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

 

Date:                  

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

 

Wednesday, 8 April 2015

10.00am

Claris Conference Centre
19 Whangaparapara Road
Claris
Great Barrier Island

 

Great Barrier Local Board

 

OPEN AGENDA

 

 

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Chairperson

Izzy Fordham

 

Deputy Chairperson

Susan Daly

 

Members

Jeff Cleave

 

 

Judy Gilbert

 

 

Christina Spence

 

 

(Quorum 3 members)

 

 

 

Guia Nonoy

Local Board Democracy/Engagement Advisor

 

30 March 2015

 

Contact Telephone: (09) 373 6218

Email: Guia.Nonoy@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

 

 


 

 

 


Great Barrier Local Board

08 April 2015

 

 

ITEM   TABLE OF CONTENTS            PAGE

1          Welcome                                                                                                                        3

2          Apologies                                                                                                                      3

3          Declaration of Interest                                                                              3

4          Confirmation of Minutes                                                                                              3

5          Leave of Absence                                                                                                         3

6          Acknowledgements                                                                                   3

7          Petitions                                                                                                     3

8          Deputations                                                                                                3

9          Public Forum                                                                                                                3

10        Extraordinary Business                                                                            3

11        Notices of Motion                                                                                      3

12        Aotea Boardriders Club request for lease                                              3

13        Auckland Transport Report – April 2015 – Great Barrier Island           3

14        Claris Airport Extension - April 2015                                                       3

15        Developing the Empowered Communities Approach                            3

16        Great Barrier Community Grants Programme 2015/2016                      3

17        Local Government New Zealand conference and Annual General Meeting 2015                                                                                              3

18        Chairperson's report                                                                                 3

19        Board Members' Reports                                                                          3

20        Great Barrier Local Board Workshop Proceedings                               3  

21        Consideration of Extraordinary Items 

 

 


1          Welcome

 

Chairperson IM Fordham will welcome everyone in attendance. Member JC Cleave will lead a karakia.

 

2          Apologies

 

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

 

3          Declaration of Interest

 

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

 

4          Confirmation of Minutes

 

That the Great Barrier Local Board:

a)           confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Wednesday, 11 March 2015, 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 Great Barrier 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.

 

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

 

9          Public Forum

 

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

 

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

 

10        Extraordinary Business

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

11        Notices of Motion

 

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

 


Great Barrier Local Board

08 April 2015

 

 

Aotea Boardriders Club request for lease

 

File No.: CP2015/04812

 

  

Purpose

1)      To seek direction from the Great Barrier Local Board on the request from the Aotea Boardriders Club for a lease over reserve land in the Medland’s Beach area.

Executive Summary

2)      The Great Barrier Local Board have been approached by a local surf club - the Aotea Boardriders Club (ABC) – who would like to lease an area of reserve in the Medland’s Beach area for a club house.   They have identified two possible locations - Sandhills Reserve and Medlands Playground Reserve – both on Sandhills Road.

3)      Staff have worked with the club to confirm their requirements and assess the suitability of each location. Close neighbours of each reserve have been consulted.

4)      Both reserves are potentially suitable sites for a club house.  Neighbours of both reserves were strongly against the granting of a lease for a club house near their property, although many did support the establishment of a club house in the Medlands’ area.

5)      Direction is now required from the Great Barrier Local Board on the request.

6)      Options include:

i)       Progress the development of a lease over part of Sandhills Reserve

ii)      Progress the development of a lease over part of Medlands Playground Reserve

iii)     Turn down the request

iv)     Request staff to work with the club to identify and evaluate other options on public and private land in the Medlands and Kaitoke area and report back to the board.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Great Barrier Local Board:

a.      Request staff to work with the club to identify and evaluate other options on public and private land in the Medlands area and report back to the board.

 

Comments

7)      Background:

8)      The Aotea Boardriders Club (ABC) was formed around 2004. The club was initially formed to hold surf competitions and create an identity for surfers on the island.  The ABC logo was developed and applied to the popular ABC hoodies which are sold to club members and visitors and are the main source of funds for the club. 

9)      Several surf comps are held each year and the club has an annual competition with Mangawhai Boardriders Club, alternating between Barrier and Mangawhai each year.

10)    Over the years club members have come to realise the importance of surfing to under 15 year olds and have provided a surf club each January and integrated them into competition days as well as holding a separate competition days for kids.

11)    As the original club members have had families of their own, their commitment to guiding and providing for the young surfers on the island has strengthened.

12)    Since 2007 the club has operated from an old bus on Blackwell’s land at Kaitoke.  The bus has now gone and the club has decided that they are ready to take on a permanent clubhouse, which will be used as a base for organized activities and for social gatherings.

13)    The club has been working with the Central Facility Partnership Fund and has been encouraged to put together an application for funding to build a clubhouse.  To do this, they need to have a lease over an appropriate site.

14)    The club has approached Auckland Council and the Great Barrier Local Board for permission to lease an area of approximately 100m2 for a clubhouse and decks in either Sandhills Reserve or Medlands Playground Reserve.

15)    Process

16)    A process for considering potential sites was agreed at the start of the project:

Stage

Working with

Status

1)    Confirm requirements for lease area

ABC

Complete

2)    Identify options

Local board

Complete

3)    Due diligence

District Plan restrictions

Reserve classification restrictions


HGI planning team


LSP advisor

 


Complete

Complete

4)    Informal consultation with immediate neighbours

Local board – by letter

Complete

5)    Discuss pros and cons of potential site(s)

Local Board

Complete

6)    Report to board

Local board

April 2015

17)    Requirements for lease area.

Criteria

Requirement

Notes

Lease footprint

100m2

Plus around 400m2 for septic field if building is to have plumbed water.

60m2 building 40m2 deck.

Building type

Hall, open plan style

Also require lockable storage space

Ownership of building

Owned by club

 

Toilet

Within 50m

May require own toilet within building due to building regulations

Power

Basic solar for lights

No need for generator

Gas

Gas bottle for cooking, water heating and bbq

 

Water

Basic tank

Club to confirm size required

Range of uses

Social, storage, club meetings

Possibly some commercial activity. Hire of boards, sale of clothing

Building available to other community groups

Yes

To be managed by club

Vehicle access to building

Ideally, yes. But short walk is acceptable.

 

Car parking

For 5-10 vehicles

To be shared with other reserve users on first come basis

Hours of use

Various hours between 8am and 10pm

 

Overnight use

No

 

Number of users

10-20 expected for meetings and surf school

Events can be bigger but event permit process will need to be followed.

Alcohol sold

No

 

Alcohol permitted

Yes, subject to bylaw as applied to the reserve

 

Smoking permitted

Not within lease area.

In addition some Auckland Council reserves are smokefree

18)    Options - both reserve locations requested by ABC were considered:

19)    Medlands Playground Reserve

Medlands Playground Reserve

75 Sandhills Road

Legal Description

Lot 29 DP 65251

Size

2633m2

Possible site M1 in Medlands Playground Reserve.  Approx 100m2 footprint shown

20)    Sandhills Reserve

Sandhills Reserve

143

Sandhills Road

Legal Description

Lot 1 DP 63224, Lot 18 DP 69899, Lot 8 DP 74884

Size

1574m2 + 1010m2 + 1722m2 = 4306m2

Location of possible sites S1 – S3 in Sandhills Reserve.  Approx 100m2 footprint shown.

