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

 

Date:                      

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

 

Thursday, 11 December 2014

3.30pm

Council Chamber
Henderson Civic Centre
6 Henderson Valley Road
Henderson

 

Henderson-Massey Local Board

 

OPEN AGENDA

 

 

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Chairperson

Vanessa Neeson, JP

 

Deputy Chairperson

Shane Henderson

 

Members

Brenda Brady, JP

 

 

Peter Chan, JP

 

 

Warren Flaunty, QSM

 

 

Will Flavell

 

 

Tracy Kirkley

 

 

Luke Wilson

 

 

(Quorum 4 members)

 

 

 

Glenn Boyd

(Relationship Manager)

Local Board Services (West)

 

 

Busola Martins

Local Board Democracy Advisor

 

5 December 2014

 

Contact Telephone: (09) 4407323

Email: busola.martins@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

 

 


 

 

 


Henderson-Massey Local Board

11 December 2014

 

 

ITEM   TABLE OF CONTENTS                                                                                        PAGE

1          Welcome                                                                                                                         5

2          Apologies                                                                                                                        5

3          Declaration of Interest                                                                                                   5

4          Confirmation of Minutes                                                                                               6

5          Leave of Absence                                                                                                          6

6          Acknowledgements                                                                                                       6

7          Petitions                                                                                                                          6

8          Deputations                                                                                                                    6

8.1     Deputation by Shane Henderson                                                                       6

9          Public Forum                                                                                                                  6

10        Extraordinary Business                                                                                                6

11        Notices of Motion                                                                                                          7

12        Local Event Support Fund - Round Two Allocations 2014/2015                             9

13        Approval of concept design, facility upgrade report and approval to proceed to resource consent and detailed design for Ranui Community House refurbishment.         13

14        Youth Connections Strategic Action Plan, 2014 - 2017                                          47

15        Interim Open Space Provision Guidelines                                                               71

16        Proposed reclassification of Birdwood Winery Estate Reserve                            93

17        Road name approval for a private lane within the Westgate Shopping Centre 113

18        Request for feedback on the draft Local Approved Product Policy                   119

19        Long-term Plan 2015-2025: Local consultation material                                       139

20        Chairperson's report                                                                                                 143  

21        Consideration of Extraordinary Items 

 

 


1          Welcome

 

2          Apologies

 

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

 

3          Declaration of Interest

 

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

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

 

            Register

 

BOARD MEMBER

ORGANISATION

POSITION

Vanessa Neeson, JP (Chairman)

Ranui Sector Trial

Chair

Shane Henderson (Deputy Chairman)

Waitakere Community Law Centre
Ranui Action Project

Employee
Co-Chairman

Brenda Brady, JP

Keep Waitakere Beautiful
Safer West Community Trust
Sunnyvale Residents & Ratepayers Society Inc.
West Auckland Historical Society
District Licensing Committee

Trustee
Trustee
Member
Member
Member

 Peter Chan, JP

Cantonese Opera Society of NZ
Asian Leaders Forum
NZ-Hong Kong Business Ass.
NZ-China Business Ass.
Auckland Chinese Environment Protection Association (ACEPA)

Member
Member
Member
Member
Advisor

Warren Flaunty, QSM

Westgate Pharmacy
West Auckland Hospice
NorSGA Properties
Westgate Pharmacy Ltd
The Trusts Community Foundation Ltd Rodney Local Board
Waitemata District Health Board
Waitakere Licensing Trust
Massey Birdwood Settlers Ass.
Taupaki Residents & Ratepayers Ass.

Contractor
Trustee
Director
Director
Director
Elected Member
Elected Member
Elected Member
Member
Member

Will Flavell

Rutherford College

Employee

Tracy Kirkley

District Licensing Committee

Heart of Te Atatu South         

Member

Member

Luke Wilson

NZ Police - Massey Community Constable
D.A.R.E. West

Employee
Member

 

 

4          Confirmation of Minutes

 

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a)         Confirms the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Thursday, 4 December 2014, as a true and correct record.

 

 

5          Leave of Absence

 

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

 

6          Acknowledgements

 

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

 

7          Petitions

 

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

 

8          Deputations

 

Standing Order 3.20 provides for deputations. Those applying for deputations are required to give seven working days notice of subject matter and applications are approved by the Chairperson of the Henderson-Massey Local 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.

 

8.1       Deputation by Shane Henderson

Purpose

1.       This deputation is to submit signed petitions against the sale of synthetic cannabis in Waitakere.

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a)      Receives the deputation from Shane Henderson.

 

Attachments

a          Signed petitions against the saile of Cannabis in Waitakere................ 147

 

 

9          Item withdrawn

 

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.

 


Henderson-Massey Local Board

11 December 2014

 

 

Local Event Support Fund - Round Two Allocations 2014/2015

 

File No.: CP2014/24570

 

  

 

 

Purpose

1.       To present a summary of applications received in round two of the local event support fund for 2014/2015 for the Henderson-Massey Local Board. The Henderson-Massey Local Board is requested to either fund, partially fund or not fund the applications.

Executive summary

2.       A contestable local events support fund of $155,715 is available to the Henderson-Massey Local Board for distribution over two funding rounds in the 2014/2015 financial year.

3.       In round one the local board disbursed $105,435, leaving $50,280 for allocation in round two.

4.       In round two 16 applications have been received seeking $154,157. These applications were presented to the local board in a workshop on 18 November 2014

 

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a)      agree to fund, part-fund or not fund, the round two 2014/2015 contestable local event support fund applications as follows:

 

Applicant

Event

Date

Amount Requested

Funding

Allocated

Prospect Primary School

Prospect School Community Day

21 March2015

 

$8,000.00

$0

Refer to Waitakere Ranges

Auckland Area of Floral Art Society of NZ

Auckland Area Designer of the Year 2015

27 August 2015 –

29 August 2015

$1,000.00

$1,000.00

Waitakere Orchid Club

Waitakere Orchid Club Spring Show

28 August 2015

$2,000.00

$2,000.00

Te Atatu South Community Assn

Heart of Te Atatu Community Fun Day

11 April 2015

$5,442.00

$4,000.00

Getin2 Life Youth Development Trust

In2it Wild Winter – Henderson-Massey

1 March 2015 –

31 July 2015

$4,495.00

$0

Corban Estate Arts Centre

 

Love Hendo

7 March 2015

$4,720.00

$4,720.00

Te Whanau o Waipareira Trust

Waitangi@Waitangi 2015

6 February 2015

$15,000.00

 

$7,000.00

Auckland Live, Regional Facilities Auckland

Morning Melodies

2 March 2015 –

14 September 2015

$20,000.00

$2,500.00

Safer West Community Trust

Keep on Keepin On – Carnival for a Cause

7 December 2014

$5,000.00

$5,000.00

Christina Beth

Peace Poppy Project

7 April 2015 –

25 April 2015

$1,000.00

$1,000.00

Waitakere Indian Association

Waitakere Holi Festival

7 March 2015

 

$15,000.00

$5,000.00


Baseball New Zealand

18U Oceania Baseball Championships

5 March 2015 –

8 March 2015

$5,000.00

$5,000.00

Henderson Photographic Society

Henderson Photographic Society Presents

5 June 2015 –

7 June 2015

$2,500.00

$2,500.00

Auckland Live, Regional Facilities Auckland

School Holiday Programme 2015

13 April 2015 –

18 July 2015

$5,000.00

$0

Auckland Kids Achievement Trust T/A Foundation for Youth Development

Westie Wednesday

19 August 2015

$5,000.00

$2,500.00

Muscular Dystrophy Assn of NZ Inc.

Life Without Limits Conference

16 April 2015 –

18April 2015

$55,000.00

$0

TOTAL

 

 

$154,157.00

$42,220.00

 

b)      that the remaining balance of $8,060 be transferred to the Henderson-Massey Discretionary Fund for future allocation.

 

 

Comments

 

5.       A contestable local events support fund of $105,435 is available to the Henderson-Massey Local Board for distribution over two funding rounds in the 2014/2015 financial year.

6.       The local events support fund provides the opportunity for Henderson-Massey Local Board to work in partnership with local event organisers to develop an events programme that reflects the aspirations of the community and supports the local board plan.

7.       The local events support fund has two funding rounds, which close at specified times during the 2014/2015 financial year, as follows:

Round

Applications Close

Assessment

Decision Making

1

31 May 2014

June 2014

July-August 2014

2

31 October 2014

November 2014

December 2014-February 2015

 

8.       Round two of the local event support fund received 16 applications totalling $154,657.

Applicant

Event

Date

Amount Requested

Prospect Primary School

Prospect School Community Day

21 March2015

 

$8,000.00

Auckland Area of Floral Art Society of NZ

Auckland Area Designer of the Year 2015

27 August 2015 –

29 August 2015

$1,000.00

Waitakere Orchid Club

Waitakere Orchid Club Spring Show

28 August 2015

$2,000.00

Te Atatu South Community Assn

Heart of Te Atatu Community Fun Day

11 April 2015

$5,442.00

Getin2 Life Youth Development Trust

In2it Wild Winter – Henderson-Massey

1 March 2015 –

31 July 2015

$4,495.00

Corban Estate Arts Centre

 

Love Hendo

7 March 2015

$4,720.00

Te Whanau o Waipareira Trust

Waitangi@Waitangi 2015

6 February 2015

$15,000.00

 

Auckland Live, Regional Facilities Auckland

Morning Melodies

2 March 2015 –

14 September 2015

$20,000.00

Safer West Community Trust

Keep on Keepin On – Carnival for a Cause

7 December 2014

$5,000.00

Christina Beth

Peace Poppy Project

7 April 2015 –

25 April 2015

$1,000.00

Waitakere Indian Association

Waitakere Holi Festival

7 March 2015

 

$15,000.00

Baseball New Zealand

18U Oceania Baseball Championships

5 March 2015 –

8 March 2015

$5,000.00

Henderson Photographic Society

Henderson Photographic Society Presents

5 June 2015 –

7 June 2015

$2,500.00

Auckland Live, Regional Facilities Auckland

School Holiday Programme 2015

13 April 2015 –

18 July 2015

$5,000.00

Auckland Kids Achievement Trust

T/A Foundation for Youth Development

Westie Wednesday

19 August 2015

$5,000.00

Muscular Dystrophy Assn of NZ Inc.

Life Without Limits Conference

16 April 2015 –

18 April 2015

$55,000.00

TOTAL

 

 

$154,157.00

            

9.       Local event support funding criteria guidelines specifically tailored for the local board have been established to assist applicants in understanding the focus of this fund and to guide decision-making. The applications have been assessed in accordance with those tailored local event fund guidelines.

10.     The Henderson-Massey Local Board has the opportunity to refer applications to a more appropriate fund or to allocate funding from within its local event fund.

11.     The Henderson-Massey Local Board has the opportunity to redirect any unallocated funding to their discretionary fund and allocate it to a range of other projects which they may decide upon from time to time.

Consideration

12.     Local boards are responsible for the decision-making and allocation of local board event funding including the local event support fund. The Henderson-Massey Local Board has identified key priorities for the local area within its local board plan, some of which could be achieved through events.

13.     The Henderson-Massey Local Board seeks to engage with their diverse communities and provide for their social and cultural needs by supporting local community events that use open spaces with lots of activities while treasuring the environment.

Local board views and implications

14.     A local board workshop was held on 18 November 2014 to consider the applications to the local event support fund round two.

15.     The decisions sought within this report fall within the local board delegations.

16.     The decisions sought do not invoke the Auckland Council Significance Policy.

Māori impact statement

17.     This fund does not specifically target Maori groups. However Maori communities are likely to benefit from the events supported by the local board, alongside other groups in the community.

Implementation

18.     Once the Henderson-Massey Local Board has resolved the funding applications, staff will contact all applicants to notify them of the outcome, and commence contracting and payment.

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Signatories

Authors

Barbara Cade - Team Leader Events North/West

Authorisers

Graham Bodman - Manager - Community Development, Arts and Culture

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

 


Henderson-Massey Local Board

11 December 2014

 

 

Approval of concept design, facility upgrade report and approval to proceed to resource consent and detailed design for Ranui Community House refurbishment.

