Agenda of Infrastructure Committee

I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Infrastructure Committee will be held on:

Date:

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

Wednesday, 4 December 2013

1.00pm

Reception Lounge
Auckland Town Hall
301-305 Queen Street
Auckland

Infrastructure Committee

OPEN AGENDA

MEMBERSHIP

Chairperson	Cr Mike Lee
Deputy Chairperson	Cr Chris Darby
Members	Cr Cameron Brewer
	Cr Dr Cathy Casey
	Cr Bill Cashmore
	Cr Ross Clow
	Cr Hon Chris Fletcher, QSO
	Liane Ngamane
	Cr Calum Penrose
	Cr Dick Quax
	Cr Wayne Walker
	Cr John Watson
	Glenn Wilcox
Ex-officio	Mayor Len Brown, JP
	Deputy Mayor Penny Hulse
Independent Maori Statutory Board (alternate)	David Taipari

(Quorum 7 members)

Barbara Watson

Democracy Advisor

29 November 2013

Contact Telephone: (09) 307 7629

Email: barbara.watson@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

1 Apologies

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

2 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.

3 Confirmation of Minutes

There are no minutes to confirm.

4 Petitions

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

5 Public Input

Standing Order 3.21 provides for Public Input. Applications to speak must be made to the Committee Secretary, in writing, no later than two (2) working days prior to the meeting and must include the subject matter. The meeting Chairperson has the discretion to decline any application that does not meet the requirements of Standing Orders. A maximum of thirty (30) minutes is allocated to the period for public input with five (5) minutes speaking time for each speaker.

5.1 Jasmine Kovach - Respect Our Community Campaign

Purpose

1. Jasmine Kovach, member of the Respect our Community Campaign (ROCC) wishes to address the Infrastructure Committee with regard to the proposed East West Link.

Recommendation/s

That the Infrastructure Committee:

a) thank Jasmine Kovach, member of the Respect our Community Campaign for her presentation.

5.2 Toa Greening - Transformational Public Transportation Project

Purpose

1. Toa Greening wishes to address the Infrastructure Committee with regard to a Transformational Public Transportation Project http://www.projectmicrocar.co.nz which he has submitted to the Ministry of Transport as part of their Intelligent Transportation Systems strategy.

Recommendation/s

That the Infrastructure Committee:

a) thank Toa Greening for the presentation on his Transformational Public Transportation Project.

6 Local Board Input

Standing Order 3.22 provides for Local Board Input. The Chairperson (or nominee of that Chairperson) is entitled to speak for up to five (5) minutes during this time. The Chairperson of the Local Board (or nominee of that Chairperson) shall wherever practical, give two (2) days notice of their wish to speak. The meeting Chairperson has the discretion to decline any application that does not meet the requirements of Standing Orders.

This right is in addition to the right under Standing Order 3.9.14 to speak to matters on the agenda.

At the close of the agenda no requests for local board input had been received.

7 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.”

8 Notices of Motion

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

Infrastructure Committee

04 December 2013

East West Link Update

File No.: CP2013/26783

Purpose

1. To update the Infrastructure Committee on the East-West Link programme and provide an opportunity to give direction/guidance at this early planning stage.

Executive Summary

2. The Auckland-Manukau Eastern Transport Initiative (AMETI) and East-West Link project has progressed planning to formulate an integrated response to address transport issues for the south eastern part of Auckland. This is part of a package of projects in the "triangle" between Onehunga, East Tamaki-Pakuranga and the Airport.

3. On 28 June 2013 the Prime Minister asked NZ Transport Agency (NZTA) to advise the Government which elements of AMETI and the East-West Link could be accelerated with additional funding, and how that funding can best be targeted across both projects.

4. Four initial programme options for the East-West Link component were identified (as presented to the Transport Committee at its 5 June 2013 meeting) and discussed with key stakeholder groups, including iwi and local boards.

5. Auckland Transport and NZTA are refining these options based on stakeholder feedback and are undertaking with Auckland Council staff a multi-disciplinary inquiry-by-design process to develop, refine and evaluate options. The workshop was held 18-21 November.

6. The Better Business Case evaluation will be undertaken concurrently with the workshop to guide selection of a preferred option for NZTA/central government investment purposes based on the specific transport objectives developed.

7. High level cost estimates will be calculated and each programme option will be evaluated against the investment objectives and critical success factors and presented to the Auckland Transport and NZTA Boards.

8. Auckland Council has important interests in the East-West Link in terms of its role as part funder of the programme and representative of the wider community interests. Council must ensure that the programme contributes to Auckland becoming the world’s most liveable city.

9. Council officers propose that the Infrastructure Committee provides guidance in relation to:

· consideration of the wider outcomes (including transport effects) in the evaluation of options

· public consultation on options or a preferred option prior to a final decision;

· consideration of the level of investment being commensurate with the scale of the problem and the net benefits;

· the funding implications of East West-Link programme.

Recommendation/s

That the Infrastructure Committee:

a) support the East-West Link programme being developed in the context of AMETI, rail projects and other related projects.

b) support the multi-modal approach being taken in the development of the East-West Link programme.

c) support Auckland Transport and NZTA continuing to work with Auckland Council on the funding implications of an East-West Link programme.

d) note its expectation that Auckland Transport and NZTA consider the wider outcomes sought in the Auckland Plan (rather than just transport outcomes) in the evaluation of options.

e) note its expectation that Auckland Transport and NZTA will engage with the general public prior to a decision on a preferred option.

f) note its expectation that the level of investment is commensurate with the scale of the problem and the net benefits.

Discussion

Strategic context

10. The AMETI & East-West Link project is identified in the Auckland Plan as a high priority because of its strategic importance in providing improved transport access and unlocking the economic potential in the area and for the Upper North Island.

11. Directive (13.5) of the Auckland Pkan states: “jointly progress planning for AMETI and the East-West Link and implementation by 2021.”

12. This directive flows through to the Integrated Transport Programme and the project is identified as part of the transport programme to deliver the Auckland Plan.

13. The East-West Link has a focus on providing efficient freight movements between SH20 and SH1, and between industrial areas and the Port of Auckland and Auckland International Airport.

14. The Prime Minister outlined in his speech on Friday 28 June 2013 the Government’s intent to accelerate AMETI and the East-West Link. AMETI is in the early stages of construction with a 20 year build period. The East West Link is currently in the early feasibility stage with options being examined.

15. The Government has asked NZTA to advise which elements of AMETI and the East-West Link can be accelerated with additional funding, and how that funding can best be targeted across both projects.

16. Figure 1 below illustrates the AMETI project area as well as the project area covered by the East-West Link.

Figure 1: AMETI and East West Link Project areas

Key Objectives

17. The key objectives for the East-West Link programme are reported as:

· Improving access between the industrial areas, the State Highways and the ports (airport, inland ports and seaport).

· Providing improved access and transport choice for people travelling to key commercial centres including Onehunga, Sylvia Park and Ellerslie/Penrose.

· Improving freight between the industrial areas and the ports.

18. The objectives identified in the Better Business Case process are set out in Attachment A.

Background

19. Auckland Transport, Auckland Council and the NZTA are working collaboratively to deliver the East-West Link project. The NZTA and the Auckland Council are expected to be the major funders of a proposed programme.

20. A strategic assessment has been completed that outlines the context and case for change in relation to the proposed investment programme to improve east west connectivity through Auckland’s industrial belt (Onehunga/Penrose/Mt Wellington/East Tamaki). This does not yet include an evaluation of the options against the objectives in the Better Business Case.

21. A facilitated Investment Logic Mapping workshop was held with key stakeholders to gain a better understanding and consensus of the transport problems affecting the study area, as well as the potential benefits to be realised in successfully responding to these problems. The stakeholder panel, which included senior management from NZTA, Auckland Transport, Auckland Council, KiwiRail, Port of Tauranga, Employers & Manufacturers Association, identified and agreed the key problems, the benefits that are sought and the objectives for the programme (see Attachment A).

22. The project team has progressed a business case and identified four initial programme options of ‘further interventions’ in addition to low cost intervention improvements (essential initial projects). These options were presented to the Transport Committee at its 5 June 2013 meeting.

23. The ‘essential initial projects’ represents the minimum level of investment and includes elements that are also included in all other options. A key essential element is the bus transport improvements with a new frequent public transport network bus routes in the area.

24. Option 1 – Redistribute traffic away from SEART: This option favours further investment around the south-side of the Harbour, albeit at a more local scale. Access to/from Neilson Street area is directed via SH20 rather than SH1.

25. Option 2 – Redistribute traffic away from SEART plus improved connections to Metro Port: This option differs to Option1 by the inclusion of a new road to Metro Port and small connections within the local network in this area.

26. Option 3 – Focus on connecting the industrial belt: This option focuses on providing a spine that connects the industrial belt of Onehunga, Mt Wellington and East Tamaki. It also improves the industrial area’s access to the state highway network by upgrading Gloucester Park interchange and improving connections to State Highway 1 through new south facing ramps.

