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

 

Date:

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

 

Tuesday, 20 November 2018

2:00pm

Waitematā Local Board Office
Ground Floor
52 Swanson Street
Auckland

 

Waitematā Local Board

 

OPEN AGENDA

 

 

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Chairperson

Pippa Coom

 

Deputy Chairperson

Shale Chambers

 

Members

Adriana Avendaño Christie

 

 

Richard Northey, ONZM

 

 

Denise Roche

 

 

Vernon Tava

 

 

Rob Thomas

 

 

(Quorum 4 members)

 

 

 

Liz Clemm

Democracy Advisor – Waitematā Local Board

 

15 November 2018

 

Contact Telephone: (09) 353 9654

Email: liz.clemm@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

 

 


 

 


Waitematā Local Board

20 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     Grey Lynn 2030 Transition Community proposal for a Food Forest Project 5

8.2     Auckland Basketball Services Limited                                                              6

8.3     Auckland Electric Tramways Trust                                                                    6

9          Public Forum                                                                                                                  6

9.1     Children's Autism Foundation                                                                            6

9.2     Alexandra Bonham - Optimise Functionality of Myers Park                           7

9.3     Ponsonby Community Centre                                                                            7

9.4     Community-led Design Group - Ponsonby Park, 254 Ponsonby Road         7

10        Extraordinary Business                                                                                                7

11        Councillor's report                                                                                                         9

12        Optimal size of the civic space at 254 Ponsonby Road                                          11

13        The potential siting of the National Erebus Memorial at Dove-Myer Robinson Park                                                                                                                                       25

14        Auckland Council’s Quarterly Performance Report: Waitematā Local Board for quarter one                                                                                                                   35

15        Waitematā Quick Response Round Two 2018/2019 grant allocations                  79

16        Auckland Transport November 2018 update                                                          201

17        Trial of online voting at the 2019 local elections                                                   235

18        Local government elections 2019 – order of names on voting documents       249

19        Auckland Regional Pest Management Plan consultation feedback and recommended changes                                                                                            259

20        Grant of a new lease to West End Lawn Tennis Club Incorporated Cox’s Bay Park 2 Fife Street Westmere                                                                                                 305

21        TAPAC Arts Partnership Contribution Options                                                     311

22        Regional Facilities Auckland 2017/2018 Fourth Quarter Report                          353

23        Draft Contributions Policy                                                                                        377

24        Feedback on proposed topics for inclusion in the Auckland Water Strategy   523

25        Chair's Report                                                                                                            541

26        Board member reports                                                                                              559

27        Waitematā Local Board Workshop Records                                                          573

28        Governance Forward Work Calendar                                                                      583  

29        Consideration of Extraordinary Items 

PUBLIC EXCLUDED

30        Procedural Motion to Exclude the Public                                                               587

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                                                                           587  

 


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 Waitematā Local Board:

a)         confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Tuesday, 16 October 2018, as a true and correct record.

 

 

5          Leave of Absence

 

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

 

 

6          Acknowledgements

 

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

 

 

7          Petitions

 

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

 

 

8          Deputations

 

Standing Order 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 Waitematā 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       Grey Lynn 2030 Transition Community proposal for a Food Forest Project

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To propose a Food Forest project for Francis Reserve, Grey Lynn.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a)      thank Brigitte Sistig of Grey Lynn 2030 Transition Community and Richard Main of Gardens4Health for their presentation and attendance at the business meeting.

 

Attachments

a          Grey Lynn 2030 Food Forest Proposal........................................................ 591

b          Grey Lynn 2030 Food Forest Proposal - Appendix 1.................................. 595

 

 

 

8.2       Auckland Basketball Services Limited

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To introduce the local board to Auckland Basketball Services Limited.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a)      thank Tracy Atiga – Chief Executive Officer and Simon Whyte - Chairman of Auckland Basketball Services Limited for their presentation and attendance at the business meeting.

 

 

 

 

8.3       Auckland Electric Tramways Trust

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To discuss the Wynyard Quarter Dockline Tramway.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a)      thank Jeff Grobben of Auckland Electric Tramways Trust for his presentation and attendance at the business meeting.

 

 


 

 

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.

 

9.1       Children's Autism Foundation

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To provide a general overview of what Children’s Autism Foundation does and what they have achieved in the past 12 months.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a)      thank Jo Sutton, Team Leader – Administration/Operations, with Children's Autism Foundation for the presentation and her attendance at the meeting.

 

 

 

 

9.2       Alexandra Bonham - Optimise Functionality of Myers Park

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To propose options to gain additional functionality from Myers Park.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a)      thank Alexandra Bonham of Kids In The City for her presentation and attendance at the meeting.

 

 

 

 

9.3       Ponsonby Community Centre

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To update the local board on the successful events run by or held at Ponsonby Community Center over the past financial year.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a)      thank Lisa Rogers and John Hill, Chair of Ponsonby Community Centre for their presentation and attendance at the meeting.

 

 

 

 

9.4       Community-led Design Group - Ponsonby Park, 254 Ponsonby Road

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To discuss the vision for the civic space at 254 Ponsonby Road.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a)      thank Keith Maddison, Jennifer Ward and Chris Bailey of Community-led Design Group for their presentation and attendance at the business meeting.

 

 

 

 

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.”

 


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

Councillor's report

 

File No.: CP2018/18656

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To provide Waitematā and Gulf Ward Councillor Mike Lee with an opportunity to update the Waitematā Local Board on regional issues.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a)      receive the verbal update from the Waitematā and Gulf Ward Councillor, Mike Lee.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.      

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Liz Clemm - Democracy Advisor - Waitematā

Authoriser

Trina Thompson - Relationship Manager/Senior Advisor Waitematā Local Board

 


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

Optimal size of the civic space at 254 Ponsonby Road

 

File No.: CP2018/21755

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To seek the local board’s views on the optimal size of the civic space at 245 Ponsonby Road.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       To inform decision-making on the size of a proposed civic space at 254 Ponsonby Road, staff identified three options:

·     Option 1: Develop a 2000m2 civic space on the front portion of the site and dispose of 326m2 at the rear to offset the initial acquisition cost (status quo)

·     Option 2: Develop the whole site (2326m2) as civic space and dispose of an alternative site to offset the initial acquisition cost

·     Option 3: Develop the whole site (2326m2) as civic space with no associated disposal (preferred option).

3.       Staff recommend Option 3. This civic space will help meet the recreational needs of local residents and neighbouring areas. While the proposed size slightly exceeds the council’s provision policy, this could be justified on the basis that:

·     the location, proposed design and amenity values align with all other aspects of the policy and respond directly to two Auckland Plan focus areas

·     the civic space could support local events and be used in conjunction with regional events such as the annual Pride and Saint Patrick’s Day parades

·     Ponsonby is a destination for a number of Aucklanders, so the civic space will service a wider catchment

·     there are high community expectations that the whole site will be developed.

4.       If this option is approved, council will not recoup some of the $7.7M costs of acquiring 254 Ponsonby Road. This low financial risk is offset by 12-years of commercial rent generated on the property. There is much higher reputation risk if the site is not developed in the short-term and in line with community expectations.

5.       The next step is to prepare a report to the Environment and Community Committee, which incorporates the views of the Waitematā Local Board.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a)      support the retention of the whole site located at 254 Ponsonby Road (2326m2), Ponsonby, currently held by Auckland Council in fee simple under the Local Government Act 2002, for the purpose of developing a civic space.

 


 

Horopaki / Context

Land was bought by Auckland City Council for an urban square

6.       The former Auckland City Council acquired 254 Ponsonby Road in 2006 for $7.7M to create an urban square. This was conditional on the disposal of a portion of the land to offset the purchase.

7.       The resolution did not specify the size of the civic space, or the disposal area [Resolution C8/2006 refers]:

that the purchase price be offset by a sensible development of the rear portion of the site and proposals for this be reported back by the Property Enterprise Board”.

Implementation of the community-led design is a priority for the local board

8.       Since 2006 the site has been tenanted, delivering a commercial return to council, while various plans have been developed for the space (see Attachment A).

9.       In 2015, the Waitematā Local Board initiated a community-led design process to identify a preferred concept for development of 254 Ponsonby Road. It allocated $10,000 of Local Development Initiative funding for this purpose.

10.     A final design was chosen by the community and endorsed by the local board in April 2017.

11.     The preferred design proposes the development of the full site as a civic space, re-use of existing buildings and structures as well as a village green.

12.     Development of 254 Ponsonby Road, in accordance with the preferred design, was then selected by the Waitematā Local Board as their One Local Initiative for funding as part of the Long-Term Plan 2018-2028.

13.     The local board proposed the development of the civic space in two phases:

·     phase 1: $5.5M - Deliver the essential elements of the civic space, including landscaping, repurposing the existing structure, and toilet facilities (Long-term Plan funding)

·     phase 2: $5.5M – Repurpose existing building and improve streetscape (partially funded through service optimisation).

14.     Staff were then requested to provide advice on the optimal size of the proposed civic space and to submit a report to the Environment and Community Committee.

15.     Without a new decision council is required to implement the Auckland City Council resolution. All resolutions of legacy councils are treated as if they were council’s own in accordance with the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009.

There is shared decision-making allocation for open space acquisition

16.     The decision-making allocation for council to acquire land for parks and open spaces is set out in the allocation of decision-making for non-regulatory activities in Volume Two of the Long-term Plan 2018-2028.

The Governing Body is responsible for:

·     the number and general location of all new parks and the prioritisation of major upgrades to existing parks (including sports fields within parks)

·     acquisition and divestment of all park land, including the disposal of surplus parks, excluding any disposal and reinvestment made in accordance with the Service Property Optimisation Approach.

Local boards are responsible for the specific location of new local parks and open spaces (including the prioritisation for acquisition), and for their subsequent design and development within budget parameters agreed with the Governing Body.


 

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

17.     The proposed civic space responds to two Auckland Plan focus areas:

Belonging and Participation - Focus area 1

Create safe opportunities for people to meet, connect, participate in and enjoy community and civic life

Homes and Places - Focus area 5

Create urban places for the future.

The open space provision policy sets out the requirements for civic spaces

18.     The Open Space Provision Policy 2016 informs decision-making on the type, size and location of parks and open space.

19.     Civic spaces are a specific type of open space with a range of amenity values, including:

·     meeting and socialising opportunities

·     event space

·     landscaping and gardens

·     public artworks.

20.     The extent of the network and sizes of civic space should reflect the urban centres in which they are located.

21.     Ponsonby is defined as a ‘Town Centre. It would be well served by one or more small civic spaces (<1000m2) and one medium civic space (1500m2 to 2000m2).

22.     Staff have undertaken an assessment of 254 Ponsonby Road against the policy (see Attachment B). The assessment concludes that:

·     there is a shortfall of civic space in Ponsonby

·     the retention of the site is a high priority as it would meet current and future community needs

·     the site and proposed community design can deliver the desired amenity values

·     development of the full site would exceed the policy provision target by 326m2 (see figure 1 below).

Figure 1: Site location and size


 

There are a range of other factors to consider

23.     It is important to consider how the civic space will function. 254 Ponsonby Road will support small local events. It can also be used to support regional events such as the annual Pride and Saint Patrick’s Day parades.

24.     Ponsonby is a commercial and recreational destination for residents and visitors. This means that the civic space will serve a catchment beyond its local area.

25.     While there is limited growth projected in the immediate area, due to the Residential Single House zoning and Special Character Overlay, there is significant growth occurring nearby.