 

File No.: CP2014/27948

 

  

 

Purpose

1.   The purpose of this report is to seek approval from the Henderson Massey Local Board (HMLB) for the:

·    Concept design for the refurbishment of the Ranui Community House Incorporated (RCH) (Attachment 1);

·    The Ranui Community House facility upgrade report (Attachment 2);

·    Approval to proceed with lodging of resource consent  and development of detailed design; and

·    Approval to proceed to building consent and procurement, following completion of the resource consent and detailed design phases, provided alterations from the concept design to detailed design are only minor and the project is within budget.

Executive Summary

2.   The Ranui Community House (RCH) is situated at 474 Swanson Road, Ranui and will shortly be able to expand into the immediately adjacent space recently vacated by the Ranui Library.  The RCH is governed and managed by an incorporated society (RCHI) and expansion in to the space provided by libraries provides an opportunity for refurbishment to allow for improved function of the facility.

3.   Council is planning to fund the structural work and RCHI will be sourcing external funding for the fit out.

4.   In October 2014 the HMLB approved the extension of the lease of the former library space to RCHI.

5.   The HMLB has expressed a desire to see the refurbishment commence prior to the end of the 2014/2015 financial year.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson Massey Local Board :

a)      Approves the concept design for the refurbishment of the Ranui Community House.

b)      Endorses the findings of the Ranui Community House facility upgrade report.

c)      Approves the project proceeding to resource consent and detailed design.

d)      Approves the project proceeding to building consent and procurement, following completion of the resource consent and detailed design phases, provided alterations from the concept design to detailed design are only minor and the project is within budget.

 

 


Discussion

General

 

6.   The refurbishment of the RCH is aligned to Chapter 12 of the Auckland Plan that refers to Auckland’s Physical and Social Infrastructure.  Priority 2 states “Protect, enable, align, integrate and provide social and community infrastructure for present and future generations”.  (Auckland Plan March 2012).  Directive 12.6 states “Identify social infrastructure needs and engage local boards to prioritise community infrastructure requirements” (Auckland Plan March 2012).

7.   It also aligns with the Draft Community Facilities Network Plan which has been written to guide council’s provision of community facilities for the next 10 years and beyond. The key drivers for the network plan are to:

·    Maximise the use and efficiency of existing facilities;

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

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

 

Background

8.   RCHI is an independent incorporated society which is made up of local community volunteers and employs staff for day to day operations of the facility. RCHI obtain their funding from a variety of sources including user pays, community grants and contracts for service

9.   The RCHI govern and manage the RCH which has been located on its present site at 474 Swanson Rd, Ranui since 1994. Overtime additions and alterations have been made, the largest of which is the addition of the Ranui Library space in 2001. At that time the library and the RCH had shared use of the multipurpose room until 2005 when the library increased its foot-print and required the multipurpose room full time.  The loss of the multipurpose room was significant to the RCHI affecting its ability to hold meetings or events with larger groups.

10. It has long been acknowledged that the current facility is not fit for purpose. It is too small to cater for the present population (the management is turning away potential users every week), has dark corridors, poor visibility from the reception area, no windows in the main hall area, a cafι area that has little internal seating space and a kitchen with limited functionality.

11. The RCHI set up the Tea Tree Cafι in 2009 which is well supported by the community but due to its size returns only a small profit for the community house.  For this reason, part of the refurbishment proposal is the intention to create a larger not-for-profit sustainable social enterprise cafι to help fund some of the community house programmes.

12. The opportunity to improve the functionality of the RCH came about as a result of the Ranui Library moving to their new purpose built facility across the road.  This together with the limited capacity and not fit for purpose of the existing community house, the HMLB has indicated support for the refurbishment of the facility.

13. The deed of lease for additional space was granted by the HMLB in October 2014:

Resolution number HM/2014/181

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a) Approves a Deed of Lease for Additional Space to Ranui Community House Incorporated located at 474 Swanson Road, Ranui (Attachment A) subject to the following terms and conditions:

i) Term – Commencing 16 October 2014 to 1 September 2015

All other terms and conditions in accordance with the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012.

CARRIED

14. A partnership was formed between RCHI and Council to collaboratively manage the refurbishment. This has involved joint decision making informed by the findings of the Ranui Community House facility upgrade report, including agreement on a concept plan and a proposal that council fund the structural work with RCHI sourcing external funding for fit out.

15. Council staff acknowledge there is a risk that RCHI may not be successful in raising the fit out funding. However RCHI have a successful track record with funding agencies that recognise the commitment and quality of the services they provide to the community. From initial discussions RCHI have had it is likely the refurbishment is likely to gain support from funding agencies.

16. An amount of $40,000 has already been allocated to the RCHI by the HMLB to progress the project. $7.5k has been expended to progress the project to the concept planning stage, and the remaining $32.5k will be allocated towards preparing the resource consent application and consenting costs.

17. There are capex funds of $86,318 in 2014/2015 and $209,510 in 2015/2016 to cover remaining design and construction costs.

18. While every effort has been made to ensure the concept design can be delivered within the budgets available, staff acknowledge that once more detailed design commences costs may push the budget parameters and savings will need to be found through and adjustment to the final design. Staff will report back to the HMLB for approval of detailed design (including savings) before procuring the construction contract.

 

19. Council provides annual funding of $37,429 to support operational, marketing and accounting functions. A funding agreement has been signed that contains agreed key performance indicators which will be monitored and reported against to the HMLB.

 

Consideration

Local Board Views and Implications

20. The HMLB is highly supportive of the project, stating in their local board plan: “In Ranui we acknowledge the Ranui Community House and the great work it does for its community and support the Ranui Community House developments to provide for the children and young people who make up 35.46% of the community”.

21. The HMLB have prioritized budget to enable the refurbishment project to proceed.

Maori Impact Statement

22. Census data information indicates that 18.5% of the population in the catchment identify themselves as Maori; this is higher than the Auckland average of 10.7%.  There is an opportunity here to ensure Maori are given the opportunity to maximize the use of a refurbished facility that will cater to their needs.

23. Currently a Kapa Haka group of around 25 people meet weekly at the Community House for 2 hours. Their ages range from 14 upwards.

24. The Community Facilities Network Plan recognizes that Maori participation and use of facilities is an important factor in supporting Maori community development.

Implementation Issues

25. There are no implementation issues relating to this report.

Concept Design and QS

11 December 2014

Approval via agenda report to HMLB

11 December 2014

Resource consent

December/January 2015

Detailed design

January/February 2015

Building consent

April/May 2015

Procurement of contractor

April/May 2015

Commence construction

June/July 2015

 

26.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Ranui Community House
Facility upgrade,
community profile, needs assessment and network analysis

17

     

Signatories

Authors

Jan Brown - Principal Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Anaru Vercoe - Manager, Community Policy & Planning

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

 


Henderson-Massey Local Board

11 December 2014

 

 

 

 

Ranui Community House

Facility upgrade,

community profile, needs assessment and network analysis

 

 

 

 

 

November 2014

 

AC new logo_horz_cmyk

 


Table of contents

Part One – Introduction, purpose and background

1.1 Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………………..………………....4

1.2 Purpose………………………………………………………………………………………………….………………….…4

1.3 Background……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..…...4

1.4 History……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….….4

1.5 Legal status of property…………………………………………………………………………………………..…….5

1.6 Lease………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…..5

1.7 Community Outcomes…………………………………………………………………………………………………..5

 

Part two – Planning context & strategic drivers

2.1 The Local Government Act……………………………………………………………………………………………6

2.2 The Auckland Plan………………………………………………………………………………………………………...6

2.3 The Draft Long Term Plan……………………………………………………………………………………………….7

2.4 The proposed Auckland unitary plan (PAUP)………………………………………………………………….7

2.5 The Henderson Massey Local Board Plan………………………………………………………………………8

2.6 Draft Community Facilities Network Plan……………………………………………………………………….8

 

Part three - Catchment, population distribution, growth projects and demographic data

3.1 Catchment……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..…...10

3.2 Population distribution in the catchment………………………………………………..…………….…....11

3.3 Projected population in catchment………………………………………………………………………………12

3.4 Ethnicity data……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….12

3.5 Deprivation index……………………………………………………………………………………………………….13

 

Part four – network analysis

4.1 Community house network………………………………………………………………………………………..19

4.2 Other community facilities in the vicinity……………………………………………………………………20

 

Part five – Current and proposed activities at the RCH

5.1 Current activities at the RCH…………………………………………………………………………………….…22

5.2 Community cafι …………………………………………………………………………………………...…………..22

5.3 Registered or commercial kitchen requirements …………………………………………..….….…….23

5.4 Other proposed activities……………………………………………………………………………………………24

 

Part six – Consultation findings

6.1 Community consultation………………………………………………………………………………………….…..25

 

Part seven – Summary and recommendations

7.1 Summary of introduction and purpose………………………………………………………………………..27

7.2 Summary of planning context & strategic drivers…………………………………………………………27

7.3 Summary of community profile…………………………………………………………………………………..27

7.4 Summary of network analysis……………………………………………………………………………………..28

7.5 Recommendations……………………………………………………………………………………………………..29

 

Table 1 – Auckland Plan strategic direction March 2012………………………………………..……………6

Table 2 – RCH catchment age breakdown by percentages………………………………………………….11

Table 3 – Population projection in catchment……………………………………………………………………12

Table 4 – Deprivation index of Cau’s………………………………………………………………………………….14

Table 6 – Ethnicity breakdown by percentage…………………………………………………………………….28

Table 7 – Timeline and actions for refurbishment of RCH…………………………………………………..30

 

Graph 1 – Age in five year groupings…………………………………………………………………………………11

Graph 2 – Ethnic groups…………………………………………………………………………………………………….12

Graph 3 – Pacific peoples………………………………………………………………………………………………….13

Graph 4 – Asian breakdown………………………………………………………………………………………………13

Graph 5 -  Comparison of deprivation index for Community House catchments…………….…..14

Graph 6 – Total personal income………………………………………………………………………………………..14

Graph 7 - Employment data………………………………………………………………………………………………15

Graph 8 – Highest qualifications…………………………………………………………………………………………15

Graph 9 – Family types……………………………………………………………………………………………………..16

Graph 9 – Access to telecommunications……………………………………………………………………….…16

Graph 10 – Home ownership……………………………………………………………………………………………..17

 

Map1 – Catchment area of RCH…………………………………………………………………………………………10

Map 2 – West Auckland deprivation map by meshblock…………………………………………………….18

Map 3 – Community house network………………………………………………………………………………….19

 

References and Acknowledgements……………………………………………………………………………………31


Part One – Introduction, purpose and background       

 

1.1 Introduction

The Ranui Community House (RCH) is situated at 474 Swanson Road, Ranui; it will shortly be able to expand into the space currently being used by the Ranui Library.  This is as a result of a new purpose built library recently constructed across the road.  The new Library is designed to cater for the expected growth of the area into the foreseeable future.

 

The RCH forms part of a network of seven community houses in West Auckland which are owned by Auckland Council, however leased to and operated by local community organisations.  Community houses are small to medium sized facilities (often the size of a house) which serve as local focal points for community activities, community development and services. The Ranui Community House will be one of the larger community houses at 410 sq metres (when it occupies the full facility).

 

 

 

1.2 Purpose

The purpose of this report is to:

·    Understand the demographic make-up of the catchment census area units (CAU’s) where RCH sits;

·    Review the network of community facilities in west Auckland; and

·    Recommend to the Henderson Massey Local Board on the appropriate facility upgrade that will meet the community need for the next 10 years.

 

1.3 Background

RCH is run by an independent incorporated society which is made up of local community volunteers and which employ staff for day to day operations of the facility. Funding for the RCHI comes from a variety of sources ranging from user pays, to community grants and contracts for service.   The RCHI set up in 2009 the Tea Tree Cafι which is well supported by the community but returning only a small profit for the community house.  Part of the refurbishment proposals is the intention to create a larger not-for-profit sustainable social enterprise cafι to help fund some of the community house programmes. 