21)    Due diligence

22)    A community building is permitted in these reserves without the need for a resource consent, as long as the footprint is less than 250m2.

23)    In addition a septic field of around 400m2 would be required if the building had running water, regardless of whether it had a flush toilet.

24)    Informal consultation with immediate neighbours

25)    The immediate neighbours (those with a common boundary and those one section away from the reserve) of each reserve were consulted by letter in December 2014.

26)    Medlands Playground Reserve

27)    Six letters were sent to close neighbours of Medlands Playground Reserve

28)    Seven responses were received from neighbours of Medlands Playground Reserve. 

29)    Six of the respondents actively supported the establishment of the club house at Medlands but none supported the playground reserve as the location.

30)    Objections included:

·        Parking

·        Septic field

·        Safety

·        Increased traffic along road

·        Alcohol-related issues

·        Use of drugs

·        Noise at night

31)    Two respondents suggested the DOC reserve behind the church on Oruawharo Lane and two respondents suggested the Car park – ‘Memory Park’ at the junction of Sandhills and Oruawharo Lane as suitable locations for the club.

32)    Sandhills Reserve

33)    Ten letters were sent to close neighbours of Sandhills Reserve.

34)    Six responses were received from neighbours of Sandhills Reserve.  Three of these were from the owners of one property. None supported Sandhills Reserve as the location of a club house.

35)    Two of the respondents suggested the Car park – ‘Memory Park’ at the junction of Sandhills and Oruawharo Lane as suitable locations for the club

36)    Objections included:

·        Parking

·        Loss of flat area for ball games

·        Privatization of public space

·        Septic field

·        Safety

·        Increased traffic along road

·        Alcohol-related issues

·        Use of drugs

·        Noise at night


37)    Pros and cons of each site:

38)    Medlands Playground Reserve:

Pros:

Cons:

Open site – activity visible and likely to integrate with other reserve users

Close to accessway to beach

Public toilets on site

Playground on site for families

BBQ on site

Potential for additional use of building by family groups

Strong neighbour opposition

Space marginal – question whether there is room for a 400m2 septic field

Car parking is 50m from potential lease area

 

39)    Sandhills Reserve

Pros:

Cons:

Open site – activity visible and likely to integrate with other reserve users

Close to accessway to beach

Public toilets on site

Playground on site for families

BBQ on site

Potential for additional use of building by family groups

Strong neighbour opposition

Space marginal – question whether there is room for a 400m2 septic field

Car parking is 50m from potential lease area

 

40)    In summary, both sites are viable options.  Both locations have their pros and cons.  Both sites had strong opposition from close neighbours of the reserve.  Whilst there was significant support for an ABC clubhouse at Medland’s Beach, there was strong opposition from neighbours against leasing an area to ABC in either reserve.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

41)    The Great Barrier Local Board considered the club’s request at a workshop in February. The board requested an update report which would inform their response.

Māori impact statement

42)    No consultation with Maori has been conducted to date.  Mana whenua will be consulted if/when any lease is contemplated.

Implementation

43)    Should a preferred site be found, it would be appropriate to hold more consultation with neighbours on their concerns and mitigation of the effects on their property.

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Signatories

Author

Gary Wilton - Parks Adviser Hauraki Gulf Islands

Authorisers

Ian Maxwell - General Manager Parks, Sports and Recreation

John Nash – Relationship Manager/ Senior Local Board Advisor

 


Great Barrier Local Board

08 April 2015

 

 

Auckland Transport Report – April 2015 – Great Barrier Island

 

File No.: CP2015/04481

 

  

Purpose

1.      The purpose of this report is to respond to local board requests on transport–related matters and to provide information to elected members about Auckland Transport (AT) activities in the local board area.

Executive Summary

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

3.      In particular, this report provides and update on;

·    Local Board Transport Capital Fund

·    Footpath Renewals

·    Up-date on previous Resolutions

·    Media

 

Recommendation/s

That the Great Barrier Local Board:

a)      Receives the Auckland Transport Report – April 2014.

b)      Approves Hector Sanderson Road be funded as appropriate from the Local Board Transport Capital Fund.

 

 

Comments

Local Board Transport Capital Fund

4.      At the Local Board meeting on the 12 March 2014 the Board were provided with a list of potential Local Board Transport Capital Fund projects.

5.      The below table outlines an up-date as to decisions by the Board and on the progress of the projects. 

Table 1: Great Barrier Local Board project update for Board approval:

Resolution # GBI/2013/234 (2013)

Resolution # GBI/2014/20 (April 2014)

ID#

Project Description

Progress/Current Status

211

Hector Sanderson Road

Split into sections for funding purposes

 

·      Resolution GBI/2014/63 (15 May 2014)

“The design element of the project will be led by the Local Parks and SLIP’s project team”

 

·      Resolution GBI/2014/154 (December 2014)

Requests that those parts of projects 221 and 211 currently being progressed by the board be funded from Local Board Transport capital Fund to be confirmed in February 2015.

 

222

Fitzroy Wharf parking

·      ROC – Unable to determine at present

 

Auckland Transport is still looking at options; every option investigated to date suggests huge costs for the benefit of a few cars.

The area is very short of available space.

 

4 Parking spaces were identified, however the wall above these spaces slipped, forcing a reconsideration of location

 

This car park extension has been put on hold until the slip has been repaired. There are currently rubbish bins occupying the proposed new car park spaces and these will be relocated once slip work carried out.

 

Note: ROC = rough order of costs; FEC = firm estimate of cost)

Footpath Renewals

6.      On the 11 February 2015, the Great Barrier Local Board requested information on Auckland Transport’s footpath renewal program for Great Barrier Island.

7.      Maintenance and renewals for roads and footpaths on Great Barrier are considered jointly on an annual basis, Auckland Transport has not separated the two or assigned an individual budget for footpaths, due to the limited coverage on the island.

8.      In the event any footpath is damaged or requires maintenance, Auckland Transport relies on the issue being brought to their attention by the public or local board, at which time the issue will be assessed and if need be repaired or replaced.

9.      It is also to be noted that contractors commissioned by Auckland Transport regularly inspect footpaths on the island, while caring out other duties while in the vicinity.

Resolution Updates

August 2014 resolutions:

10.    On the 13 August 2014 the Great Barrier local Board made the following resolution;

I.   Request a response from Auckland Transport on the following matters at the September 2014 business meeting which are not included in the officer’s report;

II.  An update on the speed limits project.

11.    Auckland Transport response;

I.     Auckland Transport legislative team is still working on this and an up-date is now expected in May/June 2015.

November 2014 resolutions:

12.    On the 12 November  2014 the Great Barrier Local Board made the following resolution;

a.       Great Barrier local Board agrees to contribute $71,455.87 from its SLIPs capex towards the installation of a commercial pontoon at Whangaparapara Wharf subject to Auckland Transport contributing the remaining costs and confirming the project can be delivered in the current financial year.

