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

 

Date:                      

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

 

Thursday, 30 July 2015

6.00pm

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

 

Puketāpapa Local Board

 

OPEN AGENDA

 

 

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Chairperson

Julie Fairey

 

Deputy Chairperson

Harry Doig

 

Members

David Holm

 

 

Ella Kumar

 

 

Nigel Turnbull

 

 

Michael Wood

 

 

(Quorum 3 members)

 

 

 

Brenda  Railey

Democracy Advisor

 

20 July 2015

 

Contact Telephone: 021 820 781

Email: brenda.railey@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

 

 


 


Puketāpapa Local Board

30 July 2015

 

 

ITEM   TABLE OF CONTENTS                                                                                        PAGE

1          Welcome                                                                                                                         5

2          Apologies                                                                                                                        5

3          Declaration of Interest                                                                                                   5

4          Confirmation of Minutes                                                                                               5

5          Leave of Absence                                                                                                          5

6          Acknowledgements                                                                                                       5

7          Petitions                                                                                                                          5

8          Deputations                                                                                                                    5

9          Public Forum                                                                                                                  5

10        Extraordinary Business                                                                                                5

11        Notices of Motion                                                                                                          6

12        Albert-Eden-Roskill Governing Body Members Update                                           7

13        Acting Chairperson's Report, July 2015                                                                     9

14        Board Member Reports, July 2015                                                                            13

15        Auckland Transport Report for July 2015                                                                23

16        Allocation of discretionary capital budget to local boards                                    35

17        Manukau Harbour Forum: Legislative Change Requiring Agreement by Resolution 43

18        Project P.E.T.E.R Strategy Team meeting notes                                                     61

19        Record of Puketāpapa Local Board Workshop Proceedings                                65

20        Resolutions Pending Action Schedule, July 2015                                                   71  

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

 

4          Confirmation of Minutes

 

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a)         confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Thursday, 25 June 2015, as a true and correct record.

 

5          Leave of Absence

 

That an apology from Chairperson JM Fairey for leave of absence, be 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 Puketāpapa 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 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.

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

30 July 2015

 

 

Albert-Eden-Roskill Governing Body Members Update

 

File No.: CP2015/13105

 

  

 

Purpose

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

 

Recommendation/s

That the Puketapapa Local Board thank Governing Body Members for their update.

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Signatories

Authors

Brenda  Railey - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

30 July 2015

 

 

Acting Chairperson's Report, July 2015

 

File No.: CP2015/13106

 

  

Purpose

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

 

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board receive the Acting Chair’s Report for July 2015.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Harry Doig Acting Chair's report, 15 June to 19 July 2015

11

    

Signatories

Authors

Brenda  Railey - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

30 July 2015

 

 



Puketāpapa Local Board

30 July 2015

 

 

Board Member Reports, July 2015

 

File No.: CP2015/13107

 

  

Purpose

1.       The purpose of this report is to provide Board members with an opportunity to update the local board on the projects they have been involved with since the last meeting.

Executive Summary

2.       Board Member reports are attached for the month of July 2015, providing an update their portfolio work.

It is anticipated that Board members will speak to their reports at the meeting.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board receive the Member reports for July 2015.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

David Holm Report, 18 June to 18 July 2015

15

bView

Michael Wood Report, 28 May to 29 July 2015

17

    

Signatories

Authors

Brenda  Railey - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

30 July 2015

 

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

30 July 2015

 

 







Puketāpapa Local Board

30 July 2015

 

 

Auckland Transport Report for July 2015

 

File No.: CP2015/14429

 

  

Purpose

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

Monthly Overview

2.       The Transport Portfolio Lead briefing on transport matters in the Puketapapa area was scheduled for 22 June 2015. Matters on the agenda for discussion included:

·      An update on the Local Board funded Duncumbe Street cycle project.

·      Dominion Road Parking Zone.

·      Various other transport matters.

·      Site visits were also undertaken to a number of sites including Goodall Street and Roskill South village.

3.       A briefing session was held with the Local Board on the draft corridor management study for Hillsborough Road.

4.       Auckland Transport attended a meeting with Mana Whenua and the Local Board to discuss cultural markers for the Mt Roskill Safe Routes cycle scheme.

5.       Auckland Transport conducted a walk over of the route for the Safe Routes scheme with Local Board members and officers in early July.

6.       AT officers attended a meeting with the Albert-Eden Hockey Club and the Mt Eden Hockey club relating to potential safety issues on Somerset Road.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board receive the report.

 

Reporting Back

Consultation Report

7.       Consultations that have been forwarded to the Local Board for comment in the last reporting period are outlined in Attachment 1.

Resolution PKTPP/2014/165

8.       Puketapapa Local Board expressed the view that the Local Board supported encouraging and enabling the community use of grass berms as much as practicable and requested Auckland Transport to develop berm planting guidelines.  Auckland Transport can now advise that a draft approach to berm planting has been considered by the AT Board’s Customer Focus Committee and has been approved for consultation with Local Boards.  It is anticipated that the material will be circulated in the near future.

Resolution PKTPP/2015/122 Te Auaunga/Oakley Creek Rehabilitation Programme

9.       The Te Auaunga Awa/Oakley Creek Rehabilitation Project is being undertaken by the Auckland Council Stormwater Unit to realign and rehabilitate 1.3km of Oakley Creek (Te Auaunga Awa) primarily through the Walmsey and Underwood Reserves in the Puketapapa Local Board area. The works affect Owairaka Park and McGehan Close Reserve in the Albert-Eden Local Board area and Hendon Avenue Reserve which straddles both the Albert-Eden and Whau Local Board areas.

10.     Part of the project involves the construction of the Owairaka footbridge, the cost of which is to be evenly split between the Puketapapa and Albert-Eden Local Boards and would be required in the 2016/17 or 2017/18 financial years.