 

Council owns and maintains the exterior and structural elements of the asset however the internal maintenance, chattels and operations are RCHI’s own responsibility.  Auckland Council does however provide funding support for operational, marketing and accounting purposes.

 

1.4 History

Whilst there have been community groups, such as the quilters, meeting in Ranui since the early 1970’s, the current RCH was not moved onto its present site until 1994.  The building was relocated from Edmonton Road, where it was formally a post office. Additions and alterations have been made overtime, the largest being the addition of the Ranui Library space in 2001.

 

 

1.5 Legal status of property

The legal description of the RCH is Lot 10-12 DP 20280.  The property is owned in fee simple by Auckland Council under the title number NA852/58.

 

1.6 Lease

The lease between Auckland Council and RCH commenced on 1 September 2010 and runs for five years to 1 September 2015 and with a right of renewal for a further five years, the final expiry date is 31 August 2020.  The annual lease payment is $500.00 plus GST.

 

1.7 Community Outcomes

The third schedule of the lease outlines the community objectives that RCH needs to comply with:

·    To be accessible to the community and support and encourage the use of the (reserve) for the purpose of a community house and associated community activities;

·     To ensure the Land and Building are available for use by voluntary organisations to achieve the Community Objectives on payment of a reasonable charge that is consistent with the fees policy of the Lessor;

·    To create a sense of ownership of the Land and Building by the wider community of Waitakere City;

·     To provide a service that is responsive to the demands of the wider community of Waitakere City;

·     To be managed in a financially sustainable manner that not only maintains but permits use of the (reserve) for the purpose of a community house and associated community activities;

·     Provide a high level of customer satisfaction to users and members of the public using the Land and Building;

·      Provide a venue for events and activities consistent with these Community Objectives.

 

It is recommended that when the variation to the RCHI lease to include the extended area of the Library be negotiated, that the above Community Outcomes be amended to reflect the contract with Auckland Council, including any new Community Outcomes that both parties wish to see incorporated. 

 

The Community Outcomes also need to be corrected as the building is not located on a reserve, rather is owned in fee simple and not subject to reserve status. 


Part two – Planning context & strategic drivers

 

2.1 Local Government Act

Auckland Council has an obligation under the Local Government Act to “enable democratic local decision-making and action by, and on behalf of communities; and to meet the current and future needs of communities for good-quality local infrastructure, local public services, and performance of regulatory functions in a way that is most cost-effective for households and businesses”.  In this Act, “good-quality, in relation to local infrastructure, local public services, and performance of regulatory functions, means infrastructure, services, and performance that are efficient, effective and appropriate to present and anticipated future circumstances”. (Local Government Act 2002, Amendment Act 2012)

 

2.2 The Auckland Plan

The Auckland Plan is a thirty-year strategic spatial plan which focuses on the long-term development of the city as it develops and grows.  The Auckland Plan has strong themes of growth, managed expansion within a compact city form, improving public transport, prioritising children and young people and strengthening communities.

 

The Auckland Plan in its development strategy map (urban core) identifies Ranui as ‘a local centre and an area of moderate change with a mix of low rise apartments and terraced houses up to 3 and 4 stories.  Up to a third of sites estimated to be redeveloped over 30 year period in these areas.  Will include some small lot detached and semi-detached housing’. (Auckland Plan March 2012)

 

Table 1 – Auckland Plan strategic direction March 2012

 

Chapter 12 of the Auckland Plan covers Auckland’s Physical and Social Infrastructure, priority 2 states “Protect, enable, align, integrate and provide social and community infrastructure for present and future generations”.  (Auckland Plan March 2012).

 

Directive 12.6 states “Identify social infrastructure needs and engage local boards to prioritise community infrastructure requirements” (Auckland Plan March 2012).

 

It is within the context of the above strategic direction that Council is formulating its plans for proposed use of its community facilities.

 

2.3 The Draft Long Term Plan

The draft Long Term Plan is currently out for consultation.  The Mayor’s proposal was for a capped 2.5% rate increase which would severely limit CAPEX budgets for new builds and major refurbishments, recently this was raised to 3.5% and many projects previously not budgeted may now be able to proceed.  The outcome of the draft Long Term Plan consultation will not be known until mid 2015.

 

2.4 The Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan (PAUP)

The PAUP is the key tool in delivering The Auckland Plan and managing the way Auckland grows. It will determine:

·    what can be built and where;

·    how to create a higher quality and more compact Auckland;

·    how to provide for rural activities; and

·    how to maintain the marine environment.

The PAUP replaces the 12 existing district and regional plans.

 

Information from the PAUP tells us that:

 

Ranui town centre is zoned as a Local Centre in the PAUP; this zone applies to a large number of small centres throughout Auckland. The centres are located in areas of good public transport.


The zone provides for the local convenience needs of surrounding residential areas, including local retail, commercial services, offices, food and beverage, and smaller-scale supermarkets. The zone discourages single large-scale commercial activity that would prevent a mix of activities within the local centre. The expansion of local centres may be appropriate if it provides greater social and economic well-being benefits for the community. Provisions allow for buildings up to four storeys high, enabling residential use at upper floors.

 

New development within the zone requires resource consent so that it is designed to a high standard which enhances the quality of the centre’s streets and public open spaces.

 

Objectives

1. A network of local centres that enable commercial activity which services local convenience needs and provides residential living opportunities.

2. The scale and intensity of development within local centres respects the future planned character of the surrounding environment.

 

Policies

1. Enable activities for local convenience needs of the surrounding residential area, including local retail, commercial services, office, food and beverage and small scale supermarkets.

2. Require development to achieve a high standard of design.

3. Enable residential activity above street level.

4. Discourage large-scale commercial activity that would adversely affect the:

a. retention and establishment of a mix of activities within the local centre

b. function, vitality or amenity of the City Centre, Metropolitan and Town Centre zones

c. safe and efficient operation of the transport network.

5. Provide for the outward expansion of local centres to better provide for community social and economic well-being, where expansion is suitable for growth in terms of strategic and local environmental effects. (Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan, notified 30th September 2013)

 

2.5 The Henderson Massey Local Board Plan 2014

The Henderson Massey Local Board Plan 2014 states “In Ranui we acknowledge the Ranui Community House and great work it does for its community and support the Ranui Community House developments to provide for the children and young people who make up 35.46% of the community”. 

 

2.6 Draft Community Facilities Network Plan

The purpose of the community facilities network plan is to guide council’s provision of community facilities for the next 10 years and beyond. The key drivers for the network plan are to:

·    Maximise the use and efficiency of existing facilities,

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

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

There are two key components of the network plan:

·    Strategic framework – guides council’s decision making on the provision and investment in community facilities.

·    Recommendations - to investigate areas of need for new facilities and existing facilities that need major upgrades or need to be investigated because of issues affecting performance.

All of these recommendations will require localised and detailed community based assessment to determine the appropriate response. “Community facilities development guidelines” have been developed to provide an end-to-end process for this implementation.  It is intended that any future investment will be determined following detailed investigation which provides clear evidence of need and the development of a robust business case.


Part three - Catchment, population distribution, growth projections and demographic data

3.1 Catchment

Community Houses are designed to respond to the needs of local residents within a 1 – 2 km catchment.  The specific location of the RCH, being on a transport route from Waitakere, Swanson and Te Henga, means that a percentage of their users would come from outside of the 1 – 2 km catchment area, but it would scew the data if we were to assume that the catchment includes all of the CAU’s in these coastal villages.  So for the purpose of this research the catchment for the RCH covers the four census area units (CAU’s) of Urlich, Starling Park, Ranui Domain and Ranui South.

 

Map 1 – Catchment area of RCH

3.2 Population distribution in the catchment

To develop an information base for identifying the long-term nature and needs of the RCH catchment of communities, population-related data have been accessed from Statistics New Zealand. This material covers 2013 census information for population counts, age distributions and ethnicity figures.  This selection of data will inform council’s thinking on the optimum scope of facility development for the RCH.

 

The total population in the 2013 census for the four CAU’s in the catchment is 11,253; this is broken down by age cohorts and by percentage to:

 

Table 2: RCH catchment age breakdown and percentages

Total 0-9 Years

Total 10-19 Years

Total 20-29 Years

Total 30-39 years

Total 40-49 years

Total 50-59 years

Total 60 + years

Total All Ages

2,190

1,800

1,626

1,626

1,491

1,170

1,332

11,253

19.46%

16.00%

14.45%

14.45%

13.25%

10.40%

11.84%

 

 

What is clear from the above statistics is that there is a large cohort of children and young people with  35.46% under the age of 20 years old living within the RCH catchment. 

 

The 2006 census of usually resident population for the RCH catchment was 10,104, in 2013 it had grown to 11,253, this is an 11.37% increase over the seven year period. Below is a comparision of the age of the population in the catchment between 2006 and 2013 broken down into 5 year groups.  This shows that the 0-4 and 65+ age groups have grown percentage wise faster than other age groupings.

 

Graph 1 – Age group comparison 2006 – 2013

 

3.3 Projected population in catchment

The population estimates are based on the 2006 census but it does still provide valuable data on the expected population increases in the RCH catchment.

 

Table 3 – population projection in catchment

CAU Description

2006

2011

2016

2021

2026

2031

% Change 2006 to 2031

Urlich

2440

2530

2600

2660

2690

2700

10.66%

Starling Park

2450

2750

2840

2920

2980

3020

23.27%

Ranui Domain

3210

3360

3490

3610

3740

3860

20.25%

Ranui South

2550

3010

3390

3780

4170

4570

79.22%

 

10,650

11,650

12,320

12,970

13,580

14,150

32.86%

 

The population projection data suggests that there will be 3,500 more residents in the RCH catchment from 2006 to 2031.  The 2013 usually resident population of 11,253 is tracking just slightly lower than expected so this number may not be met by 2031.

 

3.4 Ethnicity data

Ethnicity matters in relation to the provision of programmes and facilities within a geographical area as different ethnicities respond to different cultural activities.

 

European is the single dominant ethnic group in the RCH catchment, although if one was to add Maori, Pacific and Asian you would see that these ethnicities would outnumber the European percentage.

 

Graph 2 – Ethnic groups

 

 

 

 

A breakdown of the Pacific Peoples show that the dominent Pacific ethnicity is  Samoan.

 

Graph 3 – Pacific Peoples

 

The graph shows that the Asian population has grown significantly since the 2006 census, with 7% of the Asian population being Indian and 4% being Chinese.

 

Graph 4 – Asian breakdown

 

3.5 Deprivation Index

Deprivation information comes from the Department of Public Health, University of Otago, Wellington.  The following information is the latest published and is based on the 2013 census.  A deprivation level of 9 indicates high levels of hardship and as you can see below all four of the CAU’s in the catchment are either a nine or in the case of Ranui Domain a 10.  This means that residents may well struggle to access council facilities and to pay the fees to attend programmes. 

 

Table 4 deprivation index of CAU’s

Census area unit

Deprivation index

Urlich

9

Starling Park

9

Ranui Domain

10

Ranui South

9

The Social Deprivation Index is a measure of socio-economic status calculated for small geographic areas rather than individuals. The calculation uses a range of variables from the 2013 Census of Population and Dwellings which represent nine dimensions of social deprivation. The variables include Income, Employment, Support, Living Space and Home ownership.

 

The following graph shows that the RCH catchment has the highest levels of population deprivation in comparison to the other community houses in the West.

 

Graph 5 – Comparison of deprivation index for Community House catchments

 

The following data provides some background to the index of the CAU’s in the catchment with 23% of the residents aged 15 or over earning less than $5,000 per annum and 59% in total earning less than $30,000 per annum.

 

Graph 6 – Total personal income

Employment data tells us that in 2013 8.3% of the residents over the age of 15 were unemployed, this is considerably higher than the national average of 6.2%.

 

Graph 7 – employment data

 

As for educational achievements, 28% of the residents in the RCH catchment have no qualifications, but since 2006 all the indicators show that more residents are gaining some form of qualification.

