau Nui swim and water safety programme to take place at Pukekohe and Patumahoe primary schools from 1 December 2014 to 1 February 2015

$3,983

Marae Facilities Fund

Nga Hau E Wha Marae O Pukekohe

Towards costs to replace windows and doors, flooring, removal of textured ceiling and installation of air-conditioning in the Whare moe (sleeping house)

$25,000

Franklin Local Board School Pool Capital Grants Fund

Ararimu School

Towards operational costs, new bbq tables and a new pool ladder

$1,800

Franklin Local Board School Pool Capital Grants Fund

Awhitu District School

Towards a solar heating system to increase the water temperature

$18,495

Franklin Local Board School Pool Capital Grants Fund

Beachlands School

Towards operational costs -

pool chemicals, repairs and maintenance, utilities and water testing charges. 

$2,650

Franklin Local Board School Pool Capital Grants Fund

Clevedon School

Towards operational costs which include chemicals, repairs and maintenance, painting and water testing

$3,215

Franklin Local Board School Pool Capital Grants Fund

Glenbrook School

Towards operational costs which include chemicals, repairs and maintenance, utilities, water testing, mowing and fence repairs

$13,886

Franklin Local Board School Pool Capital Grants Fund

Hunua School

Towards operational costs including chemicals, repairs and maintenance, utilities, water testing, water supply

$5,979

Franklin Local Board School Pool Capital Grants Fund

Maraetai School

Towards operational costs including chemicals, repairs and maintenance, utilities and water testing

$5,000

Franklin Local Board School Pool Capital Grants Fund

Paparimu School

Towards operational costs including chemicals, water testing, repairs and maintenance and four new lane buoys

$6,586

Franklin Local Board School Pool Capital Grants Fund

Te Hihi School

Towards operational costs which include chemicals, repairs and maintenance, utilities and water testing.  It also includes sending two people on a water testing course.

$1,000

 

 

Total amount requested

$252,979

Comments

7.    At the 6 March 2014 meeting, the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee agreed to the continuation of the interim community funding approach for the 2014/2015 financial year:

That the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee endorse existing funding arrangements and grants schemes being rolled over for the 2014 /2015 financial year.” (REG/2014/36)

 

8.    The funds for the legacy community funding and local board discretionary community funding schemes within the southern local board areas cover the following funds:

·      Local Board Discretionary Community Fund

·      Social Investment

·      School Holiday Programme Fund

·      Community Crime Prevention Fund

·      Marae Facilities Fund

 

9.    Thirty-one eligible applications were received in this round to be considered under the following funds:

·      Local Board Discretionary Community Grants Fund

·      Marae Facilities Fund

·      Franklin Local Board School Pool Grants Fund

 

10.  When considering the applications to the Local Board Discretionary Community Grants Fund, the Franklin Local Board should be guided by their local board plan priorities.  These are not eligibility criteria; rather they are guidelines to support the local board when considering the merits of each application.

 

11.  The Franklin Local Board held a workshop on 14 October 2014 to consider each application and how each project aligned with the Franklin Local Board Plan priorities, the south “Community Funding Policy for Grants, Donations and Sponsorships” and the criteria and process used to assess applications to the Franklin Local Board School Pool Grants fund.

 

12.  Financial Summary - Summary of Franklin Local Board’s available balances for the 2014/2015 financial year:

 

2014/15

Annual

Budget

 

Type of Fund

Grants

paid

Balance

$29,618

 

Local Board Discretionary Community Fund

$0

$29,618

$32,888

 

Social Investment Fund

$0

$32,888

$4,619

 

School Holiday Programme Fund

$4,619

$0

$6,800

 

Community Crime Prevention Fund

$0

$6,800

$15,945

 

Marae Facilities Fund

$0

$15,945

$15,759

 

Franklin Local Board School Pool Capital Grants Fund

$0

$15,759

$105,629

TOTAL

$4,619

$101,010

 

 

School Holiday Programme Fund

 

Marama Hou Ministries Trust

$4,619

School Holiday Programme Fund

$4,619

 

 

 


 

Consideration

Local Board Views

13.  A copy of the current legacy community funding and local board discretionary community funding schemes policy, criteria and assessment guidelines within the southern local board areas was circulated to all board members for the workshop held on 14 October 2014.

14.  Local board feedback on these applications was sought at a workshop with the Franklin Local Board on 14 October 2014.

Maori Impact Statement

15.  Community funding is a general programme of interest and accessible to a wide range of groups, including Maori. Maori are therefore likely to benefit alongside other groups in the community. The provision of community funding to support community development initiatives provides opportunities for all Aucklanders to undertake projects, programmes and activities that benefit Maori.

General

16.  The allocation of grants to community groups is within the adopted annual plan and budgets.

17.  The decisions sought by this report do not trigger the Auckland Council Significance Policy.

Implementation Issues

18.  Following the Franklin Local Board allocating funding for Round One, Community Development, Arts and Culture will notify the applicants of the local board decision.

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Signatories

Authors

Jan Perkins - Community Funding Co-ordinator South

Authorisers

Kevin Marriott - Manager Community Facilities

Teresa Turner - Relationship Manager

 


Franklin Local Board

28 October 2014

 

 

Road Name Approval for a road within an approved subdivision at 59 Paparata Road, Bombay, by Paparata Limited (Reference S11086)

 

File No.: CP2014/22824

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       This report outlines the background for the Applicant (Paparata Limited) to seek approval from the Franklin Local Board to name one Private Way (Common Access Lot at 59 Paparata Road, Bombay (Reference S11086) (approved 15 April 2014).

Executive summary

2.       The legacy Franklin District Council had an existing road naming policy which set out the requirements and criteria of the Council for proposed road names.  These requirements and criteria have been applied to ensure that consistency of road naming within the former Franklin area, until a new road naming policy is adopted by Auckland Council.

3.       The Applicant proposes one (1) preferred road name, being ‘Cranleigh Way’ and one (1) alternative name being ‘Altera Way’. Local Iwi have put forward the names ‘Hemopo’, ‘Tahapeehi’ and ‘Pukekura Way’.

4.       The Applicant’s proposed preferred name ‘Cranleigh Way’ meets the road naming policy criteria.  This name is recommended to be considered by the Local Board.  The alternate names ‘Altera Way’, ‘Hemopo’, ‘Tahapeehi’ and ‘Pukekura Way’ also meet the criteria.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board considers for approval the name ‘Cranleigh Way’, for the one new Private Way, pursuant to section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974, noting that the alternative names ‘Altera Way’ Hemopo’, ‘Tahapeehi’ and ‘Pukekura Way’” also meet the criteria.

 

Comments

5.       The legacy Franklin District Council had an existing road naming policy which set out the requirements and criteria of the Council for proposed road names.  These requirements and criteria have been applied to ensure consistency of road naming within the former Franklin area, until a new road naming policy is adopted by Auckland Council.

6.       The 8 lot Village-zoned subdivision, at 59 Paparata Road, will be accessed by one Common Access Road (Private Way), with the main access from Paparata Road to the south. 

7.       Shown below is a copy of the subdivision plan highlighting the location of the proposed road to be named with the Applicants preferred names attached.

8.       The Applicant has put forward one preferred name for the one road, one alternative name and a further three alternative names following consultation with the local Iwi, Ngati Tamaoho and Ngati Te Ata. 

Table One

Applicant Preferred Name

Background or significance

 

 

Cranleigh Way

The Crainleigh name has links to Andrew Bayly (National MP for Hunua) who is part owner of the property and this is also the name of one of his companies.

 

 

Applicant Alternative Name

 

Altera Way

The word means ‘highest point’ and this name is felt to be appropriate because the Private Way is high on the hill.

 

 

Iwi proposed names

 

Hemopo

Family name

(put forward by Lucille Rutherfurd from Ngati Tamaoho)

Tahapeehi

Family name

(put forward by Lucille Rutherfurd from Ngati Tamaoho)

Pukekura Way

An old Maori name which referred to the Bombay area

(put forward by Karl Flavell from Ngati Te Ata)

 

Decision Making

9.       The Auckland Council, by way of the Auckland Council Long Term Community Plan (2012 – 2022), allocated the responsibility for naming of new roads, pursuant to section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974, to Local Boards.

10.     The Applicant’s preferred road names, the alternative names and the suggested names by local Iwi have been assessed against the criteria set out in the legacy Franklin District Council Road Naming policy, C.1.2(a), as follows:

Table Two

The duplication of names in current usage in the Auckland metropolitan area (either spelling or pronunciation) should be avoided.

Names should be reasonable brief

Short roads will be given short names to avoid cartographic problems

The use of more than one word in is generally to be avoided.  Hyphens to connect to parts of names is to be avoided and the name should be written as one word or as separate words.

The possessive form is not acceptable, e.g. Hector Avenue not Hector’s Avenue

Descriptive names are acceptable provided they are not ambiguous

Council encourages the use of names which have historic and/or geographic significance and the use of names of early explorers, early settlers and early notable people and events having regard to the area concerned

The use of Maori names when known is encouraged.

Council welcomes suggestions from subdividers, community groups and residents and it encourages the road names on a theme. The use of any name is entirely at the discretion of the Council, whether for policy reasons or other considerations.

Where there is an association or grouping of names in a locality, names submitted should have an appropriate association with other names in the locality and the introduction of names void of significance or inappropriate to the nomenclature in a locality should be avoided.

Terms such as ‘road’, ‘avenue’ etc are to be used in circumstances appropriate to the situation.

The Council may take into account any additional relevant factors outside its stated policy as may arise on a case by case basis.

Road Names should be checked with New Zealand Post

11.     Assessment Outcome

Table Three

Applicant Preferred Name

Meets criteria

 

 

Cranleigh Way

Yes

 

 

Applicant Alternative Name

 

Altera Way

Yes

 

 

Iwi proposed names

 

Hemopo

Yes

Tahapeehi

Yes

Pukekura Way

Yes

12.     It is noted that a Common Access Lot is a Private Way and should be named ‘Way’ as required by the current standards set out in AS/NZS 4819:2011.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

13.     The decision sought from the Franklin Local Board for this report does not trigger any significant policy and is not considered to have any immediate impact on the community.


