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

 

Date:

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

 

Thursday, 15 November 2018

3.00pm

St Chads Church and Community Centre
38 St Johns Road
Meadowbank

 

Ōrākei Local Board

 

OPEN AGENDA

 

 

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Chairperson

Kit Parkinson

 

Deputy Chairperson

Carmel Claridge

 

Members

Troy Churton

 

 

Colin Davis, JP

 

 

Toni Millar, QSM, JP

 

 

Ros Rundle

 

 

David Wong, JP

 

 

(Quorum 4 members)

 

 

 

Kim  Lawgun

Democracy Advisor

 

7 November 2018

 

Contact Telephone: 021 302 163

Email: kim.lawgun@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

 

 


 

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

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

8.1     Deputation - Ellerslie Affiliated Football Club                                                  5

8.2     Deputation - Community Facility in Stonefields                                               6

9          Public Forum                                                                                                                  6

10        Extraordinary Business                                                                                                6

11        Trial of online voting at the 2019 local elections                                                       9

12        Local government elections 2019 – order of names on voting documents         21

13        Ōrākei Quick Response Round One 2018/2019 grant applications                       31

14        Ngahue Reserve - Oceania Football Confederation Updated Stage 2 Development Proposal                                                                                                                        41

15        Auckland Council's Quarterly Performance Report: Ōrākei Local Board for quarter one                                                                                                                                 57

16        Auckland Regional Pest Management Plan consultation feedback and recommended changes                                                                                              89

17        Auckland Transport November 2018 update                                                          119

18        Feedback on proposed topics for inclusion in the Auckland Water Strategy   139

19        Draft Contributions Policy                                                                                        157

20        Update on development at 471 Riddell Road, Glendowie                                     169

21        Regional Facilities Auckland Fourth Quarter Performance Report for the quarter ending 30 June 2018                                                                                                  199

22        Chairperson's Report                                                                                                223

23        Board Member Report – Carmel Claridge - November 2018                                241

24        Board Member Report - Troy Churton November 2018                                        267

25        Board Member Report - Colin Davis                                                                        299

26        Board Member Report – Toni Millar                                                                         301

27        Board Member Report – Ros Rundle                                                                       305

28        Board Member Report – David Wong                                                                      313

29        Governance Forward Work Calendar                                                                      329

30        Ōrākei Local Board Workshop Proceedings                                                          339

31        Resolutions Pending Action                                                                                     353  

32        Consideration of Extraordinary Items 

PUBLIC EXCLUDED

33        Procedural Motion to Exclude the Public                                                               359

C1       Sites and Places of Significance to Mana Whenua – Tranche 1: Plan Changes to the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) and Auckland Council District Plan - Hauraki Gulf Islands Section 2018                                                                           359

C2       The Landing Hardstand – Fees Review – November 2018                                   360  

 


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 minutes of the Ōrākei Local Board meeting held on Thursday, 18 October 2018, be confirmed as true and correct.

 

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 7.7 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 Ōrākei Local Board. This means that details relating to deputations can be included in the published agenda. Total speaking time per deputation is ten minutes or as resolved by the meeting.

 

8.1       Deputation - Ellerslie Affiliated Football Club

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To deliver a presentation to the Board during the Deputation segment of the business meeting.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       Mark Weipers, President of the Ellerslie Affiliated Football Club (AFC) was in attendance to provide a status report on progress regarding the consenting and construction of the Michaels Avenue Reserve stage three amenities/clubrooms complex.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a)      receive the presentation and thank Mark Weipers for his attendance.

 

 

8.2       Deputation - Community Facility in Stonefields

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To deliver a presentation to the Board during the Deputation segment of the business meeting.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       David Ealson will be in attendance to present on the community facility in Stonefields.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a)      receive the presentation and thank David Ealson for his attendance.

 

 

 

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.”


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

Trial of online voting at the 2019 local elections

 

File No.: CP2018/20817

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To seek local board feedback on:

·   the trial of online voting at the 2019 local elections

·   the subset of voters to participate in the online voting trial.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       The postal system is declining. The frequency of postal deliveries is decreasing and the cost of sending mail is surging. An alternative method to postal voting must be put in place to secure the future of local democracy over time. Following the overall trend of transactions and activities moving online, online voting is the natural progression. It will increase convenience and accessibility for voters and has the potential to increase voter turnout.

3.       Following the 24 May 2018 Governing Body’s in-principle support for an online voting trial at the 2019 local body elections, Auckland Council has entered into a collaborative agreement with eight other councils to work together towards the trial.

4.       The project comprises three phases. The first phase, from now to December 2018, includes a procurement process aimed at selecting a preferred provider and all participating councils, seeking their Governing Body’s approval to proceed with the trial based on a full business case.

5.       The security of the online voting solution is paramount. The participating councils are committed to offering a similar or higher level of security than postal voting. The solution will fulfil stringent security requirements and will be designed, implemented and tested with the assistance from external Information and Communications Technology (ICT) security experts.

6.       In the case of Auckland Council, only a specified class of electors (a subset) will be offered to participate in the online voting trial. The other eight councils are intending to offer online voting to all their voters. In all cases, voters will retain the ability to vote by post.

7.       The Local Electoral Matters Bill states that the specified class of electors can be defined according to one or a combination of geographical areas or another common factor, like overseas residence or disability.

8.       The size of the subset is still to be confirmed by the Minister of Local Government, but will likely include between 10 and 30 per cent of Auckland’s voting population.

9.       The subset needs to be representative of the overall voting population. Staff have conducted an analysis of the population across the 21 local board areas based on a range of criteria. The preliminary results (refer Attachments A and B) show that no individual area is perfectly representative and that a combination of several areas will increase the representativeness of the sample of electors.

10.     Staff recommend also including in the subset, the voters that are most disproportionately impacted in their ability to participate with the sole postal method, i.e. the overseas and disabled voters.

11.     This paper seeks local board feedback on the participation of Auckland Council in the trial and on the subset of voters eligible to participate in the trial.

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a)      provide feedback on:

i)        the trial of online voting at the 2019 elections

ii)       the subset of voters to participate in the trial.

 

 

Horopaki / Context

12.     For several years, Auckland Council has been supportive of trialling online voting for local body elections. At its December 2016 meeting, the Finance and Performance Committee resolved to ‘request the Minister of Local Government to explore a pilot trial of an electronic voting system including by-elections’ [resolution number FIN/2016/164].

13.     On 27 July 2017, the Governing Body approved the council’s submission on the previous parliament’s Justice and Electoral Select Committee inquiry into the 2016 local authority elections (which has not concluded yet). The submission advocated for councils to be able to trial online voting [resolution number GB/2017/83]. Local boards provided feedback and input into the submission, with several boards expressing support for online voting.

14.     At its 24 May 2018 meeting, the Governing Body agreed in principle to an online voting trial for the 2019 local body elections, subject to the following conditions:

·   the costs being acceptable

·   the legislation and regulations being in place on time

·   identified risks being manageable

·   the council giving its final approval to proceed.

15.     The Local Electoral Matters Bill, which amends the Electoral Act 1993 and the Local Electoral Act 2001 to enable the conduct of trials of new voting methods is still before Parliament. Councillor Richard Hills and staff made an oral presentation to the Justice Select Committee on Auckland Council’s submission on the bill on 29 August 2018. The select committee is due to report back on 9 November 2018.

16.     The enabling regulations are being drafted. The Department of Internal Affairs (DIA) released an exposure draft of the regulations on 19 October 2018, which is open for consultation until 2 November 2018. Two engagement events for community representatives and stakeholders have been organised in Wellington on 26 October 2018 and Auckland on 31 October 2018.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

Why online voting?

Future-proofing local democracy

17.     The internet has become an integral part of everyday life. Many of the transactions that used to be carried out by post have long been replaced by online options, to the extent that people expect online facilities for their day-to-day activities. Online voting is therefore a natural progression and constitutes an opportunity to modernise the operation of local democracy in New Zealand.

18.     The current postal voting method relies entirely on New Zealand Post providing an effective and reliable service. It is a reality that the postal service is declining. Fewer New Zealanders choose to communicate via post, particularly first time and younger voters, many of whom have never posted a letter. The frequency of delivery is decreasing and the cost of sending mail is surging. The postal cost for the 2019 Auckland local elections will increase by an estimated 77 per cent compared with 2016, because of a postage price increase of almost 60 per cent and an increase in the number of electors of approximately 70,000.

19.     It will become increasingly difficult to deliver postal voting effectively and affordably. Therefore, it is crucial to have a viable alternative to postal voting in place, and online voting is the obvious choice.

Online voting has the potential to increase voter turnout

20.     Voter turnout has been dropping in both national and local elections in New Zealand. In the Auckland 2016 local elections, the voter turnout was 38.5 per cent. This means that almost two out of three eligible electors did not vote.

21.     Online voting has the potential to enhance participation in elections. Auckland Council conducted voter awareness research after the 2016 local elections[1]. The results strongly indicate that if online voting was available, electors would be more inclined to vote.

22.     When asked ‘If you had the choice of online voting or postal voting in the future, which would you prefer?’, 74 per cent of the respondents across all age groups in the 2016 survey said they would prefer online voting to postal voting. Focusing on the non-voter group alone, 82 per cent of respondents said they would prefer online voting to postal voting and 25 per cent said online or app-based voting would make them more likely to vote.

23.     The results reflect an appetite for online voting, particularly when faced with the inconvenience of postal voting: 13 per cent of non-voters (4 per cent of all respondents) completed voting papers but did not post them. Factors such as not knowing where to find a post box, the additional effort of physically taking papers to a post box and the confusion caused by the postal deadline and the actual close of the voting period a few days later, created further barriers to voter participation. Removing these barriers alone would potentially have pushed the overall voter participation in Auckland’s 2016 local elections from 38.5 per cent to 42.5 per cent.

24.     International experience and research demonstrates the positive effect that online voting can have on voter turnout. Some non-voters and infrequent voters are drawn to internet voting in Canada and European countries such as Estonia and Switzerland. This means that some electors who have not voted previously voted for the first time, or on a more regular basis, because online voting was an option.

25.     In Estonian parliamentary elections, turnout has increased by 2.3 per cent since online voting was introduced in 2005. Post-election surveys in Estonia show a large proportion of people indicated they wouldn’t have voted if online voting wasn’t offered.

26.     At the municipal level in Canada, researchers examining online voting over time found that internet voting increased voter turnout by 3.5 per cent.

27.     The introduction of electronic voting for overseas military voters in various United States (US) jurisdictions has resulted in significant improvements in turnout. In Cook County, one of the largest electoral jurisdictions in the US, turnout increased from 11 per cent to 53 per cent after the introduction of internet voting in 2012.

Online voting improves accessibility

28.     Currently, a large part of the disability community requires support to complete and post voting papers. People with vision impairment, for example, cannot vote secretly and without the assistance of a support person. Online voting, coupled with screen-reading technology, would allow them to vote unaided.

29.     International postal timeframes can make it difficult for overseas voters to submit their votes in time. For them as well, online voting would make it easier to participate in the New Zealand local elections.

Online voting offers a better voting experience

30.     Online voting will make the voting process easier and faster, increase the speed and accuracy of results and reduce costs of local elections over time.

31.     Estonia, where online voting has been used in elections from 2005 and is now well established nationwide, has attempted to quantify the efficiency gain for using online voting as opposed to booth voting. It calculated that, in the Estonian parliamentary elections of 2011, the cumulative time savings in online voting were 11,000 working days, or €504,000 ($890,000) in average wages.[2]

32.     Online voting offers the potential to reduce voter errors. Technology can help prevent a voter from accidentally spoiling their ballot or submitting an incorrect or invalid vote.

33.     International experience suggests that a real tangible benefit of online voting is to substantially improve the voting experience of voters, making it more convenient to vote when, where and how they want.

34.     Online voting also offers potential for greater information and engagement. It provides end-to-end verifiability so that a voter is able to verify that their vote was received. These benefits will improve the experience of those who were already intending to vote and has the potential of addressing some of the barriers for non-voters.

Booth voting is not a viable option

35.     Booth voting is provided for in the Local Electoral Act 2001 and is authorised under regulations. However, reverting to booth voting on a single election day as an alternative or complementary option to postal voting is not a viable solution.

36.     Election day is increasingly losing its meaning for people as they want the convenience to vote when it suits them, as shown by the growth in advance voting in recent years’ general elections, with a significant 47 per cent of advance voting at the 2017 general election compared with 29 per cent in 2014 and 15 per cent in 2011.[3]

37.     A third argument against using booth voting for local elections is the complexity of the local election voting process. Compared with parliamentary elections, voting in local government elections takes more thought and more time, making booth voting impractical.

38.     In Auckland for instance, electors need to vote for the Mayor, one or two councillors for their ward, between five and eight local board members, as well as District Health Board (DHB) members and, in some cases, licensing trust members. Using an actual example from the 2016 local elections, a Waitākere Ward/Henderson-Massey Local Board elector had to make a choice between 74 candidates standing for 21 positions, as follows:

·   Mayor: 19 candidates for one position

·   Waitākere Ward: nine candidates for two positions

·   Henderson-Massey Local Board: 24 candidates for eight positions

·   Waitākere Licensing Trust (Ward 2): six candidates for three positions

·   Waitematā DHB: 16 candidates for seven positions.

Making the trial happen

39.     To organise the trial, Auckland Council is partnering with eight other councils. They are Gisborne District Council, Marlborough District Council, Matamata-Piako District Council, Palmerston North City Council, Selwyn District Council, Hamilton City Council, Tauranga City Council and Wellington City Council.

40.     The nine councils have obtained in-principle political and executive approval to trial online voting at the 2019 elections, have formally entered into a participation agreement and have formed an Online Voting Working Party.

41.     The working party is working closely with the DIA to ensure the necessary legislative and regulatory framework is in place on time to enable the proposed trial in 2019.

42.     The working party is following a three-phase approach to organise the trial, as detailed below.

Phase 1 – July to December 2018

43.     The working party is currently developing a business case, which will define the scope and costs of the proposed trial, and explain how any risks to the security and integrity of the solution will be managed. The business case will also outline how the nine councils will share the costs of the trial.

44.     As part of the business case development, the working party issued a request for a proposal to potential suppliers in September 2018. Responses are being evaluated by a panel of representatives from the working party and ICT experts. A preferred provider will be selected by mid-November 2018.

45.     Based on the business case, the governing bodies of the nine councils will be asked to confirm their participation in the trial in December 2018.

46.     In the case of Auckland Council, the business case and paper seeking the approval of the Governing Body will be presented at the 13 December 2018 meeting and will include feedback from local boards.

47.     During this phase, the participating councils are also engaging with the parties that will be involved in the trial, including regional councils, DHBs and licensing trusts. Auckland Council staff have started engaging with representatives from all Auckland DHBs and licensing trusts. Overall, their reaction to the trial has been positive but the additional costs will ultimately be a decisive factor in securing their support.

Phase 2 – January to ‘go/no-go’ date

48.     After the list of participating councils has been confirmed, the councils will enter into an agreement with the provider and start developing the online voting solution.

49.     The trial can only proceed if the regulatory framework is in place on time, otherwise there will be insufficient time to be ready by October 2019. The working party and the supplier will agree the date by which regulations need to be in place for the trial to proceed – the ‘go/no‑go’ date.

50.     If the decision is ‘no-go’, the working party will negotiate with the supplier how to proceed. Options will be to either continue to develop a system to use for any by-elections, or shelve the work for a future trial.

Phase 3 – ‘Go’ date to October 2019

51.     If regulations are in place on time, phase 3 will include:

·   development, testing and audit of the online voting solution

·   deployment of the solution for the elections

·   evaluation of the trial after the elections. 

How it will work in practice

52.     Full details of how the online solution will work and how it will integrate with the election providers’ systems to ensure the integrity of the whole election process is maintained will only be available once the tender process is completed and a vendor has been selected.

53.     The chart below provides an overview of the experience of an elector choosing to cast their vote online:

Security and integrity

54.     No information technology (IT) or voting system is 100 per cent secure, but the Online Voting Working Party is committed to developing an online voting solution that will guarantee a similar or higher level of security than currently offered by postal voting.

55.     The request for proposal to vendors includes stringent requirements to ensure that the integrity and security of the online voting solution will be maintained at all times.

56.     The solution will be independently audited by international IT security experts.

57.     The participating councils are assisted by the former Chief Information Officer for the New South Wales Electoral Commission, which has been using online voting in their state elections, as well as ICT security experts from the Government Chief Digital Office. The participating councils have also enlisted additional external ICT security resources to assist with the evaluation of the vendors’ proposals and, in a later stage, with the design, implementation and testing of the online voting solution.

Selecting a subset of electors eligible to vote online

Why a subset, and what subset

58.     Any new voting system must meet the test of being free, fair and regular, provide for universal, equal and secret suffrage, and be fully trusted by voters. It therefore needs to be robustly tested and trialled.

59.     A trial will also increase public awareness of online voting and enable users to become familiar with the new technology, thereby building trust and credibility in the system. Building trust and gaining support is one of the most critical parts of the process. Without trust, the system will be unusable, and the integrity of the whole electoral system could be called into question.

60.     The Government considers that trialling online voting for the whole Auckland electorate, equalling approximately a third of the New Zealand electorate, is too big a risk. Auckland Council will only be allowed to trial online voting with a specified class of electors (a subset). Choosing a representative sample of eligible voters is therefore important to ensure that evaluation of the trial is robust.

61.     The other eight councils participating in the trial intend to offer online voting to all their voters. In all cases, voters will retain the ability to vote by post.

62.     The Local Electoral Matters Bill states that it is the regulations that will authorise the use of online voting by a specified class of elector for the trial. The bill defines a class of electors as:

·   an area or subdivision in which the specified class of electors is eligible to vote, or

·   any other characteristic that makes online voting suitable for the specified class of electors.

63.     The recommendation to the Governing Body will be to ask the Government that the subset of Auckland electors eligible to vote online be made of:

·   overseas voters

·   people with a disability

·   voters in specific local board areas.

Selection parameters for the subset

Size

64.     The first consideration for defining the subset is its size. The subset should be of reasonable size for implementation and risks to be manageable, but significant enough to enable testing, research and a robust evaluation.

65.     The initial thinking presented to the Governing Body was to include in the sample approximately 110,000 voters, or 10 per cent of the voting population. Estimating the potential uptake based on overseas experience with online voting, it is believed a maximum of 30 per cent of voters within the subset would actually use the solution and vote online. This means an online voting solution would be built for a potential 33,000 voters using the solution; only 3 per cent of the overall Auckland electorate.

66.     It is now being considered to increase the size of the subset to approximately 330,000 voters, or 30 per cent of the voting population. With the same estimated uptake of 30 per cent, approximately 99,000 voters would use the online voting solution; about 9 per cent of the overall Auckland electorate.

67.     Confirmation is pending from the DIA as to how large a subset the Minister of Local Government would allow Auckland Council to include in the trial.

68.     For comparison purposes, the other larger participating councils are the Wellington city and Hamilton city councils, with respectively an approximate 153,000 and 103,000 voters eligible to participate in the online voting trial.

Accessibility

69.     It is considered the trial should benefit those who are most disproportionately impacted in their ability to participate with the single postal method. Therefore, it is recommended having overseas and disabled voters as part of the subset. This group constitutes an estimated 30,000 voters.

70.     Because overseas and disabled voters will be enrolled across the Auckland region, they will potentially vote online for all the wards and local boards.

Representativeness

71.     The subset must be defined in such a way that it cannot call into question the neutrality and integrity of the electoral process or of the elections results.

72.     It needs to be representative of the Auckland voting population, based on a range of criteria that correlate with voter turnout. These include:

·   age

·   ethnicity

·   income

·   education level.