26.     Waitematā is one of the fastest-growing areas in Auckland. The population has increased by 6.7 percent since 2006. Further population and employment growth has the potential to impact on the use and enjoyment of the open space network.

27.     The following open spaces are near 254 Ponsonby Road:

·     Tole Street Reserve (12000m2) within c.195 metres

·     Costley Reserve (5000m2) within c.195 metres

·     Vermont Street Reserve (5000m2) within c. 690 metres

·     Harry Dansey Reserve (7000m2) within c. 690 metres

·     Western Park (7.3 hectares) within one kilometre

·     Victoria Park (9.4 hectares) within one kilometre.

28.     The presence of this open space does not provide a substitute for the amenity a civic space is intended to provide. It does, however, show the area is well-provisioned.

There are three options for decision-makers to consider

29.     Staff have identified three options for the size and location of the proposed civic space at 254 Ponsonby Road:

·     Option 1: Develop a 2000m2 civic space on the front portion of the site and dispose of 326m2 at the rear to offset the initial acquisition cost (status quo)

·     Option 2: Develop the whole site (2326m2) as civic space and dispose of an alternative site to offset the initial acquisition cost

·     Option 3: Develop the whole site (2326m2) as civic space with no associated disposal (preferred option).

Option 1: Develop a 2000m2 civic space on the front portion of the site and dispose of 326m2 at the rear to offset the initial acquisition cost (status quo)

30.     This entails developing a 2000m2 civic space. This is the maximum size of a medium civic space under the provision policy. The residual 326m2 back portion of the site would be subdivided creating a new residential lot.

31.     This option reflects the status quo under the legacy resolution.

32.     The benefit of this option is that the proceeds of disposal would offset the cost of acquisition. As an indication of possible value, the land values of adjacent residential properties (excluding improvements) range from $1.4M to $1.5M.

33.     These sale proceeds would be in addition to rent accrued over the last 12 years.

34.     However, there would be a number of planning issues associated with the sub-division and development of a 326m2 section in this location. Such a small lot size would require a resource consent under the Unitary Plan. Any design would also need to align with its Special Character Overlay. Mimicking neighbouring properties could detract from the historic character, as could modern design.

Option 2: Develop the whole site (2326m2) as civic space and dispose of an alternative site to offset the initial acquisition cost

35.     Council would develop the whole site as a civic space under this option.

36.     This represents minor over-provision (326m2), but it is expected that the additional space would be well utilised during any regional events.

37.     Council would also dispose of an alternative site to offset some of the $7.7M costs of acquiring the land.

38.     This option would be in keeping with the decision of Auckland City Council.

39.     It would provide a financial return to council comparable to the sale of part of 254 Ponsonby Road; and would be in keeping with the legacy decision.

40.     It would deliver the civic space sought by the community.

41.     However, disposal of an alternative site would be a lengthy process and could delay the development of the civic space. There are set legislative processes to follow as well as community consultation.

42.     Delays to the project heighten reputational risk. The community has expected to see development of the civic space since 2006.

43.     There would also be reputational risks if two council assets were sold to fund the project.

Option 3: Develop the whole site (2326m2) as civic space with no associated disposal.

44.     Council would also develop the whole site as a civic space under this option, maximising utility for events as sought by the community.

45.     Council would not seek to dispose of any other asset, other than to help pay for phase two as planned.

46.     The main benefit of this option is that it could be implemented much faster than the other two options. It is not dependent on sub-division or property disposal processes.

47.     The option would not generate any financial return to offset the cost of development. However, there are sufficient funds allocated in the Long-Term Plan 2018-2028 for this purpose.

48.     Council has recovered a significant portion of the purchase price through commercial rent over the last 12-years.

·         Staff have developed criteria to assess the three options

49.     Staff developed assessment criteria to enable the comparison of the options. These criteria are unweighted and allow for objective assessment:

·     strategic alignment

·     amenity values and functionality

·     maximising place-making and supporting community empowerment

·     value for money.

50.     The first criterion focuses on alignment with the provision targets and network principles in the Open Space Provision Policy and the Auckland Plan focus areas.

51.     The second considers the range of recreational opportunities that can be provided, including for some regional events.

52.     The third acknowledges the investment of the community and the quality of the process used to arrive at a preferred design.

53.     The fourth focuses on value for money. This includes financial returns in the form of rent and sale proceeds.

54.     A summary of the options against the assessment criteria is provided in Table 1 below.

·         Table 1: Assessment of options against criteria

·         Criteria

·         Option: 1

·         Develop front portion and dispose of 326m2

·         Option: 2

·         Develop whole site as open space and dispose of alternative site

·         Option: 3

·         Develop the whole site as open space

·         Strategic alignment

·         ✓✓✓

·         ✓✓

·         ✓✓

·         Amenity and function

·        

·         ✓✓

·         ✓✓✓

·         Place-making community empowerment

·        

·         ✓✓

·         ✓✓✓

·         Value for money

·         ✓✓

·         ✓✓✓

·        

·         Staff recommend Option 3

55.     On balance staff recommend Option 3 over Option 2.

56.     Option 3 had the lowest reputational risk to council. It is the easiest to implement meaning that the civic space could be developed in the short-term in line with community expectations.

57.     This option will not provide the largest financial return. Option 2 provides additional capital on top of the commercial rent generated since 2006.

58.     However, these funds are not needed for phase one and identifying a comparable site may be difficult. There could also be reputational issues if council was to sell another asset to fund phase two of the project.

59.     Option 1 is least preferred. It aligns with the council’s provision metrics and would generate the financial return anticipated by the legacy resolution. However, it would be difficult to implement, and the civic space may not function well over the long-term. Obtaining land in this location again, if needed, would be extremely difficult and costly.

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

60.     Development of the civic space will enhance amenity and recreational opportunities in Ponsonby. The community has anticipated the achievement of this outcome since 2006.

61.     Multiple rounds of public consultation have created a high degree of public engagement in the development of 254 Ponsonby Road. Public feedback has consistently found majority support for the provision of open space across the whole site.

62.     A community-led design process has then resulted in a high sense of local ownership of the proposed civic space design.

63.     Community aspirations from three separate rounds of public consultation include:

·     a place to sit and relax

·     an urban green space

·     a place to hold markets and events

·     a play space

·     an area to host public art

·     a place which demonstrates sustainable design

·     space that would encourage and foster social connections.

64.     They align strongly with the council’s public amenity values and the Auckland Plan.

65.     The views of the local board are sought through this report.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

66.     Māori identity and well-being are an important outcome in the Auckland Plan. The development of the civic space should respond to the following focus area:

 

Focus area 7

Reflect mana whenua mātauranga and Māori design principles throughout Auckland

 

67.     Development proposals should also draw upon previous mana whenua consultation on the Ponsonby Road Master Plan. The following is a summary of the advice provided:

·    strong support for this site to be open space

·    a preference that the site contain play facilities

·    that Māori heritage and stories be highlighted at this site possibly through technology story boards or posts

·    that the proposed art gallery and exhibition space incorporates Māori art.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

68.     Options 1 and 2 entail the sale of assets, which could be expected to generate up to $1.5M. This is in addition to commercial rents that council has generated.

69.     There is One Local Initiative funding available for phase one of the project ($5.5M).

70.     The local board propose to partially fund phase two ($5.5M) through service optimisation. It is currently working with Panuku to investigate options to sell another site in Ponsonby with an estimated value higher than the figure above.

71.     Regardless of the option taken, there will be a budget shortfall to complete the whole $11M two-phase project.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

72.     There is a low financial risk with the preferred Option 3. This is offset by the commercial rent generated.

73.     There is much higher reputation risk if the site is not developed in the short-term and in line with community expectations.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

74.     The next step is to prepare a report to the Environment and Community Committee, which incorporates the views of the Waitematā Local Board.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

254 Ponsonby Road - Development Timeline

21

b

245 Ponsonby Road - Policy Assessment

23

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

William  Brydon - Principal Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Paul Marriott-Lloyd - Senior Policy Manager

Trina Thompson - Relationship Manager/Senior Advisor Waitematā Local Board

 


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

The potential siting of the National Erebus Memorial at Dove-Myer Robinson Park

 

File No.: CP2018/21258

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To establish support from the Waitematā Local Board for the siting of the National Erebus Memorial at Dove-Myer Robinson Park, subject to following all relevant statutory and design-led processes.  

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       Dove-Myer Robinson Park has been proposed as a location for the National Erebus Memorial. The memorial is planned to commemorate the Erebus plane disaster which occurred on 28 November 1979. This disaster resulted in 237 passengers and 20 crew losing their lives and remains one of New Zealand’s worst civil disasters.

3.       The key objectives for the project are to:

·        establish a memorial which expresses the magnitude of the event and is an enduring legacy to New Zealanders

·        honours the lives of those who died in the Erebus disaster and provide a place to pay respects

·        acknowledges the effect the event had on families and recovery personnel

·        accommodate a wide range of users through an accessible design that can inspire a range of interpretations and meaning 

·        achieve a high standard of design that is sympathetic to, and adds value to, the memorial’s location and surroundings.

4.       The project is being sponsored and led by the Ministry for Culture and Heritage and the Ministry has selected Dove-Myer Robinson Park as the preferred location from a short list of five sites in central Auckland recommended by Auckland Council. A national design competition for the memorial will begin once the site has been confirmed.

5.       Dove-Myer Robinson Park, located on the edge of the Waitematā Harbour, is highly valued for its green open space, specimen trees, feature rose garden, significant ecological bush areas, heritage buildings and rich Māori and European history. These much-cherished landscape, heritage and cultural values will need to be recognised and protected through the design process. This will ensure that the memorial is not just a fitting tribute to those who died in the disaster but is a memorial that speaks universally to visitors as a place of peaceful contemplation and reflection, and one that enhances the values of the site as a recreation reserve.

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a)      Supports locating the National Erebus Memorial at Dover-Myer Robinson Park subject to:

i)        a delegated Waitematā Local Board representative sign off of memorial design parameters

ii)       all necessary building and resource consent requirements being met

iii)      a rigorous design process which includes a review of the short listed designs by the Auckland Urban Design Panel and, as a separate process, the Waitematā Local Board

iv)      the local board granting landowner approval for the installation of the winning  design subject to Board approval of this design

v)      Ministry for Culture and Heritage providing funding to cover all costs relating to the installation and future maintenance of the structure and associated landscape features.

Note: That the Ministry for Culture and Heritage will lead mana whenua consultation on the location.

 

Horopaki / Context

6.       On 28 November 1979 an Air New Zealand scenic flight (TE-901) to Antarctica crashed into Mt Erebus, tragically claiming the lives of 237 passengers and 20 crew. This accident is New Zealand’s worst peacetime disaster and is the worst aviation accident ever to have occurred in the Southern Hemisphere.

7.       The Prime Minister, Right Honourable Jacinda Ardern, has publicly committed to ensuring that a national memorial for Erebus will be created.

8.       The 40th anniversary of the Erebus accident will be in November 2019 and the Ministry for Culture and Heritage has been in discussion with the families of those who died about the establishment of a national memorial.  It is intended to commence construction on the 40th anniversary (with appropriate ceremony) and complete the memorial in May 2020. 

9.       There are existing memorials to the Erebus disaster at the three following Auckland locations:

·        Waikumete Cemetery, where the bodies of unidentified passengers were buried in a mass grave containing 16 caskets. The memorial lists the names of the unidentified victims and those who were not recovered from the crash scene.

·        Overlooking the eastern approaches to Auckland International Airport a memorial garden and plaque includes the names of 20 crew members who died in the crash.

·        St Matthews in-the-City where there is a memorial stain glass window and a plaque below the window which is dedicated to all the people who lost their lives.