 

Māori impact statement

14.     The decision sought from the Franklin Local Board on this report does not adversely affect Maori communities, as the naming of roads is not linked to one of Council’s strategic priorities for Maori.  Despite the above, the applicant has sought comments from Ngati Tamaoho and Ngati Te Ata and has taken all comments and suggestions into consideration.

Financial and Resourcing Implications

15.     The cost of processing the approval of the proposed new road names and any installation of road name signage is recoverable in accordance with Council’s Administrative Charges.

Legal and Legislative Implications

16.     The decision sought from the Franklin Local Board for this report is not considered to have any legal or legislative implications.

Implementation

17.     The Southern Resource Consents Team is involved in ensuring that appropriate road name signage will be installed accordingly once an approval is obtained for the new road names.

Conclusion

18.     The Applicant’s proposed preferred name ‘Cranleigh Way’ meets the road naming policy criteria.  This name is recommended to be considered by the Local Board.  The alternate names ‘Altera Way’, ‘Hemopo, ‘Tahapeehi’ and Pukekura Way’ also meet the criteria.

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.    

Signatories

Authors

Mineke Meyerink - Intermediate Planner

Authorisers

Heather Harris - Manager Resource Consents

Teresa Turner - Relationship Manager

 


Franklin Local Board

28 October 2014

 

 

July - Sept 2014 Quarterly Pukekohe Town Centre Revitalisation Project update to the Franklin Local Board

 

File No.: CP2014/23013

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       The report seeks to:

a)   update the Franklin Local Board on the Pukekohe Town Centre Revitalisation project for the July to September 2014 quarter

b)   amend Clause 5.5 (Meeting Quorum) of the Pukekohe Town Centre Revitalisation Committee Terms of Reference.

Executive Summary

2.       This Report provides an update to the Local Board on the delivery of the Pukekohe Town Centre Revitalisation project for the July to September 2014 quarterSpecifically the Report provides an update on the Tobin Street and West Street streetscape construction project and other collaborative projects with key stakeholders.

3.       The Report also includes a recommendation from the Town Centre Revitalisation Committee (TCRC) to amend Clause 5.5 (Meeting quorum) of the TCRC Terms of Reference.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board approves the below amendment to Clause 5.5 (Meeting quorum) of the Town Centre Revitalisation Committee Terms of Reference in order to provide greater flexibility on the make-up of the required quorum:

“Clause 5.5 Meeting quorum

A meeting quorum is considered to be met when there are three (3) representatives from either the Franklin Local Board and/ or the nominated community organisation’s (as identified in section 4.1) present at a meeting.

The quorum (of three representatives) must always be made up of at least one representative from the Franklin Local Board.”

Discussion

The Town Centre Revitalisation Project

4.       The Pukekohe Town Centre Revitalisation project is a long running programme of works to revitalise the streetscapes of Pukekohe and maintain high amenity standards within the Town Centre. The project has been on-going since its conception in 2000.

5.       The objective of the project is to improve the Pukekohe Town Centre as an attractive, safe and viable place for people to do business, shop, work and visit, consistent with the Auckland Plan vision for Pukekohe. The Town Centre Revitalisation Project continues to achieve this objective by delivering on streetscape improvement projects. Project delivery is overseen by the Pukekohe Town Centre Revitalisation Committee (TCRC) and the Franklin Local Board.

6.       Projects completed to date include paving and streetscape upgrades of Massey Avenue, King, Hall, Edinburgh, Roulston and Seddon Streets. Upgrades included the installation of associated streetscape furniture including rubbish bins, street lighting, planting and seating. The project has also delivered the upgrade of the Pukekohe Town Square and relocation of the Possum Bourne statue early 2013.

 

7.       In the quarter from July to September 2014 the following work has been undertaken:

·    The completion of the streetscape revitalisation works on Tobin Street and West Street. Construction works conducted by John Fillmore Contracting Limited (JFC).

·    The rectification of paving defects and installation faults around the Farmers development (corner of Wesley and Edinburgh streets) by North Harbour Paving & Construction.

·    Collaborative working with the Pukekohe Business Association regarding the installation of a digital interpretive information kiosk in the Pukekohe Town Square. The kiosk is to provide information for visitors on businesses within the Town Centre, upcoming events, active community groups and historical educational elements.

·    Collaborative working with the Franklin Historical Society and building owners to install a Heritage Trail around the Town Centre, identifying buildings of historical significance in Pukekohe Town Centre. The Heritage Trail is being installed in three phases over the 2014/15 and 2015/16 financial years.

Governance – The Town Centre Revitalisation Committee

8.       On 27 May 2014 the Terms of Reference for the TCRC were adopted by the Franklin Local Board. The Terms of Reference confirm the TCRC as the Project Steering Committee for the Pukekohe Town Centre Revitalisation Project. The Franklin Local Board retains ultimate decision making Authority in respect to Town Centre Revitalisation Projects.

9.       The Committee Terms of Reference Clause 4.1 - Committee membership identifies the TCRC membership as being four representatives from the Franklin Local Board and one representative from each of the following three organisation’s; the Pukekohe Business Association, the NZ Police and the Franklin Historical Society. Auckland Council and Auckland Transport officers attend meetings in an advisory and operational capacity.

10.     The Committee Terms of Reference Clause 5.5 – Meeting quorum requires that two (2) x Local Board Members and three (3) representatives from community organisations be present for decisions to be made in the meeting.

11.     Since the adoption of the Terms of Reference, the TCRC has had difficulty in reaching the quorum required to enable decision making function of the TCRC to operate. As such, the TCRC recommends to the Franklin Local Board that Clause 5.5 – Meeting quorum of the Terms of Reference be amended as follows:

Clause 5.5 Meeting quorum

A meeting quorum is considered to be met when there are three (3) representatives from either the Franklin Local Board and/ or the nominated community organisation’s (as identified in section 4.1) present at a meeting.

The quorum (of three representatives) must always be made up of at least one representative from the Franklin Local Board.

12.     This amendment is to ensure that a quorum is able to be met at meetings of the TCRC, enabling the TCRC to function in its steering committee capacity, with delegation decision making responsibilities as set out in the TCRC Terms of Reference.

13.     The amended Terms of Reference can be found in Attachment 1. The proposed amendments are shown in underlined text.

Consideration

Local Board Views

14.     This report is primarily sought for information only. A decision is also sought regarding clause 5.5 – Meeting Quorum of the TCRC Terms of Reference.

 

Maori Impact Statement

15.     While this report is for information only and does not require any decision making, the TCRC acknowledges the principals of Katiakitanga and have engaged with Iwi on the Concept Design of Tobin and West Streets. Iwi engagement will occur during the design phases of all Town Centre Revitalisaiton projects confirmed for the 2014/15 financial year.

Implementation Issues

16.     The activities detailed in this report are within budget. Any decisions arising from discussions and any changes to the work programme will have financial and resourcing implications that will need to be managed.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Pukekohe Town Centre Revitalisation Committee (TCRC) Terms of Reference (amended)

21

     

Signatories

Authors

Anna Wallace - Project Leader South

Authorisers

Penny Pirrit - Regional & Local Planning Manager

Teresa Turner - Relationship Manager

 


Franklin Local Board

28 October 2014

 

 











Franklin Local Board

28 October 2014

 

 

Auckland Transport Update – October 2014

 

File No.: CP2014/17146

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       Providing an update on transport matters for the information of the Franklin Local Board and a register of transport issues in the Franklin Local Board area, as collated by Auckland Transport’s Elected Member Relationship Manager (South).

Executive Summary

2.       This report covers matters of specific application and interest to the Franklin Local Board and its community, matters of general interest relating to Auckland Transport activities or the transport sector, and Auckland Transport media releases for the information of the Board and community.

3.       In particular, this report provides information on:

·   the Franklin Local Board’s transport capital fund

·   Consultation on proposed New Network

·   Chip seal season beginning

·   Free spring cycling courses

 

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board approves the Awhitu flag lighting project (at the intersections indicated in Attachment A) for construction to be funded from the Local Board Transport Capital Fund, based on the firm estimate of cost of $21,000.

 

Discussion

Franklin Items

A1. Local board transport capital fund

4.       The Franklin Local Board’s funding allocation under the LBTCF is currently $434,966 per annum.

5.       The Board’s current LBTCF projects are included in the table below (in which ROC = rough order of costs, and FEC = firm estimate of cost):

ID#

Project Description

Progress/Current Status

083

Pukekohe East Road-Mill Road/Harrisville Road intersection, Bombay/Pukekohe – installation of variable 70 km/h rural intersection activated warning signage (RIAWS)

·      FEC estimate of $67,000

·      On 26-Nov-13, the Board gave construction approval for the project based on the FEC of $67,000.

·      The variable speed limit was resolved by the TCC in Jun-14 for that portion within the Auckland area.

·      The Waikato District Council in Sep-14 approved a temporary variable speed limit for that portion within its area (to operate until its annual bylaw review can formalise the permanent change).

·      Installation is expected following completion of the procurement process with the sign suppliers.

074

Third View Avenue, Beachlands – install 300m of new kerb and channel between Sunkist Bay Road and Cherrie Road (both sides)

·      FEC estimate of $230,000 (not including SW infrastructure being separately funded by Council)

·      On 27-Aug-13, the Board resolved to proceed to detailed design and costing phase.

·      On 15-Apr-14, the Board gave approval to proceed with construction.

·      This work is now scheduled to commence in late Oct-14 following completion of the design.

254

Tobin Street carpark lighting improvements

·      ROC estimate of $35,000

·      Project involves installation of three double outreach poles and six new LED luminaires

·      On 26-Aug-14, the Board resolved to proceed to detailed design and costing stage.

·      A consultant is currently being engaged to carry out detailed design and costing.

347

Awhitu peninsula intersection flag lighting

·      ROC estimate of $22,000

·      FEC estimate of $21,000

·      On 26-Aug-14, the Board resolved to proceed to detailed design and costing stage.

·      AT has identified 14 sites (see Attachment A) where flag lights are able to be installed easily on existing Counties Power poles to illuminate the side roads.  A FEC of $21,000 will cover these 14 sites and includes all materials, labour, plant, mileage and traffic management but does not include luminaires.  AT proposes to use LEDs to be uplifted from AT owned-stock held at Transfield with no cost to the project.