73.     Having a representative sample will also help conduct a more robust evaluation of the trial.

Other considerations

74.     The cost and ease of implementation of the solution must also be considered. The more voters take part in the trial, the higher the cost. Offering online voting as an option to a subset of electors will also require a targeted communication campaign. A complex subset will make communication and logistics costlier and has the potential to confuse voters. Therefore, it is preferable to avoid geographical areas where the boundaries between wards and local boards are no longer aligned, following the review of representation arrangements which is to be implemented for the 2019 local elections.

75.     It was considered whether internet accessibility needed to be a criterion. The most recent data available, which comes from the State of the Internet report released by Internet New Zealand in 2017, shows that 93 per cent of New Zealanders have access to the internet, either at home, work or both. Therefore, it is not a belief that internet accessibility will be an issue for Auckland, except for Great Barrier Island.

Selecting the geographic area(s)

76.     The council’s Research and Evaluation Unit (RIMU) has conducted in-depth statistical analysis of the population across Auckland’s 21 local boards. The analysis compares the population in each local board area against the overall Auckland population using age, ethnicity, income and qualification levels. The results of the analysis are included in Attachments A and B.

77.     The analysis considered the average voter turnout in each area compared to Auckland overall, but this added parameter did not impact the results, so it was removed from the graphs provided for simplicity purposes.

78.     The analysis shows that certain local board areas have a more diverse population make up than others, and that no single board is perfectly representative of the overall Auckland population. The subset will therefore need to be made up of a combination of local board areas, allowing larger discrepancies to cancel each other out and making the sample representative as a whole.

79.     The final combination will depend on the total number of voters allowed in the subset and will be finalised once DIA confirms that number.

80.     The final recommendation on the subset will be presented to the Governing Body at its 13 December 2018 meeting. As part of this paper, local board feedback is being sought on the possibility of this local board area being included in the final subset, to be reported to the Governing Body when they are considering the final recommendation.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe / Local impacts and local board views

81.     Trialling online voting will impact elections in all local boards areas.

82.     Local board feedback will be reported to the Governing Body for consideration when making its final decision regarding the selection of the subset and the continued participation in the trial.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

83.     Voting turnout has historically been lower among Māori than non-Māori. Māori who are younger and less well-off are the least likely to vote.

84.     Findings from a recent qualitative research project focusing on Pacific and Māori revealed that online voting was popular among a large majority of participants. Participants did not express concerns about online voting and some saw the solution as more secure than postal voting.

85.     A representative sample of the Auckland Māori population will be included in the subset to participate in the trial as Māori ethnicity is one of the criteria used to choose the geographic subset.

86.     At this stage, no formal engagement has been conducted with Māori groups and community.  Staff will engage with communities and stakeholders, including Māori, as part of the development of an online voting system should a trial be confirmed to proceed for the 2019 local elections.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

87.     The full costs of implementing an online voting solution will be known after the tender process is completed and a vendor selected.

88.     The budget for the online voting trial is not included in the long-term plan and will require approval from the Governing Body, as the financial decisions relating to election costs is part of its responsibilities. A business case detailing the costs and benefits of participating in the trial will be presented to the Governing Body at its 13 December 2018 meeting.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

89.     Risks and mitigation measures are covered in the analysis section of this paper.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

90.     Feedback from the local boards will be reported to the meeting of the Governing Body on 13 December 2018.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Local board population analysis - graphs

19

      

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Elodie Fontaine - Advisor - Democracy Services

Authorisers

Marguerite Delbet - General Manager Democracy Services

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Ōrākei Local Boards

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

 


 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

Local government elections 2019 – order of names on voting documents

 

File No.: CP2018/20861

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To provide feedback to the Governing Body on how names should be arranged on the voting documents for the Auckland Council 2019 elections.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       The Local Electoral Regulations 2001 provide a local authority the opportunity to decide by resolution whether the names on voting documents are arranged in:

·   alphabetical order of surname

·   pseudo-random order, or

·   random order.

3.       Pseudo-random order means names are listed in a random order and the same random order is used on every voting document.

4.       Random order means names are listed in a random order and a different random order is used on every voting document.

5.       The order of names has been alphabetical for the 2010, 2013 and 2016 Auckland Council elections. An analysis conducted on these election results shows there is no compelling evidence that candidates being listed first were more likely to be elected. The analysis is contained in Attachment A.

6.       Staff recommend that the current approach of alphabetical printing is retained for the 2019 council elections, as the benefits to the voter outweigh any perception of a name order bias problem. 

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a)      recommend to the Governing Body that candidate names on voting documents should be arranged in alphabetical order of surname.

 

Horopaki / Context

Options available

7.       Clause 31 of The Local Electoral Regulations 2001 states:

(1)       The names under which each candidate is seeking election may be arranged on the voting document in alphabetical order of surname, pseudo-random order, or random order.

(2)       Before the electoral officer gives further public notice under section 65(1) of the Act, a local authority may determine, by a resolution, which order, as set out in subclause (1), the candidates' names are to be arranged on the voting document.

(3)       If there is no applicable resolution, the candidates' names must be arranged in alphabetical order of surname.

(4)       If a local authority has determined that pseudo-random order is to be used, the electoral officer must state, in the notice given under section 65(1) of the Act, the date, time, and place at which the order of the candidates' names will be arranged and any person is entitled to attend.

(5)       In this regulation,—

pseudo-random order means an arrangement where—

(a) the order of the names of the candidates is determined randomly; and

(b) all voting documents use that order

random order means an arrangement where the order of the names of the candidates is determined randomly or nearly randomly for each voting document by, for example, the process used to print each voting document.

Previous elections

8.       In 2013, the council resolved to use alphabetical order of names. A key consideration was an additional cost of $100,000 if the council chose the random order.

9.       In 2016, there was only a minimal additional cost to use random order due to changes in printing technology. An analysis of the 2013 election results was conducted to assess whether there were any effects due to being listed first. The analysis showed there was no compelling evidence of bias towards those listed first. Most local board feedback was to continue listing candidates alphabetically and the Governing Body resolved to use alphabetical order.

10.     All district health boards in the Auckland Council area decided to use random order of names. In the voting pack that Auckland electors received, voting documents for Auckland Council elections were alphabetical and voting documents for district health board elections were random.

11.     The following table shows the order decided by city and regional councils for the 2016 elections:

Auckland Council

Alphabetical

Hawke's Bay Regional Council

Alphabetical

Invercargill City Council

Alphabetical

Manawatu-Wanganui Regional Council

Alphabetical

Northland Regional Council

Alphabetical

Southland Regional Council

Alphabetical

Taranaki Regional Council

Alphabetical

Upper Hutt City Council

Alphabetical

West Coast Regional Council

Alphabetical

Bay of Plenty Regional Council

Random

Christchurch City Council

Random

Dunedin City Council

Random

Canterbury Regional Council

Random

Hamilton City Council

Random

Hutt City Council

Random

Napier City Council

Random

Nelson City Council

Random

Otago Regional Council

Random

Palmerston North City Council

Random

Porirua City Council

Random

Tauranga City Council

Random

Waikato Regional Council

Random

Wellington City Council

Random

Wellington Regional Council

Random

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

Options for 2019

Pseudo-random order and random order

12.     Random order printing removes the perception of name order bias, but the pseudo-random order of names simply substitutes a different order for an alphabetical order. Any perceived first-name bias will transfer to the name at the top of the pseudo-random list. The only effective alternative to alphabetical order is random order.

13.     A disadvantage to both the random printing options is voter confusion as it is not possible for the supporting documents such as the directory of candidate profile statements to follow the order of a random voting paper. Making voting more difficult carries the risk of deterring the voter from taking part.

Alphabetical order

14.     The advantage of the alphabetical order printing is that it is familiar, easier to use and to understand. When there is a large number of candidates competing for a position, it is easier for a voter to find the candidate the voter wishes to support if names are listed alphabetically.

15.     It is also easier for a voter if the order of names on the voting documents follows the order of names in the directory of candidate profile statements accompanying the voting document. The directory is listed in alphabetical order. It is not possible to print it in such a way that each copy aligns with the random order of names on the accompanying voting documents.

16.     The disadvantage of alphabetical printing is that there is some documented evidence, mainly from overseas, of voter bias to those at the top of a voting list.

Analysis of previous election results

17.     An analysis of the council’s election results for 2010, 2013 and 2016 is contained in Attachment A. It shows that any bias to those at the top of the voting lists is very small. The analysis looked at:

·   impact on vote share (did the candidate at the top of the list receive more votes than might be expected?)

·   impact on election outcome (did being at the top of list result in the candidate being elected more often than might be expected?).

18.     The analysis shows that for local boards, being listed first increased a candidate’s vote share by approximately 1 percentage point above that which would be expected statistically if voting was random. There was no detectable impact of being listed first on the share of votes received in ward elections.

19.     There is no compelling evidence that candidates being listed first were more likely to be elected in the last three elections.

20.     Staff recommend that the current approach of alphabetical printing is retained for the 2019 council elections, as the noted benefits to the voter outweigh any perception of a name order bias problem that analysis of previous election results show does not exist. 

Online voting

21.     Auckland Council intends to offer online voting to specified classes of electors for the 2019 elections. An online voting solution has the potential to improve the voting experience, even if names are ordered randomly.

22.     Online voting should present the same voting document to users as the paper equivalent. If names are in random order on the voting document, then the same random order will need to be presented to the online user. This could increase the complexity of the voting solution.

23.     On balance, staff consider that alphabetical order of names is preferable for an online voting trial.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe / Local impacts and local board views

24.     Feedback from local boards will be reported to the Governing Body when the Governing Body is asked to determine the matter by resolution.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

25.     The order of names on voting documents does not specifically impact on the Māori community. It is noted that candidates can provide their profile statements both in English and Māori.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

26.     There are no financial implications associated with the options for order of names.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

27.     If names are ordered alphabetically, there is the risk of perceived bias. If names are randomised, there is the risk of increasing the complexity of the voting experience and deterring voters. The analysis that has been conducted shows that the risk of bias is very small.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

28.     The feedback from the local board will be reported to the Governing Body.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Order of names on voting documents

25

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Warwick McNaughton - Principal Advisor - Democracy Services

Authorisers

Marguerite Delbet - General Manager Democracy Services

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Ōrākei Local Boards

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

Ōrākei Quick Response Round One 2018/2019 grant applications

 

File No.: CP2018/20368

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To fund, part-fund or decline applications received for Ōrākei Quick Response, Round One 2018/2019.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       This report presents applications received in Ōrākei Quick Response, Round One 2018/2019 (see Attachment A).

3.       The Ōrākei Local Board adopted the Ōrākei Grants Programme 2018/2019 on 19 April 2018 (see Attachment B). The document sets application guidelines for contestable community grants submitted to the local board.

4.       The Ōrākei Local Board has set a total community grants budget of $218,907 for the 2018/2019 financial year. A total of $62,108 was allocated to Local Grants Round One, leaving a remaining balance of $156,799 to be allocated between quick response rounds one and two, and local grants round two.

5.       Twenty-four applications were received for Quick Response, Round One 2018/2019, requesting a total of $63,960. No applications were received for Tree Protection Round One 2018/2019.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a)      agree to fund, part-fund or decline each application received in Ōrākei Quick Response Round One, listed in Table One.   

Application ID

Organisation

Main focus

Requesting funding for

Amount requested

Eligibility

QR1912-108

St Heliers Village Association Incorporated

Arts and culture

Towards the radio advertising for an arts event at St Heliers library.

$3,000.00

Eligible

QR1912-128

Ellerslie Theatrical Society Incorporated

Arts and culture

Towards the advertising costs to increase participation in the 2019 Ellerslie One Act Play Festival.

$2,772.00

Eligible

QR1912-102

Meadowbank and St Johns Residents Association

Community

Towards the costs of a bouncy castle hire, double decker bus hire and supplies for a Christmas party and community picnic, along with the purchase of 30 rat traps.

$2,000.00

Eligible

Application ID

Organisation

Main focus

Requesting funding for

Amount requested

Eligibility

QR1912-103

Citizens Advice Bureau Auckland City Incorporated

Community

Towards the purchase of eight chairs and two brochure carousel stands for the office waiting room.

$1,590.00

Eligible

QR1912-104

The Community of St Luke

Community

Towards the costs of purchasing and installing a new bike rack and hardstand.

$3,000.00

Eligible

QR1912-106

St Heliers and Community Support Trust

Community

Towards the costs to build an outdoor storage shed and a contribution towards repairing the shade structure.

$3,000.00

Eligible

QR1912-109

Remuera Chinese Association

Community

Towards venue hire at the Somervell Presbyterian Church for twice weekly meetings.

$2,556.00

Eligible

QR1912-110

Mission Bay Kohimarama Residents Association

Community

Towards the costs to hold a public forum and seek professional advice for a submission opposing the Mission Bay local centre redevelopment.

$9,977.00

Ineligible

QR1912-114

East Auckland Combined Probus

Community

Towards the purchase of a defibrillator.

$3,500.00

Eligible

QR1912-117

Youthline Auckland Charitable Trust

Community

Towards a portion of the regional volunteer managers’ salary.

$3,000.00

Eligible

QR1912-118

Remuera West Scout Group

under the umbrella of The Scout Association of New Zealand

Community

Towards the purchase of solar panels and crystal batteries for the ongoing activities of the scout group.

$2,491.00

Eligible

QR1912-120

New Zealand Association for Environmental Education Incorporated

Community

Towards the fees of two staff to deliver the Tread Lightly Drain Game programme at Kelly Tarltons.

$3,000.00

Eligible

QR1912-121

Communicare Auckland Incorporated

Community

Towards the costs of weekly venue hire for the friendship centre for one year.

$1,148.00

Eligible

Application ID

Organisation

Main focus

Requesting funding for

Amount requested

Eligibility

QR1912-123

Te Puawaitanga O Atareta Playcentre

Community

Towards the purchase of a terralock system and soil to construct a retaining wall as part of a playground remodel.

$3,000.00

Eligible

QR1912-127

Alcohol Healthwatch Trust

Community

Towards costs to conduct an audit and produce a report detailing external signage at off-license premises.

$1,750.00

Ineligible

QR1912-105

Glendowie Bowling Club Incorporated

Environment

Towards the costs to remove pine and eucalyptus trees.

$3,000.00

Eligible

QR1912-113

Stonefields Residents Association Incorporated

Environment

Towards the expansion of an initial trapping operation including the purchase of traps, bait and safety vests.

$2,500.00

Ineligible for a grant, but eligible to be paid as a service agreement.

QR1912-125

Plastic Bag Free St Heliers

Environment

Towards the costs of printing labels and promotional materials to eliminate single use plastic bags.

$715.00

Eligible

QR1912-111

Condor Rugby Football Club Incorporated

Events

Towards the costs to purchase professional filming equipment for the Condor Sevens National Secondary Schools Sevens finals.

$3,000.00

Eligible

QR1912-112

Zionist Federation of New Zealand

Events

Towards the marquee hire for the “Hanukah in the Bays” event.

$800.00

Eligible

QR1912-122

College Rifles Rugby Union Football and Sports Club Incorporated

Events

Towards the costs of project management, graphic design and the printing of brochures for an Australian and New Zealand Army Corps memorial event.

$3,000.00

Eligible

QR1912-107

Kim Crow

Sport and recreation

Towards the venue hire of the Ōrākei Community Centre to run weekly pilates classes.

$1,000.00

Eligible

QR1912-124

Remuera Bowling Club Incorporated

Sport and recreation

Towards the purchase of a “Junior Jack Attack” kit for youth lawn bowls.

$1,200.00

Eligible

Application ID

Organisation

Main focus

Requesting funding for

Amount requested

Eligibility

QR1912-126

New Zealand Kung Fu Wushu Federation Incorporated

Sport and recreation

Towards the costs of venue hire, equipment movers and volunteer lunches to deliver a national Washu competition.

$2,961.00

Eligible

Total

 

 

 

$63,960.00

 

 

 

 

Horopaki / Context

6.       The local board allocates grants to groups and organisations delivering projects, activities and services that benefit Aucklanders and contribute to the vision of being a world class city.

7.       The Auckland Council Community Grants Policy supports each local board to adopt a grants programme.

8.       The local board grants programme sets out:

·      local board priorities

·      lower priorities for funding

·      exclusions

·      grant types, the number of grant rounds and when these will open and close

·      any additional accountability requirements.

9.       The Ōrākei Local Board adopted their grants programme for 2018/2019 on 19 April 2018 and will operate two quick response and two local grants rounds for this financial year. 

10.     The community grant programmes have been extensively advertised through the council grants webpage, local board webpages, local board e-newsletters, Facebook pages, council publications, radio, and community networks.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

11.     The aim of the local board grant programme is to deliver projects and activities which align with the outcomes identified in the local board plan. All applications have been assessed utilising the Community Grants Policy and the local board grant programme criteria. The eligibility of each application is identified in the report recommendations.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe /
Local impacts and local board views

12.     Local boards are responsible for the decision-making and allocation of local board community grants.  The Ōrākei Local Board is required to fund, part-fund or decline these grant applications against the local board priorities identified in the local board grant programme.

13.     The local board is requested to note that section 48 of the Community Grants Policy states “We will also provide feedback to unsuccessful grant applicants about why they have been declined, so they will know what they can do to increase their chances of success next time.”

14.     A summary of each application received through Ōrākei Quick Response Round One 2018/2019 (see Attachment A) is provided.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

15.     The local board grants programme aims to respond to Auckland Council’s commitment to improving Māori wellbeing by providing grants to individuals and groups who deliver positive outcomes for Māori. Auckland Council’s Māori Responsiveness Unit has provided input and support towards the development of the community grant processes.

16.     Six applicants applying to Ōrākei Quick Response, Round One indicated that their project targets Māori or Māori outcomes.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

17.     The allocation of grants to community groups is within the adopted 2018-2028 Long-Term Plan and 2018/2019 local board agreement.

18.     The Ōrākei Local Board has set a total community grants budget of $218,907 for the 2018/2019 financial year. $62,108 was allocated to Local Grants Round One, leaving a remaining balance of $156,799 to be allocated between quick response rounds one and two, and local grants round two.

19.     Twenty-four applications were received for Quick Response, Round One 2018/2019, requesting a total of $63,960. No applications were received for Tree Protection Round One.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

20.     The allocation of grants occurs within the guidelines and criteria of the Community Grants Policy and the local board grants programme. The assessment process has identified a low risk associated with funding the applications in this round.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

21.     Following the Ōrākei Local Board allocation of funding for Quick Response Round One, Commercial and Finance staff will notify the applicants of the local board’s decision and facilitate payment of the grant.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Ōrākei Local Board Grants Programme 2018/2019

37

b

Ōrākei Quick Response Round One 2018/2019 grant applications (Under Separate Cover)

 

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Makenzie Hirz - Senior Community Grants Advisor

Authorisers

Marion Davies - Grant Operations Manager

Shane King - Head of Operations Support

Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Ōrākei Local Boards

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

 


 


 


 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

Ngahue Reserve - Oceania Football Confederation Updated Stage 2 Development Proposal

 

File No.: CP2018/20729

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To obtain local board approval of the Oceania Football Confederation request to revise the Stage 2 development plans for Ngahue Reserve and to amend the legal agreements to reflect the proposed changes.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       Oceania Football Confederation (OFC) is developing Ngahue Reserve as its “Home of Football” facility in accordance with the Agreement to Lease signed by the parties in September 2013.  This is a multi-stage development.

3.       Stage 1 comprises: Two artificial football turf, practice pitch, lighting, small grandstand, ablutions, roadways and carparking.  This stage is nearly complete except for landscaping the site.  At the completion of Stage 1 the lease for the site would be issued for a term of 30 years.

