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

 

Date:                      

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

 

Tuesday, 14 July 2015

9.30am

Upper Harbour Local Board Office
30 Kell Drive
Albany

 

Upper Harbour Local Board

 

OPEN AGENDA

 

 

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Chairperson

Lisa Whyte

 

Deputy Chairperson

Brian Neeson, JP

 

Members

Callum Blair

 

 

John McLean

 

 

Margaret Miles, JP

 

 

Christine Rankin-MacIntyre

 

 

(Quorum 3 members)

 

 

 

Suad Allie

Democracy Advisor

 

8 July 2015

 

Contact Telephone: (09) 414 2684

Email: suad.allie@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

 

 


 

 

Portfolio Activity

Responsibilities

Board Lead/s and Alternate

1

Governance

·         Board Leadership

·         Board-to-Council Relationships

·         Board-to-Board Relationships

·         Civic Duties

·         Advocacy (local, regional, and central government)

·         Relationships with Maoridom

·         Relationships with government departments and agencies

·         Relationship with Property CCO

·         Relationship with Auckland Waterfront Development

·         Advocacy with Governing Body (Local Board Plan; Local Board Agreements)

·         Unitary Plan

·         Local area plan

Brian Neeson

Lisa Whyte

 

2

Regulatory & Bylaws / Civil Defence Emergency Management

.

·         Resource consents

·         Heritage

·         Liquor

·         Gambling

·         Swimming pools fencing

·         Trees

·         Bylaws

·         Relationships with the Civil Defence Emergency Management Group

·         Community preparedness, disaster response, relief, and recovery

Callum Blair

John McLean

Christine Rankin-MacIntyre

Margaret Miles (Resource Consents only)

3

Events / Arts and Culture

 

·         Community celebration

·         Community identity

·         Neighbourhood gatherings and renewal

·         Event compliance

·         Relationship with ATEED

·         Relationship with Regional Facilities CCOs

·         Tourism

·         Artistic and cultural service levels

·         Promoting all aspects of artistic endeavour

·         Development of public art strategy and policy

Margaret Miles

4

Community and social well-being / Local Facilities

 

·         Community development

·         Neighbourhood relationships

·         Funding for neighbourhood projects

·         Community safety (excl. town centres)

·         Graffiti removal

·         Community advocacy

·         Relationships with Youth

·         Leisure centres

·         Community houses

·         Halls

·         Community hubs

·         Arts facilities

·         Community Partnerships

·         Asset Management

Callum Blair
Margaret Miles

 

 

 

 

Portfolio Activity

Responsibilities

Board Lead/s and Alternate

5

Libraries

·         Stewardship of libraries

·         Mobile library

Christine Rankin-MacIntyre
Lisa Whyte

6

Sports parks and recreation (active) / Parks, Reserves and playgrounds (passive)

 

·         Stewardship of sports parks

·         Stewardship of recreation facilities

·         Relationship with sports clubs

·         Neighbourhood parks and reserves (incl. esplanade reserves and the coastline)

·         Design and maintenance

·         Plantings, playgrounds, bollards, and walkways

·         Skateparks

·         Track Network development

Margaret Miles

Lisa Whyte

7

Town Centres

·         Town centre renewal

·         Design and maintenance

·         Community safety within town centres

·         Business Improvement Districts liaison

·         Urban design

·         Built Heritage

Margaret Miles
Brian Neeson

8

Transport / Regional Transport and CBD development

 

·         Local transport projects and public transport

(incl. roading, footpaths, cycleways)

·         Liaison on regional Transport matters

·         2nd harbour crossing

·         Bridge walk cycleway

·         Inner City Rail Link

·         Waterfront development

·         CBD master plan

John McLean
Margaret Miles

9

Natural Environment

.

·         Restoration of wetlands, streams, and waterways

·         Local priorities in relation to regional environmental management

·         Costal management including mangrove encroachment and erosion mitigation

·         Relationships with Watercare

·         Waste minimisation strategy

·         Bio security

John McLean
Callum Blair
Lisa Whyte
(waste minimisation only)

10

Economic Development / Financial oversight

 

·         Key relationship with Business Development Manager in Auckland Tourism Events and Economic Development team

·         Establish and promote local opportunities for increased tourism and economic development

·         Budgets

·         Project expenditure

·         Monitor GB strategy and Finance

·         Service Levels

·         Local funding policy

Lisa Whyte
Margaret Miles

 

 

 


Upper Harbour Local Board

14 July 2015

 

 

ITEM   TABLE OF CONTENTS                                                                                        PAGE

1          Welcome                                                                                                                         7

2          Apologies                                                                                                                        7