27. Option 4– Decongest surrounding arterials and focus east-west in a high capacity corridor: This option provides improved connections to Onehunga north of the Manukau Inlet – similar to those proposed in Option 1 - by upgrading Gloucester Park interchange, signalising the MetroPort entrance and providing south facing ramps at Panama Road. In addition to those, the option also focuses on providing a high capacity corridor south of the Manukau Inlet between the two state highways with the main aim to provide a more resilient strategic network as well as a corridor that creates enough capacity to decongest the surrounding arterials

28. Feedback was sought from key stakeholders, including Iwi and the Local Boards over May/ June 2013.

29. Based on the feedback received from the key stakeholder meetings, the project team has been refining the initial programme options. Auckland Transport and NZTA are undertaking with Auckland Council staff a multi-disciplinary inquiry-by-design process to develop, refine and evaluate options. The workshop is being held 18-21 November.

30. The Better Business Case evaluation will be undertaken concurrently with the workshop to guide selection of a preferred option for NZTA/central government investment purposes based on the specific transport objectives developed.

31. High level cost estimates will be calculated and each programme will be evaluated against the investment objectives and critical success factors before the presentation of a recommended preferred programme option business case to the Auckland Transport and NZTA Boards.

32. Auckland Transport and NZTA are planning to engage with the general public in early 2014 prior to consulting on the emerging preferred programme option.

Comments

33. Auckland Council has important interests in the East-West Link in terms of its role as part funder of the programme. Auckland Council is representative of the wider community and Local Boards represent local communities. Auckland Council has an interest in ensuring that the East-West Link programme contributes to the wider outcomes sought in the Auckland Plan and the ultimate goal of Auckland becoming the world’s most liveable city.

Need to consider the wider outcomes

34. An East-West Link programme has the potential to significantly affect a range of outcomes in Auckland and local areas. The Auckland Plan (paragraph 780) states “The planning of major projects requires rigorous analysis of all costs and benefits. Projects will only proceed if they demonstrated value for money and contribute to the outcomes sought for Auckland and/or New Zealand. This process will also help to prioritise the timing of projects.”

35. There is a need to better consider the contribution of transport to the wider outcomes sought by the Auckland Plan – not just the transport outcomes. This would mean greater consideration of how transport relates to economic growth, environmental impacts, social impacts, quality of urban form, Māori impacts, contributing to the Southern Initiative and so forth.

36. The inquiry by design workshop is considering the potential impacts of options from a wide range of perspectives and to consider how options will contribute to a wide range of outcomes sought in the Auckland Plan.

Need for a value-for-money solution

37. As a potential part funder of the East-West Link programme, Auckland Council will need to ensure the programme is delivering value for money. Due the wide range of options (costs and benefits) being considered, there is a need to ensure that the level of investment is commensurate with the scale of the problem and the net benefits. Different options might be considered differently depending on whether or not additional funding becomes available. Auckland Transport and NZTA will need to continue to work closely with Auckland Council in relation to the funding implications of the East-West Link programme.

Need for public engagement

38. Council officers consider that a final decision on a preferred option should not be made prior to public consultation.

39. A decision on a preferred option needs to be made with a full understanding of the local impacts of the options. The public needs to have the opportunity to assess the options and provide a full understanding of the local impacts, before a decision is made on the preferred option.

Consideration

Local Board Views

40. Representatives from Howick, Maungakiekie-Tāmaki, Māngere-Ōtāhuhu and Otara-Papatoetoe local boards are part of a local board forum established in August 2012.

41. This forum helped identify and agree transport issues for the area.

42. In July and September 2013 the forum considered a public transport, walking and cycling, local road improvements base option, plus four roading options with the base option included in each.

43. Separate workshops were also held with boards.

44. The September Local Board Forum received feedback to reflect their community interests on the options and their potential social and environmental impacts.

Maori Impact Statement

45. All four options proposed will have an impact on Māori and Māori aspirations for the Māngere – Ōtāhuhu, Maungakiekie – Tāmaki, and Howick areas .

46. The programme options in this report have been discussed with Mana Whenua. Auckland Transport is leading this engagement. Greater clarity of the route of the proposed roads and links would be required to inform the assessment of impacts on Māori.

47. A wananga with mana whenua is proposed in early December to receive feedback and input from Mana Whenua on programme options.

General

48. The selection of a preferred option for the East-West Link will have a significant financial implication for Auckland Council, potentially as soon as the 2014/15. The Auckland Plan seeks the implementation of the East-West Link by 2021. The timing of projects such as AMETI and the East-West Link and their staging should generally be based on when they are required and can best be delivered, rather than staging and funding over a prolonged period. In a constrained funding environment, timing and staging become important considerations in the context of the total transport programme.

Implementation Issues

49. High level cost estimates have yet to be finalised. The business case for the East–West Link programme would need to be completed to inform a decision on a preferred option. Timing and staging would be considered in the investment business case.

50. A design process will be required for the next stage and would consider implementation of the East-West Link programme.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a	Investment Logic Map	15

Signatories

Authors

Jim Fraser - Principal Transport Planner

Authorisers

Grant Barnes - Manager - Auckland Strategy and Research

Roger Blakeley - Chief Planning Officer

Dean Kimpton - Chief Operating Officer

Infrastructure Committee

04 December 2013

Northern Busway Extension

File No.: CP2013/25857

Purpose

1. To update the Infrastructure Committee about the Northern Busway extension project and to seek the committee’s support for fast-tracking the project on an alignment east of State Highway 1, subject to a number of conditions.

Executive Summary

2. Extending the Northern Busway from its current northern terminus at Constellation Station to Albany and, in the longer term, to Silverdale is a key project in the Auckland Plan. The Auckland Plan suggests the busway extension (Constellation to Silverdale) is a project to be completed between 2021 and 2030.

3. Announcements by the Prime Minister on June 28 made reference to ‘bringing forward’ a suite of planned transport projects across Auckland. This included reference to a motorway to motorway link between the Upper Harbour Highway and the Northern Motorway at Constellation Drive, upgrading the Greville Road interchange and improving the Northern Busway. Discussions with the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) has confirmed the Constellation to Albany section of the busway extension is part of this wider upgrade, known as the ‘Northern Corridor’ project package.

4. Fast-tracking of the busway extension to Albany would generate significant benefits, including much faster travel time for bus passengers, operational efficiencies, reducing conflict between buses and motorway traffic at the Constellation interchange and supporting development at Albany. Constructing the project at the same time as wider works are done to SH1 in the area is also likely to generate efficiencies and cost savings compared to building the busway extension later. A busway extension to Albany is also a critical first stage for the eventual extension to Silverdale.

5. Previous analysis by NZTA suggests significant cost savings arising from constructing the busway on the eastern side of State Highway 1 (SH1), rather than having to tunnel or bridge across the motorway to the west. However, it is strategically important for the Albany busway station to remain on the western side of SH1 to ensure excellent connectivity between the busway station and the emerging Metropolitan Centre of Albany.

6. Officer analysis has confirmed that an eastern busway alignment can support the strategic outcomes sought by the Auckland Plan in a cost-effective and efficient manner, if a number of conditions are met. These include ensuring that the Albany busway station permanently remains in its current location, ensuring that an efficient motorway crossing for buses is provided and requiring further work to determine the optimal location for any station between Constellation and Albany as well as analysis into the future busway alignment between Albany and Silverdale.

Recommendations

That the Infrastructure Committee:

a) support bringing forward construction of the Northern Busway extension between Constellation and Albany as part of the New Zealand Transport Agency’s proposed ‘Northern Corridor’ project package.

b) support the busway’s proposed alignment to the east of State Highway 1, subject to the following conditions:

- Albany busway station permanently remains in its current location west of SH1

- An efficient crossing of SH1 for buses is provided.

- NZTA works with Auckland Transport and Council officers to determine the optimal location of any future station between Albany and Constellation if such a station is justifiable.

- NZTA works with Auckland Transport and Council officers to determine the future busway alignment and station location between Albany and Silverdale

Discussion

Bringing Forward the Northern Busway Extension:

7. The Northern Busway was opened in February 2008 and consists of a two-way grade separated offline busway for 6.2 kilometres between Constellation Station and Akoranga Station, to the east of SH1. There is a further 2.5 kilometre long section of southbound only busway between Akoranga station and the Onewa Road interchange. North of Constellation Station buses are provided with bus shoulder lanes to Albany Station, although buses mix with general traffic to get through the Upper Harbour Highway motorway interchange and the Greville Road motorway interchange.

8. The Northern Busway has been a very successful project in growing public transport patronage and easing pressure on SH1 at peak times. During the weekday morning peak period, approximately 35% of people crossing the Harbour Bridge are travelling by bus – the equivalent of at least two lanes of general traffic. This number has grown significantly (from around 5,800 passengers to over 8,000 passengers) since the busway opened.

9. The Auckland Plan includes a project to extend the Northern Busway to Silverdale some time between 2021 and 2030. Previous analysis by NZTA has suggested that construction of the first stage of the busway extension (between Constellation and Albany) could be economically justified as early as 2015. Staging is considered appropriate as currently traffic congestion on SH1 is worse south of Albany, which adversely affects the travel time and reliability of bus services.