4.       Stage 1 of the development exceeded the original budget, therefore OFC has redesigned Stage 2 to take into account the available funding, and to utilise foundations developed during Stage 1.  Stage 2 will comprise a smaller administration building, viewing deck, a second practice pitch, further carparking, roadways and landscaping.

5.       As the board has earlier approved the larger Stage 2 development, OFC wishes to ensure the board is aware of, and approves of its plan for a smaller development.  Amendments to existing legal documents will also be necessary to reflect the smaller scale development.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendations

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a)      thank the executive of Oceania Football Confederation for adopting a new and refreshing approach to the relationship it wishes to develop with the Ōrākei Local Board and council staff and wider community.

b)      approve the revised Oceania Football Confederation Stage 2 development for Ngahue Reserve comprising a smaller administration building, viewing deck, a second practice pitch, further carparking, roadways and landscaping.

c)      approve the revised timeframes to complete the revised Oceania Football Confederation Stage 2 development being extended to 30 September 2020.

d)      authorise staff to take the necessary steps to document the changes needed to the existing legal agreements to reflect the revised Stage 2 development.

e)      re-confirm to OFC that landscaping and maintaining a general tidy appearance to the Ngahue Reserve site is an obligation on OFC; and that landscaping is an important component of the overall site development.

 

 

Horopaki / Context

6.       OFC occupies the Ngahue Reserve site under the terms of an Agreement to Lease dated September 2013 plus a number of variations to that agreement that the parties have subsequently agreed.

7.       OFC undertook to a Home of Football facility at no cost to council, while also providing community access of 24 hrs per turf per week.  All the components of the development that provide direct benefit to the community form Stage 1.  Other than the landscaping, Stage 1 has been completed and the facility is being used by the community, with bookings managed through the council parks booking system.

8.       The parties had agreed that Stage 2 was largely for the benefit of OFC, although the construction of these facilities was an integral part of the 2013 Agreement to Lease with the expectation that they would be constructed to complete the development of the facility.

9.       The 2013 Agreement to Lease and subsequent accompanying agreements set out in detail the process OFC is required to follow to undertake any development on Ngahue Reserve.

10.     The 2013 agreement stipulates the nature and scale of the Stage 2 development.  The agreement requires OFC to obtain approval of the local board if it wishes to materially change how Stage 2 will be delivered and for these variations to be recorded in a new agreement.

11.     The cost to develop Stage 1 was greater than expected, and the parent organisation, FIFA, working with OFC, has agreed a smaller budget to complete Stage 2.  OFC has engaged new professional consultants to provide new plans for the site that work within the available budget.

12.     Stage 2 will comprise a smaller administration building, viewing deck, the second practice pitch, carparking, roadways and further landscaping.  Omitted will be the large office space areas, café, gym, sports medicine and futsal facilities.

13.     The new facility is being designed in a cost-effective and modular manner to allow use of exiting foundations and structural steel.   This will allow for expansion of facilities if and when additional funding becomes available.

14.     OFC had provided a letter and plans (refer Attachments A and B) outlining:

·      the reason for the changes

·      new governance and management structures that have been implemented to ensure costs are closely monitored

·      plans showing the layout of the new administration building and re-location of the second practice pitch

·      a plan of the proposed final layout of the site.

15.     Consultants advising OFC are recommending that a new (rather than revised) resource consent be obtained to take advantage of new provisions in the Unitary Plan.

16.     The consultants are also advising that the construction works can largely be completed by late 2019 and all works completed by mid-2020.

17.     Acknowledging that the scale and timing for the proposed smaller Stage 2 plans differ from the definitions provided for in the legal documents previously executed between the parties, OFC has also requested that approval be given by the board to further amending the legal agreements to reflect the new Stage 2 plans and timing.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

18.     The Ōrākei Local Board has achieved its principal goal through the delivery of Stage 1 (except the landscaping). Stage 1 is essentially complete and the facility is being used by the community, with bookings managed through the council parks booking system.

19.     Staff have been meeting the new executive of OFC on a regular basis to discuss how OFC could complete the development of Ngahue Reserve to the satisfaction of the Ōrākei Local Board and in accordance with the general principles of the legal agreements that are in place.

20.     OFC has been receptive to feedback from staff, particularly around suggestions to engage a team of professional advisers that will ensure OFC can propose, deliver and complete a scaled down Stage 2.

21.     The smaller Stage 2 development is achievable and does not compromise the long-term community access to the artificial turfs that the Ōrākei Local Board secured when first agreeing to allow OFC to develop Ngahue Reserve.

22.     OFC has been advised of its obligations under the terms of the lease to maintain and care for the existing site in a manner consistent with the agreement.  OFC has subsequently responded that it will be engaging contractors to tidy the site of noxious plants and generally tidy the site.

23.     OFC has also acknowledged that it is responsible for landscaping the site (part of the Stage 1 development works) and has engaged landscape architects to work with the other consultants to develop and implement a landscape plan.

24.     The new governance and management structures at OFC introduced since April 2018 have won praise from FIFA in Zurich and provide reassurance that OFC is serious about completing this facility, albeit on a smaller scale.

25.     Since first working with OFC on the Home of Football facility, Auckland Council has also purchased the adjoining Colin Maiden Park site.  Completion of the OFC development will complement the overall Colin Maiden precinct.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe /
Local impacts and local board views

26.     This report is seeking Ōrākei Local Board approvals.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

27.     This report is seeking a variation to arrangements agreed to between the Ōrākei Local Board and OFC in 2013.  The changes are limited to a redesign of the administration block on the site.  During the initial consultation process in 2013 and a second consultation process undertaken in 2017 to consider commercial activities on the site, none of the iwi groups contacted signalled any issues regarding the development of the site.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

28.     There are no known financial impacts for the Ōrākei Local Board or wider Auckland Council family as this agreement has always proceeded on the basis of OFC developing and operating the facility at no cost to council.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

29.     Under the terms of the existing legal agreements all risks associated with the development and operation of the site reside with OFC.  This is evidenced by the need for OFC to scale back the Stage 2 development to work within the available and approved budget.

30.     The risk to Auckland Council is mainly in the event of the development not being completed or being completed to a standard un-acceptable to it as the landowner / lessor.

31.     If the development is not concluded or not completed to an acceptable standard and it is necessary for council to step-in and take back the site under the terms of the lease, there will be un-quantified costs associated with remediating the site or completing work.

32.     However, the new executive within OFC, together with FIFA executive, want to complete this facility so that OFC can re-locate to new premises and commence their proposed football development programmes.

33.     Based on the behaviours of the new executive the level of risk to Council is currently low.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

34.     If the revised Stage 2 plans are accepted by the Ōrākei Local Board, the parties will quickly move to varying the existing legal agreements to incorporate the changes, including revised timelines to complete the works.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

OFC Letter 20181031 - Ngahue Reserve Development

45

b

OFC Stage 2 Plans Ngahue Reserve

47

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Leigh Redshaw - Strategic Funding Advisor

Authorisers

Mace Ward - General Manager Parks, Sports and Recreation

Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Ōrākei Local Boards

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

 


 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

Auckland Council's Quarterly Performance Report: Ōrākei Local Board for quarter one

 

File No.: CP2018/20842

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.         To provide the Ōrākei Local Board with an integrated quarterly performance report for quarter one, 1 July to 30 September 2018.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.         This report includes financial performance, progress against work programmes, key challenges the board should be aware of and any risks to delivery against the 2018/2019 work programme.

3.         The work programme is produced annually and aligns with the Ōrākei Local Board Plan outcomes.

4.         The key activity updates from this quarter are:

·      Community Grants (403) – The Board allocated $62,108 to local community groups.

·      Ōrākei Spine shared path – develop feeder links (2314) – The project was granted resource consent.

·      Waiatarua Reserve: prepare an integrated plan (1469) – Staff have completed initial consultation with key stakeholders and mana whenua.

5.         All operating departments with agreed work programmes have provided a quarterly update against their work programme delivery. Most activities are reported with a status of green (on track), amber (some risk or issues, which are being managed) or grey (cancelled, deferred or merged). There are no activities with a red status this quarter.  

6.         The financial performance report compared to budget 2018/2019 is attached. There are some points for the local board to note:

·      The overall operating result is close to budget. Revenue is slightly below budget, by seven per cent, due to lower than expected revenue from the Landing operations. 

·      Operating expenditure is one per cent below budget, in particular with respect to locally driven initiatives as the majority of projects are in the planning phase.

·      Capital expenditure is 46 per cent below budget for asset renewals and growth funded projects.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a)      receive the performance report for the financial quarter ending 30 September 2018.

 

Horopaki / Context

7.         The Ōrākei Local Board has an approved 2018/2019 work programme for the following operating departments:

·      Community Services, which include:

o  Arts, Community and Events

o  Parks, Sport and Recreation

o  Libraries and Information, and

o  Service, Strategy and Integration

·      Community Facilities: Build Maintain Renew

·      Community Leases

·      Infrastructure and Environmental Services

·      Local Economic Development.

8.         Work programmes are produced annually, to meet the Ōrākei Local Board outcomes identified in the three-year Ōrākei Local Board Plan. The local board plan outcomes are:

·      Our local parks and open spaces are valued and enjoyed

·      Our residents are proud of their community facilities and public places

·      People can move around our area easily and safely

·      The natural environment is valued, protected and enhanced by our communities

·      A thriving economy which supports local businesses and town centres.

9.         The graph below shows how the work programme activities meet Local Board Plan outcomes. Activities that are not part of the approved work programme but contribute towards the local board outcomes, such as advocacy by the local board, are not captured in this graph.

 

Graph 1: Ōrākei work programme activities by outcome

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

Local Board Work Programme Snapshot

10.      The work programme activities have two statuses; RAG status which measures the performance of the activity (amber and red show issues and risks); and activity status which shows the stage the activity. These two statuses create a snapshot of the progress of the work programmes.


 

11.      The graph below identifies work programme activity by RAG status (red, amber, green and grey). It shows the percentage of work programme activities that are on track (green), in progress but with issues that are being managed (amber), and activities that have significant issues (red) and activities that have been cancelled/deferred/merged (grey).

Graph 2: Ōrākei Work Programme by RAG status

12.      The graph below identifies work programme activity by activity status and department. The number of activity lines differ by department as approved in the local board work programmes. 

Graph 3: Ōrākei work programme activity by activity status and department

Capital expenditure carry forwards

13.      The Community Facilities capital expenditure carry forwards were approved by the Finance and Performance Committee on 17 October 2018. A list of the carry forwards has been provided (see attachment C). As this was after the end of quarter one, commentary was unable to be provided. Commentary and updated graphs will be included in the quarter two update.

 

Key activity updates from quarter one

14.      The following are progress updates and achievements of key activities in the delivery of the local board work programmes for the first quarter:

·      The Win with Words writing competition (1146) was held at both Remuera and St Heliers Library’s in August. The programme is for students in year seven and eight and saw 17 schools in total participate.

·      The Board allocated $62,108 through its contestable local and multi-board Community Grants (403) round in this quarter. The grants are used to support local community groups in providing outcomes for the wider area that align with the Local Board Plan.

·      Churchill Park pathways – develop pathways (2303) – The concept plan has been completed and the project is currently in the detailed design phase. It is intended that priority pathways will be constructed during this financial year.

·      Resource consent has been granted for the Ōrākei Spine shared path – develop feeder links (2314), and the Tahapa Reserve East – improvements (2317) concept plan for the play-space is complete. Once approval is received from the close landfill team, both projects will be passed over to the project delivery team.

·      Waiatarua Reserve: prepare an integrated plan (1469) – Initial consultation with key stakeholders and mana whenua has been completed. During engagement service outcomes were identified and will be integrated in the draft plan and workshopped with the local board.

·      The Eastern Bays Songbird Initiative (603) funding agreement has been drafted. The group has continued to hold trap giveaway days across the Ōrākei Local Board area. Planning by volunteers and co-ordinators to promote the initiative are underway with more events planned for the next quarter.

Activities with significant issues

15.      There are no activities with significant issues for this quarter.

Activities on hold

16.      The following work programme activities have been identified by operating departments as on hold:

·      Ellerslie Recreation Centre (Michaels Ave Reserve) – replace CCTV system and replace roof (2284) is on hold whilst additional options on the replacement of the roof are assessed to ensure the best value for money. Options will be workshopped in November with the local board.

·      Ellerslie Recreation Centre (Michaels Ave Reserve) – renew ground floor changing rooms (2285) and Ellerslie Recreation Centre (Michaels Ave Reserve) – replace air conditioning – fitness area (2286) are on hold as the projects will be run concurrently with Ellerslie Recreation Centre (Michaels Ave Reserve) – replace CCTV system and replace roof (2284). Once endorsement is received for the roof option, all projects will commence.

Changes to the local board work programme

Deferred activities

17.      Colin Maiden Park Stage 3 (2309) – install new double hockey turf. This project is not council delivered and is a capital grant to a Hockey Trust. Community Facilities and Community Services are working together to establish a funding agreement. Community Services continue discussion with Auckland Hockey around the formation of a Hockey Trust. The project is deferred to financial year 2019/2020.

Cancelled activities

18.      There are no activities cancelled in this quarter.

Activities merged with other activities for delivery

19.      Shore Road reserve – upgrade carparks and new pathway (stage two) (2306) has been merged with Shore Road reserve – upgrade carparks and new pathway (2978) from the capital expenditure carry forwards which can be viewed in attachment C. Commentary on the projects progress will be updated in quarter two.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe / Local impacts and local board views

20.      This report informs the Ōrākei Local Board of the performance for the quarter ending 30 September 2018.

Key performance indicators

21.      As most of the 2018-2028 Long-term Plan key performance indicators are annual measures and do not change quarterly, staff have removed them from the quarterly performance report and will present the key performance indicators only once in the annual report at the end of the financial year.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

22.      The Ōrākei Local Board’s work programme contains a number of projects that provide direct outcomes for Māori, including but not limited to:

·      Increase diverse participation (868) which supports local communities, including mana whenua, to have input into council planning and decision making. In this quarter staff partnered with Selwyn Community Education and held five workshops with kuia and kaumatua at Ōrākei Marae on how to write online submissions.

·      Celebrating Te Ao Māori and strengthening responsiveness to Māori – Whakatipu i te reo Māori (1150) which champions and embeds te reo Māori in the Remuera and St Heliers library’s. During the first quarter, both libraries celebrated Matariki. At Remuera library local schools participated through Kapa Haka performances and St Heliers library hosted demonstrations from Louis Chretian, a Māori carver. 

23.      The local board has increased its funding of projects to improve the natural environment, in particular through pest management, weed eradication and revegetation programmes. This aligns to iwi outcomes pertaining to enhancing the environment.

24.      The Ōrākei Local Board Chair and Deputy Chairman continue to hold regular hui with Ngāti Whātua o Ōrākei kaumatua to build their relationship and work on shared outcomes for the local board area.

25.      Mana whenua customary practices are embedded into events and openings of board projects including at the opening of the new Ōrākei Local Board office on 16 July 2018.

Financial Performance

26.      Revenue is behind budget by $26,000 mainly in the Landing Operations.

27.      Expenditure is below budget by $20,000 in locally driven initiatives as projects are in the planning stage.

28.      Capital spend this quarter is $756,000 under the budget in asset renewals, and growth funded projects such as Greenway and Walkway development and Sports development.

29.      Further details of capital delivery by projects are provided in the work programme 2018/2019 quarter one report.

30.      Note that carry forward budget from 2017/2018 for operational and capex budgets are yet to be included in quarter one report.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

31.      This report is for information only and therefore there are no financial implications associated with this report.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

32.      While the risk of non-delivery of the entire work programme is rare, the likelihood for risk relating to individual activities does vary. Capital projects for instance, are susceptible to more risk as on-time and on-budget delivery is dependent on weather conditions, approvals (e.g. building consents) and is susceptible to market conditions.

33.      Information about any significant risks and how they are being managed and/or mitigated is addressed in the ‘Activities with significant issues’ section.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

34.      The local board will receive the next performance update following the end of quarter 31 December 2018.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Ōrākei Quarterly Performance Report September 2018 - Local Board Work Programme Update 2018/2019 Q1

63

b

Ōrākei Quarterly Performance Report September 2018 - Financial Appendix

81

c

Ōrākei Quarterly Performance Report September 2018 - Capital Expenditure Carry Forwards

87

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Hayley King  - Local Board Advisor - Ōrākei

Authoriser

Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Ōrākei Local Boards

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

 


 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

Auckland Regional Pest Management Plan consultation feedback and recommended changes

 

File No.: CP2018/20960

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To receive a summary of consultation feedback from local board residents on the Proposed Regional Pest Management Plan, and to provide feedback on recommended changes to the document.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       Auckland Council is currently developing a new Regional Pest Management Plan. This plan is prepared under the Biosecurity Act 1993, and describes the pest plants, animals and pathogens that will be managed in Auckland. It provides a framework to minimise the spread and impact of those pests and manage them through a regional approach. Once operative, the Regional Pest Management Plan will provide a regulatory framework to support the council’s biosecurity activities, including those funded through the natural environment targeted rate.

3.       The Proposed Regional Pest Management plan was approved for public consultation by the Environment and Community Committee in November 2017 (resolution numbers ENV/2017/161 to ENV/2017/167) and consulted on in February and March 2018 alongside the Long-term Plan 2018-2028.

4.       A workshop was held with the Board on 11 October 2018 to discuss the consultation feedback and proposed staff responses.

5.       Ōrākei Local Board residents provided 64 submissions on the plan, representing five per cent of overall submissions. The views of local board residents were similar to regional views, with high levels of support across all topics excluding the addition of cats as a pest. The extent of cat control resulting from the plan is likely to be less extensive than the concerns noted in many submissions. Staff are exploring options to mitigate submitter concerns in the wording of the final plan.

6.       This report requests the Board’s formal feedback on recommended changes to the Proposed Regional Pest Management Plan arising from key submission themes. Submission themes and corresponding changes are summarised in Attachment A.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendations

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a)      receive a summary of consultation feedback from Ōrākei Local Board residents on the Proposed Auckland Regional Pest Management Plan.

b)      provide feedback on the recommended changes to the Proposed Regional Pest Management Plan based on consultation feedback.

 

Horopaki / Context

7.       Auckland Council is currently reviewing its 2007 Regional Pest Management Strategy. The new Regional Pest Management Plan will prescribe council’s approach to pest management to reflect best practice and changes to various pest plants and animals in the Auckland region. The review is also in direct response to, and compliant with, the National Policy Direction for Pest Management 2015.

8.       The review of the Regional Pest Management Plan began with an issues and options paper discussed with elected members, followed by a public discussion document which was used as a basis for engagement with mana whenua, stakeholders and elected members.

9.       At its November 2017 meeting, the Environment and Community Committee approved the proposed Regional Pest Management Plan for public consultation alongside the Long-term Plan 2018-2028 (resolution numbers ENV/2017/161 to ENV/2017/167).

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

10.     Consultation on the proposed Regional Pest Management Plan took place in February to March 2018 alongside consultation on the Long-term Plan and other statutory planning documents. A total of 1,262 submissions were received, which represents a significant increase on the approximately 400 submissions that were received on the 2015 discussion document. The breakdown by submission type is shown in Table 1 below.

Table 1: Proposed Regional Pest Management Plan breakdown by submission type (Auckland-wide)

Submission type

Number of submissions

Percentage of submissions

Online form

1035

82%

Hardcopy form

183

15%

Non-form (e.g. email, letter)

44

3%

 

11.     Of the 1,262 submissions received, 23 were pro-forma submissions from Forest and Bird. The number of submissions received by local board area is shown in Table 2.