10.     While there are also other memorials outside of Auckland, there is no major public memorial anywhere in the country where all 257 names of those people on flight TE-901 are listed together.

11.     There are a number of national memorials in New Zealand of which Sir Michael Joseph Savage Memorial in Ōrākei is one and the Canterbury Earthquake Memorial the most recent.

12.     Auckland was chosen as the site for the new National Erebus Memorial, with Dove-Myer Robinson Park being selected by the Ministry for Culture and Heritage from a short list of potential sites that included Cornwall Park, Maungakiekie / One Tree Hill, Wynyard Quarter and Whenua Rangatira / Bastion Point. Dove-Myer Robinson best fits the preference for a peaceful park-like setting expressed by the families of the Erebus victims.

13.     The proposed location within the park is shown in the attached aerial plan (Attachment A) and the design for the memorial will be delivered through a national design competition.  A design panel/jury will provide input into the design brief, short list designs, and provide a report to a Ministry steering group with a final recommendation.

14.     The Ministry for Culture and Heritage has arranged for the New Zealand Institute of Architecture and the New Zealand Institute of Landscape Architecture to have representation on the panel.  An arts professional and urban designer round out the membership. The panel will be chaired by former MCH Chief Executive Paul James.

15.     The Auckland Urban Design Panel will review the short listed designs selected by the Ministry for Culture and Heritage. After this process the short listed designs will then be reviewed by the Waitematā Local Board.

16.     Local boards are allocated decision-making responsibility for local park improvements and place shaping and the use of and activities within local parks. The Waitematā Local Board have decision making authority relating to Dove-Myer Robinson Park and their endorsement of the design will be sought prior to seeking landowner consent from the board. The final decision on the design of the memorial rests with the Minister for Arts, Culture and Heritage.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

17.     Dove-Myer Robinson Park is located close to Auckland City Centre on the edge of the Waitematā Harbour. The site sits between Fred Ambler Lookout and Judges Bay. A little further to the east of Judges Bay is the Parnell Baths. Pedestrian access over to Tamaki Drive can be gained via the Baths.

18.     The reserve extends over 6 hectares (approximately) and consists of sloping open lawn areas with groups of large mature trees and a belt of bush that runs along the coastal edge. Dove-Myer Robinson Park includes the popular Parnell Rose Garden, a re-sanded beach on the edge of Judges Bay Lagoon and is home to some of the city’s oldest Manuka and the largest Pohutukawa tree in Auckland. The park provides views out over the lagoon at Judges Bay and the wider Waitematā Harbour and there is a restaurant / function centre that sits within a leased area adjacent to Gladstone Road.

19.     There are approximately 30 P180 restricted parking spaces within the reserve and parking is also available at the neighbouring Fred Ambler Lookout (approximately 28 P120 restricted spaces) and Judges Bay Rd (approximately 30 P120 restricted spaces). There is a public toilet located in the reserve close to the Nancy Steen Rose Garden and additional toilets plus changing facilities located on the eastern edge of the park beside Judges Bay Rd. The popularity of recreation facilities in the area, and the demand for parking on the edge of the city centre, means that there is a reasonable amount of pressure on these parking facilities. This particularly applies to the Judges Bay Rd car park during the summer when the lagoon and baths are used intensively at weekends and holiday periods. 

20.     There is no management plan for Dove-Myer Robinson Park and therefore no guidance about the placement of memorials at this site. Over time the park has accumulated a number of memorials which include:

·        a plaque and seating area commemorating the naming of Dove-Myer Robinson Park

·        a plaque, seat and tree marking the life of Sir Dove-Myer Robinson

·        a plaque and Korean rock dedicated to those who lost their lives serving in Korea

·        a plaque, garden and brick seating area dedicated to those from the Netherlands who lost their lives in the Second World War

·        a plaque and tree dedicated to the sister city relationship with Busan City in South Korea

·        various private plaques on benches

·        the Nancy Steen Rose Garden.

21.     The current memorial guidelines (the Plaques and Memorials on Parks Interim Guidelines 2011) aim to prevent parks becoming overly filled with memorials and because of the reasonably high level of memorial structures in open spaces around central Auckland the Waitematā Local Board, as a general rule, no longer support requests for memorial benches. 

22.     However, the guidelines provide for memorials in recognition of a significant event, the definition for which includes commemoration of international, national and local events.

23.     The national memorial for the Erebus disaster is considered a ‘significant event’, with the magnitude of the disaster having made an impact across the nation. While the memorial does not have a direct link to Dove-Myer Robinson, the disaster touched on many communities and families across Auckland and the memorial will have a meaning and historical context for large numbers of park visitors.

24.     One of the memorial design objectives is also to accommodate a wide range of users through an accessible design that can inspire a range of interpretations and meaning. In this regard it is intended that the memorial has universal appeal. 

25.     The design for the memorial will aim to enhance, rather than detract from, the amenity and landscape values of the site as a local park. The design will also work with, and be sympathetic to, the park form and current activities/uses enjoyed by visitors.

26.     The site is zoned Informal Recreation and General Coastal Marine and the following site constraints and planning restrictions need to be considered:

·        The sloping topography provides a challenge to the design of a memorial.

·        The site is circled by established trees which are part of a significant ecological area overlay in the Auckland Unitary Plan (SEA_T_6060).

·        Three regionally significant view shafts, identified in the Auckland Unitary Plan, cross the site (E8 Mt Eden, T1 Rangitoto Island and Auckland War Memorial Museum).

·        Three noise overlays, identified in the Auckland Unitary Plan, cross the site, describing noise from the port.

·        Within Dove-Myer Robinson Park there are two intact heritage buildings, other recorded heritage building sites, scheduled trees and recorded archaeological sites.

27.     A thorough planning assessment will be required to identify consent requirements plus site limitations and the design will need to speak to the heritage and cultural values of the site.   

28.     There is high public amenity value associated with the open grass areas and the belts of vegetation at Dove-Myer Robinson Park. Vegetation consists of mature specimen trees, a feature rose garden and significant ecological bush areas. Natural respite areas, free of constructed items, are increasingly valuable as the city intensifies. The selected design for the memorial must demonstrate how these values will be protected and enhanced and have regard to the following objectives:

·        blending in with and being sympathetic to the natural environment

·        protecting view shafts

·        maintaining open space values

·        allowing multiple uses of the area

·        being consistent with the heritage and mana whenua values of the park

·        accommodating current use types / patterns

·        increasing the use levels of this area of the park

·        providing additional amenity value.

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

29.     A workshop was held with the Waitematā Local Board on 9th October at which the board confirmed that they would not make any decision regarding this project until the views of Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei were identified.

30.     Outcome Two of the Waitematā Local Board Plan 2017 describes attractive and versatile public places that meet our communities’ needs.  Another objective is to ensure our parks, open spaces and recreation facilities meet the needs of our current and future residents so that parks are multi-purpose and can be accessed by a wide range of community groups and users

31.     Other relevant board plan objectives that touch on this project include provision of a high-quality built environment that embraces our heritage and to identify and protect places with heritage and distinctive character.  

32.     There is potentially a degree of project conflict between these two latter objectives and the memorial design and relevant consent applications must clearly demonstrate how heritage values will be protected. 

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

33.     The Ministry for Culture and Heritage has sought initial feedback from Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei. A proposal was presented to the Trust Board at a meeting on 9 November.  The Trust Board has since written to the Ministry for Culture and Heritage in support of the memorial being located at the proposed site (see Attachment B).

34.     As soon as a park site has been selected and approved, the Ministry for Culture and Heritage will work with Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei to liaise with all other mana whenua who have an interest in the site.  

35.     Dove-Myer Robinson was once a Māori pa site, contains several recorded archaeological sites and is a priority area for further archaeological investigation. 

36.     Several midden sites are recorded near the proposed site. These include Pa (headland) terrace/midden CHI 9041, NZAA R11_84 and Midden (shell) CHI 11769, NZAA R11_1403.

37.     Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei have been given approval to install an artwork at Dove-Myer Robinson that recognizes and celebrates the sites cultural and historic importance to mana whenua. This will be located just above the lagoon / sanded beach.

38.     Māori interest in this area also extends to neighbouring sites on Gladstone Road that are part of a deed of settlement between the Marutūāhu Iwi Collective and the Crown.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

39.     Capital costs are estimated at $3 million (including design). This cost and those associated with future maintenance will be funded by the Ministry for Culture and Heritage.

40.     Additional surrounding infrastructure will need to be factored into the design (e.g. new connecting footpaths).

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

41.     Memorials have the potential to create exclusive use areas in parks and their effect can go beyond their footprint, while having meaning to only a few. This can deter other users and uses.

42.     Additional risks include:

·        the location suffers from noise from the port, road and train-line, which could conflict with creating a reflective space

·        there is no direct link between the Erebus accident and the chosen location at Dove-Myer Robinson Park

·        formalising an area in the park which is cherished for its natural features and setting could conflict with current uses

·        the cat colony at Fred Ambler Lookout may impact on the visitor experience if the main entry to the memorial is from the Fred Ambler Lookout car park

·        a section of Fred Ambler Lookout car park (approximately 10 spaces) could be lost at a future time if the associated treaty settlement at this site is agreed and the car park is developed on.

43.     These risks can be generally be mitigated by:

·        building good relationships with the Waitematā Local Board, mana whenua and other stakeholders such as Heritage New Zealand, major event organisers and the owners of the restaurant located in leased council building at 85-87 Gladstone Rd

·        delivering a design that has universal appeal for all park visitors and is sympathetic to the setting

·        fully understanding planning and site limitations

·        being conversant with the relevant plans and guidelines including the Plaques and Memorials on Parks Interim Guidelines 2011, the Point Resolution Taurarua Development Plan 2015 and the Parnell Plan 2018.  

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

44.     The next steps will be taken by the Ministry for Culture and Heritage but these are expected to be consultation with mana whenua, carrying out investigation relating to site limitations and planning considerations and seeking Waitematā Local Board sign off on design parameters before starting the national design competition. 

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Proposed location for the National Erebus Memorial

31

b

Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei

33

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

David Barker - Parks & Places Team Leader

Hayley Dauben - Parks & Places Specialist

Authorisers

Mace Ward - General Manager Parks, Sports and Recreation

Trina Thompson - Relationship Manager/Senior Advisor Waitematā Local Board

 


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

Auckland Council’s Quarterly Performance Report: Waitematā Local Board for quarter one

 

File No.: CP2018/21909

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

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

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.         This report includes financial performance, progress against work programmes, key challenges the local 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 2017 Waitematā Local Board Plan outcomes.

4.         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).

5.         For this quarter there are no activities reported with a status of red (behind delivery, significant risk).

6.         The key activity updates from this quarter are:

Activity

WP Ref

Update

RAG

254 Ponsonby Road, Ponsonby Park develop civic park space (One Local Initiative)

2867

This activity is in progress and on track

 

Myers Park Caretakers Cottage and shed - renew and restore

2042

This activity is approved and on track

 

Parnell Baths - comprehensive renewal

2043

This activity is in progress and is identified as being at risk

 

Pt Erin Pool - comprehensive renewal

2046

This activity is in progress and on track

 

Salisbury Park - improve entranceway

2060

This activity is in progress and on track

 

Waitematā - Urban Forest Restoration

2788

This activity is approved and on track

 

Waitītiko, Waiateao (Meola and Motions Creek catchments) and the Three Kings to Western Springs Aquifer Initiative (Waitematā)

690

This activity is in progress and on track

 

Additional hours to network standard: Central Library - Waitematā

2108

This activity is in progress and on track

 

City play network assessment

366

This activity is in progress and on track

 

The Parnell Plan

1436

This activity is in progress and on track

 

 

7.         Further details about the status of key activities can be found in paragraph 17 below and in attachment A to this report.