 

Graph 8 – Highest qualifications

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

29.4% of families in the catchment are one parent families, this is high in comparision to the Auckland average of 18.4%.

 

Graph 9 Family types

 

The following graph shows the growth in access to telecommunications since 2006.   Although access to the internet has risen significantly since 2006 it still accounts for only 72.3% of the population in the catchment, which is low in comparison to other parts of West Auckland.  (In Sturges West there is 89.4%).

 

Graph 10 – Access to telecommunications

 

 

 

As for home ownership, more homes are owned or partly owned in the catchment, although there has been an increase of 267 homes that are rented since 2006.

 

 

Graph 11 – Home ownership

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Map 2 – West Auckland deprivation map by meshblock


Part four – network analysis

 

4.1 Community House network

West Auckland has a network of community houses that provide a range of programmes and services.  Each community house has a local governance committee who appoint and manage their own staff.  The buildings are all owned by Auckland Council and leased to the respective legal entity for each house.  The map below shows their distribution.

 

The closest Council owned community facility to RCH is Sturges West Community House being 4.3km away and then Massey Community House at 4.6 km.

 

Map 3 – Community house network

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


4.2 Other community facilities in the vicinity

Other facilities in the catchment include:

·    Ranui House – home of Ranui Action Project

Ranui Action Project attends to the Health and Wellbring of Ranui.  A Community Broker is employed by them and she has created the Ranui Accord which includes the Ranui Baptist Church, RAP, Caravan Park Hub and Council and the Ranui Community Network that includes agencies and residents throughout the local area.  Both the accord and the Network meet monthly.

Sports Clubs

·    The Starling Park Sports Club

Primarily the sports club provides facilities for teams at the weekends and evenings and are very heavily used during this time.  They also have club rooms that they rent out.

·    The Ranui Rugby League clubrooms on Ranui Domain, they host tournaments and training during the weekday evenings and weekends and play touch rubgy as well as league.

Churches

·    The Ranui Baptist Church delivers a wide range of community services including:

o Children’s Play Group;

o Mainly Music;

o Op Shop;

o Parenting Courses;

o Food Bank;

o Budgeting;

o Youth programmes;

o Senior Citizens Club;

o Counselling; and

o Toy Library.

·    Ranui Pacific Islanders Presbyterian Church primarily a church with a Samoan Language pre-school.  They have a large hall that they rent out for community events.

·    Samoan Congregational Church;

·    St Malachy’s Catholic Church; 

·    St Marks Anglican Church;

·    The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints;

·    The Tongan Methodist Church;

·    West Auckland Muslim Mosque; and

·    West Auckland New Life Church.

Schools

·   Birdwood Primary - School Hall for use by community they have karate and fitness during the week, all day Saturday and Sunday it is booked with Church groups; and

·   Ranui Primary School – The School Hall is used for a homework club,  is hired out for Zumba during the week and Churches at the weekend.  They occaisonally hire the hall out for private functions

 

 

Other facilities

·    Western Park Village- very low decile caravan park with a lot of social problems e.g. drug and alcohol – they have a small Hub with a part time coordinator.

 

All of these facilities provide for specific needs of the Ranui community, although some of the churches are not available for community use.

 

The new Ranui Library was recently opened and it has the intention of running a range of community programmes including a a learning centre which will have staff on hand to support the community with computer literacy.


Part five – Current and proposed activities at the RCH

 

5.1 Existing activities

 

The following list shows the range of activities currently run at the community house.

·    Ranui Embroiders;

·    Hatha Yoga;

·    German Playgroup;

·    Music & Movement for Pre-School;

·    Begineers Machine Sewing classes;

·    Ukelele classes;

·    Tai Chi for adults;

·    Jellybeans Playgroup;

·    ESOL class;

·    Learners License;

·    Quilting workshops;

·    Gardening at the Community Gardens;

·    Kids cooking class;

·    Hip Hop dancing; and

·    Beginners Guitar lessons.

 

The Tea Tree Cafι opens Monday to Thursday 9am to 2.30pm and on Fridays 9am to 6.30pm. This social enterprise serves organic and homemade food and the initiative is hoped to become profitable in time so that it can subsidise the cost of running programmes at the Community House.

 

The Community House also has under its’ umbrella, management of the local Ranui Community Gardens, employing a Coordinator for 15-20 hours each week. 

 

A Friday night Farmers type market also services the community by providing locally sourced food and providing a place for people to gather. 

 

5.2 Community cafι

The current Ranui Community House is a fully registered kitchen with an ‘A’ rating from Auckland Council. The business model is one of a “not for profit social enterprise community cafι.”  Under this model, any profit is made by the cafι will be put back into the community house to subsidise other programmes that benefit the community.

 

It is also intended that the community cafι will be used as a “community teaching kitchen” that aims to raise the awareness of providing local, organic and seasonal food.

 

The RCH has indicated that they wish to deliver a service to their community and that they see a community cafι as a way to support and develop community cohesion.  The cafι is an extension of their social responsibility for their community in that it provides a safe and welcoming place for people to come to.

 

Originally the cafι was set up to support the Community House to become more sustainable into the future and to become less reliant on funders.  It has developed into a means of supporting the community garden in providing an avenue for using sustainably organically grown produce and serving it to the community as well as being a vehicle for local employment.

 

The interior space occupied by the cafι in the daytime will become a multi-use space able to be rented out to classes and groups after the cafι closes.

 

RCH currently run outreach programmes to teach residents to prepare and cook food such as a kids cooking classes for beginners and an advanced one.  They have trialled a ‘Garden to Table’ programme where residents learn how to grow their own food in the community garden and then take the produce and learn how to cook, preserve and turn the food into meals to feed their families.  RCH intend to recommence these once the new facility is in place, as the current facility proved to be too small.

They also intend to commence programmes such as:

 

·    Barista training 

·    Bread making.

 

The RCH kitchen is also provided free to an organisation that runs a soup kitchen for the community. The soup is prepared and cooked in the kitchen and given to the recipients in takeaway containers once a week.

5.3 Registered or commercial kitchen requirements

Part of the proposed refurbishment of the RCH is to provide an improved registered kitchen that can support the expanded community cafι. 

 

The proposed use of any facility determines the extent of the design of any registered or commercial kitchen.  If for instance the plan is to cook meals all day for hundreds of patrons then the level of cooking facilities, extract fans, dishwashing and grease traps needs to be at a much higher specification than if a kitchen is to reheat food prepared elsewhere and make coffee.

 

The following information comes from the Auckland Council Food Safety Bylaw 2013 and details some basic requirements of what registered kitchens need to have:

 

Critical items for and A or B grade rating

 

·    Pest controls in place

·    Temperature controls for dishwashers and refrigeration

·    Food protection controls to protect from contamination e.g. red meat will not drip on other food, food stored in the open covered and protected from contamination, sneeze guards in place for displayed food etc.

·    Premises are well cleaned and well maintained and meet the standards of the Food Hygiene Regulations

High Priority items

·    Staff are trained and aware of food protection and food safety practices

·    Public display of registration certificate and current grading certificate

·    Hand washing practices – good awareness of issue and dedicated hand washing basin available with hot and cold water

·    Have adequate cleaning/sanitising schedule and pest control plan in place and which is available for inspection

·    Ventilation is adequate for cooking of food

·    Meets building code requirements (e.g. provision of toilets) or applicable building standards at time

Medium priority items required of an A or B grade

·    Hot water capacity is adequate

·    Lighting is adequate for tasks including cleaning

·    Adequate space in kitchen for food preparation and storage.

·    Adequate refuse/waste storage/disposal facilities

·    Adequate and clean facilities to dispose of waste oil or fat including grease traps

·    Ventilation if food not cooked on premises

·    Protective clothing provided meets need of food prepared or sold

·    Changing facilities for staff adequate to size of business

Low priority items

·    Colour of wall, floor and ceiling finishes

·    Ceiling height

·    Coving at edge of flooring

·    Minor notices e.g. hand washing or smoking notices

 

5.4 Other proposed activities

The RCHI have identified the need for after school and school holiday programmes to be run from the refurbished facility.  Currently children hang around the Ranui Libray after school as there are no established programmes to support them.

 

The also intend to expand cooking classes, they currently deliver children’s cooking lessons and they wish to start up classes covering:

·    Garden to table (growing your own vegetables and fruit and knowing how to prepare and cook meals using your own garden produce);

·    Bread making course; and

·    Any other courses requested that would support their community.

 


Part six – Consultation findings

 

6.1 Community consultation

Consultation was undertaken in August and September 2014 and took the form of workshops with key stakeholders, users and surveying the general public.  A number of questions were asked of each group, these included:

 

·    What is working well now?

·    What are the gaps?

·    What can we improve?

·    What should the priorities be?

 

From this the consultation was sorted into:

 

1.   Words from the community on what they want the place to feel like;

2.   Community requests for services to be run out of the hub;

3.   Specific community space requests;

4.   What realistically can be within the scope;

5.   What is probably out of scope, due to size requirement; and

 

Words from the community on what they want the place to feel like:

·    Friendly;

·    Welcoming;

·    Light – particularly in the meeting rooms as existing one has no windows;

·    Safe - especially in the carpark; and

·    Reflective of Ranui through art on the walls.

Community requests for services to be run out of the hub.

·    More events and open days;

·    Youth programmes;

·    After school care programmes;

·    School holiday programmes;

·    60+ club;

·    Drop in space;

·    Expanded budgeting service;

·    More cooking classes/menu planning classes;

·    Men’s shed/activities for men/mechanics/welding/engineering/basic DIY;

·    IPad courses/Wi-Fi;

·    Sign language course;

·    Themed weeks;

·    CAB;

·    Music/piano/art classes/craft/ballet;

·    Yoga/self-defence/martial arts/exercise;

·    Pamper evenings;

·    Table tennis;

·    Drive in Movies;

·    Darts club/poker nights; and

·    Parenting courses.

Specific Community space requests

·    Internal and external cafι seating;

·    Carpark lighting;

·    Upgraded cafι kitchen;

·    More electrical power points in meeting rooms;

·    Larger playgroup area;

·    Better storage; and

·    Larger more flexible rooms.

What realistically can be within scope

·    Improved cafι that can double up as a teaching kitchen;

·    Larger more flexible rooms;

·    Improved carpark lighting;

·    More electrical power points;

·    Larger playgroup area;

·    Improved storage;

·    Better noticeboards;

·    Drop in space; and

·    Better lighting in meeting rooms.

What is probably out of scope due to size or else being catered for elsewhere

·    Drive in movies;

·    Men’s shed (will be at the community garden); and

·    CAB.


Part seven – Summary and recommendations

 

7.1 Summary of introduction and purpose

The Ranui Community House (RCH) is situated at 474 Swanson Road, Ranui; it will shortly be able to expand into the space currently being used by the Ranui Library.  This is as a result of a new purpose built library being constructed across the road. 

 

The purpose of this report is to:

·    Understand the demographic make-up of the catchment census area units (CAU’s) where RCH sits;

·    Review the network of community facilities; and

·    Recommend to the Henderson Massey Local Board on the appropriate facility upgrade that will meet the community need for the next 10 years.

 

7.2 Summary of planning context & strategic drivers

The RCH project sits under a number of Council’s strategic documents, these are:

 

·    The Auckland Plan 2011 March 2012;

·    The Long Term Plan 2012 – 2022;

·    The Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan (PAUP 2013)

·    The Henderson Massey Local Board Plan 2014; and

·    The Community Facility Network Plan.

 

These documents provide guidance around development and provisioning of community facilities.

 

The proposed refurbishment of the RCH is supported through the Henderson Massey Local Board Plan 2014, which states:

 

The Henderson Massey Local Board Plan 2014 states “In Ranui we acknowledge the Ranui Community House and great work it does for its community and support the Ranui Community House developments to provide for the children and young people who make up 35.46% of the community”. 

 

7.3 Summary of community profile

The catchment for the RCH includes the four CAU’s of Urlich, Starling Park, Ranui Domain and Ranui South.