11.     The Puketapapa Local Board granted landowner approval for the works associated with the Te Auaunga Awa /Oakley Creek Rehabilitation Project at their June 2015 meeting, subject to various conditions and approved in principle that the project be funded from the “anticipated Auckland Council Long-term Plan or alternative funding”.

12.     The Local Board also asked Auckland Transport to provide advice as to whether the build of the Owairaka footbridge would qualify for funding from the Auckland Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF) which is available to Local Boards.

13.     Auckland Transport have reviewed the criteria for works outside the Transport Environment and believe the Owairaka footbridge meets the criteria of the fund as it “supports connectivity of cycleways and walking in the transport network” and provides a link between Wainright Ave and Owairaka Ave via existing paths either side of the stream.

14.     The Auckland Transport Code of Practice (ATCOP) standards dictate the bridge should be built suitable for cyclists and be a minimum of 2.5m wide or the preferred standard of 3 metres.  The proposed bridge would need to meet these standards to enable funding through the LBTCF.

15.     If the Puketapapa Local Board wished to fund the bridge through the LBTCF, it may need to come from the 2016/17 allocation in order to match the project timeline which would impact on the funding of other Local Board Transport Capital projects.

Resolution PKTPP/2015/128 Dominion Road

16.     The Puketapapa Local Board requested that Auckland Transport respond to the Local Board’s request for information on the possibility of progressing the Dominion Road upgrade in a shorter term than currently in the Regional Land Transport Plan, having regard to proposals for light rail. 

17.     Auckland Transport has reserved time in September to discuss this with the Local Board.

Local Board Transport Capital Projects

18.     The Puketapapa Local Board has access to the Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF) for the construction of transport related projects in its area. This fund is administered by Auckland Transport.  Each year, Local Board’s transport capital fund allocation is $379,117, and this amount can be accumulated within each electoral term.

19.     As the electoral term extends beyond the financial year, it is also possible to anticipate the allocation from the first year of the new electoral term.  The Local Board’s current list of projects is likely to exceed the allocation for this electoral term and this will be discussed with the Local Board’s transport portfolio lead.

Mt Albert Road Pedestrian Crossing Facility

20.     The zebra crossing and lighting is now in place and functioning.  Site observations seem to confirm that the crossing is popular and getting well used.

21.     Local Board Capital Projects approved:

Project

Resolution

Update

Duncumbe Street

Nov 2014: confirms the project “Duncumbe Street Greenway” proceed to detailed design with the basic cycleway as described to a budget of $170,000.

Project Manager appointed and investigation has begun. The PM will discuss progress with TPL in May 2015.

 

 

May 2015:  - the concept designs are being prepared for internal discussion within AT.  Once this is completed, the project manager will discuss this with the transport portfolio lead, it is expected this will be most useful at the June catchup.

 

 

June 2015:

The project manager will meet the transport portfolio lead at the June catchup to discuss progress.

 

 

July 2015:

The scheme assessment for the Duncumbe Street greenway is making good progress and the proposed treatments for the sections were discussed at the monthly catch up with the Transport Portfolio lead.  Once the scheme assessment is completed (expected to be July) the project will proceed to public consultation, and dependent on feedback, detailed design.

Fearon Park

Nov 2014: Agree to add the widening of the path through Fearon Park to the Duncumbe

Street greenway proposal to a budget of $190,000.

AT have appointed a project manager.  He is in discussions with AC Parks to coordinate the upgrade of the park and the construction of the shared path.

 

 

May 2015: - Auckland Councilis undertaking the redevelopment of the park and the design of the cycleway is part of that work.  The cycle path is not expected to be completed until stormwater works in the park are completed.

Lynfield Reserve

Nov 2014: Agree to the installation of a shared path for the Lynfield Reserve to a maximum of $30,000.

This will be delivered by Auckland Council Parks and funded through the Auckland Transport capital fund.  A funding agreement was drafted by AT and the signed MoU was received back on 16 April.

 

 

May 2015: – This is now with Auckland Council Parks to construct.

Keith Hay Park Lighting project

Dec 2014: Agree to fund the Keith Hay Park Lighting Project ROC $330,000 subject to availability of funds within the 2014/15 financial year with priority given to the northern section (ROC $189,000) if full funds are not available.

Auckland Transport is currently engaging a consultant to complete the electrical design, utility liaison and consenting for the work. One this is completed a Firm Estimate of Cost will be brought back to the Board for consideration and approval.

 

 

March 2015 - The firm estimate of costs is expected to be known at the end of March and will come back to the Local Board in April for final approval to move to construction, if it falls within the LB’s allocation. Auckland Council and Auckland Transport can then work through who is best to deliver the project and in what timeframe.

 

 

April 2015 – the firm estimate of costs from the consultant has been calculated now that the lighting design is complete. The firm estimate of costs for both sections from the South Western Motorway to Noton Road (excluding the pathway by the kindergarten to Richardson Road) is close to the $330k mark.  This includes 45 lights.  To complete the pathway and light it through from Notons Road to Richardson Road would require additional funding as path widening needs to occur by the kindergarten as well as a realignment of the car park. Therefore to keep the costs for the lighting project within the 330k allocation suggested by the Local Board, it is recommended to light through only to Notons Road.  Final costs will only be known once the project is tendered. If the tender indicates savings on the estimate, AT requests an indication from the Local Board if the saving can be spent on the carpark design.

 

April 2015:  b) Agree that Auckland Transport work with Auckland Council to deliver the Keith Hay lighting project within a fiscal envelope of $330,000 (from the Board’s Transport Capital Fund) after a site visit with Board members and Parks advisor to confirm the project scope.

c)   agree that if the tender process indicates savings on the allocated $330,000, that this money be spent on the Richardson Road carpark design

May 2015: - A site visit with Local Board members Holm and Wood has been arranged with appropriate officers.