·      Another 19 intersections would be too costly to have columns installed due to more distant low voltage (LV) lines that would require stretches of trenching or thrusting, or due to LV lines across private property requiring authorisation and easements.

·      These sites may be good future candidates for a separate solar panel lighting project.  To include new poles and solar panels at these 19 sites is estimated at $182,000.  However, some poles may be close enough to LV lines to make trenching/thrusting more cost effective.  Should the Board wish to consider this as a separate project, AT would suggest a priority list based on accident statistics.

249

Pukekohe North streetlighting improvements

·      ROC estimate of $201,000

·      Project involves replacement of existing streetlights with LED luminaires on 18 streets.

·      On 26-Aug-14, the Board gave approval to proceed with construction.

250

Waiuku South streetlighting improvements

·      ROC estimate of $70,000

·      Project involves replacement of existing streetlights with LED luminaires on Colombo Road, Kaiwaka Road and Norfolk Rise.

·      On 26-Aug-14, the Board gave approval to proceed with construction.

348

Kaiwaka Road new footpath, Waiuku

·      ROC estimate of $50,000

·      On 26-Aug-14, the Board gave approval to proceed with construction.

·      Design being progressed by AT.

349

Pacific Street new footpath, Waiuku

·      ROC estimate of $67,500

·      On 26-Aug-14, the Board gave approval to proceed with construction.

·      Design being progressed by AT.  Consultation will be carried out with adjacent owners of not yet developed land.

371

Whitford bus interchange

·      FEC estimate of $200,000

·      On 23-Sep-14, the Board gave approval to proceed with construction, based on the FEC of $200,000.

·      Design is complete.  Construction is expected near the end of the current financial year.

248

Hunua pedestrian facility

·      ROC estimate of $50,000

·      On 23-Sep-14, the Board gave approval for this project to progress to detailed design and costing, based on the ROC of $50,000.

·      Design is being progressed by AT.

 

 

6.       The Franklin Local Board’s transport capital fund to date is summarised below.

Franklin Local Board transport capital fund summary:

Total funding available (across 5 FYs – 2012/12 to 2016/17)

$2,174,830

Completed projects reporting actual costs (Second View Ave kerb and channel; Patumahoe/Waiuku/Attewell Roads investigation; Pukekohe station overbridge; Ardmore School footpath; Harris St bench; Pukeoware School signs; Waiuku pavers upgrade; Third View kerb and channel projects x1)

-$543,355

Projects approved for construction based on rough or firm estimates (Mill/Harrisville electronic signage; Third View kerb and channel projects x1; Pukekohe North streetlighting improvements; Waiuku South streetlighting improvements; Kaiwaka Rd footpath; Pacific St footpath; Whitford bus interchange)

-885,500

Projects at detailed design and costing phase (Tobin St carpark lighting; Hunua pedestrian facility)

85,000

Projects awaiting construction approval (Awhitu peninsula flag lighting)

21,000

Funding still available to allocate

$639,975

 

A2. Consultation on proposed New Network

7.       Consultation on the proposed New Network for Pukekohe and Waiuku has been open since 22 September, and closes on 17 October.

8.       The public transport proposals for Pukekohe include replacing the current Pukekohe loop bus with three new circular bus services.  These would run every 30 minutes throughout the day and connect with trains at Pukekohe Station.  A bus between Pukekohe and Wesley College/Paerata will be retained.  However Auckland Transport is proposing to remove the bus route between Wesley College/Paerata and Papakura.  The proposed bus routes in Pukekohe are shown on the plan at Attachment B.

9.       For Waiuku, residents are offered three different bus routes to choose from – a service to Papakura through Kingseat, running every hour at peak times and every two to three hours off-peak; a service to Papakura through Drury running every hour at peak times and every two to three hours off-peak; or a service to Pukekohe running every 30 minutes at peak times and every one to two hours off-peak.  These route options are shown on the plan at Attachment C.

10.     Later this year, a new hourly weekend train shuttle to Papakura will commence, and a later evening train during the week from Britomart will be added to the current timetable.

11.     The New Network consultation activities included over 16,000 addressed brochures mailed out to residents; 3,500 brochures sent to key stakeholders, customer service centres etc; AT ambassadors handing out brochures at Pukekohe and Papakura train stations, key business locations and on buses; and advertisements in the Franklin County News, the Waiuku Post, the NZ Herald, the Papakura Courier and the Manukau Courier.  There was also advertising online and on digital screens at some local petrol suppliers.

12.     Over the four-week consultation period, Auckland Transport also interacted with local Franklin residents at five community events, including appearances by revamped a Mercedes 305 “AmBUSador” as the central piece of a mobile roadshow.  Those events and the number of discussions or engagements had were:

 

Date

Location

Engagements

Sat 27 Sept

Franklin Market – Pukekohe

~230 people

Tue 30 Sept

Waiuku Drop in Day – Waiuku Community Hall

~60-70 people

Sun 5 Oct

Blast to the Past – Waiuku

~300 people

Thur 9 Oct

Pukekohe Drop in Day – Franklin: The Centre, Pukekohe

~20 people

Sat 11 Oct

Franklin Market – Pukekohe

~200 people

 


 

AT staff engaging with the public at the Franklin markets

13.     Feedback has been submitted by local residents using either the feedback form provided in the New Network brochure, or online via Auckland Transport’s website.

14.     By the end of the third week of consultation, Auckland Transport had received submissions from 684 people (501 hardcopy feedback forms and 183 online).  A verbal update on the final number of submissions received will be given at the meeting.

General Information Items

B1. Budget workshops

15.     Over the next month Auckland Transport is holding workshops with all Local Boards.  Cluster workshops will look at the prioritisation of medium to large Capital Works projects over the next ten years and how these are prioritised within Auckland Transport’s overall work programme.

16.     Cluster workshops will be followed by individual Local Board workshops to discuss the prioritisation in detail.  These individual workshops will also look more closely at projects and initiatives over the next three years across: Maintenance & Renewals, Road Safety, Public Transport Operations, Route Optimisation, Travel Demand Management and Parking.

B2. Chip seal season beginning

17.     Auckland Transport is about to embark on its annual road resealing programme.  Wherever possible chipseal will be used as it provides a cost effective and durable road surface which is well suited to Auckland’s flexible road pavements.

18.     Resealing the road surface waterproofs the surface and improves the road skid resistance to ensure that the roads stay in good condition.  Regular maintenance of the roads means that they do not need to be totally reconstructed.  Generally the road surface will last between 10 and 15 years.

19.     In general, a typical reseal would follow the timeline below:

Some weeks prior to reseal

·    Fix any road failures in the street – localised road pavement repairs

 

A few days prior to reseal

·    Letter drop informing residents of the road reseal

 

Day of reseal

·    Set up traffic management

·    Sweep road for debris

·    Chip seal applied

·    Roll chip into road surface


 

Within a few days of reseal

·    Sweep excess chip off the road

·    Reinstatement of road marking

 

A week or so after reseal

·    Road surface checked

·    Further sweeping to pick up any excess loose chip

·    Remove traffic management

 

3 – 4 weeks after reseal

·    Additional sweeping if required, to remove any remaining loose chip.

20.     The Contractor responds to any Call Centre service requests relating to the chip sealing during the course of the work.

B3. Free spring cycling courses

21.     With spring having sprung, Auckland Transport has a number of free cycling courses taking place across Auckland.  Bookings are essential for all courses so it is recommended to book a place early as numbers are limited.  For more information or to register a place, visit www.cyclingsthego.co.nz or phone 355 3553.

22.     Courses being run in the southern area are shown below:

Beginner bike training for adults

A good session for those new to riding, returning after a break, or lacking confidence

·    Howick                           Mon 6 Oct, 6pm – 8pm

·    Mangere                        Mon 3 Nov, 6pm – 8pm

·    Papakura                       Mon 1 Dec, 6pm – 8pm

Bike care and maintenance

A fun, interactive workshop that takes the mystery out of the bicycle, and covers how to fix a flat tyre.

·    Pakuranga                     Mon 20 Oct, 6pm – 8pm

·    Mangere                        Mon 17 Nov, 6pm – 8pm

·    Pukekohe                      Mon 8 Dec, 6pm – 8pm

Cycling on the road – an introduction

A practical on-road session for adults who can ride a bike in off-road environments but want to learn the basics or be more comfortable riding on quieter roads

·    Mangere Bridge             Sat 22 Nov, 9am – 2pm

Guided bike rides for beginners

A guided bike ride specially designed for beginner and less confident adults to learn and practice new skills

·    Mangere Bridge             Tue 21 Oct, 6pm – 8pm

·    Pakuranga                     Thu 13 Nov, 6pm – 8pm

B4. NZTA Snapchat drug-driving campaign a world-first for New Zealand

23.     For the past month the NZTA has been working with US-based Snapchat to set up and seed ‘Tinnyvision’, an innovative world-first road safety campaign targeting young New Zealand drug users to raise awareness of the dangers of driving while under the influence of marijuana.

24.     The NZTA worked with local website owners to spread the word about TinnyVision and generate interest in the funny ‘stoner snaps’.  As the word spread, thousands added TinnyVision as a friend on Snapchat, then over the course of a single day they received a series of video snaps, watching the stars of TinnyVision getting stoned and watching their reactions get slower.  After ten snaps the boys head out in the car for some food – the driver reacts too slowly and hits a girl at a pedestrian crossing.


 

25.     At this point the audience doesn’t know what they’ve just seen, but it looks real and they can’t watch it again – which is the nature of Snapchat.  A few minutes later they get the final snap with the simple written message ‘Stoned drivers are slower to react’.

26.     The ‘Tinnyvision’ account is fronted by a likeable group of young Kiwis.  The video snaps for the campaign were directed by Taika Waititi, who also filmed the NZTA’s award-winning Blazed drug-driving television advertisements which set records on YouTube and has clocked up more than two million views on-line.

27.     The Snapchat campaign has achieved its initial goal of reaching 7,500 people and 95% of those have watched the full series of snaps and received the road safety message at the end.  Commentary on social media has been overwhelmingly positive, with thousands of likes and hundreds of positive comments.