3          Declaration of Interest                                                                                                   7

4          Confirmation of Minutes                                                                                               7

5          Leave of Absence                                                                                                          7

6          Acknowledgements                                                                                                       7

7          Petitions                                                                                                                          7

8          Deputations                                                                                                                    7

9          Public Forum                                                                                                                  7

10        Extraordinary Business                                                                                                7

11        Notices of Motion                                                                                                          8

12        Meeting Minutes Upper Harbour Local Board, Tuesday 23 June 2015                  9

13        Auckland Transport Report - July 2015 - Upper Harbour                                      21

14        Proposed Right of Way Easement over Part Kells Park, Albany                           33

15        New Road Name Approval for the Residential Subdivision by Whenuapai Village Limited at 34, 36-38 Brigham Creek Road and 2, 4, 6 and 8 Dale Road, Whenuapai.        47

16        Upper Harbour Parks Work Programme                                                                  53

17        Swimming Pool Fencing Exemption – Special Exemption (Section 6) Fencing of Swimming Pools Act 1987                                                                                          59

18        Board Members' Reports                                                                                         113  

19        Consideration of Extraordinary Items 

 

 


1          Welcome

 

2          Apologies

 

An apology from Member MA Miles has 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 Upper Harbour Local Board:

a)         confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Tuesday, 23 June 2015, including the confidential section, as a true and correct record.

 

 

5          Leave of Absence

 

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

 

6          Acknowledgements

 

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

 

7          Petitions

 

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

 

8          Deputations

 

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

 


Upper Harbour Local Board

14 July 2015

 

 

Meeting Minutes Upper Harbour Local Board, Tuesday 23 June 2015

 

File No.: CP2015/09884

 

  

Purpose

The open unconfirmed minutes of the Upper Harbour Local Board meeting held on Tuesday, 23 June 2015, are attached at item 12 of the Agenda for the information of the Board only.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a)      note that the open unconfirmed minutes of the Upper Harbour Local Board meeting held on Tuesday, 23 June 2015 are attached at Item 12 of the agenda for the information of the board only, and will be confirmed under item 4 of the agenda.

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

23062015, Upper Harbour Local Board unconfirmed minutes -09062015

11

      

Signatories

Authors

Suad Allie – Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Eric Perry – Relationship Manager

 


Upper Harbour Local Board

14 July 2015

 

 










Upper Harbour Local Board

14 July 2015

 

 

Auckland Transport Report - July 2015 - Upper Harbour

 

File No.: CP2015/13136

 

  

Purpose

1.       The purpose of the report is to respond to Upper Harbour 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 Upper Harbour 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 local board and community.

3.       In particular, this report provides an update on:

·        consultation documents on proposed safety improvements;

·        media; and

·        issues register.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a)      receive the Auckland Transport Report – July 2015.

Comments

Consultation documents on proposed safety improvements

4.       Consultation documents for the following proposals have been provided to the Upper Harbour Local Board for its feedback.  As the local board’s transport portfolio holders provide feedback on the local board’s behalf, the material below is included for general information purposes only.

5.       Tawa Drive, Rosedale – Consultation Plan

Proposed ‘No Stopping at All Times (NSAAT)’ restriction/clearway - Due to high demand for traffic entering Tawa Drive from the northern catchment during the morning peak, it is proposed to provide a clearway from 7:00am to 9:30am Monday to Friday on the eastern side of Tawa Road (refer Attachment A for visual description). 

6.       Clearwater Cove, West Harbour – Consultation Plan

Proposed ‘No Stopping at All Times (NSAAT)’ restriction – To address concerns by residents regarding visibility issues due to vehicles parking along Clearwater Cove, it is proposed to install NSAAT restrictions as shown in the attached photo (refer Attachment B).


 

7.       Reflection Drive West Harbour – Consultation Plan

Proposed ‘No Stopping at All Times (NSAAT)’ restriction To address concerns by residents regarding accessibility issues due to vehicles parking at the intersection of Reflection Drive and Clearwater Cove, it is proposed to install NSAAT restrictions as shown in the attached photo (refer Attachment C).

Media

Consultation on the North Shore’s New Network opens open

8.       What’s in store for the Shore?

·          Four new frequent services across key routes.

·          More buses during morning and evening peak times on the Northern Busway.

·          Additional double decker buses on busway services.

·          In the future all North Shore buses entering and exiting the city will follow one of three different routes.    

9.       Public feedback is crucial to creating a network that benefits Aucklanders.

10.     Auckland Transport (AT) is asking people to look beyond their personal journey and weigh the benefits of the New Network as a whole.  However AT does need to know if the new services will get people where they need to go. 