10. A map showing the extent of the existing busway and the two stages of extending the busway north is shown below:

Figure 1: Northern Busway and Extensions Map

11. On 28 June 2013 the Prime Minister made a number of transport announcements (Attachment A) relating to Auckland. The Prime Minister noted that Minister of Transport Gerry Brownlee has asked NZTA for advice on how to bring forward, with additional funding, a number of key transport projects. Included in that list was reference to ‘a complete motorway-to-motorway link between the Upper Harbour Highway and the Northern Busway at Constellation Drive, upgrade the Greville Road motorway interchange and improve the Northern Busway’.

12. This package of projects is referred to by NZTA as the ‘Northern Corridor’. A diagram of the ‘Northern Corridor’ is included in Figure 2 below:

Figure 2: Northern Corridor Project Package

13. A presentation prepared by NZTA on the Northern Corridor is included as Attachment B to this report.

14. NZTA and the Ministry of Transport are following up the Prime Minister’s announcements by detailing the projects, timeframes and necessary extra funding required. Initial analysis from NZTA suggests that the project package as a whole is likely to cost around $600m-780m, with the largest proportion of that cost dedicated to the grade separation of SH1 and SH18.

15. Bringing forward the first stage of the busway’s extension, from Constellation to Albany, would generate significant benefits. For bus passengers and bus operations, the busway extension would provide much faster travel speeds and less delay by avoiding bottlenecks that buses currently get stuck in at the Upper Harbour Highway and Greville Road motorway interchanges.

16. The busway extension will also support development of Albany into a Metropolitan Centre, by improving its public transport accessibility and properly tying Albany into the Rapid Transit Network.

17. Furthermore, constructing the busway extension at the same time as other major transport projects in the area is likely to generate cost efficiencies as well as reducing the duration of disruption during construction.

Alignment of the Busway Extension:

18. Previous analysis by NZTA has identified a preferred alignment for the busway extension to the east of SH1. This conclusion was reached by comparing an eastern option with a number of other options – including a western and an east/west hybrid option. Key findings from the comparison included:

· A western or hybrid alignment is approximately 50% more expensive (around $100m) than the eastern alignment, due to the need for a tunnelled crossing of SH1

· Property costs of the western or hybrid alignments are approximately twice that of the eastern alignment

· Both options deliver broadly the same benefits in terms of savings in travel time, vehicle operating costs and benefits to public transport users.

19. Council officers raised concerns with NZTA that an eastern alignment at Albany could undermine the strategic outcomes sought in the Auckland Plan, especially if the current Albany busway station was shifted to the eastern side of SH1. The Albany busway station is located on the periphery of the Albany Metropolitan Centre, meaning a station location east of SH1 would make it very difficult for the busway to provide Albany with a strong connection to the Rapid Transit Network.

20. Further discussion between Council officers, NZTA and Auckland Transport led to agreement that the busway station should stay in its current location – noting that this could generate some operational inefficiencies and infrastructure requirements as buses from Silverdale (particularly once the busway is extended further north) would need to cross SH1 to access the busway station before crossing again to complete their journey into the city centre. Operational analysis noted that as long as an efficient crossing for buses is provided (in the short term on McClymonts Road and in the longer term through a new bus bridge north of McClymonts Road), the operational impacts of a busway to the east of SH1 and a busway station to the west of SH1 would be acceptable.

21. An eastern alignment for the busway does impact upon the most suitable location for possible additional stations located between Constellation and Albany. There are three options for an intermediary station (Rosedale Road, Greville Road and Corinthian Drive). An eastern busway alignment is likely to significantly reduce the accessibility (and therefore use) of stations at Greville Road compared to a western alignment. The difference at Corinthian Drive would be moderate (as long as a pedestrian bridge across SH1 is provided) and at Rosedale Station would be negligible.

22. Council officers consider a station at Greville Road is the least desirable of the three locations in any respect, due to a limited walk-up catchment (compared to Corinthian Drive to the north) and Greville Road being unsuited as a key east-west bus route due to buses mixing with traffic accessing the motorway (compared to Rosedale Road). Nevertheless, further work is required to determine whether any additional stations between Constellation and Albany are required and what the preferred location for such stations should be. Council officers have requested NZTA to retain its current landholdings to the west of SH1 until this matter is resolved.

23. A further key consideration for the busway’s alignment between Constellation and Albany is to ensure it is integrated with the future extension from Albany up to Silverdale. NZTA’s previous analysis highlighted a key difference between alignments is a significant adverse effect of a western alignment on the Lucas Creek Bush West site of ecological significance – located to the immediate northwest of the Oteha Valley Road motorway interchange. This area is noted as a Significant Ecological Area in the Draft Unitary Plan. Another key consideration north of Albany is ensuring the future busway alignment integrates with the area’s growth – particularly the future greenfield areas around Dairy Flat and Silverdale.

24. Undertaking further work to finalise the busway’s preferred alignment between Albany and Silverdale is another key requirement for supporting an eastern alignment south of Albany. NZTA have indicated that the Albany to Silverdale section is a separate project to the first stage of the busway’s extension and would not be included in the designation for the ‘Northern Corridor’ project package.

Financial Implications

25. Auckland Transport’s Integrated Transport Programme estimated the cost of the full busway extension from Constellation to Silverdale to be approximately $750 million. The majority of this cost relates to the Albany to Silverdale section. It is anticipated that NZTA would fully fund construction of the busway extension itself but that Council, through Auckland Transport, may need to make a funding contribution to any busway stations – as per the funding arrangement for the existing Northern Busway.

26. An economic evaluation undertaken by NZTA in 2012 suggested a benefit-cost ratio of 1.6 for the whole project and 2.8 for the Constellation to Albany section.

Consideration

Local Board Views

27. Reports very similar to this one were presented to the Rodney, Hibiscus and Bays, Upper Harbour and Devonport-Takapuna Local Boards in September 2013. All four Boards supported bringing forward construction of the busway extension on an eastern alignment, subject to the conditions outlined in this report’s recommendations.

28. The Upper Harbour Local Board also noted a desire to be involved in any decisions about station locations between Constellation and Albany.

Maori Impact Statement

29. The Northern Busway extension project will need to go through the notice of requirement process so that a designation enabling its construction can be secured. This process will consider impacts on areas of significance to Maori and is likely to involve consultation. NZTA is the lead agency advancing the project.

30. Like other Aucklanders, Maori will benefit from the Northern Busway extension project as it provides a significant improvement to public transport infrastructure in this part of Auckland.

General

31. Council’s North/West Planning Team and Built Environment Unit have been consulted in the preparation of this paper. Council officers have also consulted with Auckland Transport and NZTA on an ongoing basis in relation to this project and both Auckland Transport and NZTA have been consulted in the preparation of this paper.

Implementation Issues

32. Extending the Northern Busway is a project being led by NZTA’s Highways and Network Operation division. NZTA and the Ministry of Transport are currently seeking direction from the Government around the timing and funding of this and other transport projects in Auckland. A critical next step for the project is to secure the route and finalise design through a notice of requirement process.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a	Prime Minister's Transport Announcement Map	23
b	NZTA Northern Corridor Presentation	25

Signatories

Authors

Joshua Arbury - Principal Transport Planner

Authorisers

Roger Blakeley - Chief Planning Officer

Dean Kimpton - Chief Operating Officer

Infrastructure Committee

04 December 2013

Stormwater Infrastructure

File No.: CP2013/26800

Purpose

1. To provide an overview of stormwater infrastructure objectives including key issues, upcoming opportunities for collaboration and the strategic alignment of the stormwater work programme and to recommend a quarterly update report frequency to the committee.

Executive Summary

2. Delivery of stormwater outcomes across the region is a complex process managed through a number of interrelated processes, relationships and partnerships including those with Watercare, Auckland Transport, Waterfront Auckland, council’s Housing Project Office (HPO) and through close relationships with the development and industry sectors.

3. Auckland Council has some clear identified areas for growth, as identified in the Auckland Plan and the Auckland Housing Accord. The challenge for effective delivery of stormwater infrastructure is to support this growth with agreed and aligned priorities for investment across the wider Council family. Fostering and maintaining these family relationships is key to the effective delivery of development, infrastructure and stormwater outcomes.

4. This report provides a succinct overview of stormwater infrastructure objectives including the stormwater asset management plan, upcoming opportunities for collaboration, and some major projects for consideration by the committee in 2014. In addition, this report recommends a quarterly reporting programme from the stormwater unit with additional reporting to be provided as required.

Recommendations

That the Infrastructure Committee:

a) agree to a quarterly reporting frequency for stormwater functions with additional reporting as and when required

Discussion

Introduction & Strategic Direction

5. Auckland Council is largely responsible for two of the stormwater activities outlined in the 2010 amendment of the Local Government Act 2002: stormwater drainage, and flood protection and control. In sum council operates and maintains an extensive stormwater network comprising 6,000 km of pipes, 10,000 km of streams, 140,000 manholes, and 370 ponds and wetlands.