28.     The Tinnyvision snaps are being packaged together for use in cinema advertising and promotion on YouTube.  The compilation can be viewed on-line here:
http://youtu.be/69gVHyL-rPo.

29.     Key Facts:

·    Kiwis are amongst the highest marijuana users in the world.

·    According to the latest Drug Use in New Zealand Survey 2007/2008 (published in 2010), 14.6% of adults aged 16 to 64 had used cannabis in the previous 12 months.

·    Two out of three cannabis users admitted to driving after using.

·    Drugged driving is a serious road safety issue: ESR figures from a study conducted over 2004-2009 of the blood of deceased drivers, showed one quarter of all drivers and motorcyclists killed in road crashes were found to have cannabis present in their system, with or without other substances.

·    The Government’s Safer Journeys road safety strategy has made drug-driving a priority, aiming to significantly reduce the incidence of drug-impaired driving, with fewer people losing their lives or suffering serious injuries as a result of drugged drivers.

Media Releases

C1. Monsters and children

30.     With schoolchildren returning from school holidays on 13 October, Auckland Transport's Back to School Campaign reinforces its 'Slow Down Around Schools' message with the help of monsters and children.

31.     The campaign’s main focus is safety, but is also about educating the community and raising awareness of the vulnerability of children as pedestrians or cyclists when they travel to and from school.

32.     The campaign opened with radio advertisements and press ads in suburban newspapers reminding motorists to ‘Slow Down Around Schools’.  The campaign continues with radio advertising and bus backs.

33.     A placard campaign is also scheduled where students, together with school staff, will be waving placards at passing motorists to encourage them to be more vigilant and reduce their speed around schools.

34.     Speeding cars and drivers around schools are portrayed as ‘monsters’ and the campaign features images of terrified children reacting to the approaching monsters.

35.     Working in collaboration with Police across the region, Auckland Transport hopes to get the community talking and to realise and appreciate that it is everyone’s responsibility to keep children safe around schools.

Issues Register

36.     The regular monthly issues register is Attachment D to this report.


 

Consideration

Local Board Views

37.     The Board’s views will be incorporated during consultation on any proposed schemes.

Implementation Issues

38.     All proposed schemes are subject to prioritisation, funding and consultation.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Awhitu peninsula intersections proposed for flag lighting implementation

39

bView

Proposed New Network bus routes for Pukekohe

41

cView

Proposed New Network bus routes for Waiuku

43

dView

Issues Register – Franklin Local Board – October 2014

45

    

Signatories

Authors

Jenni Wild – Elected Member Relationship Manager (South); Auckland Transport Gaylene Harvey - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon – Elected Member Relationship Team Manager; AT

Teresa Turner - Relationship Manager

 


Franklin Local Board

28 October 2014

 

 


Franklin Local Board

28 October 2014

 

 


Franklin Local Board

28 October 2014

 

 


Franklin Local Board

28 October 2014

 

 







Franklin Local Board

28 October 2014

 

 

Rural Halls Project

 

File No.: CP2014/22352

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       To provide Franklin local board (“the Board”) with sufficient information on governance options for the rural halls in the Wairoa subdivision of Franklin and the Waiuku War Memorial Hall (“the Wairoa/Waiuku Memorial halls”), so that the Board can make an informed decision on the most appropriate governance structure.

Executive summary

2.       There are six best practice governance structures the Board could consider for the Wairoa/Waiuku Memorial halls.  The current model in use is model one – council governed and managed.  The Board is aware of a strong desire within the community to change this model to one which enables a much greater opportunity for local community leadership and delivery.

3.       The benefits and disadvantages of the six governance structures were discussed at a local board workshop on 21 October 2014.  Prior to the workshop, the Franklin Local Board had a preference for model three.

4.       The information contained in this report was prepared prior to the deadline for the Board Workshop on 21 October.  Council staff recommend that the local board confirms its preference for the ownership, governance and management of the halls in light of the information presented and discussion at the workshop.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board confirms its preferred ownership, governance and management model for Wairoa/Waiuku Memorial halls in light of the information presented and discussion at the Board workshop held on 21 October 2014.

 

Comments

5.       Information from Visitor Solutions, the Community Facilities Network Planning project and council’s operational teams has been used to prepare this report.

6.       There are six governance structures the Board could consider, each has its own benefits and disadvantages outlined in this report.  These structures should be considered within the current circumstances of each of the Wairoa/Waiuku Memorial halls, some of which enjoy a higher utilisation within the local community than others.

Governance structure options:

7.       Auckland Council’s draft Community Facilities Network Plan identifies six broad models of facility ownership governance and management (refer Attachment A).  Model one is the current model in use for the Wairoa/Waiuku Memorial halls.

·      Model one, council governed & managed

·      Model two, council governed & managed with local advisory committee

·      Model three, Community-led

·      Model four, Contract with service providers

·      Model five, Operated by independent organisations

·      Model six, Facility partnership collaboration with joint capital funding


Governance and financial implications

Model one, council governed & managed

8.       Governance under the council governed and managed structure (Model one):

·   Council undertakes governance of the rural halls directly through the Board.  The Board retains the final say on governance issues.

·   Council manages the halls directly through council staff members.

·   Monitoring and reporting levels are consistent.

·   Under this model there is little direct empowerment of local communities.  The approach to the overall operation and management of the halls is consistent.

9.       Financial implications are:

·   Capital and operational costs are council’s responsibility.  The 2013/2014 actuals for the 11 Wairoa/Waiuku Memorial halls was $364,000. 

·   Revenues go directly to local board budget.

·   Fees are set by council.

Model two, council governed & managed with local advisory committee

10.     The facility is council governed & managed with an advisory committee

·   Council appoints the advisory committee members to provide local input to decision-making.

·   Consistent monitoring and reporting levels.

11.     Financial implications are:

·   Cost and revenue flows are the same as Model one.  The 2013/2014 actuals for the 11 Wairoa/Waiuku Memorial halls was $364,000.

·   Fees are set by council.

Model three, Community-led

12.     Governance and management by a charitable trust or incorporated society.  With the community-led option there is:

·   Increased empowerment for the local community to govern, operate and manage their hall.

·   Roles and responsibilities are clearly outlined in the incorporated society constitution or trust documentation and in the Licence to Manage & Operate Premises that requires consistent reporting.

·   The local board have oversight through the monitoring and reporting requirements of the Funding Agreement.

·   Council has no rights to appoint to hall committees.

13.     Financial implications are:

Capital and renewal costs of the asset are met by council, with the operating costs being the responsibility of the committee who retain revenue to offset this.  The operating costs for the 11 Wairoa/Waiuku Memorial halls is projected to be $47,000; this amount will not be reflected in the local board budget as it will appear in the individual hall financial accounts.  Assumptions have been made as follows: 

·   One hall committee may run two halls in the case of Whitford and Clevedon.

·   All 11 halls will require cleaning and $1,000 has been budgeted for each hall.

·   Public liability insurance is payable by each committee and this amount is provided within the overall cost.


 

14.     Hall revenue currently showing in the local board budget of approximately $54,000 will also not appear in the Board budget in future years.  The following assumptions have been made and affect the total revenue stated:

·   The West Franklin Trust currently collects revenue directly for Waiuku Memorial Town Hall.

·   The Whitford War Memorial Pavilion has no current revenue flow.

·   The Clevedon District Centre has only nominal revenue from hireage.

·   Fees are set by the hall committee who has the ability to obtain external funding under this model.

Model four, Service provider contract

15.     A contract for services with an organisation which is appointed to govern and manage a council owned facility.  With this option:

·   Usually this type of contract is for specific community deliverables e.g. active recreation.

·   Council has no rights to appoint to the organisation.

·   The Board has oversight through the monitoring and reporting requirements of the contract.

16.     The financial implications are:

·   Organisation is funded through a contract to deliver a programme of work.

·   Ability to obtain external funding.

·   Fees are set by the organisation.

Model five, Operated by independent organisations

17.     This option includes:

·   Term grants being paid to independent organisations operating in a property that is not council-owned.  The grant subsidises programmes and services which are compatible with council’s goals.

·   No rights for council to appoint to the organisation.

·   Challenges for local capability, adequate resourcing, funding stream reliability and property management roles.

18.     Financial implications are:

·   Funding agreement with a reporting schedule provides accountability for the use of public funds.

·   Funding agreements are renegotiated annually.

·   Fees are set by the organisation.

·   An ability to obtain external funding.

Model six, Facility partnership collaboration with joint capital funding

19.     Facility partnerships represent a hands-off governance and management structure that entails partnership between council and other entities on equal terms, through joint capital contributions.  This structure is for new capital investment.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

20.     The Franklin Local Board believes that there is a strong sense of community ownership of each of the Wairoa/Waiuku Memorial halls within its local community due to the history of the area and the management model in place in the legacy council.

 

21.     The Board is aware that there are a number of existing or potential community groups with the capacity and capability required to operate under model three.

22.     The Board is able to allocate the necessary levels of funding necessary to establish the model three as governance structure for the Wairoa/Waiuku Memorial halls.

23.     If the Board resolves to adopt model three, council staff members recommend that the Board resolves to:

·      Endorse the implementation of the community-led governance structure (Model three), noting the revenue and cost implications to the Board’s budget for the Wairoa/Waiuku Memorial halls, listed below:

Ø Kawakawa Bay Community Hall

Ø Orere War Memorial Hall

Ø Maraetai Community Hall

Ø Whitford Community Hall

Ø Whitford War Memorial Pavilion

Ø Beachlands Memorial Hall

Ø Clevedon Community Hall

Ø Clevedon District Centre

Ø Ardmore Hall

Ø Alfriston Hall

Ø Waiuku War Memorial Town Hall

·      Undertake an Expression of Interest process to identify appropriate hall committees to manage and operate the Wairoa/Waiuku Memorial halls.

·      Retain the current Fees & Charges for the Wairoa/Waiuku Memorial halls.

·      Fund the transition costs to establish the Wairoa/Waiuku Memorial halls’ committees up to an estimated total cost of $4,500 from the 2014/2015 local board Discretionary Operational Budget.

·      Note that this model will form the basis for discussions on the implementation of the community-led governance structure (Model three) for the remaining rural halls in Franklin.