 

May 2015:

b) confirm the Keith Hay Park lighting project proceed and that the scope of the project be limited to the northern section of the park to Noton Road at this stage and that any savings in this work be allocated to detailed design from the Noton Road carpark through to Richardson Road,

June 2015:

Auckland Transport notes the May resolution and is working with the designer to complete the detailed design and consent application. Following receipt of the consent the work will be procured through an Auckland Council Parks contract with work expected to commence late spring/early summer when ground conditions are best suited for this type of work.

 

 

July 2015:

The consent application process is still being worked through with Auckland Council.

Parau/Duke Street

Nov 2014: Agree to fund the Parau Street/Duke Street safety project to $25,000.

 

Completed.

Ernie Pinches to Wesley Community Centre cycleway

Oct 2014: Move forward to discussions with the local community on the broad concept of the Sandringham Road Extension to Wesley Community Centre cycle link to gauge community support through its engagement advisor.

AT and the LB’s engagement advisor took the concept out to the community in December 2014/January 2015.

 

Oct 2014: Allocate $25,000 from the Transport Capital Fund for investigation of the Sandringham Road cycleway from Ernie Pinches Drive across SH20 to the Wesley Community Centre and War Memorial Park following successful consultation on the draft concept.

Consultation was completed in January 2015. Community support for the project was noted.

 

Feb 2015: Reconfirm Resolution CP2014/24495 that $25,000 from the TCF be released for investigaton of the Sandringham Rd Extn cycle link from Ernie Pinches Drive across SH 20 to the Wesley Community Centre and War Memorial Park following successful consultation on the draft concept.

April 2015: A project brief is being prepared and from there a project manager will be appointed.

 

 

May 2015: The project brief has been completed and a project manager has been appointed.  Further updates to the LB are expected in the next month or two.

 

 

June 2015:

A feasibility study is now underway to look at options for this route which will also provide information on costings. A report back to the Local Board on this is expected in mid July.

 

Mt Roskill Safe Routes Scheme

22.     A site walk over was conducted in early July with Local Board members to discuss the treatments and construction details for the cycleway. The project is at the consenting stage with some matters still to be resolved with Auckland Council.

23.     A meeting was held on 8 July with the hockey clubs who use the turf on Somerset Road, where on-street parking will be affected by the cycleway.  Auckland Transport have added seven further parking spaces to the design for Somerset Road (opposite the hockey turf ) to address the parking loss and it will investigate if any further measures are possible to mitigate the safety issues outlined by the hockey clubs. A response to the clubs will be sent as soon as possible.

24.     Once the consents have been obtained, and a decision from Auckland Transport’s Traffic Control Committee is finalised, the project can be tendered out for construction. This is expected to be in this calendar year.

East West Connections

25.     This project aims to provide road connections between SH20 and SH1 to improve traffic flow, particularly for heavy trucks.  The southern component of the project seeks to provide improved bus travel and cycling connections between Mangere and Otahuhu Town Centres and Sylvia Park.

26.     NZ Transport Agency and Auckland Transport announced their preferred options for connections in the Onehunga and Penrose areas and for bus priority and associated cycle improvements in the Mangere, Otahuhu and Sylvia Park areas and are seeking public feedback on the proposals.

27.     The proposed Onehunga and Penrose connections consist of a new road along the foreshore with connections into the Onehunga/Penrose freight hub, improvements to the Neilson Street/Onehunga Mall intersection, upgrading Neilson Street and improving the Neilson Street interchange with widening of both SH 20 and SH 1.  The proposal also allows for a new cycleway, a road over the railway line connecting into Great South Road and widening of Sylvia Park Road and ramps onto SH1.

 

 

28.     This proposal is expected to deliver:

·    an improvement in travel times and travel time reliability between businesses in the Onehunga-Penrose industrial area and State Highways 1 and 20.

·    an improvement in safety and accessibility for cycling and walking between Mangere Bridge, Onehunga and Sylvia Park.

·    an improvement in journey time reliability for buses between SH20 and Onehunga Town Centre.

29.     The improvements proposed between Mangere, Otahuhu and Sylvia Park will include bus, truck and transit lanes, cycling and walking improvements and bus stop improvements.

30.     Bus priority lanes will be installed on the approach to a number of intersections on Massey Road, Station Road, Atkinson Avenue and Mt Wellington Highway.  A combined bus and truck lane is proposed for Walmsley Road and for some parts of Massey Road.

31.     Benefits include improved travel times and journey time reliability for buses between Mangere, Otahuhu and Sylvia Park; an improvement in safety and accessibility for cycling and walking between Mangere, Otahuhu and Sylvia Park and an improvement in safety and accessibility for public transport users.

Auckland Transport News

The Introduction of Double-Decker Buses

32.     Auckland Transport has an urgent requirement to address capacity constraints on some bus routes. The central corridors, Northern Express and services from Botany to the CBD are experiencing growth rates of 10%, 6.5% and 7% respectively, with peak seated capacity utilization from 80% to 95%. Strategically, the Auckland Plan looks to double public transport trips to 140 million by 2022.

33.     There is a need to address capacity constraints and to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the bus New Network corridors without increasing bus volumes.

34.     The use of double decker buses is the first step in the progressive strategy for increasing capacity on high demand routes and is aligned to delivering improved customer experience, reducing congestion and increasing patronage. Customer growth is expected to be in the region of 20%-30% over the first four years of introduction.

35.     Double decker buses are due to start on the Botany route (city centre to Botany via Newmarket) in October 2015. Mt Eden, Waiheke and Northern Express routes are due to commence in early 2016, with further routes to follow progressively. Over the next ten years, it is planned that up to 13 key routes may be converted to double deck bus operation.