6. To maintain the stormwater network and achieve flood protection and control the stormwater unit is managing the delivery of a number of works over the period of the Long Term Plan (LTP) and beyond. A number of these projects are multiyear projects which broadly address four main drivers: asset renewal, growth, flooding, and the environment. The 2013/14 stormwater capital expenditure budget is $64 million. In addition a further $75 million (approximately) is likely to be delivered through third party developers.

7. Auckland Council Stormwater activity is guided by the two main operational documents; the stormwater strategic direction (Figure 1) and the 2012-2032 stormwater asset management plan (SWAMP).

8. To contribute to council’s vision to become the world’s most liveable city stormwater activity is focused around a sub-vision to achieve a water sensitive community. This vision is guided by six main objectives as detailed in figure one.

Figure 1: Stormwater Strategic objectives to achieve a water sensitive community

9. The stormwater asset management plan (SWAMP) is updated every three years and its review is a key focus of the 2013/14 financial year. The next SWAMP will span a 30-year period with a focus on the ten year period of the Long Term Plan (LTP). The 2015-45 SWAMP will address all major asset based activities, including built and green infrastructure to ensure that present and future requirements are most effectively met in the most cost effective manner.

10. The revised asset management plan will be the guiding document for all stormwater related activity for Auckland Council including development and infrastructure to support and maintain future growth areas. The draft 2015-45 SWAMP will be reported and considered by this Infrastructure Committee to ensure Auckland’s infrastructure needs are considered alongside other infrastructure decisions that sit within the wider council family.

Key Projects & Activities

11. As part of the proposed quarterly reporting a number of key stormwater projects and activities will be reported and brought to the Infrastructure Committee for socialisation and alignment with decision making. These will include the regional network discharge consents, progress and achievements resultant from the stormwater special housing design team, the sustainable catchment programme and major projects requiring collaboration and input from the wider council infrastructure family as detailed below.

12. A consolidated network discharge consent process is currently underway to support Auckland Council’s requirements to under the Resource Management Act (1991) to obtain resource consents to discharge stormwater from the region’s stormwater network into the natural environment. A region-wide approach to stormwater network discharge consents has been adopted, which focuses on outcomes for 10 consolidated receiving environments (the area of land draining to a distinct marine receiving environment or coastal catchment) as detailed in figure two.

13. Progress and key milestones in relation to the network discharge consent process will be reported to this committee as they progress.

Figure 2: 10 Stormwater Consolidated Receiving Environments

14. The Stormwater Special Housing Design team has been established to support The Housing Project Office (HPO) deliver the housing targets of the Auckland Housing Accord. The design team has been investigating the stormwater issues in each of the candidate Special Housing Areas to provide the HPO with the details of the infrastructure constraints.

15. In addition the design team is also accelerating the design and consenting of key projects that are required to unlock the growth areas. For example the Artillery Drive Tunnel in Takanini is currently being progressed by the team with the intention of utilising the Housing Accord Special Housing Areas legislation to fast track the infrastructure consents.

16. The Sustainable Catchments Programme (SCP) is a stormwater capex funded programme. The overarching strategic objective of the SCP is to contribute to the achievement of Council’s stormwater, water quality (chemical and biophysical) and stream restoration outcomes through an integrated planning and implementation methodology delivering community based interventions into priority catchments.

17. The Sustainable Catchments Programme delivers iwi and community-based interventions into seven priority catchments to improve water quality, and achieve stormwater and stream restoration outcomes. The priority catchments include Mahurangi Harbour; Kaipara/Hoteo, Whangateau Harbour; Lower Waitemata - Oakley, Motions and Meola Creeks; Papakura Stream; and Tamaki Estuary.

18. While delegation for decision making on major projects with a value of over $7.5 million sits with the finance and performance committee of Auckland Council, works of this magnitude will be considered by this committee to ensure alignment of investment and infrastructure. These are often jointly delivered major projects, and include:

· Oakley Creek to reduce flood risk, improve stream ecology and community amenity.

· The Artillery Drive Tunnel Project to unlock growth in the Takanini area

· Joint Watercare-Auckland Council project to address the combined sewer areas of the former Auckland City Council area to assess improved outcomes through collaborative planning and projects.

· Joint Watercare- Waterfront Development – Auckland Council projects (storm water related) to enable the development of the Wynyard Warf and the waterfront.

· Stanley Street Outfall – jointly with Ports of Auckland to undertake a major upgrade to a storm water outfall at Stanley Street.

19. It is recommended that this major projects activity is reported to the committee on a quarterly basis with additional reporting to be provided as and when required.

Consideration

Local Board Views

20. The stormwater unit provides local boards with quarterly updates on its work programme and works closely with local boards on issues within their local board areas.

21. Decision making on stormwater activity sits regionally however local boards are consulted on regional stormwater activities such as network discharge consents (NDC) for example. In 2013 consultation on the Waitemata Harbour NDC was undertaken with the 13 local boards within this consolidated receiving environment. Further consultation with local boards in regards to the NDC process will occur in this triennial with boards within the Greater Tamaki, Manukau Harbour, and Hauraki Gulf Islands consolidated receiving environments.

Maori Impact Statement

22. Stormwater and environmental management have integral links with the mauri of the environment and concepts of kaitiakitanga.

23. Consultation and collaboration with iwi to achieve shared stormwater outcomes are on-going through the Regional Kaitiaki forum, hui, and with specific projects. For example some stormwater projects contribute to council’s commitment to matauranga Maori (La Rosa, Tamaki, Portland Road, and Te Auaunga).

General

24. N/A

Implementation Issues

25. N/A

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Craig Mcilroy, Manager Stormwater

Authorisers

John Dragicevich - Manager Infrastructure and Environmental Services

Dean Kimpton - Chief Operating Officer

Infrastructure Committee

04 December 2013

Delivering Auckland's Infrastructure

File No.: CP2013/26637

Purpose

1. To provide an overview of infrastructure in Auckland and an understanding of the key issues that the Infrastructure Committee could consider over the next three years.

Executive Summary

2. The integration between land use planning and infrastructure investment is a significant issue for Auckland given the projected population growth over the next 30 years. The Auckland Plan identifies that Auckland will grow to 2.5 million people by 2041, which will require an additional 400,000 homes^{^[1]}. The Auckland Plan also identifies that this additional population growth will generate the need for an additional 276,000 jobs^{^[2]}. Both existing and future residents are reliant on affordable, resilient, efficient and well designed infrastructure in order to maintain a high standard of living and ensure a productive economic environment.

3. Planning and investment across the entire infrastructure sector (both physical and social infrastructure) is not always aligned between infrastructure provision and the location for growth, or across infrastructure types. This can lead to delays in the delivery of residential and employment capacity and increased costs to both providers and the wider community.

4. Resolution requires a focus on the planning for “critical” and “Auckland-wide defining” infrastructure, which includes transport, wastewater, water supply, and stormwater. These infrastructure types require significant investment and are necessary to unlock the development potential of both greenfield and brownfield land.

5. The recent formation of the Housing Project Office and establishment of Special Housing Areas is a significant advance on Auckland’s ability to co-ordinate and prioritise council infrastructure investment attuned to meeting the housing and employment needs of Aucklanders. This prioritisation will also flow through to a number of council processes, including the Annual and Long Term Plans. It will also directly affect the location of growth in Auckland, through the delivery of infrastructure capacity for uptake by the development community.

6. Legislative changes are also underway, with the proposed requirement for council’s to produce 30 year infrastructure strategies as part of their long term planning. The production of such strategies gives councils an opportunity to further improve infrastructure alignment. Such strategies also help recognise that the significant timeframes associated with infrastructure planning and delivery often exceeds the 10 year timeframes of current long term plans.

Recommendation/s

That the Infrastructure Committee:

a) receive the report and presentation of the programme of infrastructure planning and delivery underway and key issues that the committee may wish to consider over the next three years.

Discussion

7. Auckland faces a number of significant issues in the planning, delivery, and operation of its infrastructure. These issues include:

· Historical under-investment to meet current needs

· Funding

· Planning (Integration and Co-ordination)

· Resilience and Climate Change

· Managing Growth

· Renewals and Maintenance

· Contributions to the Auckland Plan

· Demand Management and Efficiency

8. While council is involved in a variety of infrastructure planning issues (as highlighted in the attachments to this report), an important focus is the delivery of infrastructure to support the growth identified in the Auckland Plan. Ensuring quality infrastructure is in place to support this expected growth will help implement Auckland Plan’s development strategy whilst also underpinning its wider social, cultural, economic, and environmental aspirations.

9. The infrastructure sector encompasses a broad range of services and infrastructure types, which can be broken down to two broad categories:

· Civil – including transportation, three waters, and utility infrastructure.

· Social – open space, education, community facilities, and health infrastructure.