8.         The work programme does not include projects which were carried forward from the last financial year.  These will be available in the quarter two report and are set out in attachment C to this report.

9.         The financial performance report compared to budget 2018/2019 is set out in attachment B to this report.  For quarter one the Waitematā Local Board capital investment was $2.5 million and net operational cost of service was $3.9 million.

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Waitematā Local Board:

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

b)      note that work programme lines 969, 1321, 1322 and 2660 will be removed from the work programme for quarter two reporting.

 

 

Horopaki / Context

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

·          Arts, Community and Events

·          Parks, Sport and Recreation

·          Libraries and Information

·          Community Services: Service, Strategy and Integration

·          Community Facilities: Build Maintain Renew

·          Community Facilities: Community Leases

·          Infrastructure and Environmental Services

·          Local Economic Development

·          Plans and Places.

11.       Work programmes are produced annually, to meet the outcomes identified in the three-year 2017 Waitematā Local Board Plan. These outcomes are:

·          Outcome 1: Inclusive communities that are vibrant, healthy and connected

·          Outcome 2: Attractive and versatile public places that meet our communities’ needs

·          Outcome 3: The natural environment is valued, protected and enhanced

·          Outcome 4: A high-quality built environment that embraces our heritage

·          Outcome 5: An accessible, connected and safe transport network with well-designed streets

·          Outcome 6: An innovative, productive and resilient local economy.

 

12.       The graph below shows how the work programme activities meet the 2017 Waitematā Local Board Plan outcomes. Activities that are not part of the approved work programme but contribute towards the local board outcomes, such as local board advocacy or projects funded by the local board’s transport capital fund, are not captured in this graph.

 

 

Graph 1: Waitematā Local Board work programme activities by outcome

 

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

Local Board Work Programme Snapshot

13.       The work programme activities have two statuses in this report.  The first is the RAG status which measures the performance of the activity (amber and red show issues and risks) and the second is the activity status which shows the stage of the activity. They create a snapshot of the progress of the work programmes.

14.       The graph below identifies work programme activity by RAG status (red, amber, green and grey).  This graph 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 or merged (grey). Refer to attachment A to this report for further detail.

 

Graph 2: Waitematā Local Board Work Programme by RAG status

 

15.       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: Waitematā Local Board work programme activity by activity status and department

Capital expenditure carry forwards

16.       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 however as this approval occurred after the end of quarter one commentary the carry forwards will be included in the quarter two reporting (see attachment C).

Key activity updates from quarter one

17.       Updates for the following key activities for quarter one are as follows:

·    2867 (OLI) Ponsonby Park - develop civic park space

Staff are preparing to report to the Environment and Community Committee in December 2018, seeking a new decision over the retention or sale of a portion of the 254 Ponsonby Road site.  Staff are scheduled to brief the Waitematā Local Board on their preliminary recommendations in late October 2018. Formal feedback from the local board will be sought in November 2018 and incorporated into the final report to the Environment and Community Committee.

·    2042 Myers Park Caretakers Cottage and shed - renew and restore

The asset will be assessed to determine the scope for the renewal.  Once the assessment has been completed the options for the renewal will be developed.

·    2043 Parnell Baths - comprehensive renewal

Physical works are in progress and are expected to continue through to mid-November 2018. Issues have been faced with the first concrete pour and steps are being taken to address this for the next pours by amending the specification.  The facility is expected to re-open on 1 December 2018.  A communications plan is being prepared to advise the public of the re-opening date of 1 December 2018.

·    2046 Pt Erin Pool - comprehensive renewal

Consultants to undertake the scoping are currently being engaged. The scope will then be finalised with physical works being planned for next financial year.

·    2060 Salisbury Park - improve entranceway

Public consultation is now complete and the local board has requested a traffic monitoring report (parking) be commissioned to help inform the local board’s decision.  The developed design and consenting phase will follow.

·    2788 Waitematā - Urban Forest Restoration

The following sites have been selected for activity: St Stephens Cemetery, Pt Erin Park, Point Resolution (may include Hobson Bay Esplanade), Seddon Fields, Westmere Park, Weona Place Lemington Esplanade. Works are currently being priced by the supplier. Options will then be presented to the local board for approval.

·    690 Waitītiko, Waiateao (Meola and Motions Creek catchments) and the Three Kings to Western Springs Aquifer Initiative (Waitematā).

A contractor has been engaged to prepare a report demonstrating the issues/threats/opportunities/existing programmes for the integrated management of the aquifer.  A literature review is complete and will be presented to the local board in November. After feedback from the local board, engagement will begin with key stakeholders including Auckland Transport, Watercare, local community groups, Auckland Council departments, mana whenua, schools and sports clubs.

·    2108 Additional hours to network standard: Central Library - Waitematā

The extension of opening hours on the weekend to 5pm, has seen Central Library customers taking advantage of the later closing. Customer feedback has been enthusiastic, and the library remains a busy hub between 4pm and 5pm. There is an average increase in door count of about 900 people over the course of the weekend. The longer days on the weekend provide greater opportunity for library staff to run events in the afternoon at the library.

·    366 WTM: City play network assessment

The scope of the play network gap analysis has been agreed with the local board at a workshop in quarter one.  Consultants are currently being procured for this assessment.

·    1436 The Parnell Plan

Community engagement feedback on the consultation document has been assessed and summarised, an implementation plan of actions has been developed and the draft plan prepared that reflects feedback. Two meetings were held with the working group and a third meeting is planned for early October to gather feedback on draft plan. The draft plan will be further refined and discussed with the local board at a workshop, before being reported for adoption in November 2018.

Activities with significant issues

18.       There are no activities with significant issues (a red RAG status).

Activities with some risk

19.       The following work programme activities have been identified by operating departments as having some risk (amber status):

·    2031 Bayfield Park - renew pedestrian bridge

The local board has approved the Greenway Connection Plan through Cox's Bay Reserve. This will mean the project completely replaces the bridge and, in its place, will be a wider, higher bridge to eliminate the current steps and wider paths on either side leading from Cox's Bay and Wharf Road.

·    2035 Grey Lynn Community Centre - comprehensive renewal

Currently liaising with Community Services regarding service levels.  Project to be planned based on the outcome of the Community Services workstream.

·    2043 Parnell Baths - comprehensive renewal

As noted in the key activity update above physical works are in progress and are expected to continue through to mid-November 2018. Issues have been faced with the first concrete pour and steps are being taken to address this for the next pours by amending the specification.  The facility is expected to re-open on 1 December 2018.

·    2044 Parnell Library - comprehensive renewal

The future lease of the Parnell Library has yet to be clarified.  The purpose of this project is to bring back status quo (original condition) to the leased space if lease is not renewed. The exterior of the building is covered by the building owner and not the responsibility of Auckland Council.  The scope of the project would need to be clarified if the lease is being renewed.  It is suggested that this project could be deferred into financial year 2020.  Lease negotiations are ongoing for the library. A stakeholder meeting with the library has been held to discuss the scope of works.

·    2056 Western Park - renew boardwalk and paving

The expected end date for the works has been delayed by six weeks due to wet weather and related safety issues from the saturated ground condition.  The stairs and walkway are complete and opened for public use. The site fences have been removed and relocated to the decking platform on Hopetoun Street so that the decking renewal works can start.  The renewal of the decking area will be completed by late October 2018.

Activities on hold

20.       The following work programme activities have been identified by operating departments as on hold (amber status):

·    2047 St Stephens Cemetery - renew walkway

This project is on hold pending decision on storm water disposal options and Heritage New Zealand consent.  Additionally, the current budget allocation is insufficient for the required investigation and redesign.  Stormwater options and budget requirements are under review.

·    2057 Western Springs Lakeside Park - renew playground

This project is on hold until the Western Springs Park master plan has been consulted. Project timelines have been moved to allow for construction in summer (February-May 2020). The concept plan for the playground will be designed once the master plan consultation is complete.

·    2066 Olympic Pool - improve acoustics in main pool

This project is on hold due to a structural (seismic) assessment of the pools. The schedule is unlikely to be achieved and it is recommended the project be rolled into structural remedial works if they are to occur.  Results of the structural assessment are still pending

·    2067 Olympic Pool - replace main pool sparge line

This project has been placed on hold until a complete seismic assessment is done on the building.  A detailed seismic assessment is underway. Due to the size of the facility and complex condition, additional professional advice is sought prior to this report being finalised.  On receipt of the report a strategic assessment will be carried out and recommendations will be provided in regard to its future.

Changes to the local board work programme

Deferred activities

21.       There are no activities which have been deferred to next year’s work programme for this quarter.

 

Cancelled activities

22.       These following activities are cancelled and will be removed from the work programme for quarter two (grey status):

·    969 Pilot: Grey Lynn Library Hall community-led management by Grey Lynn Community Centre Inc (GLCC Inc)

The local entity (GLCC Inc) is not ready to progress the pilot and the timing is not right. The committee are interested in understanding the sustainability of Grey Lynn Community Centre building and contributing to any future development plans at this stage.  The Grey Lynn Library Hall building has been assessed as an ‘earthquake prone’ building. It will require strengthening work to comply with new legislation. Advice is to put the pilot on hold for the 2018/2019 financial year, whilst also waiting further direction from the Western Waitematā needs analysis (refer to work programme item 1405).

·    1321 Kindergarten, 16 Tahuna Street, Freemans Bay: Lease to Auckland Kindergarten Association - Freemans Bay

This lease project was placed on the 2018/2019 work programme in error.  A new community lease was approved by the local board on 12 May 2015 for a term of 10 years with one 10-year right of renewal.  This line item will be removed for quarter two reporting.

·    1322 Kindergarten, Alberon Reserve, 12 Alberon Place, Parnell: Licence of reserve to Auckland Kindergarten Association – Parnell

This lease project was placed on the 2018/2019 work programme in error.  A new community lease was approved by the local board on 12 May 2015 for a term of 10 years with one 10-year right of renewal.  This line item will be removed for quarter two reporting.

·    2660 Victoria Park; 271 Victoria Street, Freemans Bay: Lease to Circability Trust

This lease project is a duplicate entry of ID1320.  This line item will be removed for quarter two reporting.

 

Activities merged with other activities for delivery

23.       There are no activities that have been merged with other activities for this quarter.

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

24.       This report informs the Waitematā Local Board of the performance for the quarter ending 30 September 2018.

Key performance indicators

25.       As most of the Long-term Plan key performance indicators are annual measures and do not change quarterly, they will not be included in the quarterly performance reports and will be presented in the annual report at the end of the year.  This approach is a change to the format of quarterly reports for this financial year.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement https://acintranet.aklc.govt.nz/EN/workingatcouncil/techandtools/infocouncil/Pages/MaoriImpactStatement.aspx

26.       A number of the key projects set out in this report have involved direct engagement with iwi and the projects themselves have been refined as a result of this engagement.  For example the Public Open Space Naming Fund (carried forward from last year’s work programme) involved consultation with iwi for traditional names or the gifting of contemporary names and the Parnell Plan has benefitted from iwi involvement.

27.       The Waitematā Local Board will continue to ensure mana whenua have input into local board projects and that projects are refined in response to this valued input.

28.       The Waitematā Local Board supports the use of traditional iwi names and dual names for public spaces as a standard approach to Māori responsiveness and to reflect the history of the local board area.

29.       Mana whenua customary practices continue to be embedded into the opening events for the local board’s projects.