11.     The launch of the North Shore New Network is planned for 2017, but the time for feedback is now.

12.     The public submission period for the North Shore New Network closed on 13 July.  North Shore residents were sent a copy of the consultation brochure along with a map in their mail box.  Alternatively the documents were available on the AT’s website at (www.aucklandtransport.govt.nz).

 

Issues Update

13.     The following Issues Update comprises issues raised by Upper Harbour Local Board members and Local Board Services staff:

Location

Issue

Status

East Coast Rd

·     Local board requested footpath between 894 and 896 East Coast Road be constructed via funding from Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF) ($35,000).

·      Public consultation carried out.

·      AT worked with several local residents. over a couple of identified issues.

·      Start date to be determined internally (AT). 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hobsonville Road Footpath opposite old petrol station

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

·      Reported as dangerous for pedestrians. 

 

 

 

 

 

·      AT has temporarily fixed the hazards to make these locations safe for pedestrians.

·      In addition, AT’s area engineers are conducting further investigations and monitoring, during the ongoing development in the area.

·      Monitoring will be on-going until the area is fully developed.

The Avenue/SH17 intersection, Albany

Request for safety assessment of The Avenue/SH17 intersection, Albany.

·      Scoping investigation phase complete.

·      Feasibility study complete.

·      Scheme assessment complete

·      The detail design was programmed for the 2013/2014 and 2014/2015 financial years and was expected to take about 9 months to complete.

·      However, the project is not included in the current Long-term Plan (LTP) 2015/2025 or proposed Rapid Land Transport Plan (RLTP).

·      AT and the board are working to see if this project can be brought forward.

·      As part of the State Highway revocation agreement, NZTA has agreed to fund approximately 50% of the project, which should enable AT to raise the priority of the project.

Lucas Creek Bridge design

·     The board has requested an opportunity to see the designs for the proposed strengthening and widening and The Avenue upgrade 

·    Workshop with the board to be held once plans available.

 

Consideration

Local board views and implications

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

Māori impact statement

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

Implementation

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

General

17.     The activities detailed in this report do not trigger the Significance Policy.  All programmes and activities are within budget/in line with council’s Annual Plan and Long-term Plan documents, and there are no legal or legislative implications arising from the activities detailed in this report.

 


 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Tawa Drive, Albany

25

bView

Clearwater Cove West Harbour

29

cView

Reflection Drive West Harbour

31

     

Signatories

Authors

Ivan Trethowen – Auckland Transport Elected Member Relationship Manager

Authorisers

Roger Wilson – Council Engagement Manager, Auckland Transport

Eric Perry – Relationship Manager

 

 


Upper Harbour Local Board

14 July 2015

 

 





Upper Harbour Local Board

14 July 2015

 

 


Upper Harbour Local Board

14 July 2015

 

 



Upper Harbour Local Board

14 July 2015

 

 

Proposed Right of Way Easement over Part Kells Park, Albany

 

File No.: CP2015/11563

 

  

Purpose

1.       The purpose of this report is for the Upper Harbour Local Board to grant approval regarding a right of way easement over part Kells Park.

Executive Summary

2.       The proposed development at 243, 245 and 247 Dairy Flat Highway requires rear access over part of Kells Park to its basement car parking. The land is located between the Kells Park carpark and Dairy Flat Highway, and adjoins the north-western boundary of Kells Lane (refer Attachment A – Site Aerial)

3.       An existing easement of right of way serves only one of the three properties in the development.  It is proposed to substitute with an easement to legalise access for all three properties over part of Kells Lane and through the public car parking area (refer Attachment D).

4.       In addition to the proposed substitute easement, two easement strips are to be created over parts of the development site in favour of council’s reserve land.  These provide for the proposed widening of the public carpark area.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a)      provide landowner consent and support the creation of the proposed easement “A” over part Kells Park in favour of the properties at 243, 245 and 247 Dairy Flat Highway, being Lot 1 DP38729, Lot 1 DP148906 and Lot 1 DP66714, and the simultaneous extinguishing of the existing easement in favour of the property at 245 Dairy Flat Highway, Lot 1 DP148906, as shown on DP91102.

b)      provide landowner consent and support the creation of easements “B” and “C” in favour of council’s reserve land as shown on the plan of proposed easements (61172-GE-004 Sheet 2) for the purpose of improving public car parking, and anticipates that the payment of a proportional share of on-going maintenance costs will be provided for in the easement document.

 

 

Comments

5.       The owners of the land at 243, 245 and 247 Dairy Flat Highway have proposed a comprehensive redevelopment of the three parcels of land creating 49 apartments plus an element of commercial and retail development in seven blocks (refer Attachment B – renders of development and Attachment C – final carpark plan (1)).