Table 2: Breakdown of Proposed Regional Pest Management Plan submissions by local board area

Local board

Number of submitters

Percentage of submitters

Albert-Eden

116

9%

Devonport-Takapuna

53

4%

Franklin

50

4%

Great Barrier

24

2%

Henderson-Massey

46

4%

Hibiscus and Bays

85

7%

Howick

52

4%

Kaipātiki

98

8%

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu

17

1%

Manurewa

18

1%

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki

51

4%

Ōrākei

64

5%

Ōtara-Papatoetoe

7

1%

Papakura

21

2%

Puketāpapa

12

1%

Rodney

162

13%

Upper Harbour

41

3%

Waiheke

37

3%

Waitākere Ranges

87

7%

Waitematā

51

4%

Whau

41

3%

Regional

5

0%

Not Supplied

69

5%

Outside Auckland

55

4%

Total

1,262

 

 

12.     The consultation feedback form included eight questions relating to key programmes in the Proposed Regional Pest Management Plan that were described in a summary document (see Attachment B for details around each of the proposed approaches). The responses received for each question from residents of the Ōrākei Local Board area are summarised below in Table 3, and show a high level of support across all these topic areas.

Table 3: Feedback from Ōrākei Local Board residents on the Proposed Regional Pest Management Plan

Question

Response

Percentage of submissions local board

Percentage of submissions regional

1. What is your view on the proposed approach to pest plant management in parks?

Full support

25%

26%

Partial support

8%

17%

Partial do not support

3%

3%

Full do not support

5%

2%

Other comments

58%

53%

2. What is your view on the proposed approach to managing kauri dieback?

Full support

26%

27%

Partial support

26%

29%

Partial do not support

2%

5%

Full do not support

4%

2%

Other comments

42%

37%

3. What is your view on the proposed approach to prevent the spread of pests to the Hauraki Gulf Islands?

Full support

44%

46%

Partial support

23%

19%

Partial do not support

19%

12%

Full do not support

6%

2%

Other comments

8%

21%

4. What is your view on the proposed approach to managing pests on Aotea/Great Barrier?

Full support

37%

44%

Partial support

26%

20%

Partial do not support

3%

4%

Full do not support

3%

2%

Other comments

31%

30%

5. What is your view on the proposed approach to managing pests on Kawau Island?

Full support

48%

43%

Partial support

22%

23%

Partial do not support

9%

7%

Full do not support

7%

4%

Other comments

15%

23%

6. What is your view on the proposed approach to managing pests on Waiheke Island?

 

Full support

43%

44%

Partial support

19%

21%

Partial do not support

7%

5%

Full do not support

0%

3%

Other comments

31%

28%


 

Question

Response

Percentage of submissions local board

Percentage of submissions regional

7. What is your view on the proposed approach to the management of rural possums?

Full support

38%

38%

Partial support

31%

28%

Partial do not support

5%

7%

Full do not support

7%

4%

Other comments

19%

23%

8. What is your view on the proposed approach to the management of freshwater pests?

Full support

54%

46%

Partial support

8%

23%

Partial do not support

5%

4%

Full do not support

3%

3%

Other comments

30%

25%

 

13.     In addition to the eight themed questions covered in Table 3, a further open-ended question elicited responses about a wide range of other topics covered in the proposed plan.

14.     The most commonly raised topic in the open-ended question was the issue of cat management. A wide range of views on this topic were expressed, including requests for increased cat management beyond that in the proposed plan. The majority of submissions on this topic voiced concerns about cats being included as pests. These submitters cited animal welfare issues and concerns that domestic cats throughout Auckland would be at risk under the proposed plan. Staff are exploring options for mitigating these concerns, which in many cases reflect a perception of more extensive cat control than was envisaged in the plan. Options for mitigating concerns include clarifying the spatial extent of the proposed approach in the final plan, and alternatives to the use of the term ‘pest cat’.

15.     Staff have worked through submissions to determine any changes to be recommended for the final plan. Attachment A identifies key themes where amendments to pest management programmes in the proposed plan were sought by submitters, along with proposed staff responses. Feedback themes have been grouped according to the questions in Table 3 (above), along with an ‘other’ category to capture feedback related to other topics.

16.     This report seeks formal feedback from the Board at its November 2018 business meeting on the recommended changes to the Proposed Regional Pest Management Plan in response to consultation feedback.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe /
Local impacts and local board views

17.     During engagement on the issues and options paper and wider public consultation on the discussion document, key issues were raised in relation to cats, possums, widespread pest plants, and the ban of sale of some pest species. In addition to these regional issues, the Ōrākei Local Board provided feedback on locally specific issues of importance to the area, including pigeons, weeds on council land, rabbits, and the importance of education around pests.

18.     Proposed approaches to be taken in relation to these issues were workshopped with the Board in July 2017. At its August 2017 business meeting, the Board provided formal feedback on these proposed management approaches. A copy of this feedback is appended in Attachment C.

19.     A recent workshop with the Board was held on 11 October 2018 to discuss the consultation feedback and the recommended amendments to the plan, as set out in Attachment A.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

20.     Section 61 of the Biosecurity Act requires that a Regional Pest Management Plan set out the effects that implementation of the plan would have on the relationship between Māori, their culture, their traditions and their ancestral lands, waters, sites, maunga, mahinga kai, wāhi tapu, and taonga.

21.     Engagement has been undertaken with interested mana whenua in the Auckland region during development of the plan, and formal submissions were received from the mana whenua groups listed below. In addition, staff are working closely with mana whenua on the development and implementation of a range of biosecurity programmes, providing opportunities for mana whenua to exercise kaitiakitanga, through direct involvement in the protection of culturally significant sites and taonga species.

·      Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum

·      Te Kawerau ā Maki

·      Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whātua

·      Te Uri o Hau

·      Te Tira Whakamātaki - Māori Biosecurity Network.

22.     Submissions were largely supportive of the approaches set out in the proposed plan, and key themes noted in feedback from mana whenua included:

·      the need to enhance rather than protect ecosystem function and resilience

·      the need to recognise ecological value outside Significant Ecological Areas

·      the need to identify performance measures to enable people to readily evaluate success

·      the need to adopt management strategies that incentivise good management approaches

·      the importance of community education and involvement in pest management

·      mana whenua participation in pest management in collaboration with Auckland Council.

23.     Staff have prepared a summary of mana whenua feedback, including proposed staff responses. This document will be circulated to mana whenua submitters for their consideration in November and December 2018. This content will be included in the final submission summary that is reported to the Environment and Community Committee in March 2019, alongside the final plan. This content will be made available to all local boards prior to the committee meeting.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

24.     The Proposed Regional Pest Management Plan presents a major change in pest management in Auckland, and therefore requires a significant increase in investment. As part of consultation on the Long-term Plan 2018-2028, the council sought community views on two options for increased investment in the natural environment funded by a targeted rate.

25.     On 31 May 2018 the Governing Body approved the introduction of a natural environment targeted rate to raise $311 million for environmental initiatives. These initiatives include addressing kauri dieback and targeted ecological protection (resolution GB/2018/91).

26.     This level of investment allows substantial (approximately 80 per cent), but not full, implementation of the Proposed Regional Pest Management Plan. Some changes to the proposed plan will be made to fit the funding envelope, most notably reducing the spatial extent of parks supported by pest plant control in buffer zones, and removing the moth plant good neighbour rule from the Hauraki Gulf Islands. These changes are addressed in further detail in Attachment A.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

27.     There are no significant risks arising from the Board giving feedback on the Proposed Regional Pest Management Plan at this time. However, if the Board chooses not to give feedback this would create a risk that their views will not be reflected in the final Regional Pest Management Plan.

28.     If adoption of the Regional Pest Management Plan is delayed, this will create significant risks to the council’s ability to achieve targets for protecting native biodiversity, through effectively regulating the control of pest plants, animals and pathogens.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

29.     Attachment A has been prepared to facilitate local board feedback on the recommended changes to the proposed Regional Pest Management Plan.

30.     Staff will progress development of the final Regional Pest Management Plan in line with the process and indicative timeframes outlined in Table 4 below. A copy of the final plan and supporting information (including a full submissions analysis report and staff recommendations) will be provided to local boards for information prior to Environment and Community Committee adoption in March 2019.

Table 4: Timeframes for the finalisation of the Regional Pest Management Plan

Action/Milestone

Indicative timeframe

Mana whenua engagement to address changes proposed in submissions

September – October 2018

Local boards resolve formal feedback at business meetings

November – December 2018

Environment and Community Committee workshop

November 2018

Staff draft final plan

December 2018 – February 2019

Environment and Community Committee adopt plan

March 2019

 

Closing the loop with local boards and submitters

April – May 2019

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Key submission themes and recommended amendments to the Proposed Regional Pest Management Plan consultation feedback

95

b

Proposed Regional Pest Management Plan 2018 - Summary Document

105

c

Ōrākei Local Board feedback on the Proposed Regional Pest Management Plan

117

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Dr Imogen Bassett – Biosecurity Principal Advisor

Authorisers

Gael Ogilvie – General Manager Environmental Services

Barry Potter - Director Infrastructure and Environmental Services

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Ōrākei Local Boards


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

 


 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

Auckland Transport November 2018 update

 

File No.: CP2018/21291

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To provide an update to the Ōrākei Local Board on transport related matters in its area including the Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF).

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       This report provides:

·  A progress update to the Ōrākei Local Board about its current transport capital fund projects, including financial information about how much budget remains in this political term.

·  An update to the Ōrākei Local Board on issues such as the Glen Innes to Tamaki Drive shared path and Clonbern Park car park.

·  Decisions of the Traffic Control Committee as they affect the Board area and notes consultation information sent to the Board for feedback.

3.       Auckland Transport is investigating the request from the Board to Auckland Transport on behalf of Bike Tamaki Drive from the October 2018 business meeting.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a)      receive the Auckland Transport November 2018 update report.

 

Horopaki / Context

4.       This report addresses transport related matters in the local board area and includes information on the status of the LBTCF.

5.       Auckland Transport is responsible for all of Auckland’s transport services, excluding state highways. They report on a monthly basis to local boards, as set out in their Local Board Engagement Plan. This monthly reporting commitment acknowledges the important engagement role local boards play within and on behalf of their local communities. 

6.       The LBTCF is a capital budget provided to all local boards by Auckland Council and delivered by Auckland Transport. Local boards can use this fund to deliver transport infrastructure projects that they believe are important but are not part of Auckland Transport’s work programme. Projects must also:

·  be safe

·  not impede network efficiency

·  be in the road corridor (although projects running through parks can be considered if there is a transport outcome).

Quarterly report on Auckland Transport projects and activities

7.       Auckland Transport have also committed to providing more detailed information to local boards on their activities every quarter. Attached is information on Auckland Transport’s activities from July to September 2018:

·  Attachment A – Auckland Transport Activity Report.

·  Attachment B – AT School Community Transport

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

Local Board Transport Capital Fund

 

8.       The table below summarises the balance of LBTCF remaining budget and has been updated to include the increased allocation from 1 July 2018. The Board have access to approximately $1,000,000 as they can use the allocation from the 2019/2020 financial year.

9.       The table below reflects the status of projects to which LBTCF has already been committed.

Status update on current of Local Board Transport Capital Fund projects

Project

Description

Current status

Has the status changed since last month’s update?

Funds allocated

Elwood Place Footpath extension

Delivered by community facility

Allocated

No

$63,000

Wayfinding signage – 12 walkways in St Johns Park area

Improve the accessibility of links through St Johns Park to services such as bus stops

In progress

Yes

$45,000

Selwyn Reserve Walkway

Close the gap in the current walking network in Selwyn Reserve

Waiting board decision to commit funds

No

$148,000

Gowing Drive connection to the Glen Innes to Tamaki Shared Path

Pedestrian and cycling connection

Feasibility

No

$2,000,000 (unallocated)

 

Ngahue Footpath extension

Widen and extend the footpath from the Ngahue Road end of College Road

Awaiting Colin Maiden Park review

No

$175,000

(unallocated)

 

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe /
Local impacts and local board viewsClonbern Car park

10.     Auckland Transport has undertaken further investigation into the Clonbern car park in Clonbern Road Remuera.

11.     Auckland Transport has had a security guard stationed at the entrance to Clonbern car park from 26 October to 9 November 2018 to help users of the carpark to stay within the 2000 kilogram weight limit. Auckland Transport understands the importance of the car park to the community, however if this weight restriction is not adhered to there will be no option but to close the carpark.

12.     Auckland Transport has provided the Board with the current report from our consultants as requested by resolution in October.

Glen Innes to Tamaki Drive Shared Path

13.     The Glen Innes to Tamaki Drive shared path consultation on section 2 from St Johns Road to Tamaki Drive closed on 9 November 2018.

14.     Two open days were held on the 27 and 28 October 2018 in St Johns and Ōrākei. These were well attended by the community, including local board members. There was a number of comments both constructive and positive for the project team to take away and work through.

15.     There was an opportunity to comment on the communities preferred replacement balustrade for section three. There were three options available on the day to view and comment on. Due to the engineering constraint of the height being 1.4 metre, there was no wood option. 

16.     However, the week prior to the open days Auckland Transport and NZTA agreed to a 1.2 metre height balustrade, this change has enabled the project team to consider wood as an option. This will be considered against the feedback from the public and local board.

Bike Tamaki Drive

17.     In a presentation to the Board’s October 2018 meeting, the Bike Auckland sub group; Bike Tamaki Drive requested the Board’s support for a number of cycle safety recommendations relating to Tamaki Drive.  The Board has forwarded these recommendations to Auckland Transport.

18.     Auckland Transport’s walking and cycling team is working with Bike Auckland to ensure the recommendations are considered in cycling and safety programmes for Tamaki Drive.

Auckland Transport consultations

19.     Over the last reporting period, Auckland Transport has invited the Board to provide its feedback on the Zebra Crossing on Meadowbank Road proposal.

20.     The Board has expressed full support for this proposal.

Traffic Control Committee resolutions

21.     Decisions of the Traffic Control Committee affecting the Ōrākei Local Board area in October 2018:

Traffic Control Committee Decisions

Suburb

Street/Area

Suburb

Description

Work

Decision

Ōrākei

Remuera Road, Portland Road, Westbury Crescent

Remuera

Permanent Traffic and Parking changes combined

No Stopping At All Times, SSP Restriction, P2 Parking, Traffic Island, Pedestrian Crossing, School Crossing Point, School Patrol, Give Way Control, Rush Median, Edge Line

Carried

Ōrākei

Remuera Road, St Vincent Road, Remuera Road, Garden Road, Norana Avenue, Clonbern Road, Victoria Avenue

Remuera

Permanent Traffic and Parking changes combined

No Stopping At All Times, Loading Zone, Paid Parking Area, Bus Stop, Mobility Parking, Lane Arrow Markings, Traffic Islands, Traffic Signal Control, Stop Control, Flush Median, Edge Lines, Keep Clear

Carried

Ōrākei

St Johns Road, Lavender Court, Temple Street, Gerald Way

Meadowbank

Permanent Traffic and Parking changes combined

No Stopping At All Times, Clearway, P30 Parking, Bus Stop, Bus Shelter, Bus Lane, Lane Arrow Markings, Traffic Islands, Traffic Signal Control, Stop Control, Give Way Control, Flush Median, Edge Line, Shoulder Markings, No Passing

Carried

 

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

22.     The proposed decision of receiving the report has no impacts or opportunities for Māori. Any engagement with Māori, or consideration of impacts and opportunities, will be carried out on an individual project basis.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

23.     The proposed decision of receiving the report has no financial implications.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

24.     The proposed decision of receiving the report has no risks.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

25.     Auckland Transport will provide another update report to the Board in February 2019.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Auckland Transport Quarterly Activities Report: July - September 2018

123

b

Auckland Transport School Community Transport Report: July - September 2018

135

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Melanie Dale - Elected Manager Relationship Manager

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon - Manager Elected Member Relationship Team Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Ōrākei Local Boards

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

 


 


 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

Feedback on proposed topics for inclusion in the Auckland Water Strategy

 

File No.: CP2018/21167

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To provide formal feedback on the proposed topics for inclusion in the Auckland Water Strategy.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       Both freshwater and marine environments in Auckland are under pressure from historic under-investment, climate change and rapid growth. The Auckland Plan 2050 identifies the need to proactively adapt to a changing water future and develop long-term solutions.

3.       In response to these challenges, the Environment and Community Committee approved the scope of a strategy for Auckland’s waters at its June 2018 meeting (resolution ENV/2018/78). The strategy will provide strategic direction for the council group to meet the challenges and opportunities for improved management for water in all its forms. It will establish the outcomes needed for Auckland’s waters, as part of implementation of the Auckland Plan.

4.       Staff from across Auckland Council, Watercare and Auckland Transport have started developing the draft Auckland Water Strategy by first identifying Auckland’s water issues.

5.       A comprehensive engagement programme has also commenced. This has included mana whenua engagement through the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum as well as separate workshops with operational kaitiaki.

6.       Staff have also attended workshops with all 21 local boards, the governing body and subject matter experts to present the progress of the strategy, and to introduce key topics to be addressed in the strategy.

7.       A draft discussion document is now being developed. This document will set out the key water topics, and propose a framework for the water strategy, for public feedback. 

8.       This report provides an update on the development of the strategy and requests formal feedback from the local board on the proposed topics for inclusion in the strategy (see Attachment A). A template to guide local board feedback has been included as Attachment B to this report.

9.       Feedback from local boards will be summarised as part of a report to the Environment and Community Committee in December 2018, seeking approval of a water strategy discussion document, ahead of public consultation from February to April 2019.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendations

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a)      provide feedback on the proposed topics for inclusion in the Auckland Water Strategy (Attachment A of the agenda report)

b)      note that local board feedback on proposed topics for inclusion in the Auckland Water Strategy will be included in a report to the Environmental and Community Committee in December 2018, seeking approval of the draft Auckland Water Strategy discussion document for public consultation in early 2019.

 

Horopaki / Context

10.     The health of Auckland’s waters is a significant issue. Decades of pressure have had negative impacts on water quality, and on freshwater and marine environments. This pressure will continue to increase if changes are not made to the way that water is valued and managed. Population growth and climate change will further amplify the challenges, with greater demand for water services, and an increased risk of flooding and coastal inundation.

11.     The Auckland Plan notes a key challenge of ‘environmental degradation’ and identifies the need to proactively adapt to a changing water future and develop long-term solutions (focus area five of the Auckland Plan’s environment and cultural heritage outcome). Other focus areas of the Auckland Plan speak to the need to future-proof Auckland’s infrastructure, make sustainable choices, and fully account for past and future impacts of growth.

12.     The Environment and Community Committee agreed to the development of the Auckland Water Strategy at its 12 September 2017 meeting. The committee noted that water is often described and managed in categories, such as stormwater, wastewater and drinking water. An overarching strategy for Auckland’s waters, in all their forms, was identified as a way of ensuring the full range of desired outcomes for water are defined and achieved in an integrated way.

13.     Several drivers give weight to the timely development of this strategy. These include heightened public awareness of water quality risks, and strong support from the public for improvements to water quality through the ten-year budget, central government initiatives (such as the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management and the Department of Internal Affairs review of three waters outcomes) and the need to update existing strategies due to significant population growth. It also responds to mana whenua aspirations surrounding te mauri o te wai.

14.     Since the strategy’s initiation in September 2017, staff have undertaken preliminary analytical work and engagement across the council group. This includes resolving the intersection of the strategy with the section 17A three waters review, mapping the council group’s current water-related activities, and analysing the public feedback on the proposed Auckland Plan and 10-year budget.