Financial Performance

30.       The Waitematā Local Board capital investment for the quarter was $2.5 million and net operational cost of service was $3.9 million. 

31.       Operating revenue for the first quarter revenue was slightly ahead of budget for Studio One Toi Tū and the Ellen Melville Centre.

32.       Operating expenditure for asset-based services is above budget. The overspend is to do with response related maintenance work to remediate the remainder of the April storm work orders. The response budgets are held centrally and will be allocated to relevant local boards. 

33.       Capital investment of $2.5 million in period related mainly to the comprehensive upgrade of Parnell Baths, spend of the quarter is at $1.5 million. The Western Park - renew boardwalk and paving project expenditure for the quarter was $380,000. The large variance in total capital spend compared with budget is due to the revised capital budget not being updated with carry-forward budgets.

34.       The Finance and Performance Committee approved the carry forwards in October and these will be reflected in local board financials in the next quarterly report.

35.       Further financial details are set out in attachment B to this report.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

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

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks https://acintranet.aklc.govt.nz/EN/workingatcouncil/techandtools/infocouncil/Pages/Risks.aspx

37.       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.

38.       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

1.       The local board will receive the next performance update following the end of quarter two in February 2019.


 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Waitematā 2018/2019 Work Programme - Q1 Report

47

b

Waitematā 2018/2019 - Financial appendix

67

c

Capital expenditure carry forwards 2018/2019 (from 2017/2018)

77

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Simon  Tattersfield - Senior Local Board Advisor - Waitematā

Authoriser

Trina Thompson - Relationship Manager/Senior Advisor Waitematā Local Board

 



Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

Waitematā Quick Response Round Two 2018/2019 grant allocations

 

File No.: CP2018/20369

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

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

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       This report presents applications received for Waitematā Quick Response, Round Two 2018/2019 (see Attachment A).

3.       The Waitematā Local Board adopted the Waitematā Grants Programme 2018/2019 on 17 April 2018 (see Attachment B). The document sets application guidelines for contestable community grants submitted to the local board.

4.       The Waitematā Local Board has set a total community grants budget of $150,000 and a total accommodation support budget of $125,000 for the 2018/2019 financial year. A total of $22,380 was allocated to Quick Response Round One and $51,900 was allocated to Local Grants, Round One. This leaves a remaining balance of $75,720 to be allocated between two quick response and one local grants round.

5.       Thirty applications were received for Quick Response Round Two 2018/2019 requesting a total of $69,162.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Waitematā Local Board:

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

Application ID

Organisation

Main focus

Requesting funding for

Amount requested

Eligibility

QR1920-206

Ciara Bernstein

Arts and culture

Towards the purchase of a digital audio desk.

$3,000.00

Eligible

QR1920-209

Hipold D’Souza

Arts and culture

Towards the costs of venue hire, sound and lighting to deliver a Konkani play.

$1,000.00

Eligible

QR1920-211

The Auckland Performing Arts Centre at Western Springs

Arts and culture

Towards the purchase of a computer and the costs of software installation.

$3,000.00

Eligible

QR1920-215

Kyan Krumdieck

Arts and culture

Towards the cinematographer, sound and camera gear costs to produce an historic heritage character piece documentary.

$680.00

Eligible

QR1920-224

Pacific Culture and Arts Exchange Centre Limited

Arts and culture

Towards the venue hire of Auckland Town Hall and promotion costs to hold a young Chinese piano and violin concert.

$3,000.00

Eligible

QR1920-237

The Documentary New Zealand Trust

Arts and culture

Towards the Q Theatre venue hire for “Doc Edge Pride 2019”.

$3,000.00

Eligible

QR1920-244

Auckland Youth Orchestra Incorporated

Arts and culture

Towards the Auckland Town Hall venue hire for the 2019 symphony concert.

$3,000.00

Eligible

QR1920-245

Galatea Theatre

Arts and culture

Towards the lighting hire to deliver “Madonna's Mule”, a Christmas theatre production.

$1,000.00

Eligible

QR1920-201

Amanda Chapman

under the umbrella of Grey Lynn 2030 Transition Community Trust

Community

Towards the purchase of tools and the costs of marketing to enable the start-up of a community tool library.

$3,000.00

Eligible

QR1920-207

Fun and Games Toy Library

Community

Towards the purchase of indoor and outdoor banners and flyers for promotional use.

$1,145.00

Eligible

QR1920-214

Youthline Auckland Charitable Trust

Community

Towards a portion of the regional volunteer manager's salary.

$3,000.00

Eligible

QR1920-216

Auckland Heritage Roses

Community

Towards the design and purchase of feather flags and vinyl banners.

$903.00

Eligible

QR1920-220

Auckland Pride Festival

Community

Towards the costs of a Be Accessible consultation and implementation plan for the Auckland Pride Festival.

$2,925.00

Eligible

QR1920-223

Rainbow Youth Incorporated

Community

Towards catering, staff wages and voucher cards to deliver a volunteer appreciation event.

$2,677.00

Eligible

QR1920-225

Auckland City Centre Residents' Group Incorporated

Community

Towards operational and administrative running costs for the residents group.

$2,506.00

Eligible

QR1920-229

Rainbow Youth Incorporated

Community

Towards the costs of an advertising campaign to raise awareness of youth homelessness.

$1,815.00

Eligible

QR1920-230

St Columba Anglican Church Parish

under the umbrella of The Diocese of Auckland

Community

Towards the purchase of a new stove, dishwasher and rangehood for the church and community centre.

$3,000.00

Eligible

QR1920-234

Westhaven Forum Trust Limited

Community

Towards the costs of gathering feedback and creating a website to engage with stakeholders of the Westhaven Marina.

$3,000.00

Eligible

QR1920-238

Alcohol Healthwatch Trust

Community

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

$2,050.00

Eligible

QR1920-239

Life Education Trust Counties Manukau

Community

Towards the cost to print 404 workbooks for the students of Grey Lynn School.

$808.00

Eligible

QR1920-241

The Samoan Methodist Churches of Samoa (Grey Lynn Parish) in New Zealand

Community

Towards the purchase of a marquee for a community cricket day.

$3,000.00

Eligible

QR1920-202

Parnell Community Trust

Environment

Towards the costs of marketing materials and tutor fees for a series of sustainable living workshops.

$1,680.00

Eligible

QR1920-235

For the Love of Bees

Environment

Towards facilitation fees and materials to run a series of school and public workshops.

$2,814.00

Eligible

QR1920-205

Zionist Federation of New Zealand

Events

Towards the generator and lighting hire for the “Hanukah in the Bays” event.

$800.00

Eligible

QR1920-208

New Zealand Spirit Festival

Events

Towards the costs of venue hire, audio, staging and labour to deliver a yoga day at Western Springs.

$3,000.00

Eligible

QR1920-213

Ponsonby Business Association

Events

Towards the costs of entertainment to deliver the “Christmas in the Dark 2018” event.

$3,000.00

Eligible

QR1920-218

All Together Multi-Culture Society Club of New Zealand Incorporated

Events

Towards the costs to host the “Russian Day 2019” at Western Springs Community Centre.

$3,000.00

Eligible

QR1920-228

Wilde Projects Limited

Events

Towards the architectural design and artist fees to deliver a six-day Queer Pavilion event at Albert Park.

$3,000.00

Eligible

QR1920-233

Claudia Maran

Events

Towards the organisation fees, music, activation equipment and marketing to deliver two community events.

$1,500.00

Eligible

QR1920-243

Auckland Electric Tramways Trust

Historic Heritage

Towards the costs of lifting and relocating the Auckland Tram 255.

$2,859.00

Eligible

Total

 

 

 

$69,162.00

 

 

 

 

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 Waitematā Local Board adopted their grants programme for 2018/2019 on 17 April 2018 and will operate three quick response, two local grant and one accommodation support round 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 Waitematā 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 Waitematā Quick Response Round Two 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.     Twelve applicants applying to Waitematā Quick Response, Round Two 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 Waitematā Local Board has set a total community grants budget of $150,000 and a total accommodation support budget of $125,000 for the 2018/2019 financial year. $22,380 was allocated to Quick Response, Round One and $51,900 was allocated to Local Grants, Round One. This leaves a remaining balance of $75,720 to be allocated between two quick response and one local grants round.

19.     Thirty applications were received for Quick Response, Round Two 2018/2019 requesting a total of $69,162.

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 Waitematā Local Board allocation of funding for Quick Response Round Two, 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

Waitematā Quick Response Round Two 2018/2019 grant applications

85

b

Waitematā Local Board Grant Programme 2018/2019

195

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Makenzie Hirz - Senior Community Grants Advisor

Authorisers

Marion Davies - Grant Operations Manager

Shane King - Head of Operations Support

Trina Thompson - Relationship Manager/Senior Advisor Waitematā Local Board

 


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 


 


 


 


 


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

Auckland Transport November 2018 update

 

File No.: CP2018/21578

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report 

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

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       This report covers:

·    a summary of Auckland Transport projects and operations in the local board area

·    a summary of the board’s transport capital fund

·    a summary of general information items sent to the board

·    Traffic Control Committee decisions.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a)      receive the Auckland Transport November 2018 update report.

 

Horopaki / Context

3.       This report updates the board on Auckland Transport (AT) projects and operations in the local board area, it updates the local board on their advocacy and consultations, and includes information on the status of the Local Board Transport Capital Fund.

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

5.       The Local Board Transport Capital Fund 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).


 

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

Auckland Transport projects and operations in the local board area

6.       The table below has a general summary of projects and activities of interest to the board with their current status. Please note that all timings are indicative and are subject to change:

Item

Update

Park Road Busway - bus priority improvements on Park Road between Grafton Bridge and the Hospital entrance

No updates this month.

Previous update:  AT has been engaging with key stakeholders on the Park Road project. Traffic management outside the new University medical facility conflicts with construction of the proposed improvements and is likely to delay the project until 2020.  Public consultation has been put on hold until we confirm with the University the earliest date that construction could proceed.

Wellesley Street Bus Improvement Project (formerly Midtown bus route) – Improving how city centre buses operate

The project team for the Detailed Business Case has formed and work is underway.  Workshops with stakeholders and the local board are being scoped.  Overall project co-ordination is being undertaken with the Victoria Street linear park team, the light rail team and City Rail Link Ltd.

Pt Chevalier to Westmere cycleway - A dedicated cycle route along Pt Chevalier Road and Meola Road ending near the Westmere Shops 

Urban design advice is being sought. The project team will present options to the Project Control Group to confirm the form of the cycleway before going into detailed design. Feedback on the options from the Community Liaison Group will also be presented to the Project Control Group.

Route 4 of Waitematā Safer Routes. Improvements for pedestrians, people on bikes and bus users for the section of Great North Road between Crummer Road and Ponsonby Road.

No update this month.

Previous update:  The project team has developed three concept designs to characterise the route.  The design is based on the safe system approach and meets the needs of pedestrians, people on bikes and in vehicles.  The new design has significant cost increase around kerb works and associated utility costs.  The designs and indicative costs were presented to the Project Control Group who have requested that the Cost Scope Adjustment (NZTA Funding) be progressed and agreed with NZTA. They asked that funding be found for the project.  Detailed design will be progressed when we have the funding agreed.

Parnell cycleway – proposed cycleway through Parnell

No update this month.

Previous update:  The project team has worked through a multi criteria assessment of concept design options and determined AT’s preferred design option.  AT is currently preparing materials for a community reference group workshop.

AT in partnership with NZTA are planning safety and connectivity improvements to the Strand/Gladstone Road intersection as part of the proposed cycleway.