36.     Historically trees have not been proactively managed on sections of these routes. Double-deckers cannot run safely on the route with hazards above the ground. Tree work is required to mitigate this risk and manage the safe carriage of passengers.

37.     Where trees do intrude into the road corridor, Auckland Transport will seek to avoid their removal unless that is a last resort. Minor pruning or maintenance will in some situations will be the only requirement, but where major tree surgery, tree removal or mitigation planting is required, there will be consultation. In some cases, the need for removing trees may be able to be avoided by altering kerb lines and other similar measures.

38.     Aside from trees, other obstacles that are being carefully checked are shop verandas, utility service poles and cables. As a result of this process, alterations to verandas, or the relocation of poles and cables may be required.

39.     Local Boards that have routes where it is planned to operate double deck bus services will be individually briefed about the specific measures necessary within their local board areas to accommodate them. Depending on the scale and severity of the measures required, a Board may be offered either a workshop or a briefing for the Transport Portfolio Leads.

 

Travelwise update and school awards

40.     The Travelwise programme is an innovative schools-based programme that aims to improve road safety and achieve a reduction in the number of vehicles driving to and from school at peak times.  It does this through encouraging and increasing alternative modes of travel, and providing safer facilities for all road users.

41.     There are currently 408 schools on the Travelwise programme.  At those schools, Auckland Transport supports activities and events, helps with policies and systems, promotes road safety for children and drivers, offers scooter and cycle training, and runs Back to School and Slow Down promotions.  Most of the schools have student groups who help with running the programme as well as a Lead Teacher who is the central point of contact for Auckland Transport.

42.     Since its inception in 2005, Travelwise has achieved the following results:

·    There are approximately 202,000 students involved in the programme

·    75% of all Auckland school aged students attend a Travelwise School

43.     Safe School Travel Plans have helped:

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

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

·    Reduce CO2 emissions by 735 tonnes each year

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

44.     The schools listed below have been awarded for their outstanding Travelwise achievements in 2014.  The awards are based on four criteria:

·    Mode share shift from when the school first starts as a Travelwise School

·    Their inclusion of road safety and active travel in the curriculum

·    The efforts to involve the school community in road safety and mode share

·    The inclusion of these matters in the ethos and organisation of the school.

45.     If a school is high achieving in all of these areas they are awarded Gold (e.g. mode shift of more than 4%), medium achievement is awarded Silver, and medium to low achievement is awarded Bronze.

46.     Award winners in the Puketapapa Local Board area were:

Gold award winners

Silver award winners

Bronze award winners

·    Hillsborough Primary School

·    Royal Oak Primary School

·    May Rd School

·    Mt Roskill Primary School

·    Three Kings Primary School

·    Waikowhai Intermediate

·    Lynfield College

·    Marshall Laing Primary School

·    Mt Roskill Intermediate

·    Waikowhai Primary School

·    Wesley Primary School

47.     In previous years, a celebration has been planned near the end of the financial year, and the awards given out related to the previous school year.  This year Auckland Transport is looking to plan an event for the end of Term 4 to celebrate 2015 Travelwise achievements following feedback from schools that they would prefer to receive their awards in the same school year as the results are achieved.

Cycling News

48.     Cycling in Auckland has had a boost with the announcement of the urban cycleway fund.  This fund will help to accelerate delivery of sections of the Auckland Cycle Network with new infrastructure and improve existing facilities.

49.     Although the proposed improvements are focused on the central area, two projects near the Puketapapa Local Board area that will benefit from the fund are the Waterview shared path (linking to the Northwestern Cycleway) and a path from New North Road to New Lynn transport interchange.

Auckland’sTrains Going All-Electric

50.     Auckland’s rail network will be all-electric from next Monday 20 July. New trains will be operating all services on the electrified network from Papakura in the south to Swanson in the west, a few weeks ahead of schedule.

51.     It has been a difficult few months with on-going issues caused by the ageing diesel fleet. Running both electric and diesel trains has caused a few problems and Auckland Transport are working hard with KiwiRail, CAF and Transdev to improve performance and reliability, and it will continue to make improvements when the all-electric fleet is operational.

52.      The increased number of services now operating on the network have made schedules very tight and work is continuing to make sure trains meet their spot into the busy Newmarket and Britomart stations. Customers will see an improvement in punctuality as drivers become more familiar with the new trains. There will be a bedding in period and it is inevitable that there will be issues and Auckland Transport is hoping to keep these to a minimum.

53.     From 20 July buses will shuttle passengers between Swanson and the former Waitakere station.  On the Southern Line the electric trains end at Papakura and there will be a shuttle service using diesel trains to and from Pukekohe.

54.      The last of Auckland’s 57 electric trains are currently being shipped from Spain and the full fleet will be in service by the end of the year.

55.      The new trains have been very popular. By the time the new timetable comes into effect, Aucklanders will have taken more than 14 million trips across the Auckland rail network in the past year, a 21% increase.  The modern new trains mean extra capacity as well as improved comfort.  At peak times the six car trains provide even more room.

56.     The trains have wider doors making it easier for passengers. See AT’s video showing the features of the new trains www.at.govt.nz/electrictrains.  The new trains are much quieter than the old diesel trains and they accelerate faster, so extra caution needs to be exercised when using railway crossings.

Issues Raised through/ by Board Members

Location or Name of Issue

Description

 

AT Response

Denny Avenue

A request for an investigation of vehicle speeds on Denny Avenue.

In looking at the available speed counts, AT found that the majority of vehicles (85th percentile) on Denny Avenue drive at or below 47 km/hr, which is within the posted speed limit. This is not considered high when compared to other similar roads throughout the region. The 85th Percentile speed is the speed that 85 percent of vehicles do not exceed. AT found that there have been no reported crashes relating to speed on this road in the past five years and the crash record for Denny Avenue does not suggest there is a significant issue with excessive speeds on the road. Taking all of these factors considered into account this street does not rank highly when compared to other similar streets across the region for a speed calming treatment and unfortunately AT is not able to recommend any changes on Denny Avenue at this stage..