15.     An extensive local board and mana whenua engagement programme has been undertaken. In September and October 2018, staff presented the proposed topics to be addressed through the water strategy to all 21 local boards. Mana whenua have been engaged at both a governance and operational level. The Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum provided strategic direction while operational kaitiaki provided direction on the values. Subject matter experts from across the council group, local boards and the governing body have also provided feedback on the key topics.

16.     This report provides a progress update on the development of the strategy, and also provides an opportunity for the local board to provide formal feedback on the proposed topics for inclusion in the strategy (Attachment A).

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

Purpose and proposed topics for inclusion in the Auckland Water Strategy

17.     The Auckland Water Strategy will provide strategic direction for the council group in how meet the challenges and opportunities for improved water management. It is expected that the strategy will define the approaches taken around water in other strategies and plans as they are subsequently developed and reviewed.

18.     The proposed topics for inclusion in the Auckland Water Strategy (see Attachment A) were developed through the review of the existing policies and strategies, and through a series of workshops and discussions with staff from Auckland Council family, including Watercare and Auckland Transport.

19.     Attachment A describes the current strategic context, purpose, vision, values, issues, processes and principles that are proposed to inform the development of the discussion document for the draft Auckland Water Strategy.

Request for local board feedback

20.     Further to the workshops held with local boards in September and October 2018, local boards are formally requested to provide feedback on the draft topics for inclusion in the Auckland Water Strategy, ahead of the Environment and Community Committee’s consideration in December 2018. Attachment B provides a template to guide local board feedback.

21.     The draft vision for inclusion in the Auckland Water Strategy is ‘Te mauri o te wai – the life supporting capacity of water – is protected and enhanced’. Local boards are requested to provide feedback on whether this vision is right for the communities they represent.

22.     The draft values for inclusion in the strategy are detailed below. Local boards are requested to provide feedback around whether these values cover the aspects of water that are most important to the boards:

·   ecology

·   water use

·   culture

·   recreation and amenity

·   resilience.

23.     The draft issues to be addressed through the strategy are detailed below. Local boards are requested to provide feedback on whether these categories capture the issues that are of greatest concern to them:

·   cleaning up our waterways

·   meeting future water needs

·   growth in the right places

·   adapting to a changing water future.

24.     The draft processes to be worked on through the strategy are detailed below. Local boards are requested to provide feedback on whether these categories capture the processes that they are most concerned with:

·   creating our water future together

·   setting priorities for investment

·   achieving net benefits for catchments

·   applying a Māori world view.

25.     The draft principles to be included in the strategy are detailed below. Local boards are requested to provide feedback on whether or not they agree with these principles:

·   recognise that water is a taonga

·   work with natural ecosystems

·   deliver catchment scale thinking and action

·   focus on achieving the right-sized solutions with multiple benefits

·   work together to plan and deliver better water quality outcomes

·   look to the future.

26.     As the development of the strategy has progressed, it has become clear that it will need to be developed in stages. Many of the water challenges that have been identified require more analysis and public engagement before a strategy can be agreed. For this reason, the discussion document that is proposed to be released early 2019 will be focused on identifying and agreeing the water issues that Auckland faces within a proposed framework of vision, values and principles. From there, the governing body will be able to review and agree a staged programme that builds on the framework towards a final strategy.

27.     Local board feedback on the draft topics outlined in Attachment B will be summarised as part of the report to the Environment and Community Committee in December 2018, requesting approval of a draft discussion document for public consultation. A further update on the Auckland Water Strategy will be provided to local boards in February 2019.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe /

Local impacts and local board views

28.     Local boards have a strong interest in improving water quality across the Auckland region and currently fund many local projects focused on restoration of local waterways.

29.     Staff attended a local board chairs’ meeting on 13 November 2017 to introduce the concept of the strategy and expected range of activities arising from the strategy. Board chairs indicated their interest in continued involvement.

30.     Staff presented the scope, summary and the progress on the strategy’s development to all 21 local boards between 30 August 2018 and 23 October 2018. Key themes in the feedback provided by local boards at these workshops included the need to:

·   acknowledge water as being a precious commodity that needs to be preserved as the population grows

·   increase the focus on the health of Auckland’s harbours

·   identify future drinking water sources

·   educate people around resilience, water usage, and the impacts of their activities on the environment

·   strengthen regulation and compliance to protect waterways.

31.     This report presents the proposed topics for inclusion in the Auckland Water Strategy, and seeks a formal feedback from the local board ahead of Environment and Community Committee approval of a discussion document in December 2018 for public consultation in early 2019. Key questions to guide local board feedback have been included as Attachment B.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

32.     Mauri (life force) is a fundamental concept of the Māori world view. The state of mauri is an indicator of overall environmental, cultural and social wellbeing. All water sources have an inherent mauri that can be diminished or enhanced.

33.     Enhancing the mauri of waterways is of key significance to mana whenua in their role as kaitiaki of Auckland’s waters. Early engagement with mana whenua to promote kaitiakitanga and embed mana whenua values into this work will be critical to the success of the actions outlined in this report.

34.     The development of the Auckland Water Strategy has been guided by the strategic advice provided by the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Governance Forum. The forum has determined it will provide its own strategic advice, to ensure that core mana whenua principles and values are given the attention they need. The forum requested that one of their members be included on the governance group for the development of the strategy. This has been achieved with the Auckland’s Water Political Reference Group, and recognises the longstanding whakaaro and kōrero that mana whenua have provided on this kaupapa.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

35.     The budget to develop the Auckland Water Strategy was included as part of the Long-term Plan 2018-2028. This budget covers operational expenses, primarily staff time, and will be used to support public engagement.

36.     The budget required to deliver any actions arising from the strategy will be sought through the Long-term Plan 2021-2031 process. 

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

37.     An initial risk assessment for the programme has been carried out, as shown in Table 1 below.     

Table 1: Auckland Water Strategy work programme risks and proposed mitigations

Risk type

Risk description

Consequence description

Rating

(High-Medium-Low)

Mitigation/Control

Scope expansion

Water is a broad subject, and the level of detail and number of topics to cover can grow and change rapidly

Unable to deliver to time and cost

Medium

Guidance from the Political Reference Group and Executive Steering Group

Central government changes to legislation and policy

There are several central government work programmes focusing on water underway such as the Department of Internal Affairs Three Waters review and the Office of the Auditor Generals Water Programme. The strategy will need to adapt to any changes in direction from central government.

Unable to deliver to time and cost

Medium

Anticipate where possible, communication plans to include government stakeholders

Inconsistent practices and adoption of the strategy

The strategy is not adopted and reflected in the plans of the operational and delivery organisations of the council group

Outcomes of the strategy are not delivered, substantive actions to deliver the strategy are not undertaken

Medium

Ensure that the delivery teams of the council group are engaged in the development of the strategy

 

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

38.     The next steps in the development of the Auckland Water Strategy have been outlined in Table 2:

Table 2. Timeframes for the development of the Auckland Water Strategy

Activity

Expected timeframe

Formal local board feedback sought on proposed topics of the Auckland Water Strategy for the discussion document

November 2018

Internal discussions on the topics for inclusion in the draft discussion document, and presentations to the Watercare and Auckland Transport boards

November-December 2018

Draft discussion document reported to Environment and Community Committee for approval ahead of public consultation

December 2018

Public consultation on the Auckland Water Strategy discussion document

February-April 2019

Activity

Expected timeframe

Public engagement feedback presented to elected members

April 2019

Draft options for the finalisation of the Auckland Water Strategy, and associated work programmes to be presented to the Environment and Community Committee

June 2019

 

39.     Local boards will receive a further update on the Auckland Water Strategy in February 2019.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Proposed topics for inclusion in the Auckland Water Strategy

145

b

Local board feedback template for proposed topics for inclusion in the Auckland Water Strategy

153

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Andrew Chin – Auckland Waters Portfolio Manager

Authorisers

Barry Potter - Director Infrastructure and Environmental Services

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Ōrākei Local Boards

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

 


 


 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

Draft Contributions Policy

 

File No.: CP2018/20825

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To seek feedback from local boards on the draft Contributions Policy 2019.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       It is estimated that the Auckland region is short 45,000 dwellings to meet current demand for housing. A further 313,000 dwellings and work places to support 250,000 jobs will be required by 2050 to meet expected growth. To manage this growth the council has identified the:

i)        location and nature of growth - through the Auckland Plan and Unitary Plan

ii)       location and type of infrastructure required to support growth - through the Development Strategy and structure plans

iii)      when and where it will invest $7.2 billion of growth-related infrastructure in the next ten years to support development - through the Long-term Plan 2018-2028 (10-Year Budget).

3.       Growth related capex has risen from $5.1 billion in the Long-term Plan 2015-2025 to $7.2 billion in the current 10-Year Budget.  We have also updated our projection of development growth across the next ten years.  The council will repay the borrowing raised to pay for the investment in infrastructure through general rates, targeted rates, user charges, third party funding (like New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) subsidies) and development contributions.

4.       A review has been undertaken of the current contributions policy and the council has adopted a draft Contributions Policy 2019 (see Attachment A) for consultation which includes a number of changes.

5.       To recover the increased investment in growth related infrastructure the indicative urban development contribution price rises from around $21,000 to $26,000 (excl. GST).  As a result, the development contribution revenue the council expects to collect will rise to $2.7 billion from $2.23 billion under the current policy.

6.       The demand placed on transport by different types of development has been reviewed.  The analysis shows that retail and commercial development place substantially higher demand on transport infrastructure than is reflected in the current policy.  The draft policy includes higher unit of demand factors for transport, and hence prices, for retail and commercial development with smaller decreases for other development types.  This would more fairly reflect the demand different development types place on the need to invest in infrastructure.

7.       The draft Contributions Policy 2019 also proposes:

·   extending the timeframe for the payment of development contributions on residential construction.  This will better align the time that residential builders pay their DCs with the time when they sell their developments

·   refining and changing funding areas to better match investment with beneficiaries, including adding areas for:

o transport to reflect areas where significant local infrastructure investment is planned

o reserves to provide more detail on projects and their location

·   minor amendments including changes to development types.

 

8.       Consultation on the draft Contributions Policy 2019 is taking place from 19 October until 15 November 2018 including:

·   Five have your say events held across the region

·   engagement with Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum

·   opportunity for submitters to personally present their feedback to councillors on 23 November 2018.

9.       Local board November meetings will consider the draft Contribution Policy 2019 and resolve their feedback to inform the Governing Body’s decision making in December.

10.     Consultation is supported by a Consultation Document and Supporting Information, Attachments B and C respectively, which set out:

·   an overview of how the council is responding to growth and how development contributions fit within this context

·   describes how we set development contributions charges.

11.     Details the key changes in our draft Contributions Policy and why we have proposed them.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a)      resolve feedback on the Contributions Policy 2019.

 

Horopaki / Context

12.     The current policy is known as the Contributions Policy 2015 (Variation A) and reflects the Long-term Plan (LTP) 2015-2025. Development contributions have recovered approximately $400 million of funding for growth projects in the last three years.

13.     Council reviewed the current policy and recommended that it be amended to reflect changes to capital expenditure in the 10-Year Budget. At its meeting on 30 April 2018 the Governing Body agreed to consult on the draft Contributions Policy 2019 in May 2018.

14.     Feedback from the development community requested more detailed supporting information and a longer period for consultation on the draft policy. In response, at its meeting on 27 June 2018 the Governing Body agreed to extend the current policy until 31 January 2019 so that additional supporting information for the policy could be prepared and further consultation on the 2019 policy undertaken.

15.     The policy has been reviewed in accordance with the following principles:

·   purpose and principles of development contributions under the Local Government Act 2002

·   equitable sharing of costs of growth between ratepayers, developers and other members of the community having regard to such matters as who causes the costs and who receives the benefits

·   equitable sharing of costs of growth between different types of development and different funding areas

·   revenue predictability for the council and cost certainty for developers

·   administrative simplicity

·   ensuring legislative compliance.

16.     Schedule Five to the attached draft Contributions Policy 2019 considers the appropriateness of development contributions as a funding source in accordance with the requirements of section 101(3) of the Local Government Act 2002. Our Revenue and Financing Policy sets out how the council will fund capital and operating expenditure for each of its activities including its decisions to use DCs to fund growth capital expenditure.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

Capital expenditure and funding for Auckland’s growth

Capital investment and development contribution revenue

17.     The table below sets out the changes in development contribution (DC) revenue by activity between the current policy and the draft Contributions Policy 2019.

DC revenue by activity ($ billion)

Current DC policy

Draft DC policy 2019

 Transport

0.7

1.1

 Stormwater

0.5

0.5

 Parks and community infrastructure

1.0

1.1

Total

2.2

2.7

 

Contributions pricing

18.     The 10-Year Budget assumes that a Contributions Policy 2019 will be adopted reflecting the Revenue and Financing Policy position that growth-related infrastructure investment should be funded from development contributions.  The 10-Year Budget assumes that the policy will provide for DCs to recover $2.7 billion of the cost of the planned investment in growth infrastructure.

19.     The indicative urban DC will rise from around $21,000 to $26,000 (excl. GST).  DCs vary widely depending on the type of development and the infrastructure needed to support growth in different locations.

20.     Some infrastructure investments provide benefits across the region or respond to cost pressures driven by growth irrespective of location.  Under the proposed policy to recover these costs every development would pay $8,090 per Housing Unit Equivalent (HUE) for regional infrastructure.  However, the sub-regional and local requirements for infrastructure vary depending on the infrastructure required to support growth in that area and the capacity of existing infrastructure.  As a result, DC prices would vary across the region e.g.

·   Manurewa-Papakura - new DC price will be $42,182 to reflect increase in stormwater and parks investment

·   Manukau Central - new DC price will be $22,572 as there is capacity available in existing network infrastructure.

 

Impact of increasing DC price

21.     Raising the price of DCs:

·   better aligns DCs with actual cost of infrastructure

·   increases certainty that infrastructure will be delivered

·   encourages developers to more accurately price land purchased for development to reflect future DC costs

·   negatively impacts developers who have paid for land based on current DC prices.

22.     Economic research indicates that increasing the DC price does not generally increase house prices.  House prices are determined by the balance of supply and demand.   Development is only cost plus where the value of land for housing is the same as its value in alternative uses i.e. agriculture.  The price of land that can be developed for housing or business use in Auckland is much higher than its value in agricultural use.

 

23.     Developers generally establish the price they will pay for land based on:

Expected sale price of finished house (as set by the market – supply and demand)

-    Land development costs

-    Construction costs

-    Council cost including DCs

-    Profit margin

=        Price paid for land

p

Alternative options considered

24.     There are two alternatives to the proposed increase in development contributions;

·   defer or halt planned capital projects supporting growth

·   increase ratepayer funding of these projects.

25.     The increase in development contributions price over period of the 10-Year Budget is forecast to provide an additional $500 million of revenue.  Without this revenue the council would need to reduce its planned capital expenditure by between $1 billion and $4 billion depending on which projects were prioritised.  This sum exceeds the loss in revenue because development contributions make up varying proportions of the funding of individual projects[4].  This option was not adopted as these investments are vital to:

·   maintaining service levels in the face of growth pressures

·   supporting making land available for new development in both the greenfields and brownfields.

26.     To maintain the planned level of investment without increasing development contributions would require an increase in rates funding of between $50 million and $200 million per annum.  This is equivalent to an additional general rates increase of between 3 and 13 per cent.  Land owners, developers and the owners of new construction are the beneficiaries of the portion of investment in infrastructure that supports growth.  This option was not proposed as it is appropriate that the growth share of funding comes from the beneficiaries via development contributions not general ratepayers.

Possible legislative changes to funding of Community Infrastructure

27.     Central government has recently introduced the Local Government (Community Well-being) Amendment Bill which would restore the Council’s ability to use DCs to fund a broader range of community infrastructure (including, for example, public swimming pools and libraries).  If the legislation passes the council can consider changing its capital budgets and amending the policy to include the growth component of any qualifying expenditure.

Unit of demand factors

28.     Different types of development place different demands on infrastructure.  The council uses unit of demand factors to fairly share the cost of infrastructure across development types.

29.     Demand factors are set relative to the standard residential dwelling of between 100m2 and 249m2.  A standard residential dwelling is referred to as a household equivalent unit (HUE).  For example a retirement unit is charged 30 per cent of the rate for transport that a residential dwelling pays i.e. 0.3 HUE.

 

 

Non-residential transport

30.     Transport demand factors are calculated using data on the daily volume of trips generated from each development type.  For residential development the demand factor is adjusted for relative occupancy levels between residential development types.

31.     A review of the statistical trip generation data shows that retail and commercial developments generate substantially more trips than residential and other development types.  These results are consistent with officers’ experience of case by case analysis undertaken by the former councils of the transport impacts of this type of development.

32.     The transport demand factors proposed are set out in the tables below.  Because non-residential developments are usually larger than residential dwellings the demand factors are translated into HUEs per 100m2.

Units of demand per 100m2

Development Type

Current DC Policy

Draft DC Policy 2019

Commercial

0.37 HUE

0.73 HUE

Retail

0.47 HUE

2.79 HUE

Education and Health

0.37 HUE

0.37 HUE

Production and Distribution

0.29 HUE

0.10 HUE

Other non-residential not specified above

0.36 HUE

1.00 HUE

33.     These transport demand factors are comparable with those for other councils. Hamilton sets the rate for high demand non-residential at 2.75 HUEs (which includes retail) and Queenstown 2.83.  Christchurch and Wellington also use higher factors for commercial and retail development.

34.     The demand factors derived from the analysis above produce substantial price changes for retail and commercial development.  As this type of development represents a small proportion of overall development the price reduction for other development types is lower.

35.     As the transport component of DCs varies across the region based on the need for investment in each area the exact price effects will vary.  In broad average terms the DC transport price for retail will rise by $18,000 per 100m2 and $2,900 for commercial if the proposed demand factors are used in comparison to the current factors.  It will fall by $1,450 per 100m2 for production and $500 for a standard residential dwelling.  The impact is illustrated with examples based on two recent developments below

·   5,000m2 retail mall development in the North would pay $1.3 million under the proposed demand factors whereas they would have paid $224k under the current demand factors.

·   50,000m2 production development in the South would pay $410k under the proposed demand factors whereas they would pay $1.15 million under the current demand factors.

36.     Two alternative options to making the changes to non-residential transport unit of demand factors were considered:

·   retaining the status quo

·   move to the new factors in equal steps over a three year period.

37.     Retaining the status quo was rejected on the basis that the evidence clearly shows that transport demand is much higher for retail and commercial development than for other development types.  At present other development is effectively subsidising retail and commercial development.  Large developers operating nationwide will be aware of these differences in DC prices.

38.     As the price increases are substantial the council could consider a three year transition.  This option was rejected as it would extend the current subsidisation.  The price changes are substantial however the subsidisation is also large.  It is likely that developers operating nationwide will have been expecting this change for some time.

39.     It was also noted that a transition could create administration issues and present revenue risks that may be difficult to forecast.  Developers often lodge consents early when they become aware of pending changes to contributions prices.  A transition of this nature would create incentives for all development types around the staging of transitional price changes.  Retail developers may try to lodge consents prior to the date of changes and others may delay applications.  This is likely to have implications for both our revenue forecasts and our consenting and DC assessment teams.

Reserves acquisition, reserve development and community facilities

40.     The council’s unit of demand factors for reserves acquisition, reserve development and community facilities are based primarily on the relative occupancy of different types of residential development compared to a standard residential dwelling.

41.     Officers are reviewing the relative use of reserves and community facilities by the occupants of different residential development types.  Part of this review involves undertaking an extensive survey of usage of reserves and community facilities by Aucklanders.  To ensure this survey provides the best information it needs to cover Aucklanders’ use across seasons.