6.       The proposed redevelopment relies upon vehicular access from the Kells Park carpark to a basement carpark containing 146 vehicle spaces, spanning all three properties.  It also relies to some extent on circular traffic movements passing through the middle of the development and to and from the carpark via Kells Lane.

7.       In March 1980, the Takapuna City Council approved an easement of right of way over part of Kells Lane and part of the public carpark, providing a legal means of access to the rear of 245 Dairy Flat Highway.  This easement was registered in 1981.  As the existing easement over Areas A and B on DP91102 applies only to 245 Dairy Flat Highway (Lot 1 DP148906), it is proposed that this be replaced by a new easement that will include all three areas of land in the development as dominant tenements (Lot 1 DP38729, Lot 1 DP148906 and Lot 1 DP66714), which will formalise legal access for the occupants of the entire development over the relevant part of the reserve (refer Attachment D - existing and proposed easements - Sheet 1 for the existing easement and Sheet 2 for the proposed substitute easement plan).  

8.       The proposed (substitute) easement plan is tailored to include only the areas of vehicle carriageway required for the purposes of the right.  The plan excludes areas of public   landscaping contained in the original easement area, but the area covered by the proposed easement will remain much the same.

9.       Rights of way over two strips of private land are being granted by the developers to Auckland Council for the purpose of widening the public carpark.  The parking requirements for the development are fully met within the development land without reliance on the public car parking area, save for the provision of a loading zone on the alignment of the central access through the development.  Because this will be only sporadically occupied for short periods, visual and pedestrian connectivity between the park and the development will be enhanced to public benefit. This connectivity can be appreciated from viewing the renders (refer Attachment B).

10.     The existing easement would be extinguished at the time the new easement is registered.

11.     As the easement essentially replaces an existing easement without material alteration or affecting the rights of the public in respect of the reserve, it is considered that public notification under s48 of the Reserves Act 1977 is not required. 

Consideration

Local board views and implications

12.     The Upper Harbour Local Board has approved the allocation of accumulated parking funds for the partial reconstruction and extension of the existing public car parking area.  This includes the establishment of a rain garden for stormwater from that area, footpath modifications and the replacement of the old toilet block in a new location.

Māori impact statement

13.     Part of Kells Park and 247 Dairy Flat Highway have an overlay in the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan (PAUP) as a site or place of value to mana whenua.  The developers consulted with iwi as part of their resource consent application.  Earthworks on or within 50m of a site or place of value to mana whenua is a restricted discretionary activity under the PAUP.  Relevant iwi were notified of the application to determine whether any required a cultural impact assessment (CIA) to be undertaken.  Responses were received from the following:

·    Ngati Whatua o Kaipara replied stating that their korero is given provided three conditions are incorporated into the application:

(1)     Ngati Whatua o Kaipara will be notified prior to commencement of works in order that tikanga may be observed.

(2)     Provision shall be made for further input from Ngati Whatua o Kaipara concerning the trees and vegetation to be included in the design.

(3)     The use of teo reo Maori where appropriate.

·    Te Runanga o Ngati Whatua o Kaipara stated that they will defer their interests in the proposal to Ngati Whatua o Kaipara to minimise any duplication of effort.


 

14.     The applicant amended the proposal to offer these conditions as recommended by Ngati Whatua o Kaipara.  It is noted that the preparation of a CIA for the proposal has not been requested by any of the relevant iwi.  As a result, it is considered that any adverse effects on mana whenua or on the historic heritage of the area will be less than minor.

Implementation

15.     There will be no financial implications involving increased council costs beyond the approved contribution of the local board’s car parking funds and the existing maintenance requirements applicable to Kells Park improvements.  Schedule 5 of the Property Law Act provides for the construction and repair of private ways.  Maintenance costs can be shared and a condition can be imposed to clarify an appropriate requirement in this regard.  This would be addressed by the Manager Local Sports Parks – North in providing formal approval subject to conditions under delegated authority.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Site Aerial

37

bView

Renders of development

39

cView

Final Carpark Plan

43

dView

Exiting and Proposed Easements

45

     

Signatories

Authors

Stanley Bolton – Park & Recreation Advisor

Authorisers

Mark Bowater – Manager Local and Sports Parks

Eric Perry – Relationship Manager

 


Upper Harbour Local Board

14 July 2015

 

 



Upper Harbour Local Board

14 July 2015

 

 


Upper Harbour Local Board

14 July 2015

 

 


Upper Harbour Local Board

14 July 2015

 

 


Upper Harbour Local Board

14 July 2015

 

 


Upper Harbour Local Board

14 July 2015

 

 


Upper Harbour Local Board

14 July 2015

 

 


Upper Harbour Local Board

14 July 2015

 

 

New Road Name Approval for the Residential Subdivision by Whenuapai Village Limited at 34, 36-38 Brigham Creek Road and 2, 4, 6 and 8 Dale Road, Whenuapai.