Roskill South Village

Two retailers are reporting that patrons visiting the restaurant in this shopping area are parking here for long periods disrupting the parking for their customers.

 

Parking Design organised some site surveys after 6pm at this location. Based on these surveys there is still available capacity after 6pm, as turnover still appears to be occurring after this time. AT parking officers will discuss the situation with the retailers.

 

509 Mt Albert Road

Retailers in this location are reporting that vehicles are overstaying their 60 minute limit and restricting parking opportunities for their customers.

This is still under investigation.

Cnr Stamford Park Rd and Arundel Street

Complaint that a compulsory stop sign at this location needs attention as it is obscured by foliage and needs angle adjustment.

The stop sign was attended too and the foliage is no longer obscuring the sign. AT’s traffic engineer will assess if road marking needs to be added to provide additional warning of the upcoming compulsory stop.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Consultation

33

     

Signatories

Authors

Lorna Stewart, Elected Member Relationship Manager, Auckland Transport

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon, Elected Member Relationship Team Manager, Auckland Transport

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

30 July 2015

 

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

30 July 2015

 

 

Allocation of discretionary capital budget to local boards

 

File No.: CP2015/13889

 

  

Purpose

1.       This report seeks direction from Local Boards on the proposed discretionary fund for local board capital expenditure (Capex fund) regarding the:

·    model for allocating the fund

·    criteria for the fund.

Executive Summary

2.       The Governing Body has created a discretionary fund for capital expenditure for local boards. Local boards are to work with staff to develop a formula for allocation and criteria for qualifying projects.

3.       The Capex fund enables local boards to deliver small local asset based projects, either directly, in partnership with the community, or through joint agreements between boards.

4.       The Capex fund will be managed over three years. Local boards can use their entire three year allocation for one project or spread it over the three years for smaller projects.

5.       Local boards provided views on how funding should be allocated during the review of the Local Boards Funding Policy (LBFP) in 2014. The resulting funding formula for Locally Driven Initiatives (LDI) allocates 90 per cent based on population, 5 per cent on deprivation and 5 per cent on land area. The same allocation formula can be used for the Capex fund to maintain consistency in the policy. Staff note however that the link between costs and land area is weak and leads to major shifts in the allocation of funding.

6.       A formula based approach provides limited funding for the Great Barrier Island and Waiheke boards. Local boards should consider what level of funding over three years is appropriate for these boards. Staff recommend setting funding at one per cent of the fund for Great Barrier and two per cent for Waiheke.

7.       Using the Capex fund is preferable to LDI funding as the Governing Body funds the consequential opex. Boards should consider whether they need to continue to use LDI funding for minor (less than $1 million) capital projects.  Boards should also consider whether they need to be able to bring forward regionally funded projects using the Capex fund.

8.       The proposal to allocate a Capex fund to local boards will require an amendment to the LBFP. This will amend the Long-term Plan and requires the use of the special consultative procedure.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a)      provide feedback on the allocation of Capital expenditure (Capex) funding to local boards.

 

Comments

Background

9.       The Governing Body has created a discretionary fund for capital expenditure for local boards. On May 7 the Budget Committee passed the following resolution:

a)   Provide a new Local Board discretionary capex fund of $10 million per annum noting that this will incorporate the existing Facilities Partnership Fund.

b)   Approve the following parameters for this fund:

i.          The fund may be managed as a three year amount

ii. Local Boards may use the fund to build council owned assets, add to an existing council funded renewal or new capital project, work in partnership with an external provider or seed fund a community project.

10.     The Budget Committee requested that staff and local boards develop a formula for allocation and criteria for qualifying projects to report to the Finance and Performance Committee.

Purpose of the Capex fund

11.     The purpose of the fund is to ensure locally important projects are given appropriate priority. It is envisaged that the fund will be used for projects similar to those historically funded by the local improvement projects (LIP’s) or small local improvement projects (SLIP’s).

Funding Allocation Model

 

Principles for funding allocations

12.     The core principles for allocating funding to local boards are an:

·    equitable capacity for each local board to enhance well-being

·    administrative effectiveness

·    transparency.

Attributes for funding allocation

13.     The Local boards funding policy (LBFP) makes allocations on the following basis:

·    90 per cent based on local board population size

·    5 per cent based on the relative level of deprivation of the board

·    5 per cent based on the land area of the board

·    Waiheke and Great Barrier Island are funded for a fixed amount set by the Governing Body.

14.     The following table shows the level of local board support for the use of the above factors for allocating LDI recorded during the review of the LBFP.

Local Board Attribute

Local Boards that supported use during last review of LBFP

Relationship to need for funding

Staff Comments

Population

21

Strong

Strongly relates to demand for services

Deprivation

17

Weak

Little objective evidence for relationship to demand for services 

Geography

16

Weak

High distortion effect on allocation that does not relate to need for services

 

15.     A key decision for the allocation of the Capex fund will be to determine the appropriate level of capital funding for Great Barrier Island and Waiheke. The discussion document considers the two current allocation models used to fund these boards:

·    LDI allocation: Great Barrier Island and Waiheke receive the same proportion of the Capex fund as they currently receive of the total funding pool for Locally Driven Initiatives. (This is 2.3% of the total pool for  Great Barrier Island and 2.7% for Waiheke)

·    Transport Model: Great Barrier Island receives 1 per cent and Waiheke 2 per cent of the total funding pool.