10. Each of these infrastructure types has their own planning needs and limitations. Funding for new infrastructure is largely reliant on the ability for Auckland residents to absorb rates, development charges, and service levies. The limitations in Auckland’s ability to absorb additional infrastructure costs are a critical consideration for planning and investment. There is strong benefit in seeking to reduce costly delays to infrastructure delivery, as well as improving efficiencies in the operation of the infrastructure assets and networks.

11. All of these infrastructure types are critical to accommodating Auckland’s projected growth whilst providing liveable communities. Some infrastructure types are considered to be leaders of development, as they can assist in defining the location and timing of new urban growth and underpinning intensification. Transport and the “3 Waters” are generally leaders in terms of investment to provide for and direct growth. This is highlighted by Figure 12.1 of the Plan, which is shown below:

12. The challenge is to ensure alignment between “Auckland-wide defining infrastructure” to prevent delays to the delivery of development capacity and the supplies of housing and employment. The Auckland Plan places a heavy focus on improving this alignment, including Priorities 1 and 2 of Chapter 12 (Auckland’s Physical and Social Infrastructure) and Priority 2 of Chapter 13 (Auckland’s Transport). Achieving improved alignment in infrastructure delivery would provide significant support to delivering the wider aspirations of the Auckland Plan.

13. Key projects underway to achieve improved alignment include the:

· Infrastructure Providers Forum – a mayoral lead forum with senior leadership from across the infrastructure sector.

· Auckland Plan Implementation and Prioritisation Programme – a strategic planning initiative to assist in growth planning across Auckland, with consideration of infrastructure investment.

· Forward Land and Infrastructure Programme - an agreed implementation programme for land development integrated with infrastructure services over a short-term (3-year), medium (10-year and 20-year) and long-term (30 year) timeframes. It provides a direct linkage between infrastructure planning and the implementation of the Auckland Housing Accord and possibly Local Government Act Amendment requiring a thirty year infrastructure strategy (see separate paper).

· Integrated Transport Plan led by Auckland Transport.

· Investigation and Assessment of Major Transport Projects – such as AMETI, the East-West Link, an additional harbour crossing, Penlink, and the Puhoi to Wellsford Road of National Significance.

Consideration

Local Board Views

14. Local Board Plans provide a local perspective on the infrastructure investment needed to support the aspirations of Auckland’s communities. Review of these Plans and their alignment with the Auckland Plan, as well as CCO alignment with these Plans, is an ongoing process.

15. Engagement with local boards is undertaken for individual infrastructure and transport strategy projects. Additionally local boards are being engaged on future options for Special Housing Areas, the location of which is impacted by infrastructure availability.

Maori Impact Statement

16. Iwi authorities have been fully engaged in the development of the Auckland Plan and the Auckland Unitary Plan, which provide direction for growth across Auckland. Most recently iwi authorities have been advised of the new opportunities that may eventuate under the Housing Accords and Special Housing Areas Act 2013. Additionally, iwi authorities are consulted during the preparation of the Annual Plan and Long Term Plan.

17. Engagement with the Independent Maori Statutory Board will be undertaken for individual infrastructure and transport strategy projects. The CE of the IMSB has also been invited to attend the Auckland Housing Steering Project Group that overseas special housing areas prior to reporting to the Governing Body.

General

18. The recommendations contained within this report fall within the committee’s delegated authority.

Implementation Issues

19. Reprioritisation or the introduction of new projects will require a review of available council resources, as well as the co-operation and resourcing of infrastructure providers (both internal and external to council). In Special Housing Areas there may also be opportunity for innovative solutions to be employed to deliver infrastructure, (eg through developer agreements).

20. The funding of infrastructure is addressed through the Annual and Long Term Planning (LTP) processes. For the 2013/14 financial year the total infrastructure capital funding is approximately $1.4b (including stormwater, water, wastewater, public transport, roads and footpaths, regional and local parks).

21. There is a significant discussion underway on options for the future funding of infrastructure. Council participants in these discussions (eg the Council’s finance team, has worked closely with central government on its review of development contributions). Similarly, council has initiated its own work programme (eg the investigation of shared land value uplift as part of the Housing Action Plan).

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a	An introduction to Auckland's Infrastructure	59
b	An Overview of Transport in Auckland	65

Signatories

Authors

Kevin Wright - Manager: Transport Strategy

Tim Hegarty - Principal Infrastructure Planner

Authorisers

Grant Barnes - Manager - Auckland Strategy and Research

Ree Anderson - Project Director for Housing

Roger Blakeley - Chief Planning Officer

Dean Kimpton - Chief Operating Officer

Infrastructure Committee

04 December 2013

Attachment: An introduction to Auckland’s Infrastructure

Purpose

This paper provides a snapshot of Auckland’s infrastructure, the key drivers from Central Government, and the work currently underway by Auckland Council.

Defining Infrastructure

Chapter 12 of the Auckland Plan specifically addresses the role of Auckland’s physical and social infrastructure. It covers a broad range of infrastructure types and highlights a number of issues facing the sector. The Plan sets the strategic direction for Auckland’s infrastructure through Directive 12 of the Plan:

“Plan, deliver, and maintain quality infrastructure to make Auckland liveable and resilient”

The chapter is split into two, with physical and social dealt with separately. For clarity, each of these infrastructure types are defined as:

· Network Utilities (aka “Physical Infrastructure”) – Infrastructure assets, networks, and activities that are used for the purposes of the generation, transmission, and distribution of energy and fuels including natural gas and petroleum products; the collection, treatment and distribution of potable water; the collection, treatment, and disposal of wastewater; the collection, treatment, and disposal of stormwater, and the operation of telecommunication and radiocommunication networks.

· Social Infrastructure – A broad term that covers a wide range of facilities, services, and locations delivered by council, government, and community groups that support and sustain the well-being of people and communities.

In addition, the Chapter refers to “critical infrastructure”, which is a category of infrastructure identified in section 57 of the Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Act 2009. This section requires such infrastructure to be identified in the spatial plan. The Auckland Plan defines it this type of infrastructure as:

“infrastructure assets, services, and systems which:

i. Are an immediate community requirement and fundamental to enabling development. If destroyed, degraded, or rendered unavailable for periods of more than one day, this loss would have serious consequences for the health, safety, security, and social and economic wellbeing of the Auckland Region (e.g. major wastewater treatment plants).

ii. Are fundamental to the long-term well-being of the community and contribute to Auckland’s liveability, such as those components relating to cultural and social infrastructure (e.g. public open and libraries.”^{^[3]}

The Draft Unitary Plan also has a number of relevant definitions, including:

“Infrastructure - The facilities, services and installations that enable a community to function. Includes activities, structures, facilities and installations for:

· airports

· airport approach surfaces

· water supply and wastewater reticulation (including storage and treatment facilities)

· broadcasting

· defence

· education

· electricity generation, transmission and distribution

· healthcare

· hospitals

· transmission, distribution and storage of gas and liquid fuels

· motorways and roads

· walkways and cycleways

· ports

· public parks

· public institutions

· public transport

· railways

· solid waste disposal

· stormwater

· telecommunication and radio communication

· air quality and meteorological services”

“Significant infrastructure - Existing or proposed infrastructure, or a component of infrastructure, which:

· due to its location, function, development or operation, is of strategic (critical) importance to the form, function and/or growth of Auckland, or otherwise has national significance; or

· if unavailable, would have a serious adverse effect on the social or economic wellbeing of Auckland or a community within Auckland: or

· it is a lifeline utility as defined in s.4 of the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002.”

Given the scope of the infrastructure contained in these definitions, Auckland Council has undertaken a wide range of work across the infrastructure sector. A range of the infrastructure types dealt with by Auckland Council is dealt with in the next section.

Infrastructure in Auckland

The following section identifies some of the major existing facilities and networks that are present in Auckland (this is not an exhaustive list):

Three Waters (Water, wastewater, and stormwater)

· The Hunua and Waitakere water supply dams

· The Waikato pipeline

· The Ardmore, Waikato, Waitakere, and Huia water treatment plants

· The Mangere Wastewater Treatment Plant

· The Rosedale Wastewater Treatment Plant

· The Army Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant

· The Pukekohe Wastewater Treatment Plant

Energy

· Southdown Power Station

· Otahuhu Power Station

· Transpower transmission network and Grid Exit Points

· Vector and Counties Power electricity transmission networks

· The Wiri Oil Terminal and associated pipelines

· The Vector gas transmission and distribution network

Telecommunications

· Subsea cable connections to North America and Australia

· The Warkworth Satellite Station

· Air Traffic Control facilities

· Maritime New Zealand radio facilities

· Kordia communication facilities

Health

· Auckland Hospital: Grafton

· Auckland Hospital: Greenlane

· Waitakere Hospital

· Middlemore Hospital

· North Shore Hospital

· Manukau Super Clinic

Tertiary Education Facilities

· The University of Auckland

· Auckland University of Technology

· Massey University

· UNITEC

· Manukau Institute of Technology

Defence

· Whenuapai Air Base

· Devonport Naval Base

· Papakura Military Camp

Community and Recreation Facilities

· Auckland War Memorial Musuem

· MOTAT

· Auckland Zoo and Western Springs

· Mt Smart Stadium

· Regional Parks

Justice

· The Auckland High Court

· Mt Eden Prison and Corrections Facility

· Auckland Region Women’s Corrections Facility

· Auckland Prison (Paremoremo)

These facilities and networks are a snapshot of the wide range of infrastructure types in Auckland. They are often also supported by a range of smaller assets and networks, while a number of inter-connections between various infrastructure types also exist.