 

The community profile showed that the catchment is expected to grow from its base of 10,650 in 2006 to 14,150 by 2031 which is a 32.86% increase.

 

A total of 3,990 children and young people under the age of 20 years old are living within the RCH catchment which represents 35.46% of the total.

 

The RCH catchment has high levels of deprivation, this is demonstrated by:

 

·    59% of the residents earning less than $30,000 per annum;

·    Three of the CAU’s having a deprivation index of 9 and one of 10, which indicates relatively high levels of hardship for some of the residents;

·    28% of the residents in the RCH catchment have no qualifications; and

·    29.4% of families are one parent families.

 

The dominant population is European followed by Pacific Peoples, Maori, Asian and Middle Eastern, Latin American and African.

 

Table 6 Ethnicity breakdown by percentage

European

Māori

Pacific Peoples

Asian

MELAA(9)

44.24%

18.45%

27.97%

15.28%

1.78%

 

7.4 Summary of network analysis

West Auckland has a network of community houses that provide a range of programmes and services.  Each community house has a local governance committee who appoint and manage their own staff.  The buildings are all owned by Auckland Council and leased to the respective legal entity for each house.  The map below shows their distribution.

 

The closest Council owned community facility to RCH is Sturges West Community House being 4.3km away and then Massey Community House at 4.6 km.

 

Other facilities in the catchment include Ranui House, (home of Ranui Action Project), two sports clubrooms, nine churches and two schools.   All of these facilities provide for specific needs of the Ranui community, although some of the Churches are not available for community use.

 

7.4 Summary of Community Consultation

During August and September 2014 key stakeholders, users and the wider residents of the catchment were consulted on to understand their needs and desires for the RCH.  Some key themes came from the community on what they wanted the place to feel like, these were:

·    Friendly;

·    Welcoming;

·    Light – particularly in the meeting rooms as existing one has no windows;

·    Safe - especially in the carpark; and

·    Reflective of Ranui through art on the walls.

 

As for specific space requests these were for:

·    Internal and external cafι seating

·    Carpark lighting

·    Upgraded cafι kitchen

·    More electrical power points in meeting rooms

·    Larger playgroup area.

·    Better storage

·    Larger more flexible rooms

 

From the consultation a brief was developed to inform the architects on what design changes will need to be made to achieve the consultation outcomes.

 

7.5 Recommendations

The RCH is a high functioning community facility that is well supported by its community.  Over many years it has struggled to meet the growing need for space to run programmes and services due to the constrained size of the facility.   The loss of the multipurpose room which was shared by RCH and the Ranui Library was a blow to the RCH as it no longer was able to hold meetings or events with larger groups.

 

RCHI have informed Council staff that they have to refuse requests on a regular basis from people wishing to hire the facility because it is fully utilised both during the day, at nights and weekends. 

 

The office and reception area is not fit for purpose as it is very small.  There is no staff meeting room and the Tea Tree Cafι struggles to meet demand.  The RCH have identified a potential need for  an after school programme and a school holiday programme for primary age children in Ranui but the RCH does not have enough space to offer this service to the community.  Neither does it have the capacity to service groups with more than 40 people because the rooms are too small. 

 

It is for these reasons that the RCHI have developed plans to redesign the total interior of the house to enable them to better serve their community.

 

In December 2013 the Henderson Massey Local Board allocated $40,000 from its discretionary fund to allow the RCHI to prepare plans, obtain resource and building consent to enable it to make the necessary alterations to the house.  They contracted Jasmax architects to provide a concept plan and it was in May 2014 that Community Policy & Planning was invited by the HMLB to partner RCHI to support them through the process of the design, consenting and construction of the refurbishment. 

 

In October 2014 a resolution was passed by the Henderson Massey Local Board agreeing to lease the space being vacated by the Library to the RCH. 

 

A local architect has been employed to review the Jasmax design and to develop a concept plan to resource consent standard, this will been costed by a Quantity Surveyor to ensure that the design is affordable.  Subsequently it is recommended that the plan be consulted on with the community prior to moving into detailed design, to ensure that the community are happy with the proposed changes.

 

The RCHI, being an incorporated society with charitable status from the Charities Commission and having a lease over the footprint of the building has the ability to secure funding from external grant agencies such as ASB Community Trust, The Trusts Community Foundation (TTCF) and the Lotteries Trust Board.   To do this they need to have completed the concept design phase, been granted resource and building consent, and (in the case of TTCF) have tendered for the construction of the facility.  It is hoped that the balance of the money allocated by the Henderson Massey Local Board for this phase of the project will be sufficient to enable RCHI to complete all of these stages.

 

Early discussions with some of the funders have indicated a level of support for the refurbishment of RCH, due in part to the appreciation of the current services and programmes RCH provide for their community and the identification of the high level of deprivation in the area.

 

The proposed process and timeline is as follows:

Table 7 - Timeline and actions for refurbishment of Ranui Community House

Concept Design and QS

11 December 2014

Approval via agenda report to HMLB

11 December 2014

Resource consent

December/January 2015

Detailed design

January/February 2015

Building consent

April/May 2015

Procurement of contractor

April/May 2015

Commence construction

June/July 2015

 

 

 


References and acknowledgments

 

Ranui Community House Lease (Aug 2010)

Auckland Plan (March 2012)

Auckland Council Long Term Plan (2012 – 2022)

Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan, notified 30th September 2013

Henderson Massey Long Term Plan (2014)

Draft Community Facilities Network Plan (2014)

Statistics New Zealand – 2006 & 2013 census data

University of Otago deprivation index (2013)

 

 

Acknowledgements

 

Brian Osborne (RIMU) for provision of statistical data

Kim Conway & Claire Wilson (CDAC) for graphs and consultation information

 

The project team comprising:

Matt Appleyard (Community Development)

Jacqueline Puna-Teaukuru (Community Facilities)

Shannon Dizac (Regional Operations – Property)

Brya Taylor (Community Facilities)

 


Henderson-Massey Local Board

11 December 2014

 

 

Youth Connections Strategic Action Plan, 2014 - 2017

 

File No.: CP2014/27859

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       The purpose of this report is to seek approval for the 2014-2017 Youth Connections Strategic Action Plan for the Henderson-Massey area and the priorities for 2014/2015.

Executive Summary

2.       The Youth Connections Strategic Action Plan (Attachment A) provides a framework to guide local youth employment actions for the Henderson-Massey Local Board area for the next three years.  The action plan establishes the local context and future key actions for the Henderson-Massey Local Board Youth Connections programme of work. 

3.       A draft plan was reviewed by the Henderson-Massey Local Board at a workshop held on 21 October. 

 

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a)      Approves the Youth Connections Strategic Action Plan (2014-2017) as attached to this report (Attachment A)

b)      agree the priority focus areas for 2014/2015 are:

·        supporting and scaling up existing youth employment initiatives

·        exploring opportunities to increase youth employment in the Westgate developments

·        developing rangatahi Māori employability initiatives and partnerships.

c)      agree to commit funding from the board’s Local Discretionary Initiatives (LDI) budget to implement this plan.

 

 

Comments

Youth Connections Strategic Action Plan

4.       The action plan incorporates feedback received at the local board workshop and is aligned to the outcomes and timeframes outlined in the Henderson-Massey Local Board Plan.

5.       The objectives of the plan are to:

·        provide a framework to guide local employment priorities and actions for the Henderson-Massey local board area

·        support effective engagement between local board members and stakeholders of employment initiatives

·        provide a key mechanism for the Henderson-Massey local board to communicate with the business community, local communities and key stakeholders around the area’s youth employment initiatives and its future direction.

6.       The plan sets out the following seven strategic priorities to increase youth employability and unlock employment opportunities for young people in the Henderson-Massey local board area:

·    build local and regional business, community and education partnerships

·    unlock transport barriers for young people

·    create youth employability learning incentives with employers and local community-led partners

·    championing and showing the value of employing young people

·    scaling up successful community-led youth “work ready” initiatives

·    designing youth employment opportunities for Westgate

·    health sector partnerships and developing rangatahi Māori employability initiatives.

7.       The priority areas for 2014/2015 are:

·    supporting and upscaling existing youth employment initiatives such as Massey Employment Gateway and ZEAL’s youth enterprise development

·    exploring opportunities to increase youth employment in the Westgate developments

·    developing rangatahi Māori employability initiatives and partnerships, including Health sector partnerships with the Waitemata District Health Board.

Alignment to Local Board Plan

8.       The Henderson-Massey Local Board Plan (2014-2017) has a major focus on increasing employment with  three specific focus areas:

·    supporting local employment: ‘A vital business sector that creates valued local employment opportunities’

·    supporting community-led youth employment programmes through Youth Connections

·    supporting Māori organisations in their work to provide better business and employment opportunities for rangatahi.

The action plan addresses each of these focus areas.

 

 

9.       Youth Connections Across Auckland was initiated in 2012 with an aim of addressing youth unemployment. The purpose is to link employers, schools, community organisation and young people in an integrated system to support young people’s transitions from school to eventual employment. A range of initiatives were established within ten local board areas with centralised project management and political support. 

10.     In November 2012, the Henderson-Massey Local Board agreed to form a joint initiative with the Whau Local Board to implement a Youth Connections (West) project (HM/2012/15, 15 November 2012). The initiative’s objectives were to:

a)   work with employers to increase employment opportunities for young people

b)   work with young people to prepare them for employment and provide in-work mentoring and support. 

11.     The Henderson-Massey Local Board contributed funding of $47,000 from its discretionary budget towards this initiative, supplementing funding of $150,000 received from the Tindall Foundation. 

12.     While some positive results were achieved by Youth Connections in this initial phase, both  local boards and council staff agreed that the model did not make a significant impact on reducing youth unemployment or unlocking employment opportunities for young people in the region. 

13.     The board held a workshop on 19 August 2014 where it agreed to re-focus its Youth Connections attention on the Henderson-Massey area and withdraw from the joint initiative with the Whau Local Board.  Staff  were requested to develop an action plan for Youth Connections for the Henderson-Massey area. 

Funding:

14.     The Tindall Foundation has committed $650,000 p.a. to Youth Connections Across Auckland over the three years 2014-2017. This funding includes a subsidy towards the Henderson-Massey Local Board youth connections initiative conditional on the Local Board also contributing funds, as summarised in the table below. 

Contributor:

2014/2015

2015/2016

2016/2017

total

Tindall Foundation

$30,000

$25,000

$20,000

$75,000

HMLB

$15,000

$20,000

$25,000

$60,000

TOTALS

$45,000

$45,000

$45,000

$135,000

The board has provided for this funding from its draft budget.

15.     The $47,000 that the Henderson-Massey local board committed to Youth Connections in 2012, has not been spent and is available to support the implementation of this plan in addition to amounts in the table above.

Consideration

Local Board Views and Implications

16.     A draft plan was generally endorsed at the local board workshop on 21 October and feedback has been incorporated into the draft plan. Pending approval of the draft plan, action plans will be developed and reported on annually. Monthly updates on progress will be provided to the board’s delegated portfolio holders.

Maori Impact Statement

17.     The plan includes a focus on rangatahi Māori employability initiatives. A priority focus involves working with the Waitemata DHB to increase Māori employment in the health sector.  It is envisaged that in implementing the plan, Council will work closely with iwi and Māori organisations in the area. This will ensure the systems align with culturally secure strength-based approaches to youth development, and draw on a Māori development perspective to youth employment. 

Implementation Issues

18.     Council staff will lead the implementation of this plan, in conjunction with relevant community organisations and stakeholders. It is anticipated that a project leadership or advisory group will be established to support the implementation of the plan.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Youth Connections Strategic Action Plan 2014 - 2017

51

     

Signatories

Authors

Paul Prestidge - Community Development Programme Manager

Authorisers

Graham Bodman - Manager - Community Development, Arts and Culture

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

 


Henderson-Massey Local Board

11 December 2014

 

 





















Henderson-Massey Local Board

11 December 2014

 

 

Interim Open Space Provision Guidelines

 

File No.: CP2014/28327

 

  

 

 

Purpose

1.       To seek feedback from local boards on the Interim Open Space Provision Guidelines.

Executive summary

2.       The Interim Open Space Provision Guidelines (the guidelines) provide direction on the quantity, distribution and configuration of parks and open space sought by the council in both greenfield developments and the existing urban area.