16.     Five models have been considered for allocating the Capex fund between all boards based on the population, deprivation and land area attributes of the boards:

·    Model A: All boards funded based on 100% population

·    Model B: All boards funded based on 95% population and 5% deprivation

·    Model C: All boards funded based on 90% population, 5% deprivation and 5% land area

·    Model D: Great Barriers receives 2.3% and Waiheke receives 2.7% of total funds, remaining funds allocated to all other boards based on 90% population, 5% deprivation and 5% land area

·    Model E:  Great Barriers receives 1% and Waiheke receives 2% of total funds, remaining funds allocated to all other boards based on 90% population, 5% deprivation and 5% land area.

17.     The following pages present these five models in table and chart form.

18.     Other potential funding attributes that have not been included in the modelling are:

·    rates paid: there is no relationship with need for services, and support was low for this attribute during the last review, with six boards in favour.

·    current levels of capital expenditure: data on regional activities is unavailable at local level. Levels of expenditure on local assets are not relevant to the purpose of the Capex fund. Gaps in the provision of assets will be met through the relevant network facilities plan.   

·    population growth: growth will be addressed every three years through the proposed allocation formula.

 

 

19.     The charts show the following:

·    Using land area as an allocation factor significantly increases funding to Rodney and Franklin local boards.

·    Great Barrier Island receives less than $7,000 under a population based allocation. This rises to $77,000 under the allocation formula that includes deprivation and land area.

·    Providing Great Barrier Island and Waiheke with fixed allocations under the LDI allocation and Transport models only has a small impact on the other 19 boards.

20.     In determining the appropriate funding levels for Great Barrier Island and Waiheke  consideration should be given both to the total value of the funding over three years, and the typical costs of activities likely to undertaken by these boards. The following table shows the level of funding these boards would receive over three years in comparison to the next smallest board, Papakura:

Allocation formula model

Three year capex funding allocation for

Great Barrier

Waiheke

Papakura

Board Population size

900

8,400

45,000

A: 100% population

$20,000

$180,000

$970,000

B: 95% population + 5% deprivation

$130,000

$260,000

$1,000,000

C: 90% population + 5% deprivation + 5% land area

$230,000

$290,000

$970,000

D: GBI: 2.3% Waiheke 2.7% (Current LDI allocation)

$690,000

$820,000

$940,000

E: GBI: 1% Waiheke 2% of total fund

$300,000

$600,000

$960,000

 

21.     The average cost for SLIPs projects in the last financial year was $31,000 for Great Barrier Island and $27,000 for Waiheke.  Under Model E Waiheke would receive two per cent of the fund, and be able to deliver 20 average cost projects over three years. Great Barrier would receive one per cent of the fund and be able to deliver 10 average cost projects over the same period.  They can of course accumulate funds over the three year period to undertake larger projects.

22.     Staff consider there is a strong case for using the same formula for LDI and the capex fund to maintain consistency in the allocation.  However, there is also a case for excluding land area given its impact on the distribution of funding.

23.     Staff consider that allocating Great Barrier and Waiheke the same proportion of funding as they receive from the LDI opex fund would over fund these boards compared to other board areas. Staff recommend an allocation of one per cent of the total fund to Great Barrier, and two per cent to Waiheke would be appropriate.

Decision making process for capex projects

24.     The chart on the following page provides an overview of decision making pathways for each type of project.

 

25.     Staff will work with boards to develop guidelines for facilities partnerships (including feasibility studies) and community-led projects.

Bringing future capex allocation forward

26.     The governing body has proposed that the fund be managed over a three year period, aligned with the Long-term Plan planning cycle.  Local boards can use their entire three year allocation for one project or spread it over the three years for smaller projects. This provides boards with greater choice in the size and timing of projects they undertake.

27.     As a practical consideration, it is unlikely that all 21 local boards would be in a position to bring forward their three years of funding to 2015/16.  However, in the event that this was to happen, the projects would need to be assessed against the modified “gateway” process to ensure they were able to be delivered.

28.     Budget for the Capex funding is included in the ten year plan. Local boards’ can only bring three years budgets forward however so future decision making is unencumbered.

 

 

Role of LDI funding

29.     The table below sets out how the Capex Fund and LDI Opex Fund could be used for different types of projects.

Funding Type

Project Type

Capex Fund

LDI Opex fund

Capex

Minor Asset based projects (less than $1M)

ü

GB funds consequential opex

?

LBs fund

consequential opex (feedback sought)

Top-up of  regional projects and renewals

ü

?

Major Asset based projects (greater than $1M)

ü

GB approval required. GB funds consequential opex.

û

Must use Capex fund for large projects

Opex

Capital grants to community groups

ü

Debt funded opex. Must be included in annual plan

ü

Standard opex expenditure

Feasibility Studies

ü

ü

30.     Local boards are currently able to fund capital projects using their LDI budget by funding the consequential opex. The capex fund largely does away with the need for this and the Mayor’s report proposed the removal of the ability to fund major new facilities with opex funded by their LDI. This raises the question of whether local boards still need the ability to use LDI to fund minor capital projects. The table sets out the key differences between the Capex fund and the LDI opex fund for capital projects.

Capex fund

LDI opex fund

GB funds consequential opex

LB funds consequential opex

Easier for GB to control and plan for debt (set amount available for three years)

Creates variable unknown capex requirements on an annual basis

Simplified reporting processes

Complex financial reporting required to track LB funding vs regional funding

 

31.     Staff recommend that local boards’ do not fund minor (less than $1 million) capital projects with LDI opex from 1 July 2016. This will not impact projects that boards have already committed to funding.

32.     Local boards should provide feedback on whether they see a need to use:

·    LDI to fund minor capital projects

·    Capex funding to bring regionally funded projects forward.

Transferring LDI to Capex

33.     Local boards may transfer their currently approved capex projects paid for by LDI (as outlined in their LB Agreement 2015/16), to the new discretionary fund.  This will free up their LDI opex again and remove the need to fund consequential opex.