13.    Auckland Transport response;

a.       Pontoon installation is currently in planning, engineering and consenting state, the project is still on track to be completed by June/July 2015.


Media

Auckland train numbers hit the lucky 13 – Million

14.    March 2015 sees the annual total train passenger trips pass 13 Million for the first time; this is an annual growth of 19% to the end of February.

15.    Auckland trains are now carrying 10,000 more customers on a normal weekday than at this time last year.

16.    In March 2014, 11 million annual trips were recorded of which means and increase of two million trips in 12 months.

17.    Each weekday in February, on average 51,500 customers used Auckland’s trains including 12,500 during the morning peak (7am to 9am).

18.    Auckland Transport is aiming to have electric trains on most services by the middle of this year, which will mean extra capacity, improved comfort and reliability.

19.    Overall total public transport boarding’s have increased by more than 9% for the 12 months to end of February, an additional 6.6 million boarding’s, taking the annual total to 77 million. 

Auckland Transport wants to share our roads

20.    Auckland Transport is looking for a car share operator to launch a large scale scheme in Auckland, based on Plug-in Electric Vehicles.

21.    Auckland Transport has released a request for Proposal (RFP) from car share operators to create a scheme here.

22.    It would initially require the operator to have 250 – 300 vehicles which AT will match with a similar number of carparks dedicated to care share vehicles. It is expected that in time the fleet would increase to at least 500 cars.

23.    Car share schemes are based on members who pay a membership fee which entitles them to use a scheme-owned car on demand, for which they pay a per-trip charge based upon the time used.

24.    There are already about five million people, world-wide, who are members of a car share scheme and the numbers of both users and cities with a scheme, are growing rapidly, changing transport habits in the process.

25.    Auckland Transport chairman Dr Lester Levy says evidence shows members reduce the number of cars they own, with some giving up ownership altogether.  As a result, one shared-car can replace between eight and 20 privately-owned cars, depending on the scheme and the city.

26.    Dr Levy says if a large scale scheme in Auckland achieved at the lower end of the scale, it could replace 2000 private cars and at the higher end, as many as 10,000.

27.    He says besides reducing their car ownership, scheme members tend to travel fewer kilometres each year in a car and significantly re-orientate their transport habits onto a mix of car-share, public transport and walking and cycling.

28.    Mayor Len Brown says, “A scheme like this can make an important contribution to both our transport network, our commitment to lowering carbon emissions, and our sustainability initiatives. Once again, it is about offering Aucklanders alternatives – a new transport option, an alternative energy source, and if people want, an alternative to private car ownership to complement public and active transport.”

29.    In addition, car-sharing schemes had the potential to allow operators of large fleets to significantly reduce the number of vehicles they own.


30.    Dr Levy says, “We estimate that Auckland Transport could reduce its fleet by between 25 and 50%, which would represent a significant saving to ratepayers. All of these changes would make a contribution towards Auckland reducing road congestion and encouraging people out of private cars into alternative forms of travel.”

31.    When a scheme is based on electric vehicles, as favoured for Auckland, there would be an accompanying reduction in environmental pollution, an encouragement for more people to move to electric vehicles and the substitution of a clean, “home-grown” fuel for imported fossil fuels.

32.    These benefits will tick a number of the boxes in Auckland's Low Carbon Action Plan and assists our existing initiatives to also meet low carbon objectives, Dr Levy says.

33.    Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority (EECA) Chief Executive, Mike Underhill, applauds Auckland Transport for its leadership in this proposal which will help get Auckland moving, support the Low Carbon Auckland Action Plan and play an important part in supporting the uptake of electric vehicles nationwide. 

34.    “Auckland Transport’s proposal will offer Auckland businesses and residents an exciting alternative to using their own car in the city.”

35.    Mr Underhill says electric vehicle car share programmes have been successfully running overseas for years. “It’s time for New Zealand to grab the opportunity to reduce our carbon emissions and make the most of our abundant renewable electricity.”

36.    “Wearing his hat” as chairman of both the Auckland and Waitemata District Health Boards,  Dr Levy says an average of 126 premature deaths each year in Auckland, of adults below 30, are attributed to transport emissions in the air.

37.    “Anything that brings that figure down is worth doing – and this is but one of the health benefits that will come from cleaning up Auckland’s air,” he says.

38.    Dr Levy notes Auckland already has a commercial car-share operator, City Hop.  There is also a community based scheme, NZ Car Sharing on Waiheke Island. Auckland Transport has worked with both for a number of years, they are relatively small-scale operators and the RFP released today is for a large-scale scheme.

39.    Dr Levy says both existing schemes are welcome to respond to the RFP but even if they don’t, Auckland Transport will continue to work with them.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

40     The board’s views will be incorporated during consultation on any proposed schemes.

Māori impact statement

41.    No specific issues with regard to the Maori Impact Statement are triggered by this report.

General

42.    The activities detailed in this report do not trigger the Significance Policy. All programmes and activities are within budget/in line with the Council’s Annual Plan and LTP documents and there are no legal or legislative implications arising from the activities detailed in this report.

Implementation

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

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.    

Signatories

Author

Ivan Trethowen – Auckland Transport Elected Member Relationship Manager

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon – Auckland Transport Elected Member Relationship Team Manager

John Nash – Relationship Manager/ Senior Local Board Advisor

 


Great Barrier Local Board

08 April 2015

 

 

Claris Airport Extension - April 2015

 

File No.: CP2015/04485

 

  

Purpose

1.      The purpose of the report is to provide the Local Board with the results of an investigation into the requirements and feasibility for a future extension of the Claris Airport, Great Barrier Island.

Executive Summary

2.      The Aotea Great Barrier Local Board Plan 2014 emphasizes Great Barrier airfields as a vital link to the mainland, and the Local Board is committed to ensuring Claris Airfield is meeting the island’s needs (and future needs).

3.      This report covers a high level review and assessment of the current facility, and the limitations on aircraft flying into Great Barrier Airport.

4.      The report seeks to address the question of the viability and improvement to service possible by upgrading the runway and facilities.

5.      The report has been prepared in consultation with transport operators and Civil Aviation Authority guidelines.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Great Barrier Local Board:

a)      Receives the Claris Airport Extension – April 2015 Report.

b)      Notes the Civil Aviation Authority’s current regulatory requirements for aerodrome certification and operation are currently under review, and subject to change.

 

 

Comments

Glossary of aviation abbreviations used

ADF

Automatic Direction Finder

AGL

Above Ground Level

CAA

Civil Aviation Authority

ECT

Evening Civil Twilight

IFR

Instrument Flight Rules

MCT

Morning Civil Twilight

MET

Meteorological

NDB

Non Directional Beacon

NZGB

New Zealand Great Barrier Airport

RESA

Runway End Safety Area

RNAV

Area Navigation

RPT

Regular Passenger Transport

VFR

Visual Flight Rules

 

 

 

Summary of current facility

6.      Great Barrier Airport was originally built in 1938 to help connect the island with the mainland. From its basic beginnings it has been enhanced over the years to better service the changing needs of the island community. It is a capable and well thought out facility for this specialised task.