3.       The guidelines were adopted by the Parks, Recreation and Sport Committee in August for interim use and feedback during a six month trial period (attachment A).  An updated version of the guidelines, incorporating amendments based on feedback, will be reported in early 2015 to the Parks, Recreation and Sport Committee and Regional, Strategy and Policy Committee for adoption.

4.       The primary focus of the guidelines is ensuring the open space network provides access to a range of high-quality recreation, social and environmental experiences. The guidelines direct how open space should be distributed within both greenfield developments and the existing urban area by establishing triggers in relation to travel distance, resident population or the proximity of other land uses (such as an urban centre) that determine when the open space network should provide for the following experiences:

·        Neighbourhood parks

·        Suburb parks

·        Sub-regional parks

·        Civic spaces

·        Local sports parks

·        Connections

5.       For existing urban areas the guidelines focus on improving the quality, accessibility and connectivity of existing open space. The guidelines identity areas of significant and moderate shortfall in the quantity of open space relative to the current and future population within the existing urban area.

6.       A target for the quantity of local recreation open space within greenfield developments of 2 hectares per 1000 residents is proposed.

7.       The guidelines set out how different types of open space should be laid out and configured in relation to other land uses, such as housing and streets, to ensure that a high quality open space network is achieved.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a)      Provide feedback on the Interim Open Space Provision Guidelines

 

 

Comments

Background and strategic context

8.       The Open Space Provision Guidelines (the guidelines) are part of the Parks and Open Spaces Policy Programme and are a key tool to implement the policy direction of the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan (PAUP), the Parks and Open Spaces Strategic Action Plan 2013, the Sport and Recreation Strategic Action Plan 2013 and the Parks and Open Space Acquisition Policy 2013 (the acquisition policy).

9.       The guidelines provide direction on the distribution, quantity and configuration of parks and open space sought by the council in both greenfield developments and the existing urban area. They will inform a range of council activities including:

·    Assessing open space acquisition opportunities

·    Development of spatial plans (area plans, precinct plan and structure plans)

·    Identifying strategic infrastructure requirements, including development of a regional open space network plan

·    Informing the development of local open space network plans for local board areas

·    Providing advice on council’s open space requirements to developers

10.     The guidelines were adopted by the Parks, Recreation and Sport Committee in August for interim use and feedback during a six month trial period.

11.     A successful open space network responds to the local context and therefore it is expected that variation in the provision of open space will occur across Auckland. The guidelines are intended to set out a framework for assessing open space provision rather than establish strict targets for council or developers to achieve.

12.     The guidelines apply to greenfield developments and existing urban areas. They primarily focus on the provision of local parks, rather than sub-regional or region scale open space. 

13.     The guidelines have three parts, each of which are explained further below:

·        Distribution of open space

·        Quantity of open space

·        Configuration of open space

Distribution of open space (pages 4 to 8 of the guidelines)

14.     Ensuring the open space network provides the community with access to a range of high quality recreational, social and environmental experiences is the primary focus of the guidelines.

15.     The first part of the guidelines direct how open space should be distributed within both greenfield developments and the existing urban area by describing six experiences the open space network should deliver:

·        Neighbourhood parks

·        Suburb parks

·        Sub-regional parks

·        Civic spaces

·        Local sports parks

·        Connections

16.     The guidelines establish triggers in relation to travel distance, size of resident population or the proximity of other land uses (such as an urban centre) that determine when the open space network should provide for each of the experiences. Criteria relating to the size of open space required and key activities provided for are also established for some experiences.

17.     Provision targets used by the legacy councils in Auckland as well as other councils in New Zealand and overseas have been considered in establishing the distribution targets (attachment B).

18.     Each of the experiences and the relevant triggers for provision are explained below:

Neighbourhood parks and suburb parks

19.     Neighbourhood parks and suburb parks describe open space that provides common informal recreation experiences throughout urban areas. The guidelines establish criteria about the typical area of open space required for a neighbourhood park (0.3ha) and suburb park (3ha) and the activities they should provide for (such as play opportuniites, respite, trail networks)

20.     Walking distance targets are proposed for neighbourhood parks and suburb parks relative to PAUP zoning. Shorter walking distance targets are proposed for the PAUP zones that provide for higher density residential development. This assists with providing residents in higher-density housing with easy access to informal recreation open space. The following walking distance targets are proposed:

 

 

Neighbourhood Park

 

 

Suburb Park

 

High density areas:

(Terraced Housing and Apartment Zone, Local Centre, Town Centre, Metropolitian Centre and Mixed Use)

 

400m walk

(approx. 5 mins)

 

1000m walk

(approx. 12 mins)

Remaining urban residential areas

 

600m walk

(approx. 7.5 mins)

 

 

1500m walk

(approx. 18 mins)

 

Sub-regional parks

21.     Sub-regional parks describe large (typically >30ha) areas of open space that provide for a variety of informal recreation and sport experiences. These parks are usually located within, or on the periphery of, the urban area. Examples include Barry Curtis Park, Western Springs, Auckland Domain.

22.     The guidelines propose that Auckland Council will proactively acquire sub-regional parks when opportunities arise and needs are identified through network planning, rather than expect sub-regional parks to be planned for by developers in greenfield areas. The guidelines do not propose a travel distance target for sub-regional parks, but state that residents within each of the northern, central, southern and western areas of urban Auckland should have easy access to a variety of sub-regional parks.  

Civic space

23.     Civic space describes the squares, plazas, greens, streets and shared spaces within urban centres which provide for social and informal recreation experiences. The provision guidelines propose the quantity and diversity of civic space relate to the scale of the urban centre. A local centre is proposed to be the smallest urban centre to trigger civic space requirements.

Local sports parks

24.     Local sports parks describe open space which is used for organised sport, and typically includes facilities such as sports fields, courts and club buildings. Sports parks are also provided for at a sub-regional scale. 

25.     The guidelines propose that greenfield developments should provide for the local sport park requirements of their residents. Based on existing levels of sports field demand this equates to approximately 3ha of land per 2000 households. A threshold of 2000 households is proposed, as this generates sufficient demand for two sports fields, and results in larger sports parks which have efficiencies in terms of layout, facility use and maintenance. The 3ha minimum size includes allowances for club rooms, car parking and for other facilities such as courts.

26.     No target for local sports parks provision is proposed for existing urban areas. The sports park network within the urban area is largely in place, and acquisition opportunities of land suitable for new sports parks are rare.

Connections

27.     Creating a connected open space network is one of the areas of focus of the Parks and Open Spaces Strategic Action Plan 2013.  The guidelines encourage open space to be distributed to create contiguous networks that have a range of recreational, transport and ecological benefits.

Quantity of open space (pages 9 to 11 of the guidelines)

28.     Different policy responses are required for guidance on the quantity of open space between greenfield developments and the existing urban area.  In greenfield developments there is generally no existing open space network and there is the ability to determine the amount and distribution of open space. In existing urban areas the open space network is largely in place and there are significant constraints on increasing the amount of open space, including the cost and availability of suitable land.

29.     Achieving quantity targets is a secondary focus for the provision of open space.

Quantity of open space in existing urban areas

30.     The guidelines do not establish a target for the quantity of open space relative to the population within existing urban areas. Due to the amount of population growth projected within existing urban areas, achieving and maintaining a ratio of open space to population would be unachievable due to financial (the cost of land) and practical constraints (the availability of suitable land).

31.     The criteria of the Parks and Open Space Acquisition Policy 2013 (the acquisition policy) establish how the council prioritises acquisition opportunities within the existing urban area in response to population growth. The acquisition policy generally prioritises acquisition opportunities where there is:

·        High levels of expected population growth

·        Relatively poor access to informal recreation open space

·        Low quantity of existing open space relative to the current and future population

32.     For the purpose of informing open space acquisition priorities, the quantity of open space across the region has been assessed in relation to:

·        The quantity of open space (all types) within each census area unit

·        The quantity of recreational open space within each census area unit

·        Projected  population growth between 2014 and  2030

·        Strategic alignment with the Auckland Plan Development Strategy and PAUP zonings

33.     Draft quantity analysis is included within the interim guidelines (attachment A, page 10). This map identifies where moderate and significant shortfalls in the quantity of open space relative to the current and future population are located within the existing urban.

Quantity of open space in greenfield developments

34.     In greenfield development areas the guidelines set a target for the quantity of local informal recreation open space of 2 hectares per 400 households (approximately 1000 residents). Local informal recreation open space is defined as having an informal recreation, sport or civic open space function and excludes parks considered to serve a sub-regional or regional catchment.

35.     Analysis of the existing provision of open space within the urban areas of Auckland, local board areas and ten case study areas has informed recommending a target of 2 hectares per 400 households of informal recreation open space. The target of 2 hectares of local recreation open space per 400 households is relatively consistent with the existing amount of local recreation open space provided in the urban area of Auckland.

36.     The Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan introduces a green infrastructure corridor zone which is to be applied to land within the 1 in 100 year floodplain in greenfield developments. The integration of green infrastructure and open space land is integral to creating a connected open space network. The guidelines allow for up to 50% of local recreation open space to be provided in the form of green infrastructure where this has demonstrable recreation benefits (such as creating trail networks).

37.     No target for the amount of open space required for conservation or green infrastructure corridor purposes is proposed. The values and characteristics of an area determine the need for these open space functions rather than the population of a development. Targets are also not proposed for large sub-regional or regional recreation open space, as it is expected council will identify and acquire land for these functions outside of the greenfield development process (structure planning and subdivision).

Configuration of open space (pages 12 and 13 of the guidelines)

38.     The third part of the guidelines sets out how different types of open space should be laid out and configured in relation to other land uses, such as housing and streets, to ensure that a high quality open space network is achieved.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

39.     This report seeks the views of local boards on the interim open space provision guidelines. The view of local boards will be reported to the Parks, Recreation and Sport Committee and will inform proposed amendments to the guidelines prior to their adoption.

Maori impact statement

40.     Engagement with Maori on the guidelines will occur during the trial period.

Implementation

41.     Further development and testing of the provision guidelines is occurring during the period for the remainder of 2014. This involves:

·        Assessing open space acquisition opportunities against the guidelines

·        Testing the guidelines with developers preparing structure plans for special housing areas and future urban zone land

·        Engagement with iwi and property developers

·        Refinement of the modelling of provision targets

·        Illustration of the concepts within the guidelines

42.     Final guidelines will be report to the Parks, Recreation and Sport Committee in early 2015 following the trial period.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Interim Open Space Provision Guidelines

77

bView

Examples of provision targets used by former Auckland Council and other NZ and overseas park authorities

91

     

Signatories

Authors

Andrew Beer - Principal Policy Analyst

Authorisers

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

Anaru Vercoe - Manager, Community Policy & Planning

 


Henderson-Massey Local Board

11 December 2014

 

 














Henderson-Massey Local Board

11 December 2014

 

 



Henderson-Massey Local Board

11 December 2014

 

 

Proposed reclassification of Birdwood Winery Estate Reserve

 

File No.: CP2014/26831

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       To seek the Henderson-Massey Local Board’s view concerning the reclassification of Birdwood Winery Estate Reserve Lot 2 DP 50606 from local purpose (historic site) to local purpose (community buildings) reserve and a recreation reserve pursuant to s16 (2A) of the Reserves Act 1977.

Executive Summary

2.       On 7 September 2006 the former Waitakere City Council (WCC) resolved to classify the whole of Birdwood Winery Estate Lot 2 DP 50606 as a local purpose (historic site) reserve.

3.       The Reserves Act 1977 requires all reserves to be classified according to its principal or primary purpose. Lot 2 and the two buildings located there are predominantly used for community and recreation which is not consistent with its current classification as local purpose (historic site) reserve.