These improvements include signalising the intersection and improving pedestrian and cycle connectivity. AT will shortly be consulting with residents and will share the details with the reference group once finalised.

Nelson St cycleway phase 3 – a bi-directional cycleway from Nelson Street to Quay Street

No update this month.

Previous update:  Due to streetscape improvement opportunities for Market Place and Custom Street West, AT is delaying making any decisions following the October 2017 consultation on the proposal.  AT will update the board, submitters and other key stakeholders when a decision is reached.

Victoria Street East-West cycleway - dedicated cycle route along Victoria Street West, from the Beaumont Street intersection to the Hobson Street intersection.

No update this month.

Previous update:  The draft detailed design has been delivered and the project team are working through an urban design review in collaboration with Council’s Design Office.  As per the current programme the construction start date is expected to be November 2019.

Federal Street Walking and Cycling Improvements

(proposed for Federal Street linking Fanshawe Street to Victoria Street until the full Federal Street Upgrade occurs.)

No update this month.

Previous update:  We are currently analysing feedback we received from consultation and will soon produce a report highlighting key themes and changes to be made to improve the safety of the design as a result (expected October/ November 2018).

Tamaki Drive cycle route (Quay Street to Ngapipi Bridge)

No update this month.

Previous update:  The project team has endorsed a high quality segregated off-road cycleway design on the north side of Quay Street and Tamaki Drive, the revised design has been sent to the Board for their feedback.  The project is currently awaiting funding approval from NZTA.  Construction expected to start late-2018 or early-2019.

Cook Street & Union Street – improvements to safety along Cook Street in the Central City.

No update this month.

Previous update:  The Project Team is in the process of applying for funding for this project.  The team anticipates this process to take approximately 10-12 weeks.

Parnell residential parking zone - proposed permit scheme for residents and businesses

No update this month.

Previous update:  Consultation closed in December 2017.  The project team’s response to local board feedback was included in the July report to the board.  The final consultation report was published on the Auckland Transport website on the 10 August 2018.  Implementation of the parking zone will be progressively rolled out from December 2018 to the end of April 2019.

Implementation

The changes will be introduced progressively:

·    Area 1 by December 2018

·    Area 2 and 3 by early March 2019

·    Area 4 and 5 by end of April 2019

Grey Lynn & Arch Hills parking scheme - proposed permit scheme for residents and businesses

AT will be implementing the amended residential parking zone in December 2018. Letters will shortly go out to the area detailing the scheme.  In line with a resolution passed by the local board, AT will re-assess the parking situation in the remaining streets after parking patterns have normalised.

Herne Bay cycling and walking improvements – proposed changes to encourage slower driving speeds and improve routes for people walking and cycling.

No update this month.

Previous update:  The changes to the design resulting from public feedback and the review have just been communicated to residents and stakeholders.  Construction is expected to start in March 2019.

Downtown Infrastructure Improvement Programme –

·    Quay Street Strengthening 

·    Quay Street Enhancement

·    Britomart East

·    Lower Albert

·    Downtown Ferry

·    Waterfront Park

·    Mooring dolphin

 

Design of the various elements of the Programme will continue through 2018.

·    Resource consents for the Ferry Basin Redevelopment were lodged in October 2018.

·    Resource consents for Quay Street Enhancement will be lodged in November 2018.

·    Resource consents for Downtown Public Space will be lodged in December 2018.

Public engagement to begin in mid-November 2018.  Major construction work on Quay Street to begin from 26 December 2018.

Route 2 of the Waitematā safe routes - improvements for pedestrians, people on bikes, and bus users. This route runs along Richmond Road from Surrey Crescent to Parawai Crescent through the West Lynn shopping centre.

The project team is preparing the collateral for the public re-engagement which is scheduled to begin in mid-November 2018.

College Hill Parking – Parking improvements along College Hill Road.

The Parking Design Team are preparing a resolution for approval by the Traffic Control Committee.  The team expect to have this implemented before Christmas.

Parnell Busway - bus priority improvements on Parnell Road between Davis Crescent and St Mary’s Close.

Construction is planned to go ahead in the first half of 2019.  The Traffic Control Committee approval has been confirmed for the proposals. Tendering the physical works contract will occur during November 2018.

Wynyard Quarter street and park upgrades – central construction package

No update this month.

Previous update:  Work commenced on Monday 17 September. Daldy Street (between Gaunt and Fanshawe and Gaunt and Pakenham Street is now closed. Work has started removing the existing tram tracks and road surface.

Franklin Road upgrade - upgrades to improve the road quality and future-proof existing services.

Phase 1 works will be closed down on the 16 November 2018 for the Christmas period. The contractor will leave the site having completed all temporary measures including line marking, signs and hit posts in place.

In January and February 2019 the speed table at the intersection Franklin, Napier and Middle Street will be completed.  Vector North Power plan to install catenary cables and luminaires between Victoria St West and Wellington St.

Detours and diversions will be in place for all of these works. Access to and from Victoria Park New World is provided.  Some of the phase 2 works have been underway this year (during phase 1) to ensure the project remains on target and to mitigate issues for some of the stakeholders and residents.  There is no change to completion dates.

Ian McKinnon Cycleway – a high quality cycle facility connecting the North-western cycleway and the Grafton Gully cycleway.

Construction work is progressing as planned.  Due to wet weather in the last week of October and the planned hand rail extension in the first week of November, construction completion will be in November.  An opening ceremony is planned for the end of November 2018.

Parnell Station link – pedestrian link from the Station to Carlaw Park

The project is complete.

New campaign warns Auckland drivers to slow down

7.       Auckland Transport has launched a campaign to get Aucklanders to slow down when driving. The campaign features radio, cinema, social media, outdoor and bus ads, shows the scale of the devastation wrought on whānau, friends and communities across Auckland.

8.       Safety is the key focus for Auckland Transport, Auckland Council and the Government. Together there is planned investment for $700 million over the next decade to make our roads safer.

9.       Since 2014, there has been a 78 per cent increase in deaths and 68 per cent increase in serious injuries on Auckland’s roads – three times that of any other region in New Zealand. 64 people that died on the roads last year included 26 drivers, 17 passengers, 10 motorcyclists, nine pedestrians and two people on bikes.

10.     Auckland Transport Chief Executive Shane Ellison has outlined that safety is Auckland Transport’s number one priority and that the organisation is committed to achieving 60 per cent less deaths and serious injuries by 2028.


 

Local Board Transport Capital Fund

11.     Following the proposal to increase the Local Board Transport Capital Fund, the allocation to the board is now $3,073,725 in total for this electoral period.

12.     From this sum the board has approved:

·    $221,000 as additional funds for the Ponsonby Road pedestrian improvement project

·    Up to $5,000 for streetscape enhancement incorporating tree planting on St Marys Road

·    $825,000 for the Greenway connection through Cox’s Bay Reserve to Wharf Road via Bayfield Park

13.     The board currently has $2,022,725 uncommitted.

14.     Auckland Transport is preparing rough order of costs for delivery of:

·    The Greenway connection between Meola Road to Great North Road, called the Western Springs Greenway.

·    Walking and/or cycling connections in the Auckland Domain as identified in the Auckland Domain Masterplan and/or Waitematā Greenways Plan

·    Upgrading the footpath along the western side of Bourke Street, Newmarket.

·    Solution to manage parking and through-traffic into St Patrick’s Square.

·    Installation of temporary planters in MacKelvie Street in line with the original design proposal for the Ponsonby Pedestrian Project.

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

Local impacts and local board views

15.     The proposed decision of receiving the report has no local, sub-regional or regional impacts.

Auckland Transport consultations

16.     Auckland Transport attended workshops on 6 November 2018 to update the local board on their Transport Capital Fund, the Integrated Corridor Delivery Programme and consultation materials for the Waitematā Safe Routes project.

17.     During November 2018 as a series of significant public consultations will be taking place with an impact on Waitematā Local Board. For the boards information these are:

Name

Expected start date

Waitematā Safe Routes

12/11/2018

Speed Management – Bylaw Consultation

15/11/2018

Regional Public Transport Plan

19/11/2018

 

18.     Given that these are closing in mid-December it is not expected that the local board will be able to workshop these matters until February 2019.

General information items sent to the board:

19.     Please see below for a summary of items sent to the board for their information or feedback:


 

 

Item

Date sent to Board

FYI: St Stephens Avenue - Proposed P120 parking restrictions

04/10/2018

Update: Downtown Programme - Ferry Basin Development

05/10/2018

Update: City Centre Parking - Pricing Review

09/10/2018

FYI: Downtown Programme - Local Board drop-in sessions

09/10/2018

FYI: Ayr St Asphalt Resurfacing Night Work Road Closure

15/10/2018

Update: Waitematā Safe Routes – Engagement

17/10/2018

FYI: Briefing note road safety data

18/10/2018

Feedback: Kelmarna Avenue- Raised Zebra Crossing

23/10/2018

Update: Midtown and Downtown Bus Improvements

23/10/2018

FYI: Ian McKinnon - Tree Removal

29/10/2018

Waitematā Safe Routes: Key themes from CLG feedback

2/11/2018

Traffic Control Committee resolutions

20.     Please see Attachment A which outlines decisions made in the Waitematā Local Board area in October 2018. Auckland Transport's resolution and approval process ensures the most appropriate controls and restrictions are put in place and can be legally enforced.

Quarterly Report

21.     Please see Attachment B for the local board’s information which is the quarterly report on Auckland Transports activities covering July to September 2018. This contains information on projects located within the Waitematā Local Board area and regional projects.

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

Auckland Transport will provide another update report to the local board next month.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Decisions of the Traffic Control Committee

211

b

Auckland Transport activities over the July - September 2018 Quarter

213

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Ben Halliwell - Elected Member Relationship Manager

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon – Elected Member Relationship Team Manager

Trina Thompson - Relationship Manager/Senior Advisor Waitematā Local Board

 


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

Trial of online voting at the 2019 local elections

 

File No.: CP2018/20523

 

  

 

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/s

That the Waitematā 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.


 

91.    

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Relative percentage differences to Auckland for selected Census 2013 variables: Local boards A-M

245

b

Relative percentage differences to Auckland for selected Census 2013 variables: Local boards O-W

247

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Elodie Fontaine - Advisor - Democracy Services

Authorisers

Marguerite Delbet - General Manager Democracy Services

Trina Thompson - Relationship Manager/Senior Advisor Waitematā Local Board

 


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

Local government elections 2019 – order of names on voting documents

 

File No.: CP2018/20886

 

  

 

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 Waitematā Local Board:

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

 

 

Horopaki / ContextOptions 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 / Attachment

No.

Title

Page

a

Order of names on voting documents

253

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Warwick McNaughton - Principal Advisor - Democracy Services

Authorisers

Marguerite Delbet - General Manager Democracy Services

Trina Thompson - Relationship Manager/Senior Advisor Waitematā Local Board

 


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

Auckland Regional Pest Management Plan consultation feedback and recommended changes

 

File No.: CP2018/21016

 

  

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 local board on 25 September 2018 to discuss the consultation feedback and proposed staff responses.

5.       Waitematā Local Board residents provided 51 submissions on the plan, representing four 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.

6.       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.

7.       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 / Recommendation/s

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a)      receive a summary of consultation feedback from Waitematā 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

8.       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.

9.       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.