Māori impact statement

29.       It is assumed that this proposal will not have any adverse effects on Maori.

Implementation

30.     Based on the Board’s stated preference to date, considerable planning has been undertaken on Model three, the Community-led structure.  It is accepted that if there is a significant change resulting from the workshop these will be tabled at the October Board meeting.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

The Six Goveranance Structure Overview

55

bView

Waiora and Waiuku Memorial Halls Consolidated Financials

57

Signatories

Authors

Tracy Mossman – Project Coordinator

Authorisers

Fiona Johnston – Manager, Special Projects

Kevin Marriott - Manager Community Facilities

Teresa Turner - Relationship Manager

 


Franklin Local Board

28 October 2014

 

 


Franklin Local Board

28 October 2014

 

 


Franklin Local Board

28 October 2014

 

 

Draft Community Facilities Network Plan

 

File No.: CP2014/24418

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       To seek the Board’s feedback on the draft Community Facilities Network Plan (Attachment A) following workshops held with all local boards in August and September 2014.

Executive summary

2.       In August 2014 the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee endorsed the Draft Community Facilities Network Plan (REG/2014/98) for engagement with local boards, advisory panels and key external stakeholders.

3.       The purpose of the Community Facilities Network Plan (draft plan) is to guide council’s provision of community facilities for the next 10 years and beyond.  The key drivers are to:

·    Optimise the use and efficiency of existing facilities

·    Address gaps and needs for community facilities now and into the future

·    Meet demand arising from population growth and changing user expectations.

4.       The scope of the draft plan includes community centres, venues for hire (community or rural halls), arts and culture facilities, aquatic and leisure facilities.  The network includes facilities owned by council and facilities owned by third-parties which are supported by council and available for community use.  While facilities like libraries, sport clubs, community leases, schools, churches and marae are not included in the recommendations of the network plan, these facilities will be considered in the implementation phase.

5.       There are three key components of the draft plan:

·    Strategic framework – specifies the outcomes council is seeking from its investment in community facilities aligned with the Auckland Plan, Local Board Plans and other strategic priorities; and articulates the council’s key objectives for future provision.

·    Provision framework – guides council’s approach for future community facility provision.

·    Action Plan – over 50 recommended actions to investigate areas with potential gaps in provision and to investigate existing facilities with issues affecting their performance.

6.       Each action will require detailed community or sector based investigation to understand needs and determine the appropriate response.  Process guidelines have been developed to ensure a consistent approach to these investigations.  Local boards and the local community will be fully involved in investigation processes.

7.       As council may not have the capacity to invest in all community facility projects, the draft plan also provides prioritisation criteria to help determine the priorities for investment once the investigation process determines the appropriate facility response.  The ability and timeframe to implement the actions is dependent on the budget available for community facility investment in the Long-term Plan 2015-2025 (LTP).

8.       Feedback on the draft plan was sought from key stakeholders including regional sports organisations, facility partners, facility managers and advisory panels.  Submissions were also invited through shapeauckland.co.nz which closed on 15 September 2014.  A summary of feedback is attached in Attachment B.

9.       It is proposed that libraries should be included in the Community Facilities Network Plan as another key community facility that council provides, and to ensure alignment of planning and future facility provision.  Libraries have undertaken similar research to understand the gaps and needs for libraries and are well placed to be included.  There will need to be further communication with local boards on the libraries content.  Revised timeframes to integrate libraries into the plan and to align with the LTP process are outlined in this report.

 

Recommendation/s

a)      That the Franklin Local Board provides feedback on the Draft Community Facilities Network Plan which will guide council’s provision of community facilities, including any specific feedback on the strategic framework, provision framework, action plan, implementation approach and prioritisation criteria.

b)      That the Franklin Local Board notes the proposed revised timeframes to include libraries in the Community Facilities Network Plan and that further engagement with local boards will be undertaken to discuss the libraries content and the final revised network plan.

 

Comments

Draft Community Facilities Network Plan

10.     Community facilities contribute to building strong, healthy and vibrant communities by providing space for people to connect with each other, socialise, learn skills and participate in a range of social, cultural, art and recreational activities.  Community facilities contribute to improved lifestyles and a sense of belonging, identity and pride among residents.

11.     The draft plan outlines how council will provide and invest in community facilities to respond to community needs and population growth and changes.

12.     The draft plan sets out a strategic framework for community facilities to articulate why council invests in the provision of community facilities, the desired outcomes from this investment and the key objectives for future provision.  This is aligned with the strategic direction and transformational shifts in the Auckland Plan, local board plans and relevant strategic action plans.

13.     The proposed common purpose for community facilities is “Vibrant and welcoming places at the heart of where and how communities connect and participate”.

14.     The draft plan sets out four proposed key objectives to guide and underpin the future provision of community facilities:

·    Undertake robust and consistent planning to ensure future decisions on the provision of community facilities are based on clear evidence of needs and assessment of all options.

·    Maintain, improve and make the best use of existing community facilities where they continue to meet community needs and investigate the future of facilities that no longer meet community needs.

·    Provide flexible and multi-purpose facilities that are co-located and/or integrated with other community infrastructure.

·    Look for opportunities to leverage and support partnerships.

Future Provision Framework

15.     The draft plan proposes provision frameworks for each type of community facility to guide council’s approach to the provision of new facilities in the future.

Community Centres

16.     The proposed provision approach for community centres is to continue to maintain and deliver community centres at the local level across the region, recognising the important role they play in meeting local community needs for spaces to deliver a wide range of community, recreation, learning, events, arts and culture activities.


Venues for hire

17.     Given the wide range of providers of venues to hire, the draft plan proposes the council does not invest in any more new stand-alone venues for hire. It is proposed that bookable space is included in multi-purpose community centres (new or existing/redeveloped), guided by community needs assessments. Other options should be explored including partnerships or encouraging other organisations (such as schools, sports clubs and churches) to make bookable spaces available for community use. In some cases where venues for hire are no longer serving community needs, there may be potential to consider repurposing venues for other activities or possible divestment.

Aquatic and Leisure Facilities

18.     The proposed provision framework for aquatic and leisure facilities is through a hierarchy of local, destination and regional facilities to support participation in a range of sport and recreation activities from casual play through to competitive sport.  The draft plan outlines different functions and level of provision for local, destination and regional facilities.

Arts and Culture Facilities

19.     At the local level, the proposed future provision will focus on enabling participation in arts and culture activity through programming in existing facilities and new multi-purpose facilities, rather than building new standalone local arts facilities.  The focus will be placed on integrating arts space and programming within the existing network or in new multi-purpose facilities, repurposing existing spaces or partnering with others to provide suitable space.

20.     It is recognised there is a need for some specialised arts and culture facilities that serve larger catchments.  The draft plan proposes supporting a network of destination and regional arts and cultural facilities to meet sector and audience demand, which would be determined by robust investigation on a case-by-case basis.  It is proposed the council would only intervene when the private sector does not and opportunities for partnerships with the wider sector including central government should be explored.

Action Plan and Implementation

21.     The draft plan includes over 50 recommended actions to undertake investigations into the future provision of community facilities, focused on both existing facilities and potential areas for new facilities.

22.     All recommended actions will require detailed community or sector based investigation to determine the appropriate response. It is intended that any future investment in community facilities will be determined following detailed investigation which provides clear evidence of need, options analysis and development of a robust business case. Detailed process guidelines to ensure a consistent approach to these investigations have been developed (Appendix 2 of draft plan: Community Facilities Development Guidelines). Local boards and the community would be fully involved in investigation processes.

23.     As council may not have the capacity to invest in all community facility projects, the draft network plan provides prioritisation criteria to assist the governing body to determine its priorities for investment in community facilities.

24.     The draft plan identifies existing community facilities which have issues impacting on their performance and ability to meet community needs. In these cases, investigation is required to understand in more detail how the facility is operating and meeting community needs, explore various options for the facility and to determine the appropriate response. There could be a variety of options including changes to facility governance, management or programming, facility redevelopment, repurposing for another activity or possible divestment.

25.     For potential areas for new facilities, a similar investigation process is required to understand community needs, explore and test the feasibility of different options and assess the business case for a new facility.  The outcome of this investigation may identify a non-asset solution is required such as programming, partnerships or supporting a non-council facility.


 

26.     The actions in the draft network plan have been ranked according to the urgency of completing the investigation recognising different factors including condition issues, responding to catalysts, opportunities for rationalisation or partnerships, timing and scale of population growth and location in a spatial priority area.

27.     During workshops with local boards, some inaccuracies were identified in the draft plan.  Corrections have been included in the draft plan attached in Attachment A.

Stakeholder Engagement

28.     The draft plan has been informed by previous feedback from communities, principally via annual customer satisfaction surveys, user surveys, catchments studies and consultation on the Auckland Plan and relevant strategic action plans.

29.     Given this context, engagement on the draft plan has primarily been limited to targeted stakeholders, including council’s advisory panels, facility partners and managers and external stakeholder groups such as regional sports organisations.  Additionally, the draft plan has been available for wider public comment on shapeauckland.co.nz.  A summary of feedback is attached in Attachment B.

30.     Most of the actions identified in the draft plan will require further investigation to determine the appropriate response.  This will include detailed and localised community and/or sector based investigation/engagement and feedback from communities on different options. The public will also have the opportunity to provide feedback on the proposed level of future investment in community facilities via the LTP consultation process.

Incorporating Libraries into the Network Plan

31.     Through the LTP process, the Parks, Community and Lifestyle theme has been working to address priorities and funding for activities including community facilities, recreation facilities and libraries.  It has become clear there is a need for a more coordinated and aligned approach for the future planning and development of community facilities with an emphasis on multi-purpose facilities.

32.     It is proposed that libraries be included in the network plan as a key community facility that council provides and to ensure alignment of planning and future facility provision.  Libraries have undertaken similar research to understand the gaps and needs for future libraries and are well placed to be included.  There will need to be further communication with local boards on the libraries content which means the timeframes to complete the network plan will need to be extended into 2015.