7.      The airport is well situated and enjoys a clear approach and departure from the south-east over the Pacific; however it is surrounded on all other sides by rising terrain. Looking at the general topography of the island, it is apparent that the site chosen in 1938 was the best option for the airport, built in a flat area and offering the greatest possible separation from the rising terrain. The only other place on the island offering a similar scenario is Okiwi Station, where the other island airport was constructed in 1965.

8.      The main runway at Claris, Great Barrier (NZGB) is comprised of two surfaces:-

a.       A sealed strip 930m long 8m wide offset about 6m to the South.

b.       A grass strip 950m long and approximately 30m wide. The grass strip is sand based and well drained, and typically is only closed after heavy rain or for longer periods during the summer to allow grass to recover.

c.       Both the grass and sealed strip are located within the same 950m x 60m runway strip area.

d.       At the northern end of the strip is a runoff area (RESA) approximately 190m long.

e.       At the southern end of the strip the RESA is approximately 70m long. This could be expanded to approximately 200m by moving or covering a 90m section of an open drain.

f.        There is also a grass cross-runway; however this is not often used for Transport (RPT) operations.

9.      Instrument Flight Aids - The airport has two different methods of instrument approach or departure available for aircraft.

a.       NDB (Non-directional Beacon) - A ground-based radio transmitter which in conjunction with equipment in the RPT aircraft can be used to fly an approach. In order to use the NDB, aircraft must be equipped with an ADF (Automatic Direction Finder).

i.     The NDB is not a specific runway approach, rather a “circling” approach as it does not include inherent directional information. It puts aircraft in the right vicinity of the runway, but not actually on an approach path. Due to this limitation it only allows for RPT aircraft to descend to 1000 feet AGL.

ii.    Non RPT (non-commercial) aircraft can however descend to 560 feet AGL.

b.       RNAV (aRrea NAVigation) - This air navigation method is approved and documented by the CAA, and in conjunction with instruments in the RPT aircraft can be used to fly a runway approach. In order to use RNAV, aircraft must be equipped with specialised dual GPS.

i.     Because the RNAV puts aircraft on a specific approach heading to the runway, it allows RPT aircraft to descend to 508 feet AGL.

c.       Using either (or both) of the above navigation methods (NDB / RNAV) an aircraft flying on Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) can establish a safe descent or departure from the airport within the confined specs.

i.     The final part of the landing (last 1000 feet NDB or last 508 feet RNAV) will always require VFR (Visual Flight Rules) conditions with the aircraft clear of cloud and 5km visibility ahead.

ii.    The take-off is opposite requiring VFR conditions with 2km visibility ahead and clear of cloud until at least 500 feet AGL.

d.       Limiting factors.

i.     Due to the topography (rising terrain) around Claris Airport, all instrument approaches or departures are “One Way”.

·     Landings will always be “From the Coast”.

·     Take-offs will always be “Towards the Coast”.

ii.    Weather conditions.

·     Cloud base – “MET Minima” are legal minimum altitudes at which pilots must be able to see the ground and a prescribed distance in front of them.

·     Wind strength and direction.

iii.    Aircraft performance specifications.

·     Runway length and width required.

·     Maximum Tailwind component (wind from behind during landing increases the runway length required).

·     Maximum Crosswind component (wind from side during landing must not exceed safe parameters).

iv.   Surface conditions.

·     To make full use of the RNAV instrument approach, the grass runway must be open as the sealed runway is too narrow (i.e. less than 18m wide).

·     If the grass runway is closed, RNAV approaches have the same limitations as NDB approaches (see 6.a.i. above).

10.    Lighting - There are no provisions for night operations by fixed wing aircraft.

a.    There is no runway or taxiway lighting.

b.    The District Plan does not allow for any non-emergency traffic after Sunset - Evening Civil Twilight (ECT) and before Sunrise – Morning Civil Twilight (MCT).

c.    Helicopters with their own lighting can operate at night in an emergency situation (e.g. medical evacuation).

d.    Pilot controlled emergency approach lighting is available at the seaward end of the main sealed runway.

11.    Reduction in flight cancellations due to weather - The Local Board has asked if any enhancements can be made to the airport facility to reduce flight cancellations as a result of adverse weather. While many of the locals are used to the delays and interruptions that are inherent to island life, they have noted that visitors to the island often do not have the same patience and understanding.

12.    Capability for “Mercy Flights” - On occasion a sick or injured family member may be airlifted by helicopter to hospital at a time when the airport is otherwise closed to non-emergency traffic. This can pose a problem for other family members who cannot be accommodated on the rescue helicopter, but wish to join their family member ASAP. To this end, the Local Board have asked if any enhancements can be made to the airport to facilitate “Mercy Flights” outside of normal airport operational hours.

 

Identifying the limitations of the current facility

13.    Surrounding terrain - The main limitation of the airport is the rising terrain surrounding its location on three sides. This is the reason the strip is often used “one way” and often the cause for the formations of cloud that causes poor visibility and low cloud bases that stop flying. It is an inherent issue with many island airports all over the world.

14.    Adverse weather - According to operator statistics there are on average 12 days per year not suitable for flying. These are caused by:

a.    Weather conditions.

i.     Cloud Base and Visibility.

·   1000 feet cloud base and 5km visibility minimum required flying the NDB approach.

·   508 cloud base and 5km visibility minimum required flying the RNAV approach.

·   500 feet cloud base and 2km visibility minimum required for NDB or RNAV departure.

ii.    Other factors such as wind, rain, thunder.

b.    Surface conditions.

i.     When the grass runway is closed, the 9m wide sealed runway is not wide enough (and does not have sufficient side clearance to the drainage ditches) for aircraft to use the RNAV approach to the full 508 feet.

·   RPT operators are then limited to 1000 feet cloud base if using the sealed runway.

·   The exact runway width required and side clearances are dependent on the operators’ aircraft limitations and their own operational requirements and CAA approved procedures.

·   As the runway is “one way” for instrument approach or departure, wind can often be a limiting factor. The operators determine their limitations using complex calculations based on the wind strength and direction, surface conditions, and aircraft loading.

-    For example, with a strong tail wind and landing on grass, a greater landing distance is required than for the same aircraft landing on a sealed runway with a head wind.

15.    Mercy Flights - “Mercy Flights” are only affected when the airport is not usable. The two main reasons are:

a.    Weather conditions (see 14.a. above).

b.    At night time. The airport is not available for night operations due to:

i.     The District Plan specifically does not allow flight movements between ECT (Evening Civil Twilight) and MCT (Morning Civil Twilight). See Appendix A: Auckland Council District Plan – Hauraki Gulf Islands Section – Operative 2013 Conditions 2.1).

ii.    The airport is not equipped with runway and taxiway lighting.

 

Can the limitations be reduced with improvements?