10.     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

11.     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%

 

12.     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

 

 

13.     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 Waitematā 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 Waitematā 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

15%

26%

Partial support

32%

17%

Partial do not support

2%

3%

Full do not support

2%

2%

Other comments

49%

53%

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

Full support

19%

27%

Partial support

25%

29%

Partial do not support

2%

5%

Full do not support

2%

2%

Other comments

52%

37%

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

Full support

48%

46%

Partial support

15%

19%

Partial do not support

7%

12%

Full do not support

0%

2%

Other comments

30%

21%

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

Full support

13%

44%

Partial support

33%

20%

Partial do not support

0%

4%

Full do not support

0%

2%

Other comments

53%

30%

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

Full support

35%

43%

Partial support

37%

23%

Partial do not support

2%

7%

Full do not support

2%

4%

Other comments

24%

23%

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

Full support

37%

44%

Partial support

34%

21%

Partial do not support

0%

5%

Full do not support

6%

3%

Other comments

23%

28%

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

Full support

46%

38%

Partial support

26%

28%

Partial do not support

9%

7%

Full do not support

0%

4%

Other comments

20%

23%

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

Full support

30%

46%

Partial support

42%

23%

Partial do not support

3%

4%

Full do not support

0%

3%

Other comments

24%

25%

 

14.     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.

15.     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’.

16.     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.

17.     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

18.     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 Waitematā 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.

19.     Proposed approaches to be taken in relation to these issues were workshopped with the board in June 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.

20.     A recent workshop with the board was held on 25 September 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

21.     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.

22.     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

23.     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.

24.     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

25.     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.

26.     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).

27.     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

28.     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.

29.     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

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

31.     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

267

b

Proposed Regional Pest Management Plan 2018 - Summary Document

277

c

Waitematā Local Board feedback on the Proposed Regional Pest

289

 

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

Trina Thompson - Relationship Manager/Senior Advisor Waitematā Local Board

 


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

Grant of a new lease to West End Lawn Tennis Club Incorporated Cox’s Bay Park 2 Fife Street Westmere

 

File No.: CP2018/21503

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To approve granting a new lease to West End Lawn Tennis Club Incorporated at Cox’s Bay Park, 2 Fife St, Westmere.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       The West End Lawn Tennis Club Incorporated has clubrooms and tennis courts at Cox’s Bay Park in Westmere. The club have been operating at the location since 1932 and have grown to be a vibrant part of the community.

3.       The club’s lease fully expired in January 2017 and has been on a month by month lease arrangement. The club has now applied for a new lease.

4.       Due to the club owning the building and other assets they can apply for a new lease as of right without the need for an expression of interest process.

5.       The club is well run, operating from recently renovated clubrooms with an active membership of 450 across all age groups.

6.       This report recommends a new community lease be granted to West End Lawn Tennis Club Incorporated..

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a)      That the Waitematā Local Board:

i)        Grant a new community lease to the West End Lawn Tennis Club Incorporated for the site at Cox’s Bay Park, 2 Fife Street, Westmere, subject to:

ii)       term - ten (10) years with one right of renewal of ten (10) years commencing 20 November 2018

iii)      rent - $1.00 per annum if demanded

iv)      a community outcomes plan being negotiated with the group to be approved by the chair and deputy chair of the board and attached to the community lease as a schedule

v)      all other terms and conditions will be in accordance with Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012

b)      delegate authority to the chair and deputy chair to approve the agreed community outcomes plan by way of memorandum.

 

 

Horopaki / Context

7.       The club’s lease has fully expired. A new lease is required to allow continued occupation, and for the club to secure funding for ongoing improvement works. This report sets out the details to provide a new lease.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

8.       The West End Lawn Tennis Club Incorporated is located at Cox’s Bay Park, 2 Fife St, Westmere (Attachment A).

9.       This land is described as Lot 63 DP 19195 described in certificate of Title 623/56 and comprises 7259 square metres. The land is owned fee simple by Auckland Council as a classified recreation reserve pursuant to the provisions of the Reserves Act 1977.

10.     There is an operative park management plan for Cox’s Bay prepared in 1994 and updated in 2009 regarding weed control. The management plan contemplates the club being located at Cox’s Bay and its activities.

11.     As there is a park management plan and the club’s activities are approved in the plan, there is no need for public notification or iwi consultation. 

12.     The lease to the club has fully expired. The lease commenced 16 January 2002 with an initial term of five years with two rights of renewal of five years each for a total term of 15 years. The lease finally expired on 15 January 2017 and the club has been holding over on the same terms and conditions.

13.     The club has applied for a new lease to continue their activities and has submitted a comprehensive application. As the club owns the building and other assets they can apply for a new lease as of right without the need for an expression of interest process.

14.     The club’s activities commenced at Cox’s Bay on 6 February 1932. At that time there were two asphalt courts and the clubroom was a council-owned tin shed. Membership at the time was restricted to 50 members including five junior members.

15.     The club has grown since then and now has six AstroTurf courts, newly refurbished clubrooms and 450 members. Membership is evenly split between young people and adults.

16.     The club expresses its purpose as “To be recognised as the best community-based club in Auckland, renowned for the warmth of its hospitality, vibrancy, and members engagement in club activities across all ages”.

17.     The main activities of the club include tennis, interclub tennis tournaments, social functions, preschool playgroups, pilates, dance practice, rehearsals, training, and an ante-natal class. The club is an affiliated member of Tennis Auckland.

18.     Also associated with the club activities are after school and school holiday tennis programmes for youth.

19.     The clubrooms are also available for hire to other community groups at reduced rates.

20.     A site visit with club officials was undertaken on 11 July 2017. At the time a school holiday programme was underway, and all courts were fully utilised. The club’s facilities were in excellent condition having been recently refurbished and reconfigured. The facilities are well maintained and well used.

21.     Information presented with the application shows the club finances are well managed. Most of the income is derived from grants, subscriptions and donations, with coaching being the biggest item of expenditure.

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

22.     At the local board workshop on 30 October 2018, the board enquired about the impact of the extension to the clubroom building footprint on any new lease. Staff investigation found that the additional building footprint is within the leased area. Resolution WTM/2013/283 from 2013 granted landowner approval for the proposed additions and alterations. There is no resulting impact of the extension on the ability to grant a new lease in accordance with the conditions recommended in this Memo.

23.     The activities of the club align with the Waitematā Local Board Plan outcome one, “Inclusive communities that are vibrant, healthy and connected”, and outcome two, “Attractive and versatile public places that meet our communities’ needs”.

24.     The club hosts an annual West End Cup which the local board supports through a three year event partnership funding agreement.

25.     As the club owns the building and other assets on the site, the recommended lease term in the Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012 is an initial term of 10 years with a right of renewal of 10 years for a total term of 20 years.

26.     A community outcomes plan is to be negotiated with the group, to be approved by the chair and deputy chair of the board and attached to the community lease as a schedule.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

27.     Auckland Council is committed to meeting its responsibilities under Te Tiriti o Waitangi and its broader legal obligations to Māori.

28.     The council recognises these responsibilities are distinct from the Crown’s Treaty obligations and fall within a local government Tāmaki Makaurau context. These commitments are articulated in the council’s key strategic planning documents, the Auckland Plan, the Long-term Plan 2012-2022, the Unitary Plan and Local Board Plans.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

29.     There are no financial implications granting the new lease as the club own the improvements on the land and meet all costs in that regard.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

30.     There are no risks to council in granting the new lease.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

31.     If the local board approves granting a new lease staff will draft a deed of lease to send to the club for execution.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachment

No.

Title

Page

a

Lease Area Plan

309

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Tsz Ning Chung - Community Lease Advisor

Authorisers

Rod Sheridan - General Manager Community Facilities

Trina Thompson - Relationship Manager/Senior Advisor Waitematā Local Board

 


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

TAPAC Arts Partnership Contribution Options

 

File No.: CP2018/21802

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.   To approve the establishment of The Auckland Performing Arts Centre (TAPAC) as an arts partner and approve funding to the organisation as a contribution towards operational expenses.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       During the Long-term Plan consultation, The Auckland Performing Arts Centre (TAPAC) requested funding assistance for operational support from the local board.

3.       In response to the request, the local board allocated $20,000 in the 2018/2019 work programme and requested staff to investigate and provide advice on the appropriate level of support and funding mechanism

4.       At a workshop on 25 September 2018, the local board expressed interest in ongoing funding support to establish TAPAC as an arts partner of the local board.

5.       TAPAC has achieved exceptional growth over the past two years with new programme initiatives and has reached an audience of 189,600 this past year.

6.       The intent of this report is to provide the local board with advice on three options for contribution towards operational expenses:

·        Option A – Basic, $20,000: contribution of 3.2 per cent of operational expenses

·        Option B – Moderate, $40,000: contribution of 6.40 per cent of operational expenses: this is also the contribution advised as the pro-rata contribution for a full year.  

·        Option C – Comprehensive, $85,000: annual contribution of 13.5 per cent of operational expenses (recommended).

7.       It is recommended that ongoing operational funding be set at Option C - $85,000 for each financial year.

It is recommended that $42,500 be granted for the period 1 January to 30 June 2019 being pro-rata of the recommended Option C.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a)   approve the establishment of The Auckland Performing Arts Centre (TAPAC) as an arts partner.

b)   allocate $42,500 towards operational expenses for the period 1 January to 30 June 2019 pro-rata from the following budgets:

·     $20,000 – arts, community and events work programme

·     $22,500 – community response fund.

 

 

Horopaki / Context

8.       TAPAC is a purpose-built facility with a large reception area, practice and performance spaces and a theatre which seats up to 120 attendees.

9.       TAPAC built the building with council and community funds, which sits on Crown (Ministry of Education) land within the grounds Western Spring College. TAPAC owns the building and all the fixtures, fittings and equipment and is responsible for all outgoings, repairs and maintenance.

10.     The License to Occupy is for an initial term of 25 years (from 2002) with two rights of renewal of 25 years (Attachment A).

11.     TAPAC requested funding assistance from the local board during the Long-term Plan consultation to ensure the organisation’s ability to sustain its business in performing arts delivery.

12.     TAPAC’s operational expenses for 2017/2018 were $629,328 (Attachment B).

13.     The local board allocated a budget of $20,000 for TAPAC in its 2018/2019 work programme, subject to further discussion points in quarter one.

14.     At a workshop on 25 September 2018, the local board discussed on-going funding options for TAPAC. Staff advised that an ongoing contribution would establish TAPAC as an arts partner of the local board. 

15.     The local board requested advice and options for recommended contribution levels and requested clarification around ownership of and liability for the building. Advice around appropriate levels of funding was provided at a workshop on 6 November 2018.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

16.     TAPAC is all-inclusive by way of its philosophy and offers a vast range of learning and performing opportunities through workshops and performances which include drama, dance, voice and circus to a diverse demographic and across all ages (Attachment C).

17.     The centre supports numerous smaller performance and theatre groups that benefit from reduced facility hire rates. It is a destination for the wider arts community and a platform for emerging performers and theatre works enabling progression to larger venues like Q theatre.

The arts partner model

18.     There are approximately 40 local board arts partners across Auckland, including bands, theatres and arts centres, all pre-determined at the time of Auckland Council’s amalgamation in 2010.

19.     Currently the local board does not have any arts partners. A partnership would foster a closer relationship with TAPAC and staff would offer support by connecting the organisation with other council-supported partners, facilities and activities.

20.     Funding contributions are approved within the annual work programme. There is an expectation for organisations to operate a sustainable business, such as through hiring space and fee-based income recovery for which TAPAC is highly skilled. 

21.     Partners operate as registered charities and apply for most of their funding from community bodies such as Lotteries and Foundation North. A local board contribution would not hinder TAPAC’s ability to continue to receive funding because council works together with funding bodies to an agreed assessment matrix and to serve a defined purpose.