 

File No.: CP2015/12762

 

  

Purpose

1.       The purpose of this report is to seek approval from the Upper Harbour Local Board for 11 new road names for roads created by way of subdivision at 34, 36-38 Brigham Creek Road and 2, 4, 6 and 8 Dale Road, Whenuapai.

Executive Summary

2.       Auckland Council has road naming guidelines that set out the requirements and criteria that council will consider when road names are proposed. These requirements and criteria have been applied in this situation to ensure consistency of road naming across Auckland region.

3.       Following assessment against the road naming criteria, the road names listed in the table below were determined to meet the road naming policy criteria:

Road Number

Preferred New Road Name

Meaning

Alternative Road Name

Meaning

1

Whenuapai Drive

Reflects the existing township

Dame Whina Cooper Drive

Maori Icon

2

Tamiro Road

To twist

Ara Pupurangi Kauri Road

Kauri snail trail

3

Rarawaru Road

One of the inlets into Whenuapai from the Waitemata

Te Ahua Kauri Road

Kauri presence

4

Kainga Lane

Village, relates to Whenuapai Village

Whenua Lane

Land, home or country

5

Kotukutuku Avenue

Another inlet of the Waitemata

Maramara Avenue

Chip or splinter

6

McEwan Street

Family from the area who came to NZ in 1853

Peka Street

Branch

7

Ripeka Lane

Cross for cross road

Kaapia Lane

Gum, relates to Kauri gum

8

Harewood Street

The main place planes in Whenuapai flew to and from

Huarakau Street

Cone, refers to the Totara cone

11

Takatapui Street

Friendly, friendship within the community

Kakano Street

Seed, relates to the seed of the Totara

12

Te Kopuru Road

Sweet smelling Moss

Pamu Road

Farmland, refers to the use of the land before development

14

Roundel Crescent

Emblem on wings of Airforce planes

Ouenuku Crescent

Rainbow

 

4.       Local iwi groups were consulted, but only two responses were received, one from Ngai Tai Ki Tamaki, confirming they had no interest in the matter and a telephone call from Ngati Whatua approving all of the suggested names.

5.       The names shown in the table above have been proposed by the applicant, and are recommended for approval by the local board.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a)      consider for approval pursuant to Section 319(1)(j), of the Local Government Act 1974, the preferred new road names in the table below, proposed by the applicant, for the eleven new roads created by way of subdivision at 34, 36-38 Brigham Creek Road and 2, 4, 6 and 8 Dale Road, Whenuapai, while noting that the alternative road names also meet the road naming criteria.

Road Number

Preferred New Road Name

Meaning

1

Whenuapai Drive

Reflects the existing township

2

Tamiro Road

To twist

3

Rarawaru Road

One of the inlets into Whenuapai from the Waitemata

4

Kainga Lane

Village, relates to Whenuapai Village

5

Kotukutuku Avenue

Another inlet of the Waitemata

6

McEwan Street

Family from the area who came to NZ in 1853

7

Ripeka Lane

Cross for cross road

8

Harewood Street

The main place planes in Whenuapai flew to and from

11

Takatapui Street

Friendly, friendship within the community

12

Te Kopuru Road

Sweet smelling Moss

14

Roundel Crescent

Emblem on wings of Airforce planes

 

 

 

Comments

6.       The Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines allowed that where a new road needs to be named as a result of a subdivision or development, the sub-divider / developer shall be given the opportunity of suggesting a preferred new road name for council’s approval.

7.       In 2014, Auckland Council approved an application for a combined land use and subdivision consent to undertake a subdivision creating 187 residential allotments over 4 stages at 34, 36-38 Brigham Creek Road and 2, 4, 6 and 8 Dale Road, Whenuapai. The subdivision contains 11 roads that provide access to all residential allotments. The consent holder has proposed to label the roads as shown in the table above.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

Decision Making

 

8.       Auckland Council, by way of the Auckland Council Long-term Plan 2012-2022, allocated the responsibility for the naming of new roads, pursuant to Section 319(1)9j) of the Local Government Act 1974, to local boards.

9.       The applicant’s proposed road names have been assessed against the criteria set out in the Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines.

10.     All of the above preferred new road names and alternative road names meet the criteria set out in the guidelines.

11.     As the applicant’s preferred new road names meets the criteria, it is recommended for consideration for approval while noting that the names supported by iwi (alternative road names), are also appropriate as they comply with the guidelines.