Deferral of Capex

34.     Normal deferral conditions apply to the Capex fund. Projects cannot be planned outside of the three years but funds may be deferred if projects are unable to be completed within this period.

Transition for current Capex allocations

35.     There will be no transition mechanism for any existing Capex budgets held by some local boards. The Governing Body has decided that this fund will replace the current Facilities Partnership fund.

36.     Projects that have already been committed to through the Facilities Partnership fund will need to be funded from the relevant boards’ Capex fund allocation.

Local Boards Funding Policy

37.     The current Local Boards Funding Policy must be amended to provide for the allocation of capex funding.  This is an amendment to the Long-term Plan requiring use of the Special Consultative Procedure with a public consultation period of one month. 

38.     Staff propose to amend the LBFP to provide a general formula for allocating any non LDI funding. This will avoid the need to amend the LBFP every time the Governing Body decides to give local boards funding that is not for Locally Driven Initiatives.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

39.     The proposal does not impact the allocation of decision making.

Significance and Engagement

40.     The proposed Capex fund is a minor change in the scale of the Council’s budget and funding for Local Activities. As such it is not a significant change. However, creating a new funding allocation for local boards requires an amendment to the Local Board Funding Policy, and consequently the Long-term Plan.

41.     The Council is required to undertake a special consultative process for any amendment to the Long-term Plan.

Implementation

42.     The proposed amendment to the Local Board Funding Policy is not significant. As such, the amendment to the Long-term Plan will not need to be audited.

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Signatories

Authors

Beth Sullivan - Principal Advisor Policy

Authorisers

Matthew Walker - General Manager Financial Plan Policy & Budgeting

Karen Lyons - Manager Local Board Services

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

30 July 2015

 

 

Manukau Harbour Forum: Legislative Change Requiring Agreement by Resolution

 

File No.: CP2015/11666

 

  

Purpose

1.       To request that the Puketāpapa Local Board resolve on recommendations made by the Manukau Harbour Forum regarding membership and delegations to the forum. This is to ensure that the forum has a valid agreement between all nine member boards in place prior to 31 July 2015 to comply with recent changes to the Local Government Act 2002.

Executive Summary

2.       In 2014 amendments were made to the Local Government Act 2002 that affect the Manukau Harbour Forum as a joint committee of nine local boards.

3.       The forum’s existing terms of reference do not cover all the requirements under the amended legislation, as the resolutions from each member board adopting the terms of reference and establishing the forum need to be the same, i.e. showing agreement between all nine boards.

4.       In light of the above, in order for the forum to exist after 31 July 2015 all member boards will need to show agreement by resolution on the following:

i)        The number of members each local board may appoint to the joint committee;

ii)       How the joint committee chairperson and deputy chairperson are to be appointed;

iii)      The terms of reference of the joint committee;

iv)      What responsibilities are to be delegated to the joint committee by each appointee local board; and

v)      The process for amending the agreement.

5.       At its business meeting of 8 June 2015 the forum resolved as follows:

b)      Requests that this report be forwarded on to the nine member boards recommending that each board:

i)        Appoints one named member and one named alternate member to the Manukau Harbour Forum

ii)       Confirms that the chairperson and deputy chairperson of the Manukau Harbour Forum will be elected by a majority of members at the first meeting of each electoral term

iii)      Confirms the revised Terms of Reference for the Manukau Harbour Forum as appended to Agenda reports

iv)      Delegates authority to the Manukau Harbour Forum to make decision within its terms of reference noting that any significant or controversial decisions will only be made by the forum with the confirmation by resolution of all the member boards that would be affected by the decision.

v)      Confirms that any changes to this agreement will be agreed first by the Manukau Harbour Forum then recommended to the nine member boards for their approval, noting that resolutions must be identical

v)      Notes that in order for the nine member boards to agree on this new binding agreement for the Manukau Harbour Forum, the resolutions made in respect of recommendations b) i)-v) above (with the exception of b) i) where appointees must be named) must be identical and that in the absence of identical resolutions by all member boards the Forum will not meet the requirements under clause 30a of Schedule 7 to the Local Government Act 2002.

 

6.       A copy of the revised terms of reference is appended as Attachment A.

 

 

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a)      agree with the recommendations of the Manukau Harbour Forum and resolves to:

i)        appoint one named member and one named alternate member to the Manukau Harbour Forum

ii)       confirm that the chairperson and deputy chairperson of the Manukau Harbour Forum will be elected by a majority of members at the first meeting of each electoral term

iii)      confirm the revised Terms of Reference for the Manukau Harbour Forum as appended to Agenda reports

iv)      delegate authority to the Manukau Harbour Forum to make decisions within its terms of reference, noting that any significant or controversial decisions will only be made by the forum with the confirmation by resolution of all the member boards that would be affected by the decision and that the local board will reserve the right to hold and promote a different view to that of the forum on any issue that may impact the Puketāpapa Local Board area.

v)      confirm that any changes to this agreement will be agreed first by the Manukau Harbour Forum then recommended to the nine member boards for their approval, noting that resolutions must be identical

vi)      note that in order for the requirements of this new agreement for the Manukau Harbour Forum to be reached, the resolutions of each of the nine member boards made in respect of recommendations a) (i)-(v) above (with the exception of a) (i) where appointees are to be named) must be identical and that in the absence of identical resolutions by all member boards the Forum will not meet the requirements under clause 30a of Schedule 7 to the Local Government Act 2002.

 

 

Discussion

7.       In 2014 amendments were made to the Local Government Act 2002, in particular Schedule 1AA Clause 5 reads as follows:

Requirement to enter into agreement under clause 30A of Schedule 7

(1)     This clause applies to a local authority that appointed a joint committee under clause 30(1)(b) of Schedule 7 before the date of commencement of clause 30A of Schedule 7 if that committee remains in existence after that date.