33.     One advantage of extending the timeframes is alignment with the LTP process.  The level of future capital investment in community facilities won’t be known until after the public consultation process on the LTP is completed in May 2015.  Finalising the network plan once the LTP process is completed (or near completion) will ensure the plan can incorporate the LTP outcomes and governing body priorities for future investment in community facilities.

34.     The key benefit of modifying the scope to include libraries is the alignment of planning and provision to achieve better community outcomes and greater efficiency. 

35.     The revised timeframe for integrating libraries into the draft plan is outlined below:

Dec

Briefing with local boards on the library research

Dec-Jan

Development of revised Community Facilities Network Plan

Feb 2015

Workshops with local boards to review the revised plan

Mar

Report to the governing body on the revised draft plan

Apr-May

Report to local boards seeking feedback on revised draft plan

July

Report to governing body seeking approval of final Community Facilities Network Plan

Consideration

Local board views and implications

36.     During August and September, workshops with local boards were undertaken to present on the draft Community Facilities Network Plan, to respond to any questions and assist local boards in formulating their feedback.

37.     Feedback from local boards is sought on the draft plan, particularly on the following:

·    Strategic framework (section 3) including the common purpose, outcomes and objectives

·    Provision frameworks (Section 4)

·    Action plan (section 5)

·    Implementation approach (section 6) including process guidelines and prioritisation criteria.

38.     The feedback from local boards will be incorporated into a revised network plan (which includes libraries) and will be presented/reported to local boards in 2015.

Māori impact statement

39.     The provision of community facilities contributes to improving wellbeing among Maori communities by providing spaces to connect, socialise, learn skills and participate.  For all community facility types Maori are represented as users.  At aquatic facilities Maori make up 14% of users (compared to 9% of the population), 11% of leisure facility users and 9% of community centre users.  Maori are under-represented as users compared to the Auckland population at arts and culture facilities.

40.     Given the context of the network plan and the information already received through the user surveys and iwi consultation on the strategic action plans, it was not proposed to undertake any specific engagement with Maori or other facility users.

41.     The broader picture of community facility provision recognises that marae and kohanga reo are important social infrastructure for Maori and the community. Officers from Te Waka Angamua are currently scoping a project to address the future provision and development of marae facilities.  Opportunities for aligned provision and/or partnerships with marae facilities should be considered as potential options to meet community needs.

Implementation

42.     The draft plan is an aspirational plan for the next 10 to 20 years which outlines what needs to be investigated and undertaken to deliver a network of community facilities to meet community needs.  The ability and timeframe to implement the actions is dependent on the level of budget available through the council’s LTP 2015-2025.

43.     Through the LTP process, the governing body will consider the amount of funding available for investment in community facilities.  To deliver the network plan this will need to include both operational funding to undertake the required investigations and depending on the outcome of each investigation, capital and operational funding to implement the recommended response.

44.     Once the network plan is adopted, implementation will focus on progressing the high priority actions using the implementation approach and community facilities development guidelines.

45.     The draft plan lists a number of community facility projects that are already underway or were anticipated to commence construction in 2014/15.  The current review of the 2014/15 capital works programme may result in the deferral of some of these projects.  Once decisions have been made on deferrals, then the draft network plan will be amended to reflect this.


 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Draft Community Facilities Network Plan

65

bView

Draft Community Facilities Network Plan stakeholder feedback

131

     

Signatories

Authors

Anita Coy-Macken - Principal Policy Analyst – Central

David Shamy - Principal Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Penny Pirrit - Regional & Local Planning Manager

Teresa Turner - Relationship Manager

 


Franklin Local Board

28 October 2014

 

 
















Franklin Local Board

28 October 2014

 

 

Text Box: Attachment A	Item 17 


 


Franklin Local Board

28 October 2014

 

 















































Franklin Local Board

28 October 2014

 

 

Text Box: Attachment A	Item 17  


Text Box: Attachment A	Item 17

Text Box: Attachment A	Item 17     

Text Box: Attachment A	Item 17


Franklin Local Board

28 October 2014

 

 






Franklin Local Board

28 October 2014

 

 

Significance and Engagement Policy

 

File No.: CP2014/24425

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       The purpose of this report is to provide background information on the draft Significance and Engagement Policy to support local boards in providing formal feedback.

Executive summary

2.       There have been changes to the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA2002). Council is now required to adopt a Significance and Engagement policy by 1 December 2014. Council already has a Significance Policy, but it must be expanded to include engagement.

3.       A draft Significance and Engagement Policy was adopted by the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee on 4 September for public consultation from 22 September to 19 October 2014.

4.       The legislation requires the policy to consider community preferences about engagement on decisions relating to specific issues. Auckland Council carries out hundreds of consultation exercises each year, covering small neighbourhood issues up to large regional issues. A core function of local boards is to understand, engage with and represent their local communities. The development of the Significance and Engagement Policy is not intended to constrain or restrict the role of local boards in this regard.

5.       An overview of the methods that could be used depending on the significance of the issue has been compiled to provide guidance.

6.       The policy will be supported by updated guidelines, case studies and templates providing more detail on engagement principles and good practice.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board provides feedback on the draft Auckland Council Significance and Engagement Policy.

 

Background

7.       As part of the Long-term Plan (LTP) 2012-2022 process, Auckland Council adopted a Significance Policy to provide a mechanism for establishing which decisions are significant with reference to thresholds and general criteria. This was a requirement under the LGA2002 and the policy requires all council reports to state the degree of significance. A significant decision triggers an automatic requirement to consult.

8.       The Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Act 2014 amended the LGA 2002, so that all councils are now required to adopt a Significance and Engagement Policy by 1 December 2014.

9.       This legislative change requires the council to expand its current Significance Policy to include engagement. The current Significance Policy has been used to provide the basis of the new Significance and Engagement Policy.

10.     The draft Significance and Engagement Policy was adopted by the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee on 4 September for public consultation from 22 September to 19 October.

11.     Since the committee meeting, there have been some minor changes to clarify what constitutes a ‘significant’ decision. The order of the significance section has changed as a result of this, while the criteria that related to engagement are now in section 6.1 under engagement methods.

 

Consultation on the draft policy

12.     Consultation on the draft policy will not follow a special consultative procedure (SCP). Consultation will be targeted at interest groups and will seek out feedback from communities who are often not involved in council’s consultation processes.

13.     Consultation will largely be focused online through ShapeAuckland. A sign language submissions service has also been set up through Deaf Radio.

14.     A variety of stakeholder organisations have been contacted to help organise community workshops on the draft policy. This includes youth groups, ethnic groups, Grey Power, Age Concern, community organisations and networks.

15.     In addition, the council will use Our Auckland, the People’s Panel and social media as a way of further encouraging feedback on the draft policy. Local boards are encouraged to help encourage participation through their stakeholder newsletters and social media.

Role of local boards

16.     A core function of local boards is to understand, engage with and represent their local communities. They do this through a number of formal and informal mechanisms in relation to their local board plans and local board agreements, and also to inform local board input into regional plans and policies. The development of the Significance and Engagement Policy is not intended to constrain or restrict this role.

17.     While adoption of the Significance and Engagement Policy is a Governing Body decision, local boards have a role in providing input to its development. The purpose of this report is to seek local board input on the attached draft policy.

Policy approach to engagement

18.     The LGA2002 sets out principles for consultation that all councils must follow.

19.     Feedback received from the community and stakeholders on Auckland Council consultation and engagement processes has highlighted a number of other important principles to consider when engaging with the community. These have been incorporated into the policy as a way of recognising the needs of Auckland’s diverse communities, and the value that is placed on their involvement in decision-making processes.

20.     The legislation requires the policy to set out how the council will respond to community preferences about engagement on decisions relating to specific issues, assets and other matters. Auckland Council carries out hundreds of consultation exercises each year from small neighbourhood matters up to large regional issues. A list of how the council will engage on each issue would be extensive and would not allow flexibility depending on the timing, the community affected and likely level of interest on the issue. It would also limit the council’s ability to consider and refine approaches for engagement in response to community feedback.

21.     An overview of the kinds of methods that could be used depending on the significance of the issue has been compiled to provide guidance. These have been categorised as small and simple, medium or large and complex. The level of significance will be determined using the criteria in section 3 of the policy.  The criteria used to assess whether a decision is significant are also useful when considering which engagement methods should be used for a particular decision (if any).  For the avoidance of doubt, the use of the criteria to assess the level of engagement does not replace the council’s assessment of whether or not a decision is ‘significant’.

Significance

22.     A decision is significant if:

a.            the thresholds related to an activity or group of activities are exceeded; or

b.            the decision relates to strategic assets.

 

23.     A decision will also be significant where the council, having applied the criteria, decides that it is significant. Where a decision is determined to be significant, it will automatically trigger a requirement to consult.

Strategic Assets

24.     Strategic assets are defined as assets or a group of assets required for the local authority to maintain its capacity to achieve or promote any outcome that council determines is important for the present or future wellbeing of the community. The council considers its strategic assets as whole (rather than single assets), because it is the asset class as a whole that delivers the service. The list of strategic assets should cover only those assets that are significant for an entity the size of the Auckland Council. The strategic assets are listed in the Significance and Engagement Policy, which includes land or buildings owned by the council that are required to maintain the local authority’s capacity to provide affordable housing, and equity securities held by council in a port company or airport company.

25.     The definition of networks included in the list of strategic assets has been updated by inclusion of the North Harbour Stadium, Bruce Mason Theatre and Q Theatre, which Auckland Council acquired since the adoption of the Significance Policy in 2012. In addition, substantive shares in Watercare have been combined with shares in substantive CCOs as Watercare became a substantive CCO in 2012.

26.     The legislation provides that a decision to transfer the ownership or control of a strategic asset to or from the local authority may only be made if they are explicitly provided for in the council’s LTP and, from 2015, also included in the consultation document used to consult on the LTP.

27.     Decisions on assets not included in the list are subject to the normal provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 regarding decision making and consultation.  This ensures that interested or affected parties will have their views considered appropriately in decision making. The council would retain discretion to consult (including using the special consultative procedure) for these decisions if it wished.

28.     Strategic assets, as defined by this policy, that are owned and or managed by a substantive CCO are identified in the CCO Accountability Policy.