12.     The decision sought from the Upper Harbour Local Board does not trigger council’s Significance Policy, and is not considered to have any immediate impact on the community.

13.     Consultation was undertaken with NZ Post and all suggested names were accepted.

Māori impact statement

14.     The decision sought from the Upper Harbour Local Board is linked to the Auckland Plan outcome, “A Maori identity that is Auckland’s point of difference in the world”. The use of Maori names for roads, buildings and other public places is an opportunity to publicly demonstrate Maori identity.

15.     Local iwi were consulted, but only two responses were received, one from Ngai Tai Ki Tamaki, confirming they had no interest in the matter, and a telephone call from Ngati Whatua approving all of the suggested names

Implementation

16.     The Resource Consenting team is involved in ensuring that the appropriate road name signage will be installed accordingly, once an approval is obtained for new road names.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Whenuapai Village

51

     

Signatories

Authors

Andrew Foley – Subdivision Advisor

Authorisers

Ian Smallburn – Grneral Manager Resource Consents

Eric Perry – Relationship Manager

 


Upper Harbour Local Board

14 July 2015

 

 



Upper Harbour Local Board

14 July 2015

 

 

Upper Harbour Parks Work Programme

 

File No.: CP2015/09766

 

  

Purpose

1.       To present the 2015/2016 Parks capital works programme for endorsement and approval by the Upper Harbour Local Board.

Executive Summary

2.       The proposed draft annual work programme for 2015/2016 has been developed in line with the Long-term Plan (LTP) 2015-2025.  This was approved by the Budget Committee on 8 May and ratified by the Governing Body on 25 June 2015.

3.       The work programme includes capital works and renewals as well as locally driven initiatives (LDI) proposals that have been approved in principle by the Upper Harbour Local Board at a workshop held on 19 May 2015.

4.       The programme excludes candidate projects to be funded through the discretionary capex budget, as well as any external funding.

5.       The proposed work programme presented is based on LTP budget information and excludes deferrals from the financial year 2014/2015.  The work programme information is strategic to enable staff to further scope projects in detail and set priorities, which will be reported back to the Parks portfolio holders prior to works commencing.

6.       This report also seeks flexibility in project scoping by acknowledging that asset conditions are dynamic and subject to change.  Staff require the ability to amend the priorities for asset renewals to accommodate unforeseen circumstances, effectively deliver the renewals work programme, and mitigate against unforeseen health and safety issues.  Should priorities change from those identified and approved; updates will be brought to Parks portfolio holder meetings throughout the year.

 

 

Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a)      approve the 2015/2016 parks capital works programme as outlined in Attachment A of this report.

b)      delegate to the Parks portfolio lead the authority to approve the reprioritisation of existing asset renewals, if required, as informed by current condition assessments for the 2015/2016 financial year.

c)      delegate to the Upper Harbour Local Board Parks portfolio lead authority to approve design drawings and for new development projects in the 2015/2016 financial year.

 

 

 

Comments

7.       The Parks capital works programme for 2015/2016 has been developed in line with the draft LTP, which was approved by the Budget Committee on 8 May 2015 and ratified by the Governing Body on 25 June 2015.


 

8.       The proposed programmes is also in alignment with the following strategic documents :

·    the Auckland Plan;

·    Upper Harbour Local Board Local Board Plan;

·    the Sport and Recreation Strategic Action Plan; and

·    the Parks and Open Spaces Strategic Action Plan.

 

9.       The renewals programme is driven by asset condition and the results of recent survey information.  Assets in the poorest condition are given priority.  Renewals cover several asset groups and include coastal structures, sports fields, playground, public toilet, car park and horticultural renewals.  Staff attended a renewal workshop with the Upper Harbour Local board on 7 April 2015, at which a draft renewals work programme for the 2015/2016 year was presented.  The draft renewals work programme highlighted any potential assets at risk within the Upper Harbour Local Board area.

10.     The condition of park assets is dynamic and subject to factors beyond control (weather events, vandalism, theft etc.).  Flexibility is therefore recommended to address unforeseen and urgent renewals, in particular where they pose a health and safety risk.

11.     A prioritised list of assets for scoping has been identified and is presented in Attachment A. The prioritisation is based on the condition of the assets.  The information provided is the best information available to date, whilst recognising that as time progresses updated information will be verified as part of asset management best practice.  Should renewal priorities change from those identified and approved, updates will be brought to the local board throughout the year and approval sought from the Parks portfolio holders to amend the work programme as required.