Current Central Government Initiatives

Two government initiatives are relevant to the council’s infrastructure strategy portfolio. The first of these is the National Infrastructure Plan, which is prepared by the National Infrastructure Unit in Treasury. This Plan identifies key infrastructure issues and drivers for the sector including resilience and resilience.

The second initiative forms part of the “Better Local Government” reforms, with the introduction of a 30 year infrastructure strategy as part of the Long Term Planning process. This new plan is discussed in some detail in cabinet papers from the Minister of Local Government^{^[4]} and it is proposed that this strategy would cover at least the five “core” infrastructure categories of:

· Water supply

· Sewerage and sewage disposal

· Stormwater drainage

· Flood protection

· Footpaths and Roads

With regard to these infrastructure categories, the strategy would require Auckland Council to detail the following:

· Planning for maintenance, growth, and possible increases or decreases in levels of service provided;

· Managing, mitigating, or improving public health and environmental outcomes;

· Managing the risks to, and resilience of, infrastructure assets from natural disasters, and

· Managing the financial provision for risks to infrastructure assets from natural disasters.

Key Infrastructure Issues for Auckland

Given the broad range of infrastructure types needed to support Auckland, there are number of infrastructure sector issues which may be of interest to the Committee. These include:

· Funding – Regardless of infrastructure type, the cost of its planning, delivery, and operation is passed onto Auckland residents and businesses in the form of rates, taxes, and other charges. Given the limited ability for Aucklanders to absorb these costs, infrastructure must be delivered and operated efficiently.

· Resilience – Recent natural disasters in New Zealand and overseas have highlighted the fragility of some infrastructure networks and the need to improve their ability to cope with changing environmental conditions. Resilience to a broader range of issues is also being investigated by the National Infrastructure Unit in Treasury.

· Managing Growth – The projected growth of Auckland’s population will place stress on providers to deliver networks that meet both desired service levels and which meet the necessary capacity for growth.

· Renewals and Maintenance – In addition to addressing population growth, infrastructure providers face on-going work to replace and renew aging assets, while maintenance is also required to ensure satisfactory levels of service.

· Climate Change – The need to reduce greenhouse emissions and adapt to the effects of climate change will place additional pressures on infrastructure providers.

· Sustainability – Improved resource use, greater energy efficiency, reducing environmental footprints, and other sustainability measures are also an important factor for future infrastructure planning and delivery.

· Economic Development – – Infrastructure also provides vital support to Auckland’s economy, such as providing international connectivity and a secure supply of energy

Current Infrastructure Initiatives

Given the range of infrastructure types covered by the Auckland Plan, the following projects are being undertaken by Auckland Council order to achieve the aspirations of the Auckland Plan:

The Auckland Infrastructure Providers Forum

The purpose of the Forum is to improve alignment, communication, and raise the profile of the infrastructure sector. Key features:

· Identified as an action for Chapter 12 (Auckland’s infrastructure) of the Auckland Plan.

· Discussion document, feedback analysis, and scoping undertaken late 2012.

· Meetings held in March and August 2013.

· Contains a range of providers across social and physical infrastructure.

The Infrastructure Delivery Framework

The need for an infrastructure delivery framework was raised at the second infrastructure providers’ forum in August 2013. Key features:

· Addresses providers’ desire for an infrastructure plan/strategy.

· A prioritization tool for sector-wide policy development.

· Also encompasses the expansion of the Forward Land Supply and Infrastructure Programme to include the entire region and all infrastructure types.

· Feedback is expected from Forum members on possible policy/strategy projects in November.

Upper North Island Strategic Alliance (UNISA)

The purpose of UNISA is to provide a mechanism for Upper North Island Councils (currently 7 member Councils) to plan together on major inter-regional transport, port, and land use issues.

Auckland Plan Implementation and Prioritisation Programme

The Auckland Plan Implementation and Prioritisation Programme – a strategic planning initiative to assist in growth planning across Auckland, with consideration of infrastructure investment. This will inform the Forward Land and Infrastructure Programme.

Forward Land and Infrastructure Programme

An agreed implementation programme for land development integrated with infrastructure services over a short-term (3-year), medium (10-year and 20-year) and long-term (30 year) timeframes. The programme identifies priority areas for development aligned to the Auckland Plan development strategy. It provides the context for identification and delivery of Special Housing Areas (SHAs) under the Housing Accords and Special Housing Areas Act 2013.

Infrastructure White Papers

Advancing work from the Auckland Plan and addressing key infrastructure issues, e.g.

· Resilience – i.e. sudden population changes, hazards, resource supply

· Funding

· Alternative technologies

Conclusions

This paper has highlighted a broad range of issues, infrastructure types, and legislative changes affecting the committee and the infrastructure sector. Auckland Council’s current work programme looks to support the infrastructure related aspirations of the Auckland Plan, while Council Officers are well placed to provide technical assistance to the committee in future work.

Infrastructure Committee

04 December 2013

An Overview of Transport in Auckland

Purpose

This paper provides the Infrastructure Committee an overview of transport infrastructure in Auckland, including key opportunities for influence and guidance, particularly in the next three years.

Introduction

Auckland has a strategic direction for transport, as set out in the Auckland Plan, to create better connections and accessibility within Auckland, across New Zealand and to the world. The Plan, integral to achieving the vision for Auckland becoming the world’s most liveable city, contains four main transport priorities:

1) To manage Auckland’s transport as a single system

2) To integrate transport planning and investment with land use development

3) To prioritise and optimise investment across transport modes

4) To implement new transport funding mechanisms

Five main targets emerge from the strategic direction, including significantly increasing public transport trips, including into the city centre during the morning peak, reducing fatalities and serious injuries, reducing congestion on the strategic freight network and increasing the proportion of people living within walking distance of frequent public transport. The Auckland Plan identifies a range of other outcomes, targets and transformational shifts that transport is expected to contribute to. These include accelerating prospects of children and young people, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, increasing economic performance (GDP, productivity and export growth), increasing housing supply, improving the quality of urban living, keeping rural Auckland productive, protected and environmentally sound, and significantly lifting Māori social and economic wellbeing.

The Auckland Plan refers to the need for a transformational shift to outstanding public transport within one network. Such a shift to outstanding public transport enables the efficient use of the transport network, supports the development of a quality compact city and reduces greenhouse gas emissions. Public transport is important for our economy and provides access and choice to enable greater participation in our daily activities.

Challenges

Transport programmes and projects need to support growth and place-making in Auckland and contribute to a wide range of outcomes outlined in the Auckland Plan. Wider outcomes include improving health and safety, an increase in exports and tourism, delivering a quality compact city, boosting economic performance and achieving a reduction in air, water and carbon pollutants.

In delivering these outcomes, however, Auckland faces significant growth pressures and funding constraints. In the next three years, implementing the Auckland Housing Accord through the identification of Special Housing Areas will require Auckland Transport, Auckland Council and the New Zealand Transport Agency to confront investment in new infrastructure and services in greenfield areas and its relative priority to investment in brownfield areas.

The $68 billion, 30-year transport programme outlined in the Integrated Transport Programme was identified as having a $12 billion funding gap. For perspective, Auckland Council’s transport capex spend in 2012/13 was $611 million, which represents 47% of the Council’s total capex spend. In 2013/14, $854 million of capital expenditure is planned (53% of total). In both cases, this is more than twice the next largest areas of expenditure. The funding gap poses serious challenges to keeping pace with growth and determining how to best keep up with current service needs while addressing future needs like transport infrastructure in new greenfield development. Funding is a particular issue in the first decade.

Taken together, these pressures and constraints will require the Governing Body to either determine a path forward to secure additional funding or to make tough strategic choices in reprioritisation.

Opportunities for Strategic and Funding Influence and Guidance

Over the next three years, the Infrastructure Committee will have multiple opportunities to deliver important guidance and influence to the strategic direction of transport in the region. More importantly, as stewards of the Auckland Plan, the Infrastructure Committee is in the position to help deliver both accountability to ratepayers and optimal community-wide outcomes. Important matters to bring to the attention to members of this committee include but are not limited to the following:

Input to Auckland Transport Policy, Programmes and Major Projects

The first Integrated Transport Programme (ITP) (2012-2041) identified a 30-year investment programme that fell short of achieving some important targets in the Auckland Plan. A key message from the ITP was the need to focus more on travel demand management. The second version of the ITP is currently under development. This document will guide transport investment in Auckland for the many years to come — including the extent to which major projects incorporated within will deliver the positive outcomes of the Auckland Plan. The next ITP is expected to refine the programme in order to contribute to a greater extent to the Auckland Plan outcomes. The next ITP will also guide the transport component of the Long Term Plan 2015-25.