Thresholds

29.     As a general guide, the creation of a new group of activity, the cessation of a group of activity, or a 33 per cent increase or 20 per cent decrease in the nature of a group of activity, would be considered significant.

General Criteria

30.     The council has also identified a list of criteria to consider when deciding whether or not a matter is significant.

Timeline

31.     The high level timeline for the development of the policy is as follows:

Milestone

Description / steps

Timing

Developing the draft policy

Drafting the policy

Testing the policy internally, with key stakeholders and advisory panels

 

Gaining feedback on draft policy with local board members, local board chairs, IMSB

Regional Strategy & Policy for adoption prior to consultation

 

July – August

 

 

 

 

 

5 September

Consulting on the draft policy

Communications and engagement on the draft

Local board workshops

Local board reports / formal feedback process

Advisory panel workshops

Stakeholder discussions

Public engagement

September-October

Revising the draft policy

Analysing and reviewing feedback

Updating draft policy

 

October onwards

Adopting the policy

Budget Committee

Regional Strategy and Policy

Governing body for adoption

5 November

6 November

27 November

32.     This policy is expected to be adopted by 1 December 2014 and must be incorporated into the Long-term Plan (in summary form). The policy can be amended at any time.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

33.     This report is seeking the views of local boards on the draft policy.

34.     Local boards’ statutory role of identifying and communicating the views of the community on regional strategies, policies, plans and bylaws of the council has been taken into account during the development of the draft policy.

35.     Engagement with local boards to date has included:

·     an initial discussion at the Local Board Chairs Forum meeting on 28 April 2014;

·     a workshop for all local board members to discuss aspects of the draft policy on 22 August; and

·     workshops are being held with individual boards during September and October where requested.

Māori impact statement

36.     Auckland Council recognize that Māori are a critical / important audience that need to be engaged in a meaningful way. The Treaty of Waitangi Audit 2012 and the Auckland Council Guide on Engaging with Māori were reviewed during the development of the draft policy. The draft policy has been presented for discussion to the Independent Māori Statutory Board. The results of a recent research study on Māori engagement with Auckland Council will be considered prior to finalizing the draft policy and to identify improvements with the engagement guidelines.

37.     Discussions on the draft policy and guidelines will also take place at a mana whenua forum during the consultation period.

General

38.     This report does not involve decisions that will trigger the council’s current Significance Policy.

Implementation

39.     Auckland Council does not currently have an adopted engagement policy. It does however have:

·     a consultation and engagement guidebook;

·     a guide on Engagement with Māori;

·     a staff training programme in community engagement through the International Association of Public Participation (IAP2);

·     an internal network which is used to share case studies; and

·     an annual awards event to celebrate good practice.

 

40.     Further work is taking place to improve the guidance that is available, in particular with respect to engaging with Auckland’s culturally and demographically diverse communities.

41.     It is expected that updated guidance, case studies and templates will be prepared alongside the development of the draft policy so that these are available for the purposes of engagement on the draft Long-term Plan and other processes as soon as practicable. This will include legal advice on the consultation document and other changes to requirements as a result of the LGA 2002 amendments.

42.     Local boards will be encouraged to input into the development of the updated guidance, case studies and templates through engagement advisors.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Draft Significance and Engagement Policy

143

     

Signatories

Authors

Carol Hayward - Senior Specialist Engagement & Consultation

Authorisers

Karl Ferguson - Communication & Engagement Director

Teresa Turner - Relationship Manager

 


Franklin Local Board

28 October 2014

 

 



















Franklin Local Board

28 October 2014

 

 

Council Controlled Organisation Review, Progress Report to Local Boards

 

File No.: CP2014/23105

 

  

Purpose

1.       To inform local boards about key aspects of the current review of council controlled organisations (CCOs) and seek local board feedback, in particular on matters of interest to local boards.

Executive summary

2.       This report informs local boards on a number of matters relating to the CCO review. These include:

·    the key steps undertaken in the CCO review so far

·    CCO configuration options that have been considered but are not being progressed

·    CCO configuration options that are still under consideration

·    other aspects of the CCO review of interest to local boards including the Accountability Framework workstream; and the Communication, Collaboration and Consultation workstream

·    next steps in the CCO review.

3.       This report seeks feedback from local boards, in particular about an option to increase activities in support of the council’s transformational shift of radically improving the quality of urban living. The council is considering a new vehicle that could act as a single outward facing voice in the development of the Auckland region, with greater economies of scale, enhanced commerciality and the ability to partner with others.  The report seeks feedback on the concept, including comment on the considerations the council should take into account, from a local perspective, when developing the concept.

4.       The report notes that local boards have already provided feedback on the following matters which are being considered as part of the CCO review.

·    Whether local economic development activities are delivered by Auckland Council or ATEED.

·    The roles and interface between local boards and Auckland Transport in relation to place-making functions.

5.       In relation to local economic development, the report seeks local board views on ATEED being responsible for local economic development, if a mechanism can be established to hold ATEED accountable to local boards for delivery. The report also notes that the CCO review will not consider the level of funding for local economic development activities, as this is an LTP issue. Current proposals are for LTP funding for local economic development to be provided in the council’s spatial priority areas only.

6.       In relation to local boards, Auckland Transport, and place-making responsibilities, any specific proposals would require further consultation with local boards.

7.       In relation to the Accountability Framework workstream, the report notes that improved alignment between the statement of intent process and the LTP/Annual Planning process should provide the Budget Committee with greater visibility of the extent to which proposed CCO work programmes deliver on local board priorities.

8.       The Accountability Framework workstream also proposes that council requirements of CCOs, in relation to local board engagement, reporting, and consideration of local board priorities will be included in a new Governance Manual that all CCOs are required to comply with.

9.       The report also notes that the Communication, Collaboration and Consultation workstream is still being scoped and may require local board engagement at some stage.

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board considers the information provided in this report and provide feedback, in particular on matters of interest to local boards as indicated in the report.

 

Comments

Phase One – Terms of Reference and Current State Assessment

10.     The governing body adopted its terms of reference for the CCO review on 27 February 2014. The terms of reference sought to ensure that CCO governance structures were aligned with the council’s strategies and provided an efficient and effective model of service delivery. They also sought to:

·    ensure sufficient political oversight and public accountability of CCOs

·    provide clarity about roles and responsibilities

·    eliminate duplication

·    better integrate services and functions and provide a positive interface between the Auckland Council group organisations and Aucklanders.

11.     Major structural change for Auckland Transport was identified as being out of scope because Auckland Transport is a statutory entity governed by specific legislative provisions.

12.     The review is due to be completed by June 2015. Any proposals for structural change will be consulted on through the draft Long Term Plan (LTP).

13.     The terms of reference and CCO review workstreams were informed by two current state assessment reports, one prepared from a council perspective and one from a CCO perspective. Local board input to the current state assessment acknowledged significant improvements in interactions between CCOs and local boards over the three year period, although most local boards were still looking for further improvement in certain areas.

Phase Two – Assessment of Services

14.     The first step in phase two of the review was to test the rationale for delivering services through a CCO. Councillors discussed that there were both benefits and challenges from delivering services through arms’ length entities such as CCOs.

15.     Benefits include commercial focus, efficiency, flexibility in decision-making, and ability to attract specialist skills. Challenges include that the council is ultimately accountable for ratepayer funding, and achieving integration of CCO activities with other council services or policies. It was also acknowledged that where there is high political, public, iwi, or stakeholder interest in CCO decision-making, this can be challenging for the council.

16.     At its meeting of 26 June 2014, the governing body received analysis of the services currently being provided by CCOs, against a set of criteria that sought to test the suitability of those services for delivery through a CCO. Overall the analysis suggested that the services currently being delivered through CCOs were well suited to this mode of delivery. Where challenges were identified it was clear that councillors believe these can be properly managed through a CCO model.

Phase Two – CCO delivery and configuration

17.     The second step in phase two of the review was to identify whether any changes to the grouping of activities was likely to deliver better outcomes than the current CCO configuration.

18.     Councillors have discussed configuration options at a series of workshops in August and September.


 

19.     The options were informed by one or more of the following drivers for change:

·    Opportunities to address issues raised in the current state assessment, particularly removing duplication in skills and clarifying responsibilities

·    Opportunities to increase effectiveness and drive results

·    Opportunities to improve strategic alignment to Auckland Plan goals

·    Opportunities to increase efficiency/reduce costs

·    Evidence from international best practice or other desktop research.

20.     In relation to the last bullet point a number of pieces of desktop research were undertaken. These included reviews of national/international delivery models and a report by Synergine Group on the linkages between water, wastewater and stormwater.

21.     The Governing Body has not made any decisions on configuration options; however, workshop discussions have indicated that there was insufficient rationale to progress some options. 

Options not being progressed

22.     Three waters – The Synergine Group report found that there would be some benefits from the integrated management of three waters, such as enhanced catchment management planning. It also found significant linkages between stormwater and other activities of the council group, including land use planning and transport. 

23.     For this reason, the options of delivering three waters in-house or within a three waters CCO were both considered.

24.     In-house delivery of three waters could help better align water and wastewater network planning with council strategy; however, these benefits can be achieved in other ways including through greater collaboration. This option would have some significant disadvantages including very high cost of change and likely reduced commercial focus in relation to water and wastewater delivery.

25.     Delivery of three waters within a three waters CCO could have benefits in terms of operational efficiencies and greater commercial focus. However, some of the benefits can be achieved in other ways and there are some major drawbacks. For example, this option could require complex agreements between Auckland Council and Watercare as many stormwater assets are ‘soft infrastructure’ such as overland flow paths. This would have implications for local boards as many of the overland flow paths are in local parks.  Another reason that the option was not progressed was that stormwater planning also needs to be highly integrated with land use planning.

26.     Regional facilities, tourism and major events. This option would involve transferring ATEED’s responsibility for tourism and major events to RFA.  The main drivers for this option were perceived increase in efficiency and effectiveness as both RFA and ATEED have a focus on tourism and major events including conferences. However, RFA’s main objectives are to maximise utilisation of their assets, while ATEED’s focus is on delivering benefit for the Auckland Region. This option has not been progressed as there was a concern that the resulting CCO would have conflicting objectives.

27.     Larger Commercial CCO. Consideration was given to other council investments or business interests that could be transferred to ACIL; however, no significant opportunities were identified.