12.     At a workshop on 5 May 2015 a number of candidate LDI projects and initiatives were presented for consideration.  Further discussions on candidate projects for both LDI and discretionary funding will be undertaken over the coming months.

13.     A Central Risk Fund has been developed as part of council-wide project management protocols for the 2015/2016 financial year.  As a centrally managed contingency fund, it will be used to support capital projects that may be impacted or delayed by unexpected (and financially) un-planned risks occurring.  5% of the project’s budget will be held centrally, in order to mitigate against these unexpected risks.

 

Consideration

Local board views and implications

14.     It is anticipated that the local board is supportive in principle of the proposed work programme.

15.     Council approved the draft LTP budgets to include savings identified through reduction in levels of service within council parks maintenance contracts.  At a workshop on the 9 June, the local board agreed in principle not to allocate LDI funding to maintain existing levels of service within the Upper Harbour Local Board area.


 

Māori impact statement

16.     Parks and open spaces contribute to Maori well-being, values, culture and traditions.  Where any aspects of the work programme are anticipated to have an impact on tangata whenua, appropriate engagement and involvement in decision making will follow.  The impacts on Maori from each project will be assessed during the consultation phases and reported back to the local board.

Implementation

17.     Following approval of the work programme, staff will initiate planning and implementation to facilitate delivery within the 2015/2016 financial year.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Upper Harbour Work Programme 2015 16

57

     

Signatories

Authors

Tony Hart – Parks Advisor

Authorisers

Ian Maxwell – General Manager Parks, Sports and Recreation

Eric Perry – Relationship Manager

 



Upper Harbour Local Board

14 July 2015

 

 



Upper Harbour Local Board

14 July 2015

 

 

Swimming Pool Fencing Exemption – Special Exemption (Section 6) Fencing of Swimming Pools Act 1987

 

File No.: CP2015/13202

 

  

Purpose

1.       The purpose of this report is to present the Upper Harbour Local Board with applications for special exemptions from some of the requirements of the Fencing of Swimming Pools Act 1987 (the Act).

Executive summary

2.       The Upper Harbour Local Board Swimming Pool Fencing Exemption Working Party, consisting of the Members Neeson, Blair and Rankin-Macintyre were requested to consider five applications for special exemption under section 6 of the Fencing of Swimming Pools Act 1987.

3.       After consideration of the applications, the working party recommendations are as follows:

·        5 Shiloh Way, Greenhithe (spa pool): recommended to grant the application with the condition that clause (a –k) is met at all times; that the lock is repaired; the spa remain in the same location as on the day of inspection; and is granted to current owner.

 

·        12 Advance Way, Albany (spa pool): recommended to grant the application with the condition that clause (a –k) is met at all times; that the spa remains in the same position on the day of inspection; and is granted to current owner.

 

·        23 Elmore Road, Paremoremo (spa pool): recommended to grant the application with the condition that clause (a –k) is met at all times; that the bench and steps be moved 1.2m away from the spa; that it remain in the same location as the day of inspection and is granted to current owner.

 

·        32 Hobson Road, Lucas Heights (spa pool): recommended to grant the application with the condition that clause (a –k) is met at all times; that the steps be moved 1.2m away from the spa; that it remain in the same location as the day of inspection and is granted to current owner.

 

·        95 Rame Road, Greenhithe (gate opening into pool area): recommended to grant the application with the condition that it is kept in good working condition at all times and is granted to current owner.

 

 

Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a)      receive the report.

b)      receive the applications by the owners of:

i)        5 Shiloh Way, Greenhithe

ii)       12 Advance Way, Albany

iii)      23 Elmore Road, Paremoremo

iv)      32 Hobson Road, Lucas Heights

v)      95 Rame Road, Greenhithe

c)      determine each application, by way of resolution, to:

i)        grant the application for special exemption as sought, or

ii)       grant the application subject to conditions, or

iii)      decline the application for special exemption sought.

 

Comments

 

4.       Each property, which is the subject of an application before the local board, has been inspected by Auckland Council pool inspectors.  In each case, the swimming / spa pool fencing does not comply with the Act.  The details of non-compliance in each case vary and are specified in the attachments to this report.  Each applicant has chosen to seek a special exemption from the requirements of the Act.

5.       The purpose of the Act is stated to be “to promote the safety of young children by requiring the fencing of … swimming pools”.

6.       The Act requires pool owners to fence their pool with a fence.  Specific detail on the means of achieving compliance with the Act is contained in the schedule to the Act.  If a pool is not fenced with a complying fence it is an offence under the Act, unless exempt.

7.       An exemption can only be granted by the local board after consideration of the particular characteristics of the property and the pool, other relevant circumstances and taking into account any conditions it may impose.  Then, only if satisfied that an exemption would not significantly increase the danger to young children, can an exemption be granted.