16.    Reduce cancellations due to adverse weather - Some benefits could be had by widening the sealed runway and side run-off area.

a.    Winds, particularly in a tail wind (a wind from behind the aircraft).

i.     Improved grip helps decrease landing distance.

ii.    Reduced friction helps decrease take-off distance.

iii.    A wider runway with larger runoff areas allows more margin for error.

b.    Low cloud conditions coinciding with poor surface conditions and the grass runway being closed.

i.     Improving the drainage of the grass runway would improve the existing scenario.

17.    Mercy Flights when the airport is otherwise closed –

a.    Aside from adverse weather restrictions, “Mercy Flights” by helicopter could be readily accommodated with changes to the District Plan provisions to allow such flights between ECT and MCT.

b.    Fixed wing “Mercy Flights” would be more complex, requiring the above changes to the District Plan, as well as the installation, certification and maintenance of runway and taxiway lighting.

 

Planning for the Future

18.    Any improvements made to the airport should have consideration for the foreseeable future needs of the community, operators and legislation. The RPT operator’s choice of aircraft and their own company regulations (including CAA certification) will have a significant effect on the requirements for the facility.

From CAA Advisory Circular – AC 139-6, 3.1.6

The length of the runway is derived from the operational characteristics of the type of aircraft intended to use the runway. The distances required by a particular aeroplane under various operating conditions are determined from its flight manual or performance schedule… It should not always be necessary to provide for take-offs and landings at the maximum certified weight of the most exacting aircraft but enough length should be provided to ensure an economic take-off weight related to the routes to be flown from the aerodrome…”

Also, CAA has recently updated aerodrome design recommendations in line with changes to their Part 139 Aerodrome – Certification and Operation regulations. If changes are made, they should follow this “best practice” advice.

19.    Currently the aircraft of choice for the operators is the Britten-Norman Islander. The “Islander” is specifically designed for this type of flying in similar environments, and is well suited to the requirements of the role.

a.    Economic on short flights.

b.    Great short field performance.

c.    8 – 9 passengers allows a balance between economical seats and a greater frequency of flights.

d.    Robust for rough weather and grass runways.

20.    A comparable aircraft and the obvious “next size up” from the Islander is the Cessna Caravan (12 – 13 passengers). For an RPT operator to economically move up to Caravans:

a.    They would require more passenger and/or freight movements.

b.    The extra seats (over the Islander) would mean less frequent flights and/or more expensive flights.

21.    As Islander aircraft are still readily available and in production (i.e. new), and there are few comparable aircraft, it is likely they will remain the aircraft of choice for the foreseeable future.

 

Are the suggested improvements worthwhile?

22.    Reduction in flight cancellations due to weather - Given that the airport is only closed on average of 12 days per year, it is important to weigh up potential improvements against the limited potential for improved services. It should be noted that airport closure applies to full days, and not to days when specific scheduled flights are affected by adverse weather.

a.    While improvements to the facility that improve the poor weather capability are possible (i.e. widening runway and increased run-off area, runway/taxiway lighting), it is fair to assume that when flights are cancelled due to weather, this is because the weather is particularly poor. Of the cancelled days, the suggested enhancements to the runway would salvage at best 5 or 6 flying days per year. Even if the upgraded facility allowed for it, on these poor weather days passenger numbers are often down, so cancellations may still occur due to low passenger numbers.

23.    Lighting to allow for Mercy Flights:

a.    The addition of runway and taxiway lighting will offer a small improvement in the time it takes for “mercy flights” to leave the island, but only after significant expense and disruption. The ongoing cost of maintaining a full lighting system would be high even if subsidized by the airport being available for regular night flights.

b.    On the few occasions that fixed wing charters cannot leave the island, helicopter charters would be a sensible alternative, providing faster and more direct services that do not require runway lighting.

24.    Short to medium term (next 5 to 10 years) - It is unlikely that widening and repositioning the runway would have a noticeable effect on the number of services available to the island above those on offer now. It would be an expensive project to undertake and would in itself create significant disruption to air services during construction.

25.    Longer term (10 years+) – An increase in population will determine whether future RPT aircraft types will change. As part of a long term strategy, and if the airport is to continue to meet the future needs of the island, with changes to air transport rules and best practices, it would be prudent to plan for an eventual upgrade of the runway. This would bring it in line with industry best practices and provide the best possible safety margins in an emergency.

26.    Airport Land - The current land area available for an upgrade to the facility in line with CAA requirements for a Class 2B runway is sufficient to accommodate the following upgrade:

a.    18m wide sealed surface. (The existing 9m wide runway would be contoured and widened to 18m).

b.    Minimum 80m wide overall runway strip – 40m either side of the centre of the sealed strip. (The existing strip width is 76m. Some brush cutting could be undertaken to achieve the additional 4m width, or the RPT operators could amend their approved procedures to accommodate the airport’s operational limitation).

c.    900m of new subsoil drainage. (The southern open side-drains running parallel to the existing runway, and the open drain on the south-eastern (seaward) boundary would need to be covered and piped).

d.    Sealed length of the runway (and therefore length of RESA) would be determined by the operational requirements of the aircraft using the airport. RPT operators work within the limitations of the airport, and based on an Islander or Cessna Caravan at normal loads, the current strip length would be sufficient with upgrades to the RESA at the south-eastern (seaward) end.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

27.    This report canvasses the views of the Great Barrier Local Board.

Māori impact statement

28.    Prior to developing any future upgrade or development plan for Claris Airport, appropriate consultation will be undertaken with Ngati Rehua – Ngatiwai Ki Aotea Trust to establish any sites of cultural significance and how these may be protected.

Implementation

29.    The current runway configuration already meets the needs of the community, and we would not recommend upgrading the facility with the intention of reducing cancellations as a result of adverse weather.

30.    The cost of installation, certification and maintenance of new runway and taxiway lighting is likely to far exceed their usefulness. Changes to the District Plan to allow for “Mercy Flights” would allow for helicopter based mercy flights to take place with no changes to the facility.

31.    It is difficult to provide accurate costing for this report as the scope of work required is undefined, as is the implementation timeline (10 years+). Upon consideration of all or any of the possible improvements as detailed, the Local Board may request itemised costing.

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.    

Signatories

Author

Richard La Ville – Gulf Islands Facilities Manager, ATOC Central

Authorisers

John Strawbridge – ATOC Central

John Nash – Relationship Manager/ Senior Local Board Advisor

 


Great Barrier Local Board

08 April 2015

 

 

Developing the Empowered Communities Approach

 

File No.: CP2015/04988

 

  

Purpose

1.      This report provides an overview of the Empowered Communities Approach (ECA), including local board involvement in developing the approach.

Executive Summary

2.      The Mayor’s Proposal for the Long Term Plan 2015-2025 (LTP) includes developing a more empowered community approach to the work of Auckland Council. The proposed changes are:

·    to transition delivery to a more empowered community approach.

·    to move away from direct delivery (and therefore save overheads) and fund community groups to deliver more.

·    for local boards to play a much more active role by allocating more funding through them.