28.     Of the options not being progressed, the option involving transferring stormwater to a three waters CCO is likely to be of most interest to local boards for reasons outlined in paragraph 24.


 

Options still under consideration

29.     Enhanced status quo. This option will apply to all CCOs which do not undergo significant structural change. Enhanced status quo will involve reviewing the purpose and high-level objectives of each CCO as set out in the orders of council under which they were established. This does not apply to Watercare or Auckland Transport, which have specific legislative provisions defining their powers and responsibilities. The timeframe for this review will be between February and June 2015.

30.     Enhanced status quo will also involve considering a number of one off issues in relation to each CCO. The following are likely to be of most interest to local boards.

·    Whether local economic development activities are delivered by Auckland Council or ATEED.

·    The roles and interface between local boards and Auckland Transport in relation to place-making functions.

31.     A lot of feedback has already been provided by local boards on these matters and will be taken into account as options are developed.

32.     A key difficulty with ATEED delivering local economic development activities on behalf of local boards is that local boards have decision-making responsibility for this, yet they do not have a direct governance relationship with ATEED.  This report seeks local board views on ATEED being responsible for local economic development, if a mechanism can be established to hold ATEED accountable to local boards for delivery.

33.     Note that the CCO review will not address the level of funding for local economic development activities, as this is an LTP decision. Current budget proposals are for the funding for local economic development activities to be provided in the council’s spatial priority areas only.

34.     In relation to local boards, Auckland Transport and place-making, the current state assessment from local boards contained a lot of feedback which will be considered. Any specific proposals would need to come back to local boards for further feedback.

35.     Under enhanced status quo there are a number of matters to clarify in relation to Waterfront Auckland. These include the role of Waterfront Auckland in its “area of influence”, and whether the Cloud, Shed 10, and the Viaduct Events Centre, are managed by Waterfront Auckland or RFA. These matters may be of interest to some local boards. The timing for addressing these matters has not yet been determined, but further consultation with interested local boards may be required at a later date. 

36.     Urban Regeneration CCO: Serious consideration is being given to how the council can increase its level of activity to support its transformational shift of radically improving the quality of urban living. This means moving to quality compact urban form that is well connected, appropriately serviced, provides employment opportunities, and provides housing affordability and choice. These are key elements but there are many other considerations including safety, sustainability, and quality urban design.

37.     While the proposed Auckland Unitary Plan (PAUP) is an enabler, it will not be sufficient on its own to provide the scale or quality of development required.

38.     The council already has a range of vehicles for helping deliver on these objectives. These include:

·    Waterfront Auckland, which is responsible for regeneration of Wynyard Quarter

·    City Transformations which undertakes master planning and town centre upgrades

·    ACPL which has a role in facilitating housing and commercial development in specific locations including Ormiston Town Centre, Yard 37 at Hobsonville, Papatoetoe town centre, Avondale town centre, and Wilsher Village in Henderson

·    Tamaki Redevelopment Company, which is jointly owned with central government and council

 

·    Housing Project Office which is charged with implementation of the Housing Action Plan and integrated consenting in Special Housing Areas (SHAs).

39.     The council is considering a new vehicle that could act as a single outward facing voice in the development of the Auckland region, with greater economies of scale, enhanced commerciality and the ability to partner with others.  This is likely to be a staged process with the first steps undertaken as part of the CCO review. Options are still being refined but could include expanding the role of ACPL, bringing together the skills and expertise from Waterfront Auckland and ACPL, or another option which could emerge out of work still being undertaken.

40.     The concept of a new vehicle to assist in the delivery of quality urban living goals is likely to be of interest to local boards. Local boards’ role in community engagement and local place-making is central to shaping on-going change.

41.     In the initial stages it is likely that any increase in redevelopment/regeneration activity would simply reflect repriotisation of LTP budgets in areas which have been identified as spatial priorities. However, it is anticipated that the vehicle would generate and/or leverage new sources of funding over time.

42.     This report seeks comments from local boards on the concept of an enhanced delivery vehicle for urban regeneration including comment on the considerations that the Governing Body should take into account from a local perspective, when developing the concept further.

43.     Holding Company. ACIL currently owns council shares in Ports of Auckland Limited, Auckland Film Studios, and Auckland International Airport. It also manages the diversified financial assets portfolio (DFAP) on behalf of the council. An option still being considered is to transfer responsibility for the DFAP to the council. ACIL would then become a holding company for council’s ownership in commercial investments. This option does not have identifiable implications for local boards.

CCO model –working better together

44.     The focus of the review to date has been on the rationale for arms-length delivery and options for structural change. The terms of reference for the review are much wider than this and include consideration of how to make the CCO model work best for the Auckland Council group. The Auckland Council CCO model is fundamentally different to other local authorities in New Zealand as CCOs deliver core services on behalf of council. The preferred approach is a collaborative model where CCOs are delivery partners, rather than autonomous entities that the council procures services from.

45.     Two workstreams likely to be of particular interest to local boards are the Accountability Framework workstream; and the Communication, Collaboration and Consultation workstream.

Accountability Framework

46.     To date, the Accountability Framework workstream has focussed primarily on processes, with a goal of improving alignment between budgeting, the LTP process and the annual statement of intent (SOI) process.

47.     Proposed new processes have been considered at CCO Review workshops and are due to be considered formally by the CCO Governance and Monitoring Committee on 7 October 2014.

48.     The proposed new process recognises that the council’s expectations of CCOs expressed through the SOI process, need to be aligned to the LTP/Annual Plan. When the council considers CCO priorities it should do so within the context of the funding it is providing, or the funding assumptions it is making in the LTP/annual plan.


 

49.     Under the proposed new process the Budget Committee will consider CCO key performance indicators and targets at its October/November workshops with CCOs, and will agree an annual letter of expectation (LOE) to CCO chairs, that reflects budget decisions made. The CCO Governance and Monitoring Committee will receive the draft SOIs in April each year as usual and will limit its shareholder comments to checking that deliverables reflect what has already been agreed through the budgeting process.

50.     For local boards, the main implication is that the Budget Committee will also have an overview of local board priorities when it sets its funding for CCOs. For the proposed LTP, the Budget Committee workshops with local boards occur shortly before workshops with CCOs. This will enable Budget Committee members to engage with CCOs regarding local board priorities if they have concerns about any priorities that are not reflected in programmes proposed by CCOs.

51.     This does not supersede the requirement for CCOs to take local board priorities into account when they develop their proposed programmes, and for CCOs to actively engage with local boards as they do this.

52.     The other proposed change is to streamline the SOIs so that they are focused on what the CCO will deliver. Council expectations in relation to how the CCO is expected to act will be included in a new Governance Manual that will replace the current Shareholder Expectation Guide.

53.     Under recent changes to the Local Government Act 2002, the council is required to have a binding agreement with its CCOs. It is proposed that the binding agreement will cross-reference the Governance Manual which will formalise the requirement to comply with council expectations.

54.     This Governance Manual will include council expectations of CCOs in relation to local board engagement and reporting, and consideration of local board priorities. These have already been articulated in resolutions of the Accountability and Performance committee in December 2012, and the Strategy and Finance Committee in September 2013. The recent elected member survey included questions for local board members to help assess the current level of satisfaction of local board members in relation to these matters. It is intended that this will continue to be monitored annually.

Communication, collaboration and consultation workstream

55.     The purpose of this workstream is to:

·    Ensure that CCOs, elected members and council staff engage effectively over strategic issues and keep each other well informed of sensitive issues. This includes CCO interaction with the IMSB and local boards.

·    Ensure appropriate public engagement on matters of public interest.

56.     This work is still being scoped. The working group will include a staff member from Local Board Services.

57.     This work could result in new content for inclusion in the new Governance Manual referred to in paragraphs 51-53. This would need to be identified in draft form by March 2015. If there are any proposals that relate to local boards, CCO Review staff will seek guidance from Local Board Services about further engagement with local boards on these matters.

Next steps in CCO review

58.     According to the current timetable, the Governing Body will receive a report on 27 November 2014 with recommendations on CCO configuration options. If the council agrees to support any option that would require significant structural change to any CCO or the establishment of a new CCO, this will be consulted on through the LTP. The proposal to establish a new vehicle to deliver on quality urban living objectives would require LTP consultation.

59.     Work on the “working better together” workstreams will continue from now until June 2015.

 

Consideration

Local board views and implications

60.     This report asks for local board views on a number of issues that are being considered as part of the CCO review. This report has provided an overview of review and noted the matters which are likely to be of most interest to local boards.

Māori impact statement

61.     The CCO review also includes a range of issues that are likely to be of interest to Māori and to the IMSB. Staff will also seek feedback from the IMSB in relation to these matters.  

Implementation

62.     There are no implementation issues associated with this report.

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Signatories

Authors

Catherine Syme - Principal Advisor, CCO Governance and External Partnerships

Authorisers

Jaine Lovell-Gadd - Manager CCO Governance and External Partnerships

Teresa Turner - Relationship Manager

 


Franklin Local Board

28 October 2014

 

 

Franklin Local Board Workshop Notes

 

File No.: CP2014/24532

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       Providing visibility on issues considered at Franklin Local Board Workshops, which are not open to the public.

Executive Summary

2.       Workshop notes are attached for 7 October 2014 and 14 October 2014.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board receives the workshop notes for 7 October 2014 and
14 October 2014.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Franklin Local Board Workshop Notes : 7 October 2014

171

bView

Franklin Local Board Workshop Notes : 14 October 2014

175

    

Signatories

Authors

Gaylene Harvey - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Teresa Turner - Relationship Manager

 


Franklin Local Board

28 October 2014

 

 




Franklin Local Board

28 October 2014

 

 



Franklin Local Board

28 October 2014

 

 

Chairman's Report on Haramura Trip

 

File No.: CP2014/24633

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       For the Chairman to update members on his trip to Haramura.

Executive summary

2.       Refer the attached report.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board receives the Chairman’s report on his trip to Haramura.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Chairman's Report : Trip to Haramura

179

     

Signatories

Authors

Gaylene Harvey - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Teresa Turner - Relationship Manager

 


Franklin Local Board

28 October 2014