4.       To appropriately classify Lot 2 a resolution is required from the Governing Body to partially rescind (as the resolution contains multiple reserves) the former WCC resolution dated 7 September 2006, and to reclassify Lot 2 in accordance with its current use as a local purpose (community buildings) reserve and a recreation reserve.

5.       It is recommended the Henderson-Massey Local Board confirm those parts of Lot 2 (Attachment B) shown as Section 1 in Plan SO477190 and containing the Birdwood winery building and homestead, be classified as local purpose (community buildings), and the balance of Lot 2, marked as Section 2, be classified as a recreation reserve pursuant to s16 (2A) of the Reserves Act 1977.

6.       Council has the authority under s16 (2A) of the Reserves Act to classify the reserve by a passing a resolution and informing Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) of that resolution. There is no provision under s16 (2A) requiring council to advertise its intention to classify the reserve or publish a gazette notice.

7.       The successful reclassification of Lot 2 would allow for leases to be entered into with the recreation clubs located on site or any other community groups wanting to use Birdwood Winery Estate Reserve for recreation purposes.   

 

 

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a)      recommend to the Parks, Recreation and Sport Committee that it partially rescind the Waitakere City Council resolution dated 7 September 2006 (1771/2006) to classify the whole of Lot 2 DP 50606 Birdwood Winery Estate as a local purpose (historic site) reserve;

b)      confirm those parts of Lot 2 marked Section 1 on the attached plan copy SO477190 to be local purpose (community buildings) reserve and recommend approval by the Parks, Recreation and Sport Committee;

c)      confirm the balance area marked Section 2 on the SO477190 plan to be a recreation reserve (under section 17 of the Reserves Act) pursuant to section16(2A) of the Reserves Act 1977 and recommend approval by the Parks, Recreation and Sport Committee.

 

 

Discussion

8.       Birdwood Winery Estate Reserve (Lot 2) is largely open grass space of approximately 8.2619 hectares located at 99 Glen Road, Ranui. The Reserve contains the old Birdwood winery building and homestead from the former Birdwood winery.

9.       On 7 September 2006 the former Waitakere City Council (WCC) resolved to classify Birdwood Winery Estate Lot 2 DP 50606 as a local purpose (historic site) reserve under s16 of the Reserves Act 1977. Resolution number 1771/2006 (Attachment A).

10.     The Reserves Act 1977 requires reserves to be classified according to its principal or primary purpose. The current use of Lot 2 and the two buildings located within it are used for recreation and community activities and therefore not consistent with the primary purpose of a local purpose (historic site) reserve. Historic reserve classification is only used when the site’s historic, archaeological or cultural features are of paramount importance.

11.     The western end of Lot 2 is occupied by the Waitakere City BMX club. The top floor and basement of the winery building are occupied by the West City Darts club and Western Districts Model Railway club (the clubs). Both of these activities are consistent with recreation and community use and would require leases granted under s61 (2A) of the Act.

12.     In order to appropriately classify Lot 2, a resolution is required from the Parks, Recreation and Sport Committee (PRSC) to classify those parts containing the footprints of the winery and homestead buildings as local purpose (community buildings) reserve, marked as Section 1 on the attached plan S0477190 (Attachment B).

13.     The balance of Lot 2 marked as Section 2 on the attached plan SO477190 should be classified as a recreation reserve (under s17 of the Act) pursuant to s16 (2A) of the Reserves Act 1977, through a resolution by PRSC.

14.     Council has the delegated authority under s16 (2A) of the Act to classify the reserve by resolution and by providing a copy of the resolution to Land Information New Zealand (LINZ). There is no provision under s16 (2A) requiring the council to advertise its intention to classify the reserve or publish a gazette notice. Therefore, no public notification is required.   

15.     Before the classification process can begin a resolution is needed from the PRSC to partially rescind the 2006 Waitakere City Council resolution dated 7 September 2006 to classify the whole of Lot 2 DP 50606 Birdwood Winery Estate Reserve as a local purpose (historic site).

16.     The successful reclassification of Lot 2 will allow for leases to be entered into with clubs based on Birdwood Winery Estate Reserve or any other community group wanting to use the reserve in the future.

Consideration

Local Board Views and Implications

17.     The proposed reclassification was discussed at a workshop with the Henderson-Massey Local Board on 9 September 2014. Board members expressed support for the recommended reserve reclassification in this report.

Maori Impact Statement

18.     Te Kawerau a Maki do not oppose the proposed reclassification; they do not however support the granting of leases of longer than five years without full engagement with them by council and the lease holders.

19.     Nga Maunga Whakahii o Kaipara has no direct issue or areas of cultural interest on the proposed reclassification of the Reserve. They have requested further consultation if the purpose of the reclassification changes in the future.     

 

General

20.     Staff from other Council departments have contributed to this report, including:

·      Auckland Property

·      Heritage Unit

·      Legal Services

·      Community Development, Arts and Culture

Implementation Issues

21.     Before council can reclassify the reserve it must resolve through the Parks, Recreation and Sport Committee to rescind an old resolution from the former Waitakere City Council.

22.     Should the reclassification process be successful, council can offer leases through a public expression of interest process to any community groups or clubs wanting to use the reserve under section s61 (2A) of the Reserves Act.

23.     There is no significant cost associated with the reserve reclassification except for staff time.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Waitakere City Council Resolution 7 September 2006

97

bView

SO 477190 Plan

111

     

Signatories

Authors

Roma Leota - Policy Analyst, West

Authorisers

Anaru Vercoe - Manager, Community Policy & Planning

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

 


Henderson-Massey Local Board

11 December 2014

 

 















Henderson-Massey Local Board

11 December 2014

 

 


Henderson-Massey Local Board

11 December 2014

 

 

Road Name Approval for development of the Westgate Town Centre

 

File No.: CP2014/28415

 

  

 

 

Purpose

1.       This report seeks the decision of the Henderson-Massey Local Board for the road name for the road which currently services the existing Westgate Shopping Centre to the south of Fred Taylor Drive and the proposed developments within Massey North Urban Concept Plan area (Precinct E).

Executive Summary

2.       An application was made for the naming of roads created (or to be created) by the development at the Westgate Town Centre and presented to the Local Board in a meeting on 2 October 2014. Ten names were proposed and approved by the Local Board, in particular Road E, the main road that runs through the proposed town centre and which connects Fred Taylor Drive and Northside Drive, was named as Maki Street.

 

This road is aligned with the private lane that currently exists within the existing Westgate Shopping Centre to the south of Fred Taylor Drive. The current application seeks to name this private lane Maki Street, as a continuation of Road E within the proposed development to the north.

 

 

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a)      That the report be received;

b)      That the Henderson-Massey Local Board approves the name Maki Street for the private lane through the existing Westgate Shopping Centre (Precinct E within the Massey North Urban Concept Plan area).

 

 

Discussion

3.       There are a number of new roads currently being built (or in the process of being constructed) in the Town Centre Precinct Areas of the Massey North Urban Concept Plan, or otherwise known as the Westgate Town Centre. An application was made to name the new roads – they were approved in the Local Board meeting dated 2 October 2014.

Road E (as labelled in the attached drawing) which traverses through the development in the north-south axis will be named Maki Street. This road will connect Northside Drive and Fred Taylor Drive, and will be aligned with a private lane which currently services the existing Westgate Shopping Centre. The intention is that this private lane would form a continuation of Road E, and as such would take on the same name as Road E – Maki Street.

The report and plan presented in the 2 October 2014 meeting did not clearly identify this. The purpose of the current application is to confirm that the name for Road E is also proposed for this existing private lane.

 

Consideration

Local Board Views and Implications

In reaching a decision, the Local Board may wish to consider the following matters. 

4.       Procedures and guidelines for road naming are currently being developed by Auckland Council to achieve consistent region wide protocols and policies on road naming. The legacy Waitakere City Council guidelines typically required that road names have some local historical significance, reflect the natural characteristics of the land or locality, and/or establish or extend a theme in a locality. It is also noted that Council’s draft road naming policy Principle 1 states: “the use of Maori road names is actively encouraged”.

The avoidance of name duplication is a key tenet in road naming from an emergency services perspective. NZ Post endorsement of the names is recommended to ensure this area is satisfied.

The naming of the proposed road does not preclude the developer from obtaining all necessary resource consents to undertake the land development; the current application seeks the approval of road names only.

The decision to approve the road name does not trigger any specific policy or have any impact on the immediate and wider community or have any legal or cost implication to the Council.

Once the road names have been endorsed, the usual statutory process will be followed with Land Information NZ and other necessary parties advised.

Maori Impact Statement

5.       Names provided by the iwi groups are considered to have significance to Maori in recognition of the obligations of the Treaty of Waitangi, articulated in the Auckland Plan and Local Board Plan.

Auckland Plan:

A Māori identity that is Auckland’s point of difference in the world

Local Board Plan:

WORKING WITH MĀORI

Auckland Council is committed to meeting its responsibilities under Te Tiriti o Waitangi/the Treaty of Waitangi and its broader statutory obligations to Māori. As part of this commitment, our local board looks to strengthen its relationships with mana whenua, iwi and Māori organisations. Māori make up 16 per cent of Henderson-Massey’s population. The board will continue to work closely with iwi and Māori organisations in our area to develop our natural and cultural assets of importance to the community. It is our intention to engage rangatira ki te rangatira, or chief to chief. We will continue to value the guidance of mana whenua and support the role of kaitiakitanga, the guardianship of our environment and special places.

General

6.      

Implementation Issues

7.       Once approved, the Western Resource Consenting and Compliance Team will ensure that relevant resource consents are obtained by the developer, and will liaise with Auckland Transport to ensure appropriately compliant road signage is installed.

 


 

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Westgate Road Naming - Existing "Main Street" to be clarified

117

     

Signatories

Authors

Sunny Kan – Intermediate Planner, Western Resource Consenting

Authorisers

Lee Ah Ken Team Leader Western Resource Consent

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

 


Henderson-Massey Local Board

11 December 2014

 

 


Henderson-Massey Local Board

11 December 2014

 

 

Request for feedback on the draft Local Approved Product Policy

 

File No.: CP2014/28547

 

  

 

 

Purpose

1.       The purpose of the report is to seek local board feedback on the draft Local Approved Product Policy (LAPP).

Executive Summary

2.       On 9 October 2014 the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee approved the draft LAPP for public consultation (REG/2014/123).  The LAPP sets rules regarding where retail outlets of psychoactive substances may operate.  The Psychoactive Substances Act 2013 provides that a policy may regulate the location of retail outlets by reference to broad areas within a district, proximity to other premises selling approved products and/or distance from certain types of premises such as schools, places of worship and other community facilities.

3.       Local boards are being asked to provide formal feedback on the draft LAPP by the end of December.  There will be an opportunity for local boards to present their views to the hearings panel in February 2015.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a)      Receives the feedback of the draft Local Approved Product Policy in Attached C.

 

Discussion

4.       On 9 October 2014 the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee approved a draft LAPP for public consultation (REG/2014/123). 

5.       The LAPP sets rules regarding where retail outlets of psychoactive substances may operate.  The Psychoactive Substances Act 2013 provides that a policy may regulate the location of retail outlets by reference to broad areas within a district, proximity to other premises selling approved products and/or distance from certain types of premises such as schools, places of worship and other community facilities.

6.       The draft LAPP will prevent licences being granted in areas of high deprivation, near high schools and near addiction and mental health treatment centres.  It would also limit how close to an existing shop a new shop could open.  The policy also has a separate set of rules for the city centre where licences won’t be granted in areas of high residential deprivation and new shops would have to be a certain distance from existing shops.  This draft would reduce the availability of these substances in areas where their presence is likely to have the greatest potential for harm. 

7.       Public consultation on the draft LAPP will be conducted via a special consultative procedure.  The consultation will begin on 28th October and run for four weeks.  The consultation is being publicised via social media, Our Auckland, the peoples panel, various public events and advisory panel networks.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

8.       Local board views are being sought via this report.  Local boards have previously provided feedback on possible options and on a proposed draft.  Workshops on the proposed draft were held with a number of boards.  17 boards provided feedback on the specific options, three requested a complete ban.  Great Barrier declined to comment as they did not consider it an issue for their area.  