3.      The purpose of the Empowered Communities Approach (ECA) is to develop a new, more effective and empowering approach to the way council delivers services and supports community activities.  The ECA will establish a new operating model for the Community Development and Safety (CDS) unit which will shift its service delivery to have a greater focus on local and community empowerment, with a view to embedding this way of working across council departments and council- controlled organisations.

4.      A reduction in the cost to deliver community development over time is expected, starting with savings in the 2015/2016 financial year.

5.      A political advisory group (PAG) has been established to provide strategic advice and guidance as staff develop the ECA.  Discussion has centred on what empowered communities look like, and what shifts are required within council to support them. The PAG meeting in March endorsed the proposed approach.  PAG feedback included the importance of meeting local needs, rather than a ‘one size fits all’ approach.  Two further PAG meetings will be held on 16 April and 4 May.

6.      An engagement programme with local boards is underway.  Key steps in this are:

·    two chairs and portfolio holder workshops.

·    individual board workshops in April.

·    a report to local board business meetings in May/ early June.

The final empowered communities approach and the CDS operational model will be reported to the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee for endorsement in June 2015, for implementation in July-December.

7.      A targeted programme of community engagement is underway.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Great Barrier Local Board:

a)      receives the Developing the Empowered Communities Approach report.

b)      where required by the timing of the existing business meeting, the local board either delegate, hold an extraordinary meeting or accept a late report so that the board can provide formal feedback during the period 5 May – 3 June.

Comments

Background

8.      The Mayor’s Proposal for the Long Term Plan 2015-2025 (LTP) includes developing a more empowered community approach to the work of Auckland Council. The proposed changes to the community development function are:

·    to transition delivery to a more empowered community approach.

·    to move away from direct delivery (and therefore save overheads) and fund community groups to deliver more.

·    for local boards to play a much more active role by allocating more funding through them.

9.      The purpose of the Empowered Communities Approach (ECA) is to develop a new, more effective and empowering approach to the way council delivers services and supports community activities. The ECAP will establish a new operating model for the Community Development and Safety (CDS) unit which will shift its service delivery to have a greater focus on local and community empowerment, with a view to embedding this way of working across the council family.

10.    A reduction in the cost to deliver community development over time is expected, starting with savings in the 2015/2016 financial year.

11.    A political advisory group (PAG) has been established to provide strategic advice and guidance as staff develop the empowered communities approach. Discussion has centred on what empowered communities look like, and what shifts are required within council to support them.

Political Advisory Group

12.    A Political Advisory Group (PAG) has been established to provide strategic advice and guidance to staff during the development of the empowered communities approach.  Membership of the PAG includes the Mayor, six local board members (Andrew Baker, Efeso Collins, Vanessa Neeson, Peter Haynes, Julia Parfitt), five governing body members (Cathy Casey, Linda Cooper, George Wood, Alf Filipaina, Penny Hulse) and a representative from the Independent Māori Statutory Board (Karen Wilson). 

13.    At their meeting on 6 March 2015 the PAG endorsed the proposed approach.  The key points discussed were:

·    ‘Empowered Communities: Enabling Council’: The approach is underpinned by a two-way relationship between council and the community; leading to improved outcomes for Auckland.

·    Describing empowered communities: an empowered community is one where individuals, whanau and communities have the power and ability to influence decisions, take action and make change happen in their lives and communities. This includes communities of place, interest and identity.

·    How to support community empowerment: community empowerment is about providing real opportunities for people to participate and fostering the conditions that support this. An empowered communities approach is a ‘way of working’ that empowers people to play a more active role in the decisions that affect their communities.

14.    Working in a way that empowers communities requires ‘whole of council’ shifts to:

·    provide a gateway / portal into council resources and information.

·    provide more support for local boards and other areas of council to work together in joined-up ways with local communities.

·    facilitate and embed the empowered communities approach across council.

·    develop and implement creative new engagement and participation practices.

·    support the devolution of resources / functions / control to communities.

15.    Other key feedback from the PAG included:

·    the model should involve high trust between council and the community and be based on building good relationships.

·    the path Māori have been on provides an example for the ECA, which should draw from the Māori Responsiveness Framework.

·    one size does not fit all and the model may look different across different activities of council and in different communities, reflecting the make-up of those communities and their capability and capacity.

·    all parts of council need to work collaboratively to make this work. This should include the council-controlled organisations (CCOs).

·    capacity building is important and there need to be examples of how to do this effectively.

·    recognition that embedding this approach will take time.

16.    Staff will report back to the PAG on 16 April with the following:

·    revised approach.

·    the proposed operating model for the CDS unit.

·    supporting tools.

·    budget and implementation implications.

ECA timeline

17.    The key milestones are shown in the table below.

Stage

 

Date

Purpose

Local board business meetings

 

15-23 April

Context setting report

Political Advisory Group

 

16 April

Provide strategic advice on revised approach and proposed CDS model of operation

 

Chairs and portfolio holders workshop

20 April

Wider discussion of material presented at PAG

 

Local board workshops

21 April – 1 May

Discussion by individual boards

 

Political Advisory Group

 

4 May

Provide strategic advice on revised CDS model of operation

 

Local board business meetings

 

5 May – 3 June

Formal resolutions on proposal

Budget Committee

 

7-8 May

LTP budget decisions including CDS budget for 2015/2016

Regional Strategy and Policy Committee

4 June

Endorse ECA and the CDS operational model

 

Implementation

 

July - December

 

 

18.    For some local boards, the timing of the May-June local board business meetings may require the local board to either delegate, hold an extraordinary meeting or accept a late report so that the board can provide formal feedback during the period 5 May – 3 June.

Consultation and engagement

19.    Engagement with community stakeholders is ongoing, with initial feedback workshops held in March across the region. At the workshops, staff explored with participants what capabilities and ideas for empowering communities, equity issues and activities the community see themselves as best delivering. Engagement was sought on what is best kept as council core functions in relation to community development and safety.

20.    Internal staff consultation is ongoing as the approach is developed. A number of workshops have been held with staff from all departments in the operations division in the first instance.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

21.    The empowered community approach aims to provide a much more active role for local boards in community development.

22.    ECA builds on the strong focus on community led planning and development in the Local Board Plans 2014.

23.    Local boards views will be sought through the process outlined above.

Māori impact statement

24.    The ECAP has the potential to impact on Māori over time. Engagement with mataawaka and mana whenua will be undertaken during the engagement phase to enable staff to understand potential impacts.

25.    A representative from the Independent Māori Statutory Board sits on the PAG.

Implementation

26.    The model will be implemented in CDS in 2015/2016. The approach will be rolled out across the whole of council over time.

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Signatories

Author

Helen Dodd - Local Board Strategic Advisor

Authorisers

Karen Lyons - Manager Local Board Services

John Nash – Relationship Manager/ Senior Local Board Advisor

 


Great Barrier Local Board

08 April 2015

 

 

Great Barrier Community Grants Programme 2015/2016

 

File No.: CP2015/04475

 

  

Purpose

1.      The purpose of the report is to present the Great Barrier Community Grants Programme 2015/2016 for adoption.

Executive Summary

2.      The new Auckland Council Community Grants Policy was adopted in December 2014. This policy guides the allocation of local, multi-board and regional grants to groups and organisations delivering projects, activities and services that benefit Aucklanders.