42.     The results of the survey are expected to be available early next year.  Officers will report the results of the review, including the survey data, in the first quarter of next year.  If the review suggests changes should be considered to the units of demand for reserves acquisition, reserve development and community facilities the policy can be amended at that time following consultation, if appropriate.

Remissions for Māori development and social housing

43.     The current contributions policy does not provide for remissions or waivers of DCs.  Feedback from Māori and social housing developers is that the requirement to pay DCs is an additional challenge to overcome that presents a further barrier to development.  Iwi have raised the many difficulties associated with developing Māori land, as well as noting their recent gifting of land for parks and the historic confiscation of land for public works.

44.     Officers do not recommend the use of DC remissions.  Support for Māori development and social housing is better made transparently from a fixed grant budget or considered on a case by case basis.  Grants enable the council to make decisions on the relative merits of individual proposals rather than automatically supporting or rejecting applications on predetermined criteria.

45.     The council currently offers support for DCs for Māori development through the Marae and Papakāinga grant made available through the Māori Cultural Initiatives Fund.  The policies governing the fund are currently being reviewed and will be considered by the Community Development and Safety Committee later this year.

46.     Council does not currently offer a regional grant scheme that enables funding of DCs for social housing.  The council’s position to date has been that social housing is a government responsibility.  However, the council did provide a one-off grant of $475,000 to the City Mission for the development of the HomeGround facility.  The grant was based on an estimate of DCs and consenting costs.  Officers recommend that if the council wishes to consider extending support for DCs for social housing then this should be through the development of a grants scheme as part of the Annual Plan 2019/2020.  A grant can be used to fund any development costs and not just council fees, as was the case with the HomeGround grant.

47.     DCs are set to recover the cost of planned growth infrastructure from developers. Any remission of DCs would reduce revenue. The loss of revenue from a remission scheme cannot be recovered from other developers as they are only required to pay the cost of the demand they place on infrastructure.  Remissions of DCs for some developers do not change the level of demand for infrastructure from other developers.

48.     Revenue would instead need to be made up by reductions in expenditure or increases in general rates.  Remissions administered under the Contributions Policy would need to provide for automatic trigger tests and hence an unconstrained budget.

49.     Further discussion of remissions for Māori development and social housing is set out in Attachment D.

Payment timing

50.     Developers prefer to pay development contributions as close as possible to the potential realisation of their investment e.g. sale of land or buildings.  The current payment timing for the main development types (other triggers make up a very small proportion of development contributions) are at the issue of:

·   land title for subdivisions – around one year before sale

·   building consent for residential development – around six to twelve months before sale

·   code compliance certificate for non-residential development – around time of sale.

51.     DCs invoiced on building consent for residential development are approximately 25 per cent of total DC revenue.  Residential developments are currently required to pay DCs when the building consent is issued. Officers propose to adjust the payment timing for residential developments as follows:

·   a consent that creates five or more dwelling units will be treated as non-residential development. This will allow the DCs to be invoiced at time the Code Compliance Certificate (CCC) is applied for. This will extend the time until council receives payment by an average of 12 months.

·   all other residential consents will be invoiced six months after building consent is issued.

52.     This change will support residential developers by better aligning the requirement to pay DCs with developers’ cash flows. Reducing the amount of capital investment required prior to construction will make it easier for developers to finance and progress residential projects.  This proposal formed part of consultation on the draft Contributions Policy 2019 in May and was supported by all of the 17 submissions that commented on it.

53.     The proposed changes will lead to a one-off reduction in the council’s DC revenue of $10 million for 2018/2019.  The council can manage this change within its present budget.  The change is not material over the 10-Year Budget period as all developments will still pay, just slightly later.

54.     The council includes the interest cost of the difference between the receipt of DCs and the timing of investment in growth related projects.  The cost of receiving DC payments on residential building development slightly later will be factored into the DC price.  The proposal will increase the DC price by between $100 and $200 (or less than 1 per cent) on average depending on the units of demand used for transport.

55.     Considered was also given to retaining the status quo.  However, preference was given to the easing of cash flow demands on residential builders rather than land developers focusing on subdivision and non-residential builders.  Residential builders are often operating at a smaller scale with more limited access to capital.  Providing them additional time eases their cash flow demands and supports the dwelling construction the council is seeking.

56.     Neither the proposal or the status quo present any risk to the council in terms of payment security.  The council has statutory powers to recover unpaid DCs, including registering a statutory charge on property where DCs have not been paid.  While the council has some aged DC debt this is a very small proportion of the DCs invoiced over the last 8 years.  In this time the council has written off less than $100,000 of DC debt out of $740 million invoiced.

57.     Two administrative changes are also proposed to payment timing and enforcement.  Developers who require a land use consent but cannot be assessed for DCs on a resource consent or building consent will be required to pay on land use consent.  At present non-residential developments are required to pay on issue of a code of compliance certificate (CCC) or certificate of public use (CPU).  Some developments do not require a CCC or CPU to operate and are avoiding payment.  It is proposed that all non-residential developments will be required to pay at the latest 24 months of issue of a building consent.  This provides sufficient time for developers to realise their investment whilst ensuring securing of payment for council.

Other proposed changes to the Policy

Funding areas

58.     The draft Contributions Policy 2019 includes seven additional funding areas for transport. These funding areas allocate the cost of transport infrastructure to the priority growth areas in Northwest, Dairy Flat/Wainui/Silverdale, Greater Tamaki and Albany, and transport infrastructure, solely, mainly road sealing, for the benefit of rural areas in the North, West and South.

59.     Changes have also been made to the funding areas for reserves to provide a more refined allocation of these costs to development areas.  The Greenfield, Urban and Rural funding areas have been replaced with Northern Greenfield, Southern Greenfield, Northwest Greenfield and Urban funding areas. As a result the DC costs better reflect the differences in investment required to meet the needs of future growth.  A new funding area has also been created for reserves and community facilities in Greater Tamaki to reflect the specific needs and plans for that area.

60.     Two new stormwater funding areas have also been added where investment is now planned Hauraki Gulf Islands and Omaha/Matakana.

Development Types

61.     Amendments are also proposed to the following development types to better reflect the demand they place on infrastructure or clarify definitions.  Maintaining the status quo for these areas was rejected to ensure an appropriate level of cost was recovered and reduce the administration costs associated with customer confusion.

Student accommodation

62.     Create a new ‘student accommodation units’ category for student accommodation (administered by schools/universities).  This category will have a lower price for transport and open space than a standard residential dwelling because of lower occupancy.

Small ancillary dwelling units

63.     Change the ‘size’ definition of small ancillary dwelling units to those with a gross floor area less than or equal to 65m². This aligns the Contributions Policy with the definition in the Unitary Plan to avoid customer confusion.

Retirement villages

64.     Amend the definition of a ‘Retirement Village’ to align with the Unitary Plan to avoid customer confusion.

Accommodation units for short term rental

65.     Amend the definition of Accommodation Units to clarify that they include properties used for short term rental.  Long-term rentals will continue to be treated as dwelling units.

A long-term view of growth infrastructure costs

66.     The 10-year Budget 2018-2028 includes over $26 billion of investment for Auckland including significant investment to support new development over the next 10 years. This investment is not, however, sufficient to enable all the future urban areas to be developed now or all of the intensification projects to proceed immediately.

67.     The proposed contributions policy seeks to recover a fair share of the infrastructure costs currently planned from developments that are enabled by or benefit from this planned infrastructure. In areas that already have sufficient infrastructure, or it is planned within the next ten years, the policy describes the contribution to the cost of this infrastructure that will be charged to different types of development.

68.     For areas where the infrastructure provision is not already provided or scheduled for the 2018-2028 period development cannot yet proceed due to the infrastructure constraints. We will continue to work on determining the cost and funding arrangements for the infrastructure required. The development charges for these areas included in the draft Contributions Policy 2019 do not yet fully reflect the true cost of providing infrastructure in those areas. For some of these development areas, particularly greenfield areas, the council infrastructure cost per house has been estimated at around $70,000. Once the costs and funding arrangements are clear growth charges will be updated to ensure they are paying their fair share when the areas are able to be developed.

69.     Limits on the council’s ability to borrow mean that additional investment, even if it is eventually funded by developers, would require new or alternative financing mechanisms. We continue to work on new ways to partner with others to build and finance infrastructure. If we can do this successfully this will enable more development areas to be supported earlier.

Public Consultation

70.     Public consultation will run from 19 October to 4pm on 15 November 2018.

71.     Five Have Your Say Events (HYSE) have been planned to take place during the public consultation period:

·   South - Manukau

·   North - Takapuna

·   Central – CBD

·   Retirement village developers - CBD

·   Western Springs Garden Hall (evening).

72.     The location and timing of HYSE are scheduled to provide for developers and the public to engage with the council at locations and timings organised to suit their needs and preferences.  These five HYSE events provide an opportunity for developers and other interested parties to learn more about the draft policy and provide feedback.  All comments will be captured and reported through to the Finance and Performance Committee to help inform decision-making on the final policy.

73.     It is planned to ask those providing written feedback if they would like to register their interest in personally presenting their feedback to councillors on Friday 23 November 2018.  This will provide time for 30 presentations allowing 15 minutes for each presentation including questions.  Seventeen submitters expressed an interest to be heard following the May consultation.  The invitation will note that it may not be possible to make time to hear everyone if the event is over-subscribed given the need to manage costs and limitations on councillors’ available time.  If necessary, slots would be allocated on a “first come, first served” basis.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe /
Local impacts and local board views

74.     The DC price varies by location depending on the cost of infrastructure required to support development in an area. The funding areas are set out in the attached policy documents.

75.     Officers provided briefings on the draft Contributions Policy 2019 to local board cluster meetings in October. 

76.     Local boards have a statutory responsibility for identifying and communicating the interests and preferences of the people in its local board area in relation to the context of the strategies, policies, plans, and bylaws of Auckland Council. This report provides an opportunity for the local board to give input on the draft Contributions Policy 2019.

77.     Local board decisions and feedback are being sought in this report to inform the Governing Body’s consideration of the adoption of the Contribution Policy 2019 in December.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

78.     Council does not hold information on the ethnicity of developers.  The impact on Māori will be similar to the impact on other developers.

79.     Feedback from Māori received in the May consultation has been considered as part of the development of the revised draft Contributions Policy 2019. Key issues raised were that the Contributions Policy should:

·   reflect the Auckland Plan 2050 outcome to support Māori identify and wellbeing, for example by exempting (remitting) DCs for Māori developments 

·   include specific development types for Māori development.

80.     The remission of DCs for Māori development is discussed in this report.

81.     Development types are created based on evidence that different types of development generate different levels of demand for infrastructure. The policy does not currently contain specific Māori development types. Māori developments are categorised under broader development types based on the demand they generate. For example, kaumātua housing is treated the same as retirement villages, and marae fall under community facilities. As more Māori developments occur, evidence of demand generation can be used to reclassify developments or create new development types.

82.     Māori have expressed aspirations for their land that includes new forms of development that may not fit into existing development types. Legislation provides for the reconsideration of DC assessments for individual developments where evidence is available to show that the demand it will generate is less than its classification under the existing policy. Council also proactively reviews the availability of evidence for demand, and amends the Contributions Policy for new or adjusted development types and demand factors as evidence becomes available.  Council will continue to work with Māori to ensure that the Contributions Policy, in its design and its application, appropriately reflects the realities of Māori development.

83.     Feedback from iwi on the draft Contributions Policy 2019 will be sought as part of public consultation and via engagement with the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum.  Mana Whenua will also be invited to present their feedback to the councillors through the formal engagement for stakeholders referred to in the public consultation section above.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

84.     The financial implications are set out in the report.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

85.     Investment in DC funded growth related infrastructure carries the risk of development projections, and therefore DC revenue, not being met. These risks will be managed through monitoring consent applications and DC revenue.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

86.     Public consultation on the draft Contributions Policy 2019 is to be held from 19 October to 15 November 2018 as above.  Feedback would be reported to the Governing Body workshop on 29 November 2018.  Officers would report on adoption of the final policy to the 13 December 2018 meeting of the Governing Body.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Draft Contributions Policy 2019 (Under Separate Cover)

 

b

Consultation Document (Under Separate Cover)

 

c

Supporting information (Under Separate Cover)

 

d

Remissions of development contributions for Maori development and social housing (Under Separate Cover)

 

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Felipe Panteli - Senior Policy Advisor

Beth Sullivan - Principal Advisor Policy

Andrew Duncan - Manager Financial Policy

Authorisers

Matthew Walker - Group Chief Financial Officer

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Ōrākei Local Boards

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

Update on development at 471 Riddell Road, Glendowie

 

File No.: CP2018/21069

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To update the Ōrākei Local Board on a development and associated complaints at 471 Riddell Rd, Glendowie.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       A large consented shed at 471 Riddell Road, Glendowie has caused a number of complaints from neighbouring residents – particularly about the earthworks, the built form and eventual usage of the building.

3.       At this stage, the Regulatory Compliance unit is not taking any enforcement action at this site.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a)      receive update on the development at 471 Riddell Road, Glendowie report.

 

Horopaki / Context

4.       Building consent was granted for the construction of a 12 metre by 9 metre shed at 471 Riddell Road, Glendowie in September 2017 (reference number BCO10253137). Approved plans are attached to this report as attachment A.

5.       A planning assessment of the building consent application found that resource consent was not required. The building’s scale, bulk and materiality comply with the Auckland Unitary Plan.

6.       Complaints have been received about a number of items including the volume of earthworks, the nature of the building and the eventual usage of the building – these questions have also been raised by the Ōrākei Local Board (Resolution number OR/2018/173).

7.       The site is zoned Residential – Mixed Housing Suburban in the Auckland Unitary Plan.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

Earthworks

8.       There have been complaints about the volume of earthworks at the site. Initial calculations undertaken by our planning team during the building consent application process assumed staged earthworks and showed that earthworks would comply with the unitary plan permitted activity requirement of <250m3.

9.       Earthworks are completed and staff are satisfied that no further action is necessary.

Bulk, scale and built form

10.     The building itself complies with the Auckland Unitary Plan, including height in relation to boundary, maximum height and building coverage. The rules in the Residential Mixed Housing Zone do not control what materials can be used for a building such as this.

Home occupation

11.     The building has been described as a boat shed, shed and garage. Having investigated the use of the building staff understand that it will be used for the storage of vehicles including a boat.

12.     The owner of the site runs an earthmoving business from the property. This is provided for in the Residential – Mixed Housing Suburban zone however must comply with the following standards or will require resource consent.

H4.6.2. Home occupations

Purpose: to enable people to work from home at a scale that the residential character and amenity is maintained.

(1) A home occupation must comply with all the following standards:

(a) at least one person engaged in the home occupation must use the dwelling on the site as their principal place of residence;

(b) no more than two people who do not use the dwelling as their principal place of residence may work in the home occupation;

(c) no more than four people in total may work in the home occupation;

(d) the sale of goods or services from the home occupation that requires customers to come to the site and the delivery of goods to and from the site may not occur before 7am or after 7pm;

(e) car trips to and from the home occupation activity must not exceed 20 per day;

(f) heavy vehicle trips must not exceed two per week;

(g) no more than one commercial vehicle associated with the home occupation may be on site at any one time;

(h) storage for rubbish and recycling associated with the home occupation must be provided on site and screened from public view;

(i) materials or goods manufactured, serviced or repaired in the home occupation must be stored and worked on within a building on the same site; and

(j) goods sold from the home occupation must be:

(i) goods produced on site; or

(ii) goods that are primarily ordered by mail or electronic transaction and redistributed by post or courier; or

(iii) goods ancillary and related to a service provided by the home occupation.

13.     Staff have advised the property owner of the above standards, and are satisfied that, at present, the above standards are being met.

14.     Should evidence suggest that any of the rules have been breached Compliance staff will investigate to ensure ongoing compliance.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

15.     There are no financial implications other than the cost of ongoing correspondence and investigations.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

16.     Staff will continue to manage this matter according to best practice and based on legal advice.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

17.     The Regulatory Compliance unit will continue to work with the property owners and concerned residents.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Approved Plans: 471 Riddell Road, Glendowie

173

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Steve Pearce - Manager – Regulatory Compliance

Authorisers

Craig Hobbs - GM Licensing & Regulatory Compliance

Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Ōrākei Local Boards

 



Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 



Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 



Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 



Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

Regional Facilities Auckland Fourth Quarter Performance Report for the quarter ending 30 June 2018

 

File No.: CP2018/20107

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To update the Ōrākei Local Board on the performance of Regional Facilities Auckland for the quarter ending 30 June 2018.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a)      receive the Regional Facilities Auckland Quarterly Performance Report for the quarter ending 30 June 2018.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Regional Facilities Auckland Quarterly Performance Report

201

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Kim  Lawgun - Democracy Advisor

Authoriser

Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Ōrākei Local Boards

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

Chairperson's Report

 

File No.: CP2018/21186

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

To provide the Chairperson with an opportunity to update the Ōrākei Local Board Members on projects, activities and issues since last reported.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation

a)      That the Chairperson’s November 2018 report be received.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Chairperson's Report - November 2018

225

b

Ōrākei Local Board Business Awards photos

233

c

Local Board accomplishments by work programme

235

d

Waitematā Ward changes – map

237

e

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Ward changes - map

239

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Kim  Lawgun - Democracy Advisor

Authoriser

Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Ōrākei Local Boards


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

 

 


 

 


 

 


 


 

 


 

 


 

 

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

\


 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 



Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

Board Member Report – Carmel Claridge - November 2018

 

File No.: CP2018/21216

 

  

 

Purpose of the report

1.       To update the Ōrākei Local Board Members on projects, activities and issues.

 

Recommendations

a)      That the report be received.

b)      That Auckland Transport be requested to investigate the need for safer road markings for cyclists at the Tamaki Drive/Ngapipi Road Intersection for where cyclists must merge with road traffic and report proposed solutions to the Board.

c)      That Auckland Transport be requested to provide a solution to the current road user conflict on a green light at the recently constructed Ngapipi Road/Tamaki Drive intersection between city bound cyclists on the cycle lane and left turning vehicles into Ngapipi Road.

d)      That the Ōrākei Local Board note its concern about the increasing number of dangerous incidents involving Lime scooters in the local board area, and request a report from Auckland Transport on what measures are being taken to ensure adequate enforcement of regulations around their use, and the feasibility of a change in regulation to allow e-scooter use on cycle ways.

e)      That Auckland Transport be requested to review the safety of the intersection at Michaels Ave – Ellerslie - Panmure Highway and provide options for safer pedestrian crossing.

 

 

Portfolio Lead: Transport

Other (alternate portfolio holder): Parks and Reserves

Transport

Ngapipi Road /Tamaki Drive Intersection Safety Issues

Further to the presentation made by representatives from Bike Tamaki Drive to the Board’s October Business meeting, I met with them on 29 October to discuss some of their concerns. Some of the things raised by the group relate to standard road and road corridor maintenance that should be carried out as a matter of course.

Cycleway Markings

One of the more urgent things to address is the dangerous alignment of the road navigation markings on the cycle lane exiting this intersection travelling west along Tamaki Drive towards the city. The current markings indicate that all cycling commuters will leave the road and proceed up onto the shared pathway. These marking are strong visual cue leading motorists to assume cyclists will follow the cycle path line through and up onto the pavement rather than remain on road, although some of them will of course be doing so.

Another problem that requires remediation is the need to provide adequate road markings on Tamaki Drive to provide a safe means for cyclists to merge into the line of traffic flow at the end of the cycleway lane east of the intersection. In its current form the cycle lane here ends abruptly. There is no indication to motorists that the cycle way ends. Nor is there a means by which cyclists can safely exercise the option of leaving the road and entering the pathway as an alternative to merging into traffic. There is a sign that states ‘Cycle Way Ends’, but this is located in the pavement, and is not easily visible to motorists or cyclists. In its current placing this sign is superfluous and is an unnecessary additional structure on the pavement that creates both physical and visual clutter.