The City Rail Link (CRL) is the number one priority transport project in the Auckland Plan and of transformational importance in unlocking the potential of public transport in Auckland and enabling the growth of centres. Decisions about the timing and funding of CRL are current challenges which will impact on the rest of the transport programme. Working toward a possible construction start in 2016, the Long Term Plan needs to address how CRL will be funded. Funding is expected to involve an agreement with Central Government and Auckland concerning respective funding contributions. In the shorter term, the redevelopment of the Downtown Shopping Mall site in the next few years is likely to require the construction of at least the section of CRL which passes underneath this site.

The East-West Link and the Auckland Manukau Eastern Transport Initiative (AMETI) project is the second priority with the Auckland Plan seeking implementation by 2021, subject to funding. This project focuses on southern and eastern parts of Auckland, the second largest employment centre and an area of likely future growth and economic activity. The current Long Term Plan has no funding for the East West Link or speeding up AMETI and will need to be addressed in the next Long Term Plan and Regional Land Transport Plan (RLTP).

Auckland Transport has other major projects at the implementation stage including the rollout of electric trains, integrated ticketing, the Tiverton to Wolverton upgrade, design of Dominion Road, and other transformative projects. Auckland Transport is also at the planning stage in relation to rail to the airport, the rollout of new bus services across Auckland, the rollout of cycleways, Penlink, electrification to Pukekohe and other projects.

Input to the Government Policy Statement

The Government Policy Statement on Land Transport Funding (GPS) outlines the government’s spending priorities from the National Land Transport Fund (NLTF). The GPS directs the National Land Transport Programme (NLTP) in its allocation of approximately $11 billion to public transport, state highways and local roads projects in NZ over a three year period. The RLTP must likewise be consistent with its direction. The GPS is reviewed by the Minister of Transport each three years; GPS 2015 is currently under development and must be released in July 2014 to develop the next programme and will come into full effect the following July 2015. In the review of the GPS, the Ministry of Transport wants to engage Auckland Council better, possibly in the review of an early GPS draft. This committee may have an opportunity to provide input to this most fundamental transport policy statement.

NZTA Programmes and Major Projects

The NZ Transport Agency is progressing construction of the Waterview Connection to complete the Western Ring Route. NZTA is seeking designations for Puhoi to Wellsford and an Additional Waitemata Harbour Crossing .The Prime Minister’s announcement on 28 July 2013 identified additional state highway projects that NZTA has been asked to identify costs and how these could be accelerated in its programme.

Additional Funding

The delivery of the Auckland Plan’s list of transport projects will be determined by the availability of new funding. The Governing Body is responsible for consideration of alternative transport funding. It is understood that a report on this programme will be considered by the Governing Body at its December meeting. The extent to which additional funding will be available will significantly affect the timing and size of the transport programme and the scale of interventions that are possible.

Local and Regional Projects

While the bulk of this paper focuses on regional projects, it should be noted that Local Boards have been active in identifying local transport projects through their Local Board plans. This committee is in a position to influence how these local projects are integrated into the regional context so that outcomes are maximised.

Placemaking, Walking and Cycling

Becoming the most liveable city in the world is dependent on world-class placemaking. Around the world, active modes like walking and cycling are transforming cities and their spaces into places for people, commerce and community. Intra and inter-neighbourhood networks for convenient, comfortable and safe walking and cycling support intensification and public transport and improve the existing environment for everyone. The Auckland Plan sets targets for 70% completion of the regional cycleway network by 2021. Several local projects are underway, including walking and cycling access across the Harbour Bridge.

Travel Demand Management

Travel Demand Management (TDM) is the use of policies, programmes, services and products to influence whether, why, when where and how people or goods travel. It is a range of measures and activities aimed at increasing the efficiency with which the existing transport network is utilised, in recognition of the fact that capacity of this network is finite and, at times, demand will exceed capacity. Road pricing, parking management, public bike systems, ridesharing and incentives are all examples of TDM.

Auckland has a successful TDM programme, with over 480,000 Aucklanders engaged through school, workplace, tertiary or community based travel plan programmes. TDM components also support the delivery of larger infrastructure projects such as AMETI and new public transport hubs. The last ITP recommends more demand management and AT is currently drafting a TDM Operations Plan and a TDM Implementation Plan, which will guide the delivery of TDM activities over the next three years. This committee may wish to guide the exploration of TDM opportunities to mitigate peak demand and utilise the existing system far more efficiently. The ability to manage demand for additional transport infrastructure will be an important consideration for the Infrastructure Committee. Much can be learned from demand management mechanisms used for other infrastructure in Auckland.

Bus Services

Over the next three years Auckland’s bus system will be completely reconfigured to take advantage of investment in integrated ticketing and the introduction of electric trains. The new bus network focuses on providing a connected network of frequent bus services, which will operate at least every 15 minutes, 7am-7pm every day. Over 40% of residents will be within walking distance of a frequent service (compared to under 15% currently) while approximately 75% of residents will be within walking distance of a ‘connector service’ operating at least half-hourly at most times, seven days a week. The new bus network is largely funded through the reallocation of existing resources, such as the removal of bus/train duplication and currently inefficient bus routes.

Transport in Greenfield Areas

The identification of future urban areas inside the Rural Urban Boundary triggers the need to plan infrastructure in proposed greenfield areas. A process has begun to identify conceptual transport networks for each of the major greenfield development areas identified in the Proposed Unitary Plan. These networks are based on a new approach to transport planning – focusing on how transport networks can contribute to achieving the broad outcomes sought by the Auckland Plan. These conceptual transport networks will be refined through transport modelling, costing, further land-use planning, stakeholder engagement and more detailed analysis will provide a framework for structure planning in greenfield areas. The Infrastructure Committee has the opportunity to overview the planning of infrastructure in greenfield areas in terms of a coordinated and holistic approach, focusing on achieving broad outcomes.

Funding Assistance Rates Review

Funding Assistance Rates (FAR) determine the proportion of funding that a Council-approved project will qualify for funding from the National Land Transport Fund. A review of FAR is currently underway by NZTA. It is expected that a single FAR will be proposed by NZTA, which will affect the funding of different parts of the transport programme. The committee may have an opportunity to input to this FAR review.

Rail Freight

Over the next 25 years, inter-regional freight is forecast to double, with increasing use of rail. The Auckland Plan emphasises the priority of freight movement in maintaining Auckland’s status as an economic powerhouse and supports growth in exports and inter-regional movement of freight in the upper North Island. There is uncertainty around funding of the proposed triple track of the North Island main trunk line. This committee may have an opportunity to play an advocacy role in relation to how such projects are funded.

Ferries

Auckland transports nearly 5 million ferry passengers each year with 42,000 sailings. Recent extensions of the ferry service have occurred at Hobsonville and Beach Haven. Auckland Transport is proposing work in early 2014 to review, refresh and update earlier pieces of work on ferries. Such work will likely consider the current role of ferries as part of the wider public transport network, options for future ferry services and how ferries are integrated into the wider network. It will also take specific account of the special status of exempt ferry services under the Public Transport Operating Model as well as the role of ferry services as a lifeline to the Hauraki Gulf islands. The committee will likely have the opportunity to influence the direction of future ferry investments as well as associated outcomes in the Auckland Plan.

Monitoring

Monitoring and benchmarking success helps steer Auckland toward achieving the important outcomes of the 30-year Auckland Plan. This committee may wish to learn from other cities’ successes and to track our own progress before and after the implementation of major projects and initiatives. Such tracking will ensure that we can replicate successes, learn from mistakes and optimise future investments. As noted below, there will be additional opportunities for this.

Trends in Congestion and Public Transport Patronage

Looking at a few select trends and making comparisons between similar cities provides some context from which to interpret our past and better envision our future direction. This committee will have an opportunity to explore wider trends and international context in greater detail at a meeting early 2014. For now, a very brief overview of congestion, public transport patronage and vehicle kilometers travelled may be helpful.

Congestion

Traffic congestion in a growing city is often identified as an issue that needs to be managed due to economic impacts, although some level of congestion plays an important role in determining mode choice. Congestion in Auckland today is comparable to 2004, a generally flat trend, with travel increases taken up by public transport, walking and cycling. While there are caveats associated with making direct city to city comparisons, in 2012 Auckland’s congestion levels were closest to Perth with less congestion than Brisbane, Sydney, Melbourne and Adelaide. In travel time variability, a related measure, Auckland averages about 20% worse across the network, generally higher (meaning more variability) than comparable Australian cities.

Public Transport Patronage

The Auckland Plan sets the target of doubling public transport trips from 70 million in 2012 to 140 million by 2022. In 2012, per capita public transport patronage is low by international comparisons, which reflects the relatively undeveloped state of the public transport system.