22.     Staff recommend that the contribution towards an arts partner’s operational costs does not exceed 40 per cent.

Ongoing operational funding for TAPAC

23.     It is recommended that ongoing operational funding for TAPAC is set at $85,000 for the financial year because of the demonstrated high standard of programme delivery, participation and engagement that TAPAC offers. This would provide business security and alleviate organisational concerns around maintaining consistency to deliver at an exceptional level.

24.     It is recommended that an initial contribution of $42,500 is made for the remainder of 2018/2019 as a pro-rata of the recommended $85,000 for the full financial year.

25.     This amount includes $20,000 allocated in the current work programme and an additional $22,500 from the community response fund.

26.     Local board funding would enable TAPAC to:

·    continue the current level of service and retain specialist staff with additional hours

·    direct resource to strategic direction to complete a strategic business plan

·    broaden programme and outreach initiatives to grow new audiences

·    increase participation in educational programmes

·    target opportunities to new or emerging groups aided by communications and marketing.

27.     Options for funding contributions are outlined in table one:

          Table one: options for funding contributions

Amount and terms

Discussion

Advantages/Impact

 Risks/impact

Recommendation

Option A

Basic $20,000

 

Funding agreement

 

3.2 per cent of operational expenses

Contribution towards:

·      admin

 

·      Minimal amount for high level impact and collaboration of TAPAC

·      unrealistic amount for TAPAC’S contribution to arts and culture

·      no CAPEX or service costs

·      No risk to council, missed opportunity

·      risk to TAPAC to sustain delivery

·      less opportunity due to small allocation

·      lack of security for TAPAC

Not recommended

Option B 

Moderate $40,000

 

Funding agreement

 

6.75 per cent of TAPACs total operational expenses

Contribution towards a strategic grant for operations, including:

·      admin

·      staffing

·      strategic plan

·      programme development

 

 

·      lesser level of arts partner relationship with council

·      no CAPEX or service costs

·      low to moderate investment for high level of delivery

·      No significant risks identified

 

Option C Comprehensive

$85,000

 

Funding agreement

 

13.5 per cent of TAPACs total operational expenses 

 

 

Contribution towards:

·      admin

·      staffing

·      strategic plan

·      programme

development and implementation

·      new initiatives

·      sponsorship development

·      additional marketing

 

·      Realistic support and investment for high performing organisation

·      more relationship building due to higher contribution

·      a valued addition to Auckland’s arts partner network

·      no CAPEX or service costs

·      security for TAPAC

·     No significant risks identified

 

Recommended for 2019/2020 and subsequent years

 

28.     Operational expenses are calculated as the staffing and administration costs required to keep the business operational. Specific programming and ticketed activity are not included in this calculation. The business has an ability for some cost recovery, reducing the net operational liability of the organisation.

29.     It is recommended that ongoing operational funding be set at Option C.

30.     Applying a pro-rata approach, it is recommended that $42,500 be granted in the 2018/2019 year, for the period 1 January to 30 June 2019. This budget is made up of $20,000 allocated in the work programme and additional funding from the community response fund.

31.     By comparison to all council arts partners, TAPAC delivers outstanding value per head, being in the lowest quarter percentile. The recommended contribution, Option C, would provide far-reaching outcomes in terms of the local board’s investment in arts and culture delivery.

Remediation of the TAPAC building

32.     Remediation of the roof of the centre is required and a date has been negotiated between TAPAC and the MoE who will carry out the work at the end of 2019. This will impact on operations and the centre will need to close for a time but aims to mitigate risk to service delivery by operating at other locations during the period of closure.

33.     TAPAC will benefit from the alternative venues that are being investigated through the Arts and Creative Industries Needs Analysis and Stocktake of Community Space in the local board area.

34.     The centre partners with Western Springs College to deliver student programmes which are funded by the school. The remedial work and the college development will free up rehearsal space as the new school will have a theatre, taking pressure off TAPAC.

35.     The responsibility taken by MoE to carry out remedial work as well as the college development demonstrates a positive commitment to TAPAC and the arts and community it serves.

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

36.     Through an all-inclusive approach across all demographics and ages, TAPAC reaches varied communities, aligning to the local board plan and outcome one – inclusive communities that are vibrant, healthy and connected.

37.     At a workshop on 25 September 2018, the local board discussed on-going funding options for TAPAC.

38.     Advice around appropriate levels of funding was provided to the local board at a workshop on 6 November 2018.

39.     An ongoing contribution would establish TAPAC as an arts partner of the local board. This would be a new arts and culture relationship for the local board.

 

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

40.     Māori content, participation and engagement for are integral within TAPAC’s programme and in 2017/2018 there were 21,803 Māori participants or attendees, which was approximately 9 per cent of all visitors.

41.     The purpose and outcomes of arts partner funding agreements align to Māori responsiveness and this is reflected in the reporting outcomes.

 

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

42. Staff recommend allocating $42,500 towards TAPACs operational expenses for the period 1 January to 30 June 2019 pro-rata from the following budgets:

·    $20,000 – arts and culture work programme

·    $22,500 – community response fund.

43. The local board prioritises and approves budgets for an annual work programme in June of each financial year.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

44.     The risk to TAPAC without substantial support is that they cannot sustain the level of service delivery outcomes they have achieved. The recommended contribution would provide TAPAC the ability to deliver their outcomes consistently.

45.     There is a risk that due to financial pressures and change in priorities for the Waitematā Local Board the level of funding support to TAPAC may not be sustained. To mitigate the risk staff will provide a mechanism for TAPAC to demonstrate their worth to the community of Waitematā through an annual report in response to the purpose and measures set out in the funding agreement.

46.     The risk to council and the local board is mitigated as there are no capex or services costs required.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

47.     Staff will progress a funding agreement between TAPAC and the local board for $42,500 dated 1 January to 30 June 2019, being a pro-rata amount for the remainder of 2018/2019. Payment would be within twenty days of the TAPAC trust signing.

48.     Purpose and reporting outcomes will be captured in a funding agreement and TAPAC included in a reporting line in the 2018/2019 work programme.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Licence to Occupy school site agreement

317

b

Financial and performance report

321

c

TAPAC Overview and outcomes 2017/2018

345

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Xanthe Jujnovich - Arts and Culture Advisor

Authorisers

Graham Bodman - General Manager Arts, Community and Events

Trina Thompson - Relationship Manager/Senior Advisor Waitematā Local Board

 


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator



Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator



Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

Regional Facilities Auckland 2017/2018 Fourth Quarter Report

 

File No.: CP2018/19192

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To present the Regional Facilities Auckland (RFA) report for the fourth quarter to 30 June 2018.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       Regional Facilities Auckland’s (RFA) purpose is to enrich life in Auckland by engaging people in the arts, environment, sports and events. RFA work in partnership with key stakeholders to present exciting, engaging and accessible experiences to those who live in and visit the city.

3.       RFA’s fourth quarter programme continued the delivery of a diverse array of exhibitions, shows and entertainment as people flocked to experience and enjoy RFA’s exciting activities and events across Auckland.

4.       The unaudited operational result for the financial year shows an unfavourable variance to budget of $5.49m following another challenging quarter.

5.       The key factor underlying this result is that the 2017/18 budget targeted a $17.4m (+34 per cent) increase on the previous year’s external revenues, of which the organisation achieved an increase of $4.9m (+9 per cent), an overall shortfall of $12.5m.

6.       This reflected the impact of a number of planned events that did not materialise (with several major events cancelled or deferred into the following financial year).

7.       In addition, RFA revenues were also negatively affected by the impacts of a softening sponsorship and philanthropic environment, adverse weather conditions affecting Zoo visitation, less favourable commercial terms from catering suppliers, lower than budgeted net revenue from the introduction of the international visitor charge at Auckland Art Gallery, and lower attendance numbers at some key events.

8.       The shortfall in revenue was offset through the application of tight cost controls in areas that would not adversely impact RFA’s ability to grow revenue and maintain standards. This resulted in savings of $7.9 million, derived from managing vacancies to reduce staff costs, and deferring or cancelling non-committed costs (such as marketing, ICT costs and staff training).

9.       RFA have continued to increase commercial revenue, efficiently manage operational costs, and minimise the operational funding required from Auckland’s ratepayers. In a challenging market where organisations such as RFA are competing for the consumer discretionary spend, RFA’s external revenue accounts for 61 per cent of its total operational revenue.

10.     The capital programme was underspent for the year of approximately $19m with a number of projects associated with that already committed (Aotea Centre refurbishment, Western Springs renewals, Aotea urban screen, and South East Asia development). This includes $12m of requested deferrals from Auckland Council. Excluding the requested deferrals, 86 per cent of the capital programme was delivered. Finalisation of any carry over amount will be confirmed by Council in September as part of the budget refresh process.

11.     Highlights of the fourth quarter included:

·        This is the first quarter in which the New Zealand Maritime Museum has been fully integrated into RFA with the Museum looking forward to increased collaboration across the RFA group and the city to offer an enhanced experience to Aucklanders and visitors.

·        Wi Taepa: Retrospective opened at Auckland Art Gallery Toi o Tāmaki with an intimate blessing facilitated by Haerewa, the Gallery’s Māori advisory group, and curator of Māori art Nigel Borell. This major retrospective exhibition of senior Māori clay artist Wi Taepa looks back over 30 years of the artist’s practice.

·        The 2018 Auckland Writer’s Festival took over the Aotea Centre for a week in May, and had its most successful year to date with record ticket sales and attendance numbers of over 74,000.

·        The announcement of Disney’s international musical, Aladdin, coming to The Civic in 2019 received major media coverage and attracted a waitlist of thousands.

·        Auckland Live’s free family programme Pick & Mix marked its 10th anniversary with the announcement of a well-received winter line-up; with the weekend sessions selling out.

·        The Bruce Mason Centre was awarded Gold status by disability advocates, Be.Accessible, while The Civic was named Best Large Venue at the NZ Music Managers Awards.

·        Te Papa and Weta Workshop’s Bug Lab at Auckland Zoo has been a huge success, reaching almost 100,000 visits since opening in December and more than half the people visiting the Zoo at the same time.

·        For the first time in 16 years, the Zoo bred two critically endangered cotton-top tamarin babies, and also in a first for New Zealand the Zoo hatched two lace monitor babies in June, with more eggs due to hatch.

DEMOCRACY ADVISOR PLEASE CHANGE AUTHOR TO JUDY LAWLEY

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a)      receive the Regional Facilities Auckland 2017/2018 Fourth Quarter Report

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachment

No.

Title

Page

a

2017/2018 Fourth Quarter Report

355

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Caroline Teh - Local Board Advisor - Waitematā

Authoriser

Trina Thompson - Relationship Manager/Senior Advisor Waitematā Local Board

 


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

Draft Contributions Policy

 

File No.: CP2018/20703

 

  

 

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:

i)    transport to reflect areas where significant local infrastructure investment is planned

ii)   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 Waitematā 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

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 the time 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.     Consideration 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, 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.

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 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.  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.  Officers would report on adoption of the final policy to the 13 December meeting of the Governing Body.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Draft Contributions Policy 2019

389

b

Consultation Document

475

c

Supporting information

497

d

Remissions of development contributions for Maori development and social housing

517

     

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

Trina Thompson - Relationship Manager/Senior Advisor Waitematā Local Board

 


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 


 


 


 


 


Waitematā Local Board

20 November 2018

 

 

Feedback on proposed topics for inclusion in the Auckland Water Strategy

 

File No.: CP2018/21206

 

  

 

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 / Recommendation/s

That the Waitematā 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 to 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.