Green Light - Car/Cycle Conflict

Current signaling at the intersection creates a direct conflict between bikes travelling straight on the cycle path on a green light along Tamaki Drive towards the city and vehicles also travelling towards the city turning left on a green into Ngapipi Road. This is an accident waiting to happen. Motorists should have a visual cue to expect some cyclists exercising the option to remain on the road.

Reconnaissance Ride

There is an opportunity for Board members to join me and a Bike Tamaki Drive member on a ride along Tamaki Drive on the morning of Friday, 9 November to experience the matters first hand as a cyclist.

Ellerslie Transport Issues

The Ellerslie Residents’ Association are strongly lobbying for the relocation of the Ladies Mile cycleway to the Aaron Road/ Ballin Road /Amy Street corridor to create an upgraded and safer North – South route through Ellerslie.

They have also identified a number of road safety issues in the suburb that need addressing, and their comprehensive report setting these out is attached.

They have requested removal of the Ladies Mile cycleway, the provision of safer pedestrian facilities along Ladies Mile, and a solution to the congestion issues and dangers at the problematic intersection at Pukerangi Crescent. Those matters were raised with Auckland Transport some months ago, referenced in my previous Board reports and we are still waiting on a response to our resolutions.

·   Michaels Ave/Main Highway (Ellerslie - Panmure Highway Intersection).

This busy intersection involves three roads and provides access to significant recreation areas, Michael Park School, and residences. It comprises an angled wide mouthed intersection that has a blind corner and is extremely difficult for pedestrians to navigate safely. The lack of any protection for pedestrians at this intersection despite it being near to bus stops and in a densely populated residential area poses significant risk. Safer crossing facilities are needed across Michaels Ave.

Lime Scooters

The recent influx of Lime Scooters is already causing much controversy within the local board area, with reports of injury having been made directly to Local Board members. Dozens of the scooter are to be seen in clusters along Tamaki Drive. They tend to be strategically placed at bus stops, outside shops and amenities, and alongside the Onzo bikes. They are also clearly evident elsewhere throughout the local board area.

Councillor Christine Fletcher recently had a ‘near miss’ experience with one travelling at speed as she used a pedestrian crossing - resulting in a call from the Mayor for a report on their safety. That report is now publicly available though was not sent directly to Local Boards which is a disappointment given the impact of these vehicles on our communities and the wider public interest in the matter. On a personal level, I had a similar experience to Councillor Fletcher on an otherwise very quiet and pleasant Sunday afternoon as I moved across the pavement on Tamaki Drive - only to be very nearly collected by a pre-teen clearly having difficulty controlling the scooter she was riding at speed. The three scooter users I saw during this incident were all under the age of 18. I have yet to observe any users of the scooters wearing helmets and have seen a person with a child accompanying them riding at speed on the road. This is despite a comprehensive set of regulations around their use which the general public is clearly either unaware of or ignoring.

A strange anomaly within that set of regulations is that scooters are banned from cycleways. If a scooter is travelling at speed (Lime scooters have capacity to travel up to 30km per hour) it is common sense that they should be ridden in the cycle ways, rather than on footpaths where they are sharing space with users traveling at much lower speeds.

While the Board supports the use of alternative modes of transport, there needs to be adequate consideration of the safety risks posed by any new form of transport. We are disappointed that the licensing of a new activity of this nature, that has a very notable impact on our residents as they transport themselves around the local board area, involved decision making by Council officers only, and that Local Boards and the wider public were given no opportunity to raise concerns or provide a view on whether or not the motorised scooters were welcome within the community.

Tamaki Drive Vehicle Entrances

Several sites on Tamaki Drive have been identified by Bike Tamaki Drive as potential danger points where cars must cross over the footpath for ingress/egress. These include but are not limited to:

·   Akarana Yacht Club Entrance

·   Tamaki Yacht Club Entrance

·   Mission Bay Car Park Entrances (Selwyn Reserve East & West).

A comprehensive plan to create a safe solution for vehicle crossing on the increasingly used recreational pathway along the stretch of Tamaki Drive needs to be considered. Traffic movement to those sites is likely to increase dramatically in the activity around the Americas Cup. The Board needs to consider whether the existing infrastructure, signage, and safety measures are sufficient to cope with that anticipated increase in pathway users and vehicular movements.

Pavement Pinch Point Ōrākei Wharf

Concerns have been raised about the adequacy of the pavement area on the pathway opposite Kelly Tarltons adjacent to the Okahu Wharf to accommodate the increasing number of users at busy times. This is also a popular stop off point for tourists to take photographs and is at times becoming increasingly congested.

Bus Shelter – Meadowbank Train Station Bus Stop

During the consultation for the installation of the bus stop to service the 782 route the Board recommended that planning include the installation of a bus shelter at the train station stop We received assurance that plans would include the shelter, and it would be installed. There is growing concern amongst residents that despite the works to reconfigure parking and the bus stop installation finished some time ago the shelter has not yet appeared.

Environment

From the Deck

This project continues to be extremely well supported by residents. Attached is the most recent newsletter.

Eastern Songbird Project

On Friday 2 November the Board was notified that the project had handed out 462 traps to date. On Saturday 3 November the 500th rat trap was handed out to a local resident by the Eastern Songbird Project team. The project has been embraced with enthusiasm by our communities. Staff have commented that most people making contact now either in person or online already have a good base knowledge of why rodent control is necessary and are keen to extend their support of our native songbirds on their properties in other ways as well. There is potential for the project to extend into provision of bird feeders, and more focussed education around planting of food sources for the birds. The results that have been achieved with this project to date have been impressive, and there is merit in the project being extended on a regional basis, with a valid argument for the application of regional funding through the Environment levy.

Sewage Overflow in Meadowbank

On Wednesday, 24 November there was raw sewage overflow from a stormwater pipe in Meadowbank discharging to the Purewa Creek. Watercare were on site within 30 minutes of being notified. Watercare have determined that the cause of the blockage in the network was a binding of fats and oils with non- flushable items such as wet wipes. This creates what is known as a ‘fat ball’ which then blocks the system. Watercare’s most recent performance assessment of the Purewa wastewater network has shown that there are sections of the wastewater network that will require upgrade in this area to cope with capacity for growth. Watercare have identified up to 60 properties in the area that have legacy consented stormwater connections to the wastewater network. Healthy Waters will be carrying out investigations of the drainage connections of these properties commencing in December this year, with a view to upgrading as required. There remains concern amongst residents that there is inadequate monitoring of the water quality in the Pourewa Creek, and that more resources need to be put into ensuring the solution proposed is adequate to cope not only with discharges from existing properties, but the planned intensification in the future within the area.

Meadowbank St Johns Residents’ Association

Bus Route Petition

The Meadowbank St Johns community have a petition circulating requesting a change to the 782 bus route to include a gap in the new network that was previously serviced by the now discontinued 635 route. The withdrawal of the 635 service has particularly affected those residents living at the southern end of St Johns Park (Panapa Drive/Norman Lesser). Inclusion of the proposed loop as an addition to the 782 service would ensure St Johns residents have a connection to the bus network, Meadowbank Shopping Centre, Meadowbank Train Station, and local schools Selwyn College and St Thomas’s Primary School. Loss of the 635 service means that some residents of St Johns must walk for up to 1 km often involving steep hills, to the nearest bus stop. The local community is particularly concerned about the effect of loss of connection to a public transport network for elderly and isolated residents, who are not physically capable of walking the distances required to the nearest bus stops.

Meadowbank Community Centre Redevelopment

On their request the following information was provided to the Meadowbank St Johns Residents’ Association for inclusion in their December newsletter. Also provided were copies of FAQ’s provided to Meadowbank Community Centre by Community Facilities via email.

MEADOWBANK COMMUNITY CENTRE

“Few would argue that the current state of the current Meadowbank Community Centre is not up to standard. The cost of constant repairs on an old, and rapidly depreciating building are now becoming prohibitive. Previous Ōrākei Local Boards have lobbied to the Governing Body of Auckland Council for the required funding for an upgrade for the Centre for many years.

 In 2012 Auckland Council voted for $2.75 million of funding to be allocated for the redevelopment of the Community Centre through the Council’s 2016/2017 Long Term Plan. Unfortunately, this funding did not come to fruition.

In 2014 the Ōrākei Ward Councillor at that time, Cameron Brewer, tried to persuade his colleagues around the Council table to bring that funding forward to 2014/2015. Unfortunately, not only did the majority of Council vote not to do so, the funding was pushed out even further to 2020. It is highly unlikely, given the escalating costs of building materials and inflation, that by 2020 this amount of this funding would be sufficient to build a new Centre.

The current Board was therefore left with a situation where they had a structure in a very poor state, with insufficient resources within their own budget for a renewal, having to wait until 2020 for Regional funding. Funding which could continue to be deferred. An assessment report on the building’s condition indicated that it was currently not ‘fit for purpose’ – and the Board had concerns that there was a very real prospect of this asset deteriorating to the extent where it would be deemed non-service. Should a Council property be deemed non-service through Council’s internal processes, it can potentially be removed from the Local Board’s governance by the Governing Body of Council and passed over to Panuku Development Auckland (Council’s development arm) The current Board was not prepared to take the risk of losing this important community asset.

An optimization process whereby the ownership of the site is retained by Council but developed by Panuku, in conjunction with a private partner is the key to obtaining the required funding needed for the Centre and securing the site for the future. The Board’s vision is for a mixed use development with community facilities and Board offices on the ground floor, with housing above. The community facilities will be designed to accommodate a mixed used of new and existing community services. This will enable the Centre to be better used by the wider community.

 The decisions to enable commencement of the process to redevelop were made by the Ōrākei Local Board at its September Business Meeting after long and careful consideration of all options that were available to us. We have complete confidence that those decisions we have made are in the best interests of our communities and will deliver a new purpose-built community facility to our constituents that will stand the test of time. It is anticipated that the sale of the airspace for housing above the ground floor facilities will enable this much needed development for our community to be provided on a cost neutral basis.

Well before any building work starts, the public will have ample opportunity to provide their input into how they would like their Centre to look and what aspirations they have for the types of services they would like to see delivered”.

Carmel Claridge - Deputy Chairman

Ōrākei Local Board

 

Activities:

Date:                           Activities:

8th October                  Attendance at APO concert St Lukes Church & Community Centre– Horn

                                    Classics

9th October                  Auckland Transport Update

                                    Americas Cup Briefing

                                    Meadowbank St Johns Residents’ Association Meeting

10th October                Te reo training with Dean Martin

11th October                Chair/Deputy Chairman meeting

                                    Attendance at Blue Flag Accreditation Presentation – OBC

                                    Hui Practice

                                    Ōrākei Local Board Workshop

12th October                Attendance at Passchendale Commemoration – Auckland Museum

13th October                Meeting with Matthew Cole – Bike Tamaki Drive

14th October                Mission Bay Tennis Club Rosebowl Tournament – Attendance

16th October                Parks Meeting – Bledisloe House

                                    Leases Meeting – Bledisloe House

                                    Attendance – Ōrākei Local Board Business Awards

17th October                Chairing User Group Meeting – Meadowbank Community Centre 

                                    Redevelopment

18th October                Hui Preparation

                                    Presentation Oceania Village

                                    Ōrākei Local Board Business Meeting

25th October                OLB Workshop

27th October                Have Your Say Consultation Event – Stage 2 GI2TP

29th October                Meeting with Kiri Barfoot – Bike Tamaki Drive

31st October                Judging Halloween Costumes – Remuera Business Assoc

1st November              OLB Workshop

3rd November             Attendance at MSJRA event (Bus Petition & Rat Trap Education)  

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Photographs – Ngapipi Intersection Issues

247

b

Ellerslie Residents Association –Safety Issues

249

c

“From the Deck” Newsletter

263

     

Signatory

Author

Carmel Claridge - Ōrākei Local Board Member

 Date: November  2018


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


 


 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

Board Member Report - Troy Churton November 2018

 

File No.: CP2018/21062

 

  

 

Purpose of the report

1.       To update the Ōrākei Local Board Members on projects, activities and issues since the last meeting.

 

Recommendation

a)      That the report be received.

b)      That Auckland Transport report to the Board on what progress is being made between itself, Progressive and any retirement village operator or other commercial entity regarding redevelopment of the Clonbern Road car park and supermarket area.

 

Portfolio Lead: Resource Consenting and Regulatory

Other (alternate portfolio holder): Heritage; Environment (Joint)

Snapshot of Planning and Regulatory matters and general representative work

 

2.       Planning file enquiries and comments relating to a range of applications including other matters such as:

·   Responding to constituent feedback and enquiries regarding Drive Holdings Mission Bay development

·   Attending Mission Bay Residents public meeting regarding Drive Holdings development proposal – held at Selwyn College

·   Liaison with Remuera Heritage regarding various consent status matters

·   Circulating weekly consent applications and liquor licence items across Residential Associations and fielding calls or enquiries from them

·   Attending Remuera Business Association AGM – discussing updated plans for redevelopment of New World and car park areas

·   Attending Ageing and Longevity lecture – Auckland War Memorial Museum

·   Attending OLB Business Awards function

·   Updating advice to Board on Public and Nuisance bylaw

·   Liaisons with locals regarding Ōrākei Boardwalk railings and exchange of views regarding process for that going forward

·   Attending Safe summer swim series for prize-giving

·   Follow up attendances regarding several planning files including:

o 30 Paratai Drive demolition

o 71 Rukutai Street subdivision and redevelopment

o 128 Lucerne Road new build development

o 471 Riddell Road planning process irregularities or not – with support of Member Rundle

o 42A Codrington Crescent earth removal

o 91 Clonbern Road demolition

o 107 Bell Road  - consent on hold status

Clonbern Road, Remuera car park

3.       The engineer results of ongoing monitoring are attached to this report (attachment A) per my request with previously resolved support of the Board.

4.       Recently at Remuera Business Association, I understood Auckland Transport (AT) was seeking to involve Panuku Development Auckland into the redevelopment of the land area AT owns in the supermarket vicinity.

5.       There is good reason to think if this was done, the entire redevelopment process would take years longer. I believe both the car park needs and private owners want redevelopment to happen as soon as possible.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Clonbern Road Carpark Monthly Monitoring Inspection Report - September 2018

269

     

Signatory

Author

Troy Churton - Ōrākei Local Board Member

Date: 29 October 2018


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

Board Member Report - Colin Davis

 

File No.: CP2018/21220

 

  

 

Purpose of the report

To update the Ōrākei Local Board Members on projects, activities and issues since last reported.

 

Recommendation

a)      That the report be received.

 

Portfolio Lead:  Parks & Reserves (joint); Arts and Libraries; Heritage

Alternate portfolio holder: Environment; Resource Consenting and Regulatory

Other - internal appointments: Mayor’s WWI Memorial Advisory Group; Quality Advice Political Advisory Group

Other - appointments to external community organisations: Stonefields Residents Association Inc. (Lead); St Heliers/Glendowie Residents Association Inc. (Alternate); Auckland Netball Centre Inc. (Lead); Friends of Churchill Park (Lead); Ōrākei Basin Advisory Group (joint parks portfolio holder); St Heliers Bay Village Association (Alternate); Michaels Avenue Reserve Community Liaison Committee (Alternate).

Arts

As at the date of writing this report, a second work has been completed, although not entirely to the approved design: on the small utility box outside the St Heliers library. The final detailed design for the front of the box in Maheke Street is yet to be approved, although the other three sides and roof were finished some time ago. The design for the box in Polygon Road, adjacent to the St Heliers War Memorial Hall, is being prepared; this will have an image of the three art deco houses which had been in Turua Street. This project was commissioned in 2017 as part of the utility box artwork programme for completion in the 2017/2018 financial year.

Heritage

(1)     Tamaki Drive Searchlights

The scope of works for the restoration has been finalised and the tender process has started.

(2)     Heritage Projects

(i)    The revision of the Board’s WWI Roll of Honour is being finalised. It also includes a new section recording various Rolls of Honour and Memorials associated with the Board’s area.

(ii)   Restoration by the Heritage unit of the rare 90-year old heritage ventilation pipe in the St Heliers commercial area remains almost a lost cause.

(iii)  It is over six months since I saw initial drafts for the two small plaques at the Millennium Bridge, Mission Bay, which have yet to be approved and installed. One plaque with corrected text is to be relocated for better visibility from the side, to the top of the seawall, and the other new interpretative plaque is also to be placed on top of the seawall; one on either side of the Tamaki Drive entrance to the bridge.

Reports and Submissions

(i)      The printed Board’s Progress and Achievements Report for the period 1 July 2016 to 31 December 2017 has now been published.

(ii)      The Tamaki Drive Precinct Events Guidelines will soon be available in printed form.

Activities (since 5 October 2018)

As well as assisting with a range of citizens’ enquiries, attending meetings, and involvement with other community activities, I have also attended the following to date:

8 October a meeting of the St Heliers village Association.

8 October a performance by members of the Auckland Philharmonia Orchestra at St Luke’s Church, Remuera.

9 October the transport portfolio briefing.

9 October the arts portfolio briefing.

9 October a workshop on the America’s Cup.

11 October te reo practice.

11 October the Ōrākei Local Board workshop various topics.

12 October the annual Passchendaele commemoration at the Auckland War Memorial Museum.

15 October a meeting with the Chairman regarding the agenda for the Board’s business meeting.

15 October the regional/sub regional forum.

15 October a meeting of the St Heliers/Glendowie Residents Association.

16 October the community services monthly portfolio briefing.

16 October the community facilities monthly portfolio briefing.

16 October a briefing on the 2018 Carols on the Green event.

16 October the leases monthly portfolio briefing.

16 October the Ōrākei Local Board Business Awards event.

17 October the St Heliers Village Association AGM.

18 October te reo practice.

18 October a briefing on a proposed retirement village development.

18 October the Ōrākei Local Board business meeting.

19 October the official opening of the Fields of Remembrance at the Auckland War Memorial Museum.

24 October te reo practice.

24 October a meeting of the Stonefields Residents Association.

25 October te reo practice.

25 October the Ōrākei Local Board workshop various topics.

29 October debrief regarding the Board’s Business Awards event.

29 October the Tamaki Drive Protection Society AGM.

30 October the funeral of Mrs Rita Barton, the widow of the late Tom Barton, a former Chairman of the Eastern Bays Community Board and eastern suburbs identity.

1 November a briefing on a development in Riddell Road.

1 November the Ōrākei Local Board workshop various topics.

 

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Signatory

Author

Colin Davis – Member, Ōrākei Local Board of the Auckland Council

Date: 2 November 2018


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

Board Member Report – Toni Millar

 

File No.: CP2018/21356

 

  

 

Purpose of the report

1.       To update the Ōrākei Local Board Members on projects, activities and issues.

 

Recommendation

a)      That the report be received.

 

Portfolio Lead: Environment

Other (alternate portfolio holder): Arts and Libraries; Transport (Joint)

Environment

2.       Eastern Bays Song Bird Project – the team of volunteers, led by part time staff member Julie Robson [who also volunteers many hours] and Chair John Laurence do an amazing job. Thank you.

3.       Community Distribution of Rat traps - The 500th rat trap was handed out on Saturday, 3 November in Mission Bay.

Civil Defence

4.       Civil Defence are seeking feedback on the proposed National Disaster Resilience Strategy .  The proposed strategy is building a culture of resilience and the actions we can all take.  Consultation is open until Friday 7 December 2018.  For more information:  https://www.civildefence.govt.nz/cdem-sector/plans-and-srategies/proposed-national-disaster -resilience-strategy/

Transport

5.      Auckland Transport [AT] Briefing by AT Board Member Mark Gilbert and AT Executive General Manager Wally Thomas.  New initiatives being introduced to address the high number of deaths on roads. The project is called Vison Zero – zero deaths on our roads.