(2)     The local authority must, within 12 months of the date of commencement of clause 30A of Schedule 7, enter into an agreement under that clause with every other local authority or public body that has appointed members to that joint committee.

(3)     If an agreement under clause 30A of Schedule 7 is not entered into within the period specified in subclause (2), the joint committee is deemed to be discharged by the local authority.

(4)     Nothing in this clause applies if the joint committee referred to in subclause (1) was constituted or continued by, or required to be constituted or continued by, an enactment other than this Act.

8.       Each of the Manukau Harbour Forum’s member boards previously resolved varying membership and delegations (Attachment B). The Act requires agreement by resolution which means all resolutions from the boards need to be the same.

9.       Analysis has been undertaken by Auckland Council’s legal services team as to whether the boards at the time of establishment covered all the necessary points within the legislation (Attachment C).  This analysis shows that the requirements of the legislation for agreements in regard to joint committees have not been met and the member boards will need to pass new resolutions to satisfy all the requirements of the amendments to the Act.

10.     The Forum’s resolutions of 8 June 2015, based on advice from staff, were intended to keep these provisions as close as possible to what has been previously agreed by the majority of member boards.

11.     At the same meeting, the forum also took the opportunity to make a number of minor revisions to its terms of reference, which staff had been working on in consultation with the forum following a workshop on 13 April, at which this issue was originally raised with the Forum.

12.     It is important note that unless this new agreement comes into effect on or before 31 July 2015, the forum will technically cease to exist. In order to achieve this, the recommendations must be resolved, in full and unamended, by all nine member boards.

Consideration

Local Board Views and Implications

13.     Local boards have previously agreed, through adoption of the forum’s terms of reference, that the Manukau Harbour is a regional asset and it was appropriate that Local Boards will collectively contribute to strategies and outcomes that enhance the social, economic, environmental and cultural well-being of the harbour. The forum has been seen as an effective mechanism to achieve this.

14.     The role of the forum is to champion the sustainable management of the Manukau Harbour and adjacent communities. It developed a vision and strategy in line with this which was adopted in September 2014.

15.     The Forum has no budget allocated to projects and relies on the member boards to fund projects for its work programme.

Maori Impact Statement

16.     Workshops of the Manukau Harbour Forum were held on 13 April and 8 June 2015 to discuss the ongoing role of mana whenua in relation to the forum. Some minor changes were made to the forum’s terms of reference as a result of this to reflect the forum’s obligations under Te Tiriti o Waitangi/The Treaty of Waitangi, and its desire to work with mana whenua on an ongoing basis.

17.     The forum anticipates receiving further advice and options regarding the formalisation of its relationship with mana whenua.

Implementation Issues

18.     The new agreement must be entered into by all member boards prior to 31 July 2015.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Manukau Harbour Forum Revised Terms of Reference

47

bView

Resolutions by member boards

49

cView

Assessment of resolutions by member boards

53

     

Signatories

Authors

Mary Binney - Local Board Advisor - Maungakiekie-Tamaki

Authorisers

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

30 July 2015

 

 



Puketāpapa Local Board

30 July 2015

 

 




Puketāpapa Local Board

30 July 2015

 

 








Puketāpapa Local Board

30 July 2015

 

 

Project P.E.T.E.R Strategy Team meeting notes

 

File No.: CP2015/13108

 

  

Purpose

1.       The purpose of this report is to attach the Project P.E.T.E.R Strategy Team’s monthly meeting notes for information.

Executive Summary

2.       Project P.E.T.E.R (Puketāpapa Education Training & Employment Readiness) was conceived in 2011 by the education and employment working group within the Roskill Community Network (RCN).  That forum identified the need to create a collective community approach to increasing local educational, training and work-readiness programmes that lead to meaningful employment, and that one of the key needs of local organisations is the access to facilities.

3.       The Puketāpapa Local Board allocated $10,000 from the 2013/2014 budget to provide support to the Project P.E.T.E.R project.

4.       In early 2015, a 5 member Strategy Team was formed to assume a governance role of the Project P.E.T.E.R initiative.  And, in April 2015, the Puketāpapa Local Board (Board) nominated David Holm as the interim member to sit on this team.  A permanent Board member will be appointed in May 2015.

5.       The Strategy Team meets monthly and notes from their recent meetings are attached to this report (Attachment A & B).

 

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board receive the Project PETER Strategy Team meeting notes dated 14 July 2015.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Project PETER Strategy Team Meeting Notes, 14 July 2015

63

     

Signatories

Authors

Brenda  Railey - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

30 July 2015

 

 



Puketāpapa Local Board

30 July 2015

 

 

Record of Puketāpapa Local Board Workshop Proceedings

 

File No.: CP2015/13109

 

  

Purpose

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

Executive Summary

2.       The attached summary of workshop proceedings provides a record of the Board workshops held in June 2015.

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

 

 

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board receive the Workshop Notes for 3, 10 and 17 June 2015.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Workshop Notes for June 2015.

67

    

Signatories

Authors

Brenda  Railey - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

30 July 2015

 

 





Puketāpapa Local Board

30 July 2015

 

 

Resolutions Pending Action Schedule, July 2015

 

File No.: CP2015/13110

 

  

Purpose

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

Executive summary

2.       Updated version of the Resolutions Pending Actions schedule is attached.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board receive the Resolutions Pending Action Schedule for July 2015.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Resolutions Pending Action Schedule, July2015

73

     

Signatories

Authors

Brenda  Railey - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

 



Puketāpapa Local Board

30 July 2015

 

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

30 July 2015

 

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

30 July 2015

 

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

30 July 2015

 

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

30 July 2015