8.       Defining the immediate pool area will be relevant to considerations concerning the property and the pool. The immediate pool area means the land in or on which the pool is situated and as much of the surrounding area that is used for activities or purposes related to the use of the pool.  The Act provides that the fence should be situated to prevent children moving directly to the pool from the house, other buildings, garden paths and other areas of the property that would normally be available to young children.

9.       Another common consideration for local boards in exemption applications will be instances where a building forms part of the pool fence.  Where doors from a building open into the pool area, council may grant an exemption from compliance using clauses 8 to 10 of the schedule to the Act.  Council may exempt, if it is satisfied that compliance with the Act is impossible, unreasonable or in breach of any other Act, regulation or bylaw, and the door is fitted with a locking device that when properly operated prevents the door from being readily opened by children under the age of 6 years. If the local board is satisfied that a door within a wall in a building meets that test, the local board must also be satisfied that an exemption would not significantly increase the danger to young children.

10.     When granting a special exemption, the local board may impose such other conditions relating to the property or the pool as are reasonable in the circumstances (section 6(2) of the Act).  Issues to be considered include:

a)      Will the exemption be personal to the applicant so that on a sale of the property a new owner will need to apply for a new exemption?  This might be appropriate where the personal circumstances of the applicant have been considered as a relevant circumstance and had a bearing on the exercise of the discretion.

b)      Will the exemption be granted for a fixed term and regardless of changes of ownership so that the exemption runs with the property?

c)      Are there any other conditions which should be imposed, such as repairs to existing fencing, or a requirement for more frequent inspection of the pool (currently pools are inspected every three years)?

11.     Any exemption granted or condition imposed may be amended or revoked by the local board by resolution.  The rules of natural justice would, however, dictate that this action should not be taken without prior notice to the pool owner and allowing the pool owner an opportunity to be heard.

Consideration

12.     The recommendations contained within this report fall within the local board’s delegated authority.

13.     The Act enables an exemption to be granted from clauses 8 to 10 of the Act (doors in walls of buildings) if the local board is satisfied that compliance with the Act is impossible, unreasonable or in breach of any other Act, regulation or bylaw and the door is fitted with a locking device that when properly operated prevents the door from being readily opened by children under the age of 6 years.

14.     The overarching consideration in terms of the Act is that a resolution to grant an exemption may only be made after having regard to the particular characteristics of the property and the pool, any other relevant circumstances and any conditions it may impose, and only if it is satisfied that such an exemption would not significantly increase the danger to young children.

15.     The local board may resolve to grant, grant subject to conditions, or decline an application for special exemption.

16.     If an application is declined the applicant will be required to fence their pool in accordance with the Act.  The exemption hearing process under the Act does not trigger the Significance Policy, but it is an important statutory function.

17.     Auckland Council is committed to ensuring that Auckland is a safe place for children to live and play.  Pool fencing issues have a strong relationship with council’s strategic priorities for community safety.

Local board views and implications

18.     The local board is the decision maker in relation to exemption applications under the Act.

Māori impact statement

19.     This report does not raise issues of particular significance for Maori.

General

20.     Compliance with the Act is a mandatory requirement for all pool owners unless exempt.

21.     Council’s pools inspectors have consulted with the applicants in each case.  Applicants have been made aware of council’s requirements to ensure fencing is compliant with the Act.  The applicants have elected to seek a special exemption for individual reasons.

Implementation

22.     The decision must be made by resolution and contain conditions (if any).


 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

5 Shiloh Way, Greenhithe

63

bView

12 Advance Way, Albany

71

cView

23 Elmore Road, Paremoremo

79

dView

32 Hobson Road, Lucas Heights

89

eView

95 Rame Road, Greenhithe

99

     

Signatories

Authors

Phillip Curtis – Senior Swimming Pool Specialist

Authorisers

Barry Smedts – Manager Compliance

Eric Perry – Relationship Manager

 


Upper Harbour Local Board

14 July 2015

 

 









Upper Harbour Local Board

14 July 2015

 

 









Upper Harbour Local Board

14 July 2015

 

 










Upper Harbour Local Board

14 July 2015

 

 











Upper Harbour Local Board

14 July 2015

 

 














Upper Harbour Local Board

14 July 2015

 

 

Board Members' Reports

 

File No.: CP2015/01525

 

  

Executive summary

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

[Note: This is an information item and if the board wishes any action to be taken under this item, a written report must be provided for inclusion on the agenda.]

 

Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a)      receive the verbal board members’ reports.

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.    

Signatories

Authors

Suad Allie – Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Eric Perry – Relationship Manager