3.      The Community Grants Policy supports each local board to adopt their own local grants programme to be attached to the policy as an appendix.

4.      This report presents the Great Barrier Local Board Community Grants Programme 2015/2016 for adoption (see attachment A).

 

Recommendation/s

That the Great Barrier Local Board:

a)      adopt the Great Barrier Community Grants Programme 2015/2016.

 

 

Comments

5.      The new Community Grants Policy was adopted in December 2014 and implementation will commence on 1 July 2015.

6.      The policy supports each local board to develop a Community Grants Programme for 2015/2016. This local board grants programme will guide community groups and individuals when making applications to the local board.

7.      The local board community grants programme can include:

·    outcomes as identified in the local board plan

·    specific local board funding priorities

·    budget allocated to the grants programme

·    which grant types will operate locally, the number of funding rounds and when these will open and close

·    any additional criteria or exclusions that will apply

·    an indication of participation in multi-board funding

·    other factors the local board consider to be significant to their decision-making

8.      An implementation plan is underway to support an integrated and simplified approach to grants programme administration. Funding staff from different departments are working together to ensure a co-ordinated approach, expected to benefit applicants and streamline internal processes.

9.      Once the local board community grants programme has been adopted, the types of grants, funding rounds, criteria and eligibility with be advertised through an integrated communication and marketing approach which includes utilising the local board channels.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

10.    The Community Grants Programme has been developed by the local board to set the direction of their grants programme. This programme can be reviewed on an annual basis.

Māori impact statement

11.    All grant programmes should respond to Auckland Council’s commitment to improving Maori wellbeing by providing grants to organisations delivering positive outcomes for Maori.

Implementation

12.    An implementation plan is underway and the local board grants programme will be locally advertised through the local board and council channels. Targeted advertising and promotion will be developed for target populations, including migrant and refugee groups, disability groups, Maori and iwi organisations.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Great Barrier Grants Programme 2015/2016

3

     

Signatories

Author

Marion Davies - Community Funding Programme Manager

Authorisers

Graham Bodman - Manager - Community Development, Arts and Culture

John Nash – Relationship Manager/ Senior Local Board Advisor

 


Great Barrier Local Board

08 April 2015

 

 

Great Barrier Local Board – Local Grants Programme 2015/2016

Our Local Grants Programme aims to provide contestable and discretionary community grants to local communities.

 

Outcomes sought from the local grants programme

Our grants programme will be targeted towards supporting the following outcomes, as outlined in our local board plan:

·    The environment is at its best here

·    Infrastructure that fits with our environment

·    We have more residents and visitors but we won’t lose our way of life

 

Our priorities for grants

The Great Barrier Local Board welcomes grant applications that align with the following local board plan priorities:

·    Priority 1 - continuing to support island based community groups which provide facilities and services which our community values which aren’t provided by other agencies or organisations

·    Priority 2 - continuing to provide capital grants to community groups operating facilities which meet a need in our community and which are open to and regularly used by the community

·    Priority 3 - prioritising grants to community groups for purposes aligned to the outcomes and priorities in the Aotea Great Barrier Local Board Plan

·    Priority 4 - particularly supporting applications which provide evidence of a groups future vision and forward planning, including how it might work with other community groups providing similar services to best utilise scarce local resources

·    Priority 5 - continuing to support projects on private land which demonstrate a public good or benefit particularly in the environment and heritage areas and where there is a financial contribution to the project from the landowner

Lower Priorities:

We will also consider applications for other services, projects, events and activities which may be considered a lower priority on a case by case basis.


The Great Barrier Local Board has identified the following activities as lower priorities:

·    activities which are inconsistent with the direction signalled in the Aotea Great Barrier Local Board Plan.

·    applications from groups not based on Great Barrier unless the proposal has a significant and/or direct benefit to the island community

 

The Great Barrier Local Board will take into account if a group has a considerable (relative to the amount applied for) cash surplus, but has identified a specific use for this fund, which means it can’t be used as a contribution to the project.

 

In addition to the eligibility criteria outlined the Community Grants Policy, the Great Barrier Local Board will not fund:

Exclusion One: Retrospective costs. It is important groups plan for funding needs wherever possible

 

Note: the Great Barrier Island Local Board will, on a case-by-case basis, support community organisations who provide primary health care or core educational services, due to these services, being delivered on the Island, by community organisations.

 

Investment approach

The Great Barrier Local Board has allocated budgets to support the local grants programme as follows:

·    Local Grants

Application dates

Grant rounds for 2015-2016 will be as follows:

Local Grants (Community, Capital, Events, Environment and Infrastructure Fund, Natural Heritage Fund, Accommodation Support Fund)


 

2015-2016 funding rounds

Opens

Closes

Decision made

Projects to occur after

Round one –

3 August 2015

11 September

October/November

November

Round two – excluding Capital

1 April

15 May

June/July

August

 

Optional

Accountability measures

The Great Barrier Local Board requires that all successful applicants to provide:

·    Accountability measure one - the applicant will report back to the local board in a meeting (once accountability form completed)

·    A board representative will be allocated to liaise with the applicant and ensure the project has been completed, as per their application


Great Barrier Local Board

08 April 2015

 

 

Local Government New Zealand conference and Annual General Meeting 2015

 

File No.: CP2015/03682

 

  

Purpose

1.      This report informs local boards about the Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) Annual General Meeting (AGM) and conference in Rotorua from Sunday 19 July 2015 to Tuesday 21 July 2015 and invites local boards to nominate a representative to attend as relevant.

Executive Summary

2.      The Local Government New Zealand annual conference and AGM takes place at the Rotorua Energy Events Centre from Sunday 19 July to Tuesday 21 July 2015.

3.      The AGM takes place on the first day of the conference.  Auckland Council is entitled to 4 official delegates at the AGM, one of whom is the presiding (or voting) delegate.  The Governing Body will consider this at their meeting on 26 March 2015.  The 4 official delegates are likely to be the Mayor as a member of the LGNZ National Council, the Deputy Mayor as the Mayor’s alternate for this position, Cr Webster as Chair LGNZ Zone One and a member of LGNZ National Council, and the Chief Executive.

4.      In addition to the official delegates, local board members are invited to attend.  Local boards should consider the relevance of the conference programme when deciding on attendance, with the expectation that no board will approve more than one member to attend the conference.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Great Barrier Local Board:

a)      nominates Board Member xxxx to attend the Local Government New Zealand 2015 annual general meeting and conference from Sunday 19 July 2015 to Tuesday 21 July 2015 on the basis that the conference programme is relevant to the Local Board’s work programme

b)      Confirms that conference attendance including travel and accommodation will be paid for in accordance with the current Auckland Council Elected Member Expense Policy.