9.       As a result of local board feedback to the proposed draft the following changes were made:

·        Buffer zones around schools were increased

·        Buffer zones around mental health and addiction treatment centres were increased

·        New rules for the city centre were added.

10.     Local board feedback is being sought in in a parallel process to the special consultative process.  The local board process will last until the end of December with local boards having the opportunity to present their views to the hearings panel in February 2015.

Maori impact statement

11.     Māori are over represented amongst the groups of vulnerable people likely to be affected by using approved psychoactive substances.  This over representation has two effects.  Firstly getting the right option for the LAPP to maximize harm reduction will be more effective for Māori.  Secondly, any solutions need to be designed in close collaboration with Māori to ensure they are workable and support wider initiatives aimed at improving Māori outcomes.  Both of these goals are consistent with outcomes set out by Auckland Council to improve social outcomes for Māori in Auckland.

12.     The consultation process with Māori has been developed in partnership with Māori agencies.  A workshop has been undertaken with representatives from Hapai Te Hauora Tapui, an agency representing Māori health providers in the Auckland region, to provide initial feedback.  Council staff are working with the Independent Māori Statutory Board, Te Waka Angamua and Hapai Te Hauora Tapui to ensure effective engagement with Māori.  The initial work has centred on ensuring information is available to iwi and maata waka. 

General

Implementation Issues

Step

Estimated timeframe

1. Special consultative procedure

28 October – 28 November

2 Local board consultation

20 October – 19 December

3 Hearings

February 2015

4. Adopt final policy

April 2015

5. Implementation and review

Ongoing

 


 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Statement of Proposal - draft LAPP

123

bView

Changes from proposed to draft summary

135

cView

Feedback on the Local Approved Product Policy

137

     

Signatories

Authors

Callum Thorpe - Principal Policy Analyst

Authorisers

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

Karen Lyons - Manager Local Board Services

 


Henderson-Massey Local Board

11 December 2014

 

 













Henderson-Massey Local Board

11 December 2014

 

 



Henderson-Massey Local Board

11 December 2014

 

 



Henderson-Massey Local Board

11 December 2014

 

 

Long-term Plan 2015-2025: Local consultation material

 

File No.: CP2014/28274

 

  

 

 

Purpose

1.       This report seeks adoption of local consultation material for the Long-term Plan 2015-2025 (LTP) by the Henderson-Massey Local Board.

Executive Summary

2.       Over the last twelve months local boards have been involved in many Long-term Plan 2015 - 2025 workshops and meetings as part of their shared governance role. 

3.       In October 2014, local boards adopted local board plans which help inform draft LTP budget decisions.  In addition to this, advocacy discussions were held between local boards and the governing body at the end of October after which budget decisions for LTP consultation were agreed by the governing body on 6 November. 

4.       On 18 December 2014, the governing body will meet to adopt the LTP consultation document and supporting information, which includes local consultation material for each local board. 

5.       Indicative local budgets reflect 6 November governing body decisions and any minor amendments approved within the same funding envelope.

6.       This report seeks adoption of local consultation material for the LTP.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a)      adopts local consultation material (to be tabled at meeting) including:

i)        a one page (2 side) local board insert; and

ii)       Supporting information, including local funding priorities for 2015/2016, key advocacy areas, indicative local performance targets for 2015/2016 and indicative local budgets for the next 10 years.

b)      notes:

i)        the allocation of projects within Locally Driven Initiative (LDI) budgets are required to balance in every year.

ii)       proposed operational savings for asset based services within the parks, community and lifestyle theme are not reflected in draft local budgets, but are instead captured at a regional level.  Savings will be applied locally to final LTP budgets following consultation. 

iii)      high level budgets for programmes of work such as renewals, non-growth projects, parks developments, sportsfield developments and land acquisition will be developed prior to adoption of the final LTP.

c)      That the Chair be delegated the authority to make any final minor changes to local consultation material for the Long-term Plan 2015 - 2025 prior to publication including online consultation content.

 

 

Discussion

Process

7.       Over Over the last twelve months local boards have been involved in many Long-term Plan 2015 - 2025 workshops and meetings as part of their shared governance role. 

8.       In October 2014, local boards adopted a Local Board Plan which help inform draft LTP budget decisions.  In addition to this, advocacy discussions were held between local boards and the governing body at the end of October after which budget decisions for LTP consultation were agreed by the governing body on 6 November.

9.       On 18 December 2014, the governing body will meet to adopt the LTP consultation document and supporting information, which includes the following local consultation material for each local board:

a)           a one page (2 side) local board insert in the LTP consultation document; and

b)      Supporting information, including local funding priorities for 2015/2016, key advocacy areas, indicative local performance targets for 2015/2016,  and  indicative local budgets for the next 10 years.

Draft budgets

10.     Indicative local budgets reflect 6 November governing body decisions and any minor amendments approved within the same funding envelope. 

 

11.     The allocation of projects within Locally Driven Initiative (LDI) budgets are required to balance in every year.

 

12.     Proposed operational savings for asset based services within the parks, community and lifestyle theme are not reflected in draft local budgets, but are instead captured at a regional level.  Savings will be applied locally to final LTP budgets following consultation. 

 

13.     High level budgets for programmes of work such as renewals, non-growth projects, parks developments, sportsfield developments and land acquisition will be developed prior to adoption of the final LTP.

14.     This report seeks adoption of local consultation material for the LTP and agrees local targeted rate proposals, if any, for consultation.

Next steps

15.     Following the governing body meeting on 18 December, information will be provided to local board members on the consultation process and finalising local board agreements.

16.     LTP consultation will commence on 23 January 2014 through to mid-March.  Through this engagement local boards will seek views on proposals important to the local area to help develop the Local Board Agreement 2015/2016 due for adoption in May 2015.   Local Board will also seek views on the local impact of LTP proposals to inform advocacy discussions with the governing body.

17.     The governing body will make final LTP budget decisions in May 2015 and meet to adopt the final LTP in June 2015, including 21 local board agreements.

Consideration

Local Board Views and Implications

18.     This report sets out the decisions local boards need to make in order to finalise local consultation material for the Long-term Plan 2015 - 2025.

19.     In October 2014, local boards adopted a local board plans which help inform draft LTP budget decisions.  In addition to this, advocacy discussions were held between local boards and the governing body at the end of October after which budget decisions for LTP consultation were agreed by the governing body on 6 November.

Maori Impact Statement

20.     Many local board decisions are of importance to and impact on Maori. Local board agreements and long-term plans are important tools that enable and can demonstrate council’s responsiveness to Maori. Local board plans, which were developed through engagement with the community including Maori, form the basis of the consultation material of the Long-term Plan 2015-2025.

21.     There is a need to continue to build relationships between local boards and iwi, and where relevant the wider Māori community. Ongoing conversations will assist local boards and Māori to understand each other’s priorities and issues. This in turn can influence and encourage Māori participation in council’s decision-making processes. In particular, local board plans and LTP consultation material will influence relevant annual plans and local board agreements for 2015/2016 and beyond.

Implementation Issues

22.     Local board financial statements reflect the cost of undertaking local activities within each local board area.  Budgets are indicative for consultation purposes and subject to change.

23.     Following consultation, proposed initiatives and budgets will be considered and updated to reflect feedback and new information available, prior to adoption of the final LTP.

 

No.

Title

Page

A

Draft Local Board Insert

 

B

Draft Local Board Supporting Information

 

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Signatories

Authors

Linda Smith - Senior Local Board Advisor (West)

Authorisers

Karen Lyons - Manager Local Board Services

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

 


Henderson-Massey Local Board

11 December 2014

 

 

Chairperson's report

 

File No.: CP2014/28577

 

  

 

 

Purpose

1.       To provide an opportunity to the Chairperson of Henderson-Massey Local Board to update the board on her activities, projects and issues since Monday, 15th November 2014.

 

Monday
10 Nov

Monthly Arts Portfolio meeting

Henderson-Massey Local Board
Weekly Update

Local Board Plan (first proof)

Tuesday
11 Nov

Encroachment - Fred Taylor Park

Invitation-Pacifica Living Arts Festival 2014

Discussion re: Memorial for
Charanpreet Dhaliwal

Henderson-Massey Local Board Workshop

Kuk Sool Won

Wednesday
12 Nov

H-M Local Board Plan Design Mock-up

Community Facilities-Community Development Portfolio Catch up

Feasibility Study for Massey Pony Club

Te Atatu BID Association

Western Ring Route Working Liaison Group

Community Liaison Group Meeting

Thursday
13 Nov

Massey Matters Fund Allocation

Meeting with Anne Adams

Hobsonville Point Secondary School
 'Future 2025'

Friday
14 Nov

Dawn Blessing -  Te Atatū Peninsula Whare Hiranga Hapori Pātaka Kōreo - Te Atatū Peninsula Community Centre and Library

Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder Symposium

Saturday
15 Nov

Civic Opening -   Te Atatū Peninsula Whare Hiranga Hapori Pātaka Kōreo – Te Atatū Peninsula Community Centre and Library     

 

Monday
17 Nov

Communications catch-up

Monthly Events Portfolio Catch-up

Henderson-Massey Local Board Weekly Update

Tuesday
18 Nov

Zeal - discussion of youth activities in Catherine Plaza over the summer

Supporting Parent-led Initiatives

Henderson-Massey Local Board Workshop

Massey Matters AGM

Kuk Sool Won

Wednesday
19 Nov

Bi-Monthly Chairs Meeting

Joint Governing Body and Local Board Chairs meeting

RAP AGM 2014...You're Invited

Thursday
20 Nov

Invitation:  Just Play Sports Day Celebrating 25 years of Children's Rights

Walk around business to sign quilt

Fortnightly safety catch-up with the Henderson-Massey Local Board

Henderson-Massey Local Board (2nd) Business Meeting

Friday
21 Nov

Henderson-Massey Parks Portfolio Meeting

Update on the Westgate Multipurpose Facility and Town Square

Western Joint Funding Committee Meeting

Saturday
22 Nov

Henderson Christmas Festival

Monday
24 Nov

Local Board Chairs Greenways Plans
and Walking and Cycling Networks Collaboration Meeting

Community-led Place-making
Champions Group

Local Board Chairs Forum meeting

Tuesday
25 Nov

Economic Development Portfolio meeting - West portfolio holders

Design Thinking Walkthrough Session - Safety Research Project for Wider Henderson

Henderson-Massey Local Board Workshop

Kuk Sool Won

Wednesday
26 Nov

Riding for the Disabled catch-up

Community Facilities-Community Development Portfolio Catch up

Community Development (incl youth) programme portfolio meeting

Thursday
27 Nov

Ranui SST Advisory Group Meeting

Citizenship Ceremony

Violence Free Waitakere AGM

Citizenship Ceremony

Friday
28 Nov

West Councillors & Local Board Chairs Quarterly Meeting

White Ribbon Day March
(the march starts at Waitakere Hospital & ends at the Falls Hotel)

VGQ Christmas party

Tuesday
2 Dec

Catch-up with Mark Thomas
(Orakei Local Board)

Transport Portfolio briefing

Henderson-Massey Local Board Workshop

Kuk Sool Won

Wednesday
3 Dec

Sustainability of Sport and Recreation Panel and Sector Fora - West Forum

Thursday
4 Dec

Catch up with Vanessa Neeson

Fortnightly safety catch-up with the
H-M Local Board

Local board briefing on Community Facilities Network Plan and Community Grants Implementation

Henderson-Massey LB Workshop

Henderson-Massey LB Business Meeting

 

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a)      Receives the Chairperson’s report.

 

Comments

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Signatories

Authors

Busola Martins - Local Board Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

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

     

  


Henderson-Massey Local Board

11 December 2014

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

 

Item 8.1      Attachment a    Signed petitions against the saile of Cannabis in Waitakere                                                                       Page 147


Henderson-Massey Local Board

11 December 2014