PT Service Quantity per Capita (vehicle km pa/000 population)

Vehicle Kilometres Travelled (VKT)

VKT per Capita While motor vehicles will continue to be an important means of transportation in Auckland—future modelling forecasts an approximate 46% increase between 2011 and 2041—a reduction in VKT is generally desirable because it reduces congestion, frees up roads for freight and commercial activity and delivers numerous climate, air quality and water quality benefits. From 2007 to 2011, Auckland had a compound annual average increase of between 0.9% and 1.0% in VKT on the road network, a recent flattening trend that is mirrored in countries around the world.

(Data from: http://www.transport.govt.nz/ourwork/tmif/transport-volume/tv001/ and

http://www.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/population/estimates_and_projections/dem-trends-landing-page.aspx; Graphics from TransportBlog http://transportblog.co.nz/2013/09/05/auckland-vehicle-ownership-and-vkt)

Conclusion

Auckland, with nearly $25 billion in transport assets, is nearing the end of a 10-year investment programme. This phase of investment has focused squarely on completing the motorway network and Western Ring Route, implementing integrated ticketing, reconfiguring the bus network, constructing a basic rail upgrade programme through Project DART and electrifying the rail network by 2016. Another investment phase is forthcoming, with the LTP 2015-2025 and the RLTP signaling the next phase of investment. This next phase is an opportunity to shape the programmes and projects to deliver on the Auckland Plan outcomes and catalyse a transformational shift in public transport, delivering great value for money and helping Auckland towards being the world’s most liveable city.

Infrastructure Committee

04 December 2013

Local Government Act (2002) Amendment Bill (No 3)

File No.: CP2013/26518

Purpose

1. This memo summarises some of the key points of the Local Government Act (2002) Amendment Bill (No 3).

Executive Summary

2. The government introduced the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill (No 3) (the Bill) to Parliament on 4 November. The Bill is part of the Better Local Government programme of reforms and builds on the 2012 amendments to the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA). At the time of writing no announcements had been made regarding the timeframes for submissions on this Bill.

3. The Bill proposes reforms in four primary areas:

· Planning, consultation and reporting practices

· Infrastructure provision

· Development contributions

· Establishment of local boards outside of Auckland.

4. Some of the more significant reforms proposed across these four areas include:

· Reduced mandatory requirements to use the special consultative procedure

· Long term plan (LTP) and annual plan consultation based on specially prepared (and brief) consultation documents rather than full versions of those plans

· The mandatory preparation of 30 year infrastructure strategies

· The narrowing of the range of infrastructure that can be funded by way of development contributions

· The creation of an objection process for development contributions decisions.

Recommendation/s

That the Infrastructure Committee:

a) note that the Local Government Act (2002) Amendment Bill (No 3) was recently introduced to Parliament and submissions will soon be called for;

b) note that officers will report to the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee in due course with policy recommendations to inform the development of Auckland Council’s draft submission on this Bill.

Discussion

Submission development process

5. At the time of writing neither the deadline for submissions on this Bill, nor the dates for Auckland Council committee and local board meetings were known. Officers will propose a process for engaging with all elected members once these dates have been finalised. Policy recommendations to inform the development of Auckland Council’s submission, and the draft submission itself, will be reported back for the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee’s consideration in due course.

Better Local Government reforms

6. In March 2012 the government released a discussion document outlining an eight point reform programme (which has since grown to 10 points) entitled Better Local Government (BLG):

A. Purpose of local government

B. Fiscal benchmarks

C. Council governance

D. Reorganisation procedures

E. Planning, consultation and reporting practices

F. Local regulation

G. Infrastructure provision

H. Development contributions

I. Extension of local board model outside of Auckland

J. Local government performance framework.

7. Points A to D were addressed in the 2012 amendments to the Local Government Act. This Bill addresses four of the six outstanding BLG areas for reform. The government has not yet released its proposals in relation to the Productivity Commission work on local regulation (BLG point F) and the establishment of a new local government performance framework (BLG point J).

8. The discussion below outlines some of the more significant aspects of the Bill for Auckland Council and is organised around four BLG areas addressed in the Bill.

Planning, consultation and reporting practices

9. The Special Consultative Procedure (SCP) will no longer be mandatory in relation to the annual plan, the establishment of a CCO and, in most circumstances, making, amending and revoking bylaws. The requirement to use the SCP in relation to the LTP and significant bylaw changes (as defined in the new significance and engagement policy) will remain. The SCP will continue to be available for councils to use in other circumstances where they deem it appropriate.

10. The SCP process itself is to be amended to allow more flexibility in the methods used to obtain the views of the community (including explicit allowance for the use of audio-visual technology). The government has stated that it wants the focus of public consultation to be on ensuring effective public input rather than the means by which that input is obtained.

11. Local authorities will be required to adopt a significance and engagement policy. This replaces the existing requirement to adopt a significance policy. The policy will provide guidance as to how councils determine the significance of the decisions they are required to make and the basis on which they determine how to consult with their communities. The policy will also explain when the use of the SCP might be desirable.

12. The Bill will enable local authorities to amend their standing orders to allow elected members to be present at meetings by way of audio links or audio-visual links. Other people participating in the meeting may also do so by way of these links. This provision will apply to both the governing body and local boards.

13. Local authorities will be required to prepare consultation documents for their LTPs and annual plans. Public consultation will be based on these documents, rather than the full versions of the plans. The consultation document for the annual plan must be concise, identify significant differences from the LTP and explain them in a way that can be readily understood by most people. It must not contain substantial information that is not necessary for the purposes of explaining these differences. The SCP will no longer be mandatory in relation to annual plan consultation. In practice, however, the annual plan is usually consulted on at the same time as an amendment to the LTP, in which case the SCP will be mandatory.

Infrastructure provision

14. As part of their LTPs local authorities will be required to develop infrastructure strategies spanning at least 30 years. The government’s intention is that this strategy should provide a coherent perspective, across core asset classes, of the long term infrastructure needs of a community. Asset management plans will inform the development of the strategy, but it is not expected to replicate the level of details found in those plans.

15. The Bill states that the purpose of the strategy is to identify significant infrastructure issues, the options for managing them and the implications of those options. The strategy must take into account issues such as asset renewal and replacement, projected growth or decline in demand, changes to levels of service, public health and environmental outcomes, and the risk arising from natural disasters. The strategy must at least cover water supply, wastewater, stormwater, flood protection and control, roads and footpaths. Other asset classes may also be included at the discretion of each local authority.

Development Contributions

16. The Bill proposes a number of significant changes to the provisions related to development contributions.

17. The Bill proposes a new purpose for development contributions – to enable territorial authorities to recover from developers a fair, equitable, and proportionate portion of the costs of capital expenditure necessary to service growth. A new set of principles that local authorities must take into account when preparing their development contributions policies is also proposed in the Bill. The principles are intended to ensure that development contributions are used only to fund growth, are applied fairly and consistently, are calculated and assessed transparently and provide cost and revenue certainty for both developers and local authorities.

18. The Bill narrows the range of infrastructure that contributions can be used to fund. Specifically, it proposes to restrict the definition of community infrastructure to include only community centres or halls (and the land on which they are located), play equipment on neighbourhood reserves and public toilets. Under this proposal it will not be possible to fund swimming pools and libraries from development contributions. In effect this will transfer part of the cost of growth from developers and new residents to existing ratepayers.

19. Other proposals include the creation of a process whereby parties can request a reconsideration of a development contribution decision by a council and/or lodge a formal objection. The formal objection would be heard by an independent commissioner with the power to issue a binding ruling. The Bill does not require the independent commissioners to take account of either the new development principles or the development contributions policies of the local authority concerned.

20. The Bill includes provisions to encourage and explicitly enable councils and developers to enter into agreements for the private provision of infrastructure. Councils will be required to consider all requests to enter into a development agreement. The Bill also contains a provision preventing councils from using development agreements to require a developer to provide more expensive infrastructure than would have been provided had the standard development contribution applied.

21. The changes to the development contributions provisions will come into effect on 1 July 2014.

Local boards outside of Auckland

22. The LGA will be amended to enable the Local Government Commission to make provision for local boards in new unitary authorities that are established as a result of a reorganisation proposal. The Commission will also be empowered to consider more limited reorganisation proposals intended to establish local boards in existing unitary authorities. The Bill includes provisions on local board delegations, membership, decision making responsibilities, plans and agreements. These provisions are similar to those set out in the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 and explicitly do not apply to Auckland Council.

Consideration

Local Board Views

23. As this is an information report local reports were not consulted during the course of its preparation. However, all local boards will have the opportunity to input their views into Auckland Council’s submission on the Bill. Officers will propose a process to facilitate this once key dates such as governing body and local board meetings, and the submission deadline, are known.

Maori Impact Statement

24. Officers will work with Te Waka Angamua to determine an appropriate engagement strategy for seeking Iwi input into the development of Auckland Council’s submission.

Implementation Issues

25. There are no implementation issues associated with this report.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Robert Simpson - Principal Policy Analyst, Strategic Planning

Authorisers

Grant Barnes - Manager - Auckland Strategy and Research

Roger Blakeley - Chief Planning Officer

Dean Kimpton - Chief Operating Officer