 

Discussion

5.      The 2015 LGNZ Conference and AGM are being held in Rotorua. The conference commences with the AGM and technical tours from 09.30 am on Sunday 19 July 2015 and concludes at 2.30 pm on Tuesday 21 July 2015.

6.      The theme of this year’s conference is “Leading the Charge for our Communities”.  The programme includes:

·    Stephen Yarwood, former Mayor of Adelaide, will discuss performance and customer focused culture - taking your people with you

·    David Meates, CEO of Canterbury District Health Board, will present on understanding what's important to communities and why a strong focus on the customer matters

·    Dr Lester Levy, CEO of New Zealand Leadership Institute, will discuss disruptive governance – how do we increase our performance and create a strong link from strategy to transparent financial performance

·    Kevin Roberts, Executive Chairman of Saatchi & Saatchi, on telling our story and selling the value of our sector

·    Penny Webster, Councillor at Auckland Council; Rob Cameron, Partner at Cameron Partners; and Dr Oliver Hartwich, Executive Director of the New Zealand Initiative will speak on funding for growth – transformation of local government

·    Dr William Rolleston, National President of Federated Farmers; Andrew Knight, CEO of New Zealand Oil and Gas; and Gary Taylor, Executive Director of the Environmental Defence Society will discuss resource management – how a growing economy can also support a healthy environment

·    Mayors Meng Foon, Stuart Crosby, Annette Main, David Ayers and Tony Kokshoorn will each present on right-sizing your town and making the important decisions – a response to economic and demographic change

·    Brenda Halloran, former Mayor of Waterloo, Canada, will talk about nation building – infrastructure and urban development

·    Brett Way of Central Hawkes Bay District Council and Rochelle Deane of Auckland Council will present on delivering local government expertise in the Pacific – a snap shot of the Local Government Technical Assistance Facility for Pacific Countries, (PacificTA) programme.

7.      The programme also includes a number of Master Class sessions including:

•     Growing NZ's talent and economies – strategies to retain and attract skilled migrants

•     Local boards – connecting with the community

•     Engaging with iwi to grow local and regional economies

•     Collaboration, culture change and customer focus under the RMA

•     Getting the most from the One Network Roading Classification system

 

8.      Local boards should consider the relevance of the programme when deciding on conference attendance, with the expectation that no board will approve more than one member to attend the conference.

 

Annual General Meeting

9.      The AGM takes place on the first day of the conference.  Auckland Council is entitled to have four delegates to the AGM, one of whom is the presiding (or voting) delegate.  The 4 official delegates are likely to be the Mayor (or his nominee), the Deputy Mayor, Councillor Penny Webster (as Chair of Zone 1) and the Chief Executive (or his nominee).

10.    The Mayor is a member of the LGNZ National Council, the Deputy Mayor is the Mayor’s alternate for this position, Cr Webster is the Chair of LGNZ Zone One and a member of LGNZ National Council.   The Governing Body will consider an item on AGM attendance at their meeting on 26 March 2015.

11.    LGNZ requests that local board members who wish to attend the AGM, register their intention prior to the AGM. 

Costs

12.    The Local Board Services Department budget will cover the costs of one member per local board to attend the conference. 

13.    Registration fees are $1410.00 (incl GST) before 3 June 2015 and $1510.00 (incl GST) after that.  Full conference registration includes

·       Attendance at conference business sessions (Sunday-Tuesday)

·       Satchel and contents

·       Daily catering

·       Simpson Grierson welcome cocktail function

·       Fulton Hogan conference dinner and EXCELLENCE Awards function

·       Closing conference function ticket

 

14.    The council hosted tours on Sunday 19 July 2015 are not included in the conference price. Local board members are welcome to attend these at their own cost.

15.    Additional costs are approximately $150 per night accommodation, plus travel.  Local Board Services will be co-ordinating and booking all registrations and accommodation and investigating cost effective travel.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

16.    This is a report to the 21 local boards.

Māori impact statement

17.    The Local Government NZ conference will better inform local boards and thereby support their decision making for their communities including Maori.

Implementation

18.    There are no implementation issues associated with the recommendations in this report.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

LGNZ 2015 conference and master class programme

3

     

Signatories

Author

Anna Bray - Policy and Planning Manager - Local Boards

Authoriser

Karen Lyons - Manager Local Board Services

 


Great Barrier Local Board

08 April 2015

 

 




Great Barrier Local Board

08 April 2015

 

 

Chairperson's report

File No.: CP2015/03686

 

  

Executive Summary

An opportunity is provided for the chairperson to update the Board on the projects and issues she has been involved with since the last meeting, for information.

 

Recommendation

That the Great Barrier Local Board:

a)         Receives the Chairperson’s report.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Chairperson Izzy Fordham's report

3

    

Signatories

Author

Guia Nonoy - Local Board Democracy/Engagement Advisor

Authoriser

John Nash – Relationship Manager/ Senior Local Board Advisor

 


Great Barrier Local Board

08 April 2015

 

 




Great Barrier Local Board

08 April 2015

 

 

Board Members' Reports

File No.: CP2015/03687

 

  

 

Executive Summary

An opportunity is provided for members to update the Board on the projects and issues they have been involved with since the last meeting, for information.

 

Recommendation/s

a)         That the report of Board Member Susan Daly be received.

b)         That the report of Board Member Jeff Cleave be received.

c)         That the report of Board Member Judy Gilbert be received.

d)         That the report of Board Member Christina Spence be received.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Board Member Susan Daly's report

3

bView

Board Member Jeff Cleave's report

3

cView

Board Member Judy Gilbert's report

3

dView

Board Member Christina Spence's report

3

    

Signatories

Author

Guia Nonoy - Local Board Democracy/Engagement Advisor

Authoriser

John Nash – Relationship Manager/ Senior Local Board Advisor

 


Great Barrier Local Board

08 April 2015

 

 








Great Barrier Local Board

08 April 2015

 

 


Great Barrier Local Board

08 April 2015

 

 





Great Barrier Local Board

08 April 2015

 

 




Great Barrier Local Board

08 April 2015

 

 

Great Barrier Local Board Workshop Proceedings

File No.: CP2015/03688

 

  

 

Executive Summary

Attached is the Great Barrier Local Board workshop proceedings taken at the workshop held on the 4th, 11th, 12th and 25th of March 2015.

 

Recommendation

That the Great Barrier Local Board:

a)      Receives the workshop proceedings for the workshops held on the 4th, 11th, 12th and 25th of March 2015.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Workshop proceedings - 4 March 2015

75

bView

Workshop proceedings - 11 March 2015

77

cView

Workshop proceedings - 12 March 2015

79

dView

Workshop proceedings - 25 March 2015

81

    

Signatories

Author

Guia Nonoy - Local Board Democracy/Engagement Advisor

Authoriser

John Nash – Relationship Manager/ Senior Local Board Advisor

 


Great Barrier Local Board

08 April 2015

 

 


Great Barrier Local Board

08 April 2015

 

 


Great Barrier Local Board

08 April 2015

 

 


Great Barrier Local Board

08 April 2015