6.       Safety v Speed. Mid November AT are going out to the public to start consultation on 30km speed zones.  The Central City, Kohimarama and St Heliers are among the first areas to consulted with.  It is proposed to have a 30km speed limit on Tamaki Drive, extended to streets throughout these suburbs.

7.       Lime Scooters – recently introduced Lime Scooters, which can go up to 27 km per hour, pose huge safety problems to our communities. On 29 Oct, there had been 26 ACC claims in Auckland [6pm Radio NZ news].  This had increased to 44 ACC claims by Saturday 3rd November. [NZ Herald 3 Nov 2018]

8.       Lime Scooters and NZ Post Delivery Vehicles – Mark Gilbert shared that these vehicles do not meet legal vehicle requirements as stated in the Road Code.  One needs to ask does making these two types of transport road worthy need to be legally addressed?

Art

9.       Auckland East Arts Council Merit Awards Exhibition 2018 – St Thomas’ Church, Corner St Heliers Bay Road and Kohi Road.  10 and 11 November 2018

Other

10.     The Men’s Shed continues to flourish  –  Meeting/Work days are Tuesdays, Fridays and now Saturdays. Alan Minson’s team have made over 800 rat traps. People not in the suburbs of Ōrākei, Mission Bay, Kohi, St Heliers and Glendowie can purchase a trap from either the Men’s Shed or the Songbird project.  Also available are Weta Motels which are great indicators of the ecological health of an area. The next community project is to create a community dog wash for dog owners who come up to the carpark with filthy dogs so that dogs can be washed prior to getting into the car!

Activities:

Date                           Activities

 

9 October                    Creative Communities Committee – Arts Grants for Auckland Council and Creative NZ–  OLB  and Auckland East Arts Council representative

11 October                  OLB Workshop

                                    Ōrākei Residents’ Association Public meeting – Ōrākei RSA

13 October                  Tiritiri Martangi 30th Anniversary Dinner – Ellerslie Racecourse      

14 October                  Mission Bay Tennis Club – Rosebowl Competition  

15 October                  Regional/Sub Regional Cluster Workshop – Voting on line and paper vote

16 October                  OLB Business Awards Dinner – Ellerslie Racecourse         

17 October                  Meadowbank Community Centre Redevelopment Consultation Meeting – OLB offices

18 October                  OLB Workshop

25 October                  Gulf Innovation Fund Together [G.I.F.T] – Neureuter Family  speak of the exemplar conservation project on the Noises Islands

                                    OLB Workshop          

27 October                  Eastern Bays Songbird Project. Okahu Bay Domain - trap tutoring and distribution

29 October                  Auckland Transport briefing to Local Boards – Albert Street

                                    YWCA AGM and Gender Tick Project – Ellen Melville Pioneer Hall

30 October                  Tamaki Drive Protection Society AGM – presentations by Robyn Murdoch from Heritage NZ and Councillor Desley Simpson

31 October                  Eastern Bays Network Meeting - Ōrākei Community Centre

                                    Glendowie College Senior Prize Giving

1 November                OLB Workshop

2 November                Sculpture on the Shore Gala Evening

3 November                Eastern Bays Songbird Project. Mission Bay trap tutoring and distribution

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Photo Montage November – Toni Millar

303

     

Signatory

Author

Toni Millar - Ōrākei Local Board Member

 Date: 5 November 2018


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

Board Member Report – Ros Rundle

 

File No.: CP2018/21346

 

  

 

Purpose of the report

To update the Ōrākei Local Board Members on projects, activities and issues.

 

Recommendation

a)      That the report be received.

 

Portfolio Lead: Economic Development

Other (alternate portfolio holder): Community; Transport (Joint)

Economic Development

Mission Bay Business Association

Attended the AGM for the Association.  Congratulations to Mark Goldstine Chairman and the committee who were elected.

Points raised during the meeting:

Additional security cameras have been installed.

Bollards are replacing the large rocks in an attempt to stop cars being driven onto Selwyn Reserve.

There is a police presence on Selwyn Reserve from 9pm to 6am Saturday.

The section of the path from Millennium Bridge to boat ramp will start shortly, to be finished early 2019.

Parking consultation for P120 has been undertaken.

Tree light maintenance is on-going.

Possible funding suggestions for the next year is lighting the Mission Bay clock tower.

The possibility of a pontoon out from Mission Bay was again discussed and this will be followed up. 

Auckland Transport are considering lowering the speed limits in the City and town centres including Mission Bay, this will go out for consultation shortly for a city as a whole.

The additional streetscape planting has not happened to date but will be followed up.

Several large events coming up, namely Art and Craft Market day on Labour Day, Auckland Marathon, Night Market and Panasonic People’s Triathlon.

Remuera Business Association

Attended the AGM for the Association.

Congratulations to Adrian Barkla, elected as Chairman and all the returning committee plus welcome to the newly elected committee member Thomas Muller from Acoustix Hearing.

A very positive meeting with mention made of the Route 75 double decker buses and the kerb and veranda cut backs happening along Remuera Road.  The good outcome is that some of this work will be undertaken during January 2019.

Discussion regarding the development in Clonbern Road with New World and the carpark.  It is well known that the carpark has nearly reached its used by date and that large vehicles should not be parking on the upper level.  AT are monitoring the car park monthly for possible movement and change.  The new development for New World is in design stage.

St Heliers Business Association

Attended the AGM for the Association

Congratulations to Peter Jones the re-elected Chairman and the committee.

The Association has kept within their budget from the targeted rate and therefore considers it unnecessary to increase the targeted rate.

The website is running well through Wove a local website development company.  Each business is encouraged to update their businesses with any new information, or special offers etc.

Ellerslie Business Association

General discussion for the 1st meeting (normal two monthly meeting).

Fairy lights now working on the Main Highway.

The Association paid for and put in new signage for Ellerslie but the backing of the signs needs attention and this is being rectified.

Congratulations to John Rennell of Ellerslie Jewellers receiving the Community Excellence Award.

Congratulations to the winners of the Recreation and Leisure category YMCA Ellerslie.

It was also discussed that the hanging baskets outside Ellerslie Jewellers should be continued around the village and it was encouraged that each business get in behind this initiative.

Christmas get together celebration set for Monday 10 December.

Later attended the Business Association AGM.  Congratulations to John Rennell re-elected as Chairman, and to the committee.

The Association voted to increase for their targeted rate by 6.6% to cover increased costs.

There are approximately 130 businesses in the Ellerslie Town Centre.

The Village has had an excellent year with many different events bringing many people into the Village.  The Strategic Plan which was adopted last year is being followed and already the village is looking beautiful with all the planter boxes and the new art works by Paul Walsh.  The fairy lights are in place and are operational.

The Ellerslie Community volunteer Patrol undertake an amazing presence in the Village and are commended for their on-going commitment.

The Ellerslie Magazine, Facebook and e-news keeps the local community updated with what is happening in their village regularly.

Ōrākei Local Board Business Awards

The Awards Dinner held at Ellerslie Event Centre on 16 October was attended by 202 people consisting of 99 Finalists. Mark Leishman acted as MC.

The results were as follows:

Business & Professional Services

Winner - Let’s Talk! Mortgages & Insurance

Highly Commended – AML Loans

Highly Commended - The Business Alliance

Health & Beauty

Winner - Mortimer Hirst

Highly Commended - Simply Fit Gym

Hospitality - Licensed

Winner - Mission Bay Café

Highly Commended - Ampersand Eatery

Hospitality - Non-Licensed

Winner - Movenpick Mission Bay

Highly Commended - Sebastian’s Boutique Café & Catering

Recreation & Leisure

Winner - YMCA at the Ellerslie Recreation Centre

Highly Commended - Sea Life Kelly Tarlton’s

Retail

Winner - Maman Boutique

Highly Commended - Crisp Home + Wear

Highly Commended - Hedgerow – Gift and Homewares

Special Awards:

Environmental Excellence Award - Sea Life Kelly Tarlton’s

Community Excellence Award - Ellerslie Jewellers and Engravers

Excellence in Business Culture Award - Simply Fit

Remuera Golf Club People’s Choice Award

Sebastians Boutique Café & Catering

Barfoot & Thompson Supreme Award

Mission Bay Cafe

Sponsorship

We as the Ōrākei Local Board were very grateful for the incredible amount of sponsorship received for the Business Awards.  As this was a first year for the Ōrākei Local Board Business Awards, it was an unknown for all concerned but the following sponsors were very generous with sponsorship for our small businesses within the ward.

·   Barfoot & Thompson

·   Urban Partners

·   The Hobson

·   Property Funding

·   Presentations Design & Print

·   Hoed Research

·   Remuera Golf Club

·   Ellerslie Jewellers & Engravers

Thank you to all the sponsors and to the Local Board members and to Mark Scherer for making the night, “a night to remember”.

Since the Ōrākei Local Board Business Awards were held there has been a debrief, and from feedback from many sources it is suggested to hold the Business Awards every two years. 

Community

Attended the Ōrākei Community Association public meeting

Very interesting talk from Housing New Zealand, mention was made that there are many empty houses in the Ōrākei area, but as it was stated many of these properties are not owned by Housing New Zealand, so they have no say over these.

John Lawrence from Eastern Bay Songbird Project then spoke of the use of rat traps to further work towards a pest free area.  Many rats have been caught and these are registered at a central location.  Rat traps are being given out around the ward over the next few weekends, they are free and all locals are encouraged to have one in their yards.

Activities: As well as the following activities, I assisted many constituents during the month.

Date                           Activities

 

October

 8                                 Attended St Heliers Business Association monthly meeting

                                    Attended C & R meeting

 9                                 Attended Auckland Transport update meeting

                                    Attended an America’s Cup update meeting

                                    Attended and Arts and Culture update meeting

                                    Attended Mission Bay Business Association AGM

11                                Attended a Hui practice for the forthcoming visit to the Marae

                                    Attended weekly Ōrākei Local Board workshop

Attended the Ōrākei Community Association meeting about Housing NZ and the Eastern Songbird project for a pest free Ōrākei.

12                                Attended a Kura Kawana Place making workshop

15                                Attended the Regional and Sub-regional cluster meeting

16                                Attended Community Places meeting update

                                    Attended Community Services meeting update

                                    Attended Community Facilities meeting update

                                    Attended Community Leases meeting

                                    Attended the Ōrākei Local Board Business Awards evening

17                                Attended the St Heliers Business Association AGM

18                                Practiced the Shake out, Cover drop

                                    Hui practice for the forthcoming visit to the Ōrākei Marae

                                    Updated regarding development in Waimarie Road, St Heliers

                                    Ōrākei Local Board Business Meeting

22                                Attended the Mission Bay Craft Market

24                                Attended the Remuera Business Association Business AGM

25                                Hui practice for forthcoming visit to Ōrākei Marae

                                    Attended Ōrākei Local Board workshop

27                                  Attended the Consultation at Sunhill Garden Centre for the Stage 3 of the shared path

28                                  Auckland Marathon comes to St Heliers

                                    Visited the Eastern Songbird project giving out rat traps for the Ōrākei area

29                                  Verbal feedback to Kura Kawana for forthcoming workshops to assist newly elected local board members

                                      Attended the Ellerslie Business Association 2 monthly meeting

                                      Attended the Ellerslie Business Association AGM

30                                  Ōrākei Local Board Business Awards debrief meeting

                                      Attended the Tamaki Drive Protection Society AGM

November

1                                   Attended meeting regarding a Riddell Road property regarding a commercial development

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Photos from the month

310

 

Signatory

Author

Ros Rundle - Ōrākei Local Board Member

Date: 5 November 2018


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

 

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

Board Member Report – David Wong

 

File No.: CP2018/21274

 

  

 

Purpose of the report

1.       To update the Ōrākei Local Board Members on projects, activities and issues.

 

Recommendations

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a)      receive the report.

b)      request Community Services and Panuku staff to provide an update to the board on the progress made in regards to the relocation of the Citizens Advise Bureau from 4 Victoria Ave to their preferred location of the Ōrākei Community Centre.

c)      request release of key pre-application minutes and information for meetings or exchanges the Council has had relating to the following properties: 

i)        471 Riddell Road, Glendowie

ii)       10 Rangitoto Avenue, Remuera

iii)      property on the west side of Tamaki Drive and Patterson Avenue intersection - around 49-65 Tamaki Drive.

 

Portfolio Lead: Community

Other (alternate portfolio holder): Economic Development; Events, Landowner Approvals and Leases; Resource Consenting and Regulatory (Joint)

Community (& Youth)

2.       Ellerslie Residents Association – 23 Oct; chaired by newly elected Chair Troy Elliot; key discussion points on progress on Elwood Avenue – delays due to asbestos being located on pathway requiring removal. Discussion on ERA 6-point traffic issues report. Re-profile of Greenways plan – OLB pre - 2016.

3.       Barfoot and Thompson Stadium special meeting- on preschool staffing levels and wages – 5 November. Discussion on potential independent review to assess performance level of preschool and afterschool and to enhance future profitability. Assisted with drafting Terms of reference.

4.       Barfoot and Thompson Stadium Trustees meeting –covering financial performance, general operations and leasing issues with Physio and Fitness gym; 30 October.

5.       Eastern Bays Networking meeting – Ōrākei Community Centre; 31 October; overview by Tess Porter on Citizen Advice Bureau advisory services – operating from 4 Victoria Avenue; key statistics attached.

Events

6.       Mission Bay Tennis Club – Rosebowl Tournament and acknowledgement of OLB resurfacing contribution.

7.       Ōrākei Local Board Business Awards – 16 Oct 2018; presented Hospitality non licensed award winner – Movenpick, Mission Bay.

8.       Great Auckland Bargain Book Sale – Barfoot & Thompson Stadium, Kohimarama, 4 November.

Resource consenting and regulatory

9.       As part of the due process for relocating the Citizen Advice Bureau, 4 Victoria Avenue to an alternate location – designated and endorsed by CAB – being Ōrākei Community Centre; work is underway for appropriate set up. Council divisions of Community Services with Panuku have been progressing to renovate the Ōrākei Community Centre to be fit for purpose for the CAB. CAB are also requesting certain aspects of the renovation to meet their requirements.

10.     All parties need to understand the basic principles of what is proposed for OCC and work pragmatically to achieve a workable outcome.

11.     Over the past 4 months’ requests have been made to the Council Resource Consents division for pre- application information (including meeting minutes) for discussions between Council and the applicant in respect of 10 Rangitoto Avenue.

·      10 Rangitoto is of significance due to proximity of the Rawhiti Retirement Village

·      A request was made for pre-lodgement minutes between council staff and the applicant on 30 July 2018; to ascertain what future prospects and developments could take place in the vicinity

·      A formal response was received back on 6 August 2018 advising pre-application information is considered confidential

·      Members Churton, Wong and Davis attended a Local Board Consent and Planning workshop and understood from the Council advisers' presentation that Local Board members should be given access to pre-lodgement documentation.

·      The request has been referred up to the General Manager, Resource Consents; which in turn has been referred to Legal division of Council

·      There has been delay in receiving response from the Legal division.

12.     Attended Glen Innes to Tamaki sectional consultation – Ōrākei Basin balustrade option choices; 27 and 28 October, Sunhill Garden Centre /Ōrākei Bay Village with Chair Kit Parkinson.

13.     Briefing on Oceania retirement village development – 18 October.

14.     Initial review of 4A Victoria Avenue apartment development application.

Activities: 6 October 2018 – 5 November 2018

Date

Activities

11 Oct  2018

·    Hui – Te reo teachings

·    OLB workshop

14 Oct 2018

·    Mission Bay Tennis Club – Rosebowl Tournament; spring opening

16 Oct  2018

·    OLB Business Awards

18 Oct  2018

·    Oceania Retirement Village briefing

·    OLB Business meeting

19 Oct 2018

·    Downtown programme- Quay St enhancement programme debrief

23 Oct 2018

·    Ellerslie Residents Association

25 Oct 2018

·    Hui-Te Reo workshop

·    OLB Workshop

27 Oct 2018

·    Ōrākei Basin balustrade consultation – Sunhill Garden Centre

28 Oct 2018

·    Ōrākei Basin balustrade consultation – Ōrākei Bay Village

31 Oct 2018

·    Eastern Bays Network meeting – Ōrākei Community Centre

1 Nov 2018

·    OLB workshop

4 Nov 2018

 

5 Nov 2018

 

·    Great Auckland Bargain Book Sale – Barfoot and Thompson Stadium fundraiser

·    East City Community Trust special meeting – pre-school review

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Citizen Advice Bureau Statistics (Eastern branch) 2017/18

317

b

Board member report photographs - November 2018

325

     

Signatory

Author

David Wong - Ōrākei Local Board Member

 Date: 5 November 2018


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

 


 


 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

Governance Forward Work Calendar

 

File No.: CP2018/21105

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To provide the Ōrākei Local Board with its updated governance forward work calendar which is a schedule of items that will come before the Board at business meetings and workshops over the next 12 months.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation

That the Ōrākei Local Board draft Governance Forward Work Calendar be noted.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Draft Governance Forward Work Calendar - November 2018

331

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Kim  Lawgun - Democracy Advisor

Authoriser

Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Ōrākei Local Boards

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

Ōrākei Local Board Workshop Proceedings

 

File No.: CP2018/21121

 

  

 

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

1.       Attached are copies of the Ōrākei Local Board workshop records taken during workshops held on 4, 11 and 25 October 2018.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation

That the Ōrākei Local Board workshop records for the workshops held on 4, 11 and 25 October 2018 be noted.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Workshop Proceedings: 4 October 2018

341

b

Workshop Proceedings: 11 October 2018

345

c

Workshop Proceedings: 25 October 2018

349

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Kim  Lawgun - Democracy Advisor

Authoriser

Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Ōrākei Local Boards

 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

 


 


 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

 


 


 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

 


 


 


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

Resolutions Pending Action

 

File No.: CP2018/21456

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To provide the Ōrākei Local Board with an opportunity to track reports that have been requested from officers.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation

That the Ōrākei Local Board resolutions pending action report be noted.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Resolution Pending Action - November 2018

355

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Kim  Lawgun - Democracy Advisor

Authoriser

Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Ōrākei Local Boards

 



Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

  


Ōrākei Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

Exclusion of the Public: Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987

That the Ōrākei Local Board

a)      exclude the public from the following part(s) of the proceedings of this meeting.

The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter, and the specific grounds under section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution follows.

This resolution is made in reliance on section 48(1)(a) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 and the particular interest or interests protected by section 6 or section 7 of that Act which would be prejudiced by the holding of the whole or relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting in public, as follows:

 

C1       Sites and Places of Significance to Mana Whenua – Tranche 1: Plan Changes to the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) and Auckland Council District Plan - Hauraki Gulf Islands Section 2018

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Particular interest(s) protected (where applicable)

Ground(s) under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

s7(2)(ba) - The item relates to an application for a resource consent or water conservation order or a requirement for a designation or heritage order under the Resource Management Act 1991 and the withholding of the information is necessary to avoid serious offence to tikanga Maori or to avoid the disclosure of the location of waahi tapu.

In particular, the report contains information on nominated sites and places of significance to mana whenua that has been provided to Council on a confidential basis until the plan change has been approved for public notification.

s7(2)(i) - The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations).

In particular, the report contains information on nominated sites and places of significance to mana whenua that has been provided to Council on a confidential basis until the plan change has been approved for public notification.

s48(1)(a)

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

 

 

 

 

pC2     The Landing Hardstand – Fees Review – November 2018

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter