|
Central
Facility Partnerships Committee
16 June 2014
|
|
Central
Facility Partnership Stage Two applications and Feasibility Study requests for
2013/14
File No.: CP2014/09834
Purpose
1. This report
provides recommendations for the distribution of the Central Facility
Partnership Fund 2013/2014. The report also provides an update on projects
previously funded.
Executive summary
2. The
Facility Partnership fund is available to organisations to support facility
development projects that assist the council in meeting its identified
strategic community outcomes.
3. At its May
2013 meeting the Central Facility Partnership Committee
resolved to adopt a two-stage process for 2013/2014 funding round.
4. Stage one required groups to submit an
Expression of Interest (EOI). 23 proposals were received, nine were recommended
to progress to Stage Two, three were advised to develop an application for
feasibility funding.
5. This
report provides:
· a summary
of requests for feasibility funding;
· a summary
of the Stage 2 projects and recommendations for funding;
· recommendations
for extended draw down dates for previously funded projects; and
· an update
on projects previously funded.
|
Recommendations
That the Central
Facility Partnerships Committee:
a) Approve
the following legacy projects for extended draw down dates until June 2015:
· St Heliers Community Centre and Church project;
· Nga Hau Mauangi project;
· Akarana
Marine Sports Trusts; and
· Tri Star Gymnastics club project.
b) Withdraw the
$650,000 legacy funding allocated to the Mt Albert Grammar Aquatic project
and reallocate into the Central Facilities Partnership fund for 2014/2015.
c) Withdraw the
$853,854 legacy funding allocated to the Avondale Primary Swimming Pool
project and reallocate into the Central Facilities Partnership Fund for
2014/2015.
d) Acknowledges
the entity change for the legacy funding allocated to Royal Akarana Yacht
Club to Akarana Marine Sports Trust (AMST).
e) Reallocate
the balance of $5528 from the Barrier Social Club roofing project in
2012/2013 to Central Facilities Partnership fund for 2013/2014.
f) Reallocate
the balance of $6000 from the Maungarei Community Christian Trust project in
2012/2013 to Central Facilities Partnership fund for 2013/2014.
g) That the Central Facility Partnerships Funding Committee
approve/decline the following projects applications for 2013/2014.
Feasibility Study Applications:
|
Project
|
LB
Area
|
Project
Description
|
Project
Cost
|
Requested
|
Recommend
|
|
Auckland Basketball Services Ltd (ABSL)
|
Sub-Regional
|
To identify opportunities and determine options to remedy
basketball court capacity shortage within central Auckland.
|
$25,000
|
$20,000
|
$20,000
|
|
Ellerslie Eagles Rugby League Club
|
Orakei
|
To
identify options to upgrade and redesign the Ellerslie Eagles club
facilities for extended use by members/users/community groups.
|
$30,000
|
$25,000
|
$0
|
|
Marist Rugby League Club
|
Albert-Eden
|
A feasibility study to determine the shape and scope of a redesign
and rebuild of club facilities in co-operation with other sports codes and
community groups.
|
$30,000
|
$25,000
|
$0
|
|
Remuera Bowling Club Inc
|
Orakei
|
To scope the potential for a “Centre for Bowls” to be
developed in central Auckland that would incorporate both indoor and
outdoor greens to create year round access for playing bowls, as a well as
central headquarters, office space and clubroom facilities.
|
$30,000
|
$25,000
|
$25,000
|
|
YMCA Auckland
|
Waitemata
|
To identify options or opportunities for the YMCA around the
potential to increase the capacity and the footprint of the YMCA City
Stadium in Pitt St.
|
$40,000
|
$35,000
|
$25,000
|
|
|
|
$155,000
|
$130,000
|
$70,000
|
h) That
the Central Facility Partnerships Funding Committee approve/decline the following
Stage Two project applications for 2013/2014:
|
Project
|
LB
Area
|
Project
Description
|
Project
Cost
|
Request
|
Recommend
|
|
Aotea Boardriders Club
|
Great
Barrier
|
To build a small multi use clubrooms for the club and other
affiliated water based and water safety groups on Great Barrier Island.
|
$84,242
|
$71,992
|
$0
|
|
Auckland Grammar School
|
Albert-Eden
|
To develop an artificial turf with lights to release pressure
on the existing grass fields
|
$1,600,000
|
$500,000
|
$361,528
|
|
Auckland Rowing Association Incorporated
|
Regional
|
Stage 1 of a regional water sports centre to create water
access for rowing and other aquatic sports, through the installation of
hardstands, a jetty and a floating pontoon.
|
$1,800,000
stage 1
|
$800,000
over 2 years
|
$400,000
|
|
Eastern Suburbs Gymnastics Club
|
Manugakiekie-Tamaki
|
To expand and improve current facilities based on options
reported through a feasibility study in order to meet the demand for
gymnastics.
|
$2,500,000
|
$400,000
|
$0
|
|
Ellerslie Sports Club
|
Orakei
|
To build a club rooms for both cricket and football on
Michaels Ave Reserve as part of the Stage 3 of the Michael Ave Reserve
Concept Plan.
|
$2,300,000
|
$1,037,000
|
$340,000
|
|
Great Barrier Island Community Heritage and Arts Village Trust
|
Great
Barrier
|
To complete renovation and refurbishment of the Gray Homestead
as a heritage museum.
|
$87,854
|
$87,854
|
$0
|
|
The Auckland Performing Arts Centre of Western Springs (TAPAC)
|
Waitemata
|
To install a disability access ramp at the entrance to TAPAC
and to install an accessible and safe theatre seating block.
|
$138,000
|
$85,000
|
$0
|
|
Three Kings United Football Club
|
Puketapapa
|
To build a new clubhouse in accordance with the council
developed Keith Hay Park plan.
|
$3,920,000
|
$1,500,000
|
$340,000
|
|
Waiheke Island Rudolf Steiner Education Trust
|
Waiheke
|
To establish a family support and education centre alongside
the Rudolf Steiner Fossil Bay Kindergarten in Oneroa.
|
$248,000
|
$150,000
|
$0
|
|
|
|
$ 10,878,096
|
$ 3,831,846
|
$ 1,441,528
|
|
Comments
Facility Partnership Fund Purpose
6. The
Facility Partnership fund is available to organisations to assist with facility
development projects. Provision of council funding enables organisations to
leverage additional grants from other donors and develop a facility that can
offer community access.
7. Facility
partnerships provide benefit to Aucklanders through the provision of quality,
publicly accessible facilities without the council having to provide all the
funding.
8. When considering whether to support a project to the Committee
should consider the projects alignment with the principles outlined in the
Facility Partnership Guidelines as summarised in Attachment 1.
Update on
Legacy Central Facility Partnerships projects
9. Below is a summary
table of the six legacy Auckland City Council Facility Partnership projects.
The projects are at varying stages of progress and this table summarises their
progress to date.
10. As a number of
these grants expire on 30 June 2014, the Committee is asked to make decisions
regarding extending or withdrawing these grants.
Legacy
Projects - Table 1 Summary of Legacy Grants
|
Legacy
Projects
|
|
Project
|
LB
Area
|
Project
Description
|
Expiry
date
|
Grant
Amount
|
Project
Status/ Updates
|
Recommendation
|
|
St Heliers Community Centre and Church
|
Orakei
|
Large scale redevelopment of the existing site
|
30-Jun-14
|
$1,250,000
|
There has been a delay in resource consent which was approved
May 2014. The group have requested an extension in drawdown funds and
submitted an updated timeframe for project
|
Extension of St Heliers Community Centre and Church project be
granted for 1 year - expiry date 30 June 2015
|
|
Nga Hau Maiangi
|
Maungakeikei-Tamaki
|
Pontoon development & new club redevelopment at Ian Shaw
Reserve
|
30-Jun-14
|
$1,250,000
|
Project is proceeding. Tender has been awarded. LOA have been
granted. The group have requested extension in drawdown funds and have
submitted an updated timeline for project
|
Extension of Nga Hau Mauangi project be granted for 1 year -
expiry date 30 June 2015
|
|
Royal Akarana Yacht Club
|
Orakei
|
Redevelopment of the existing site at The Landing
|
30-Jun-14
|
$1,000,000
|
Have signed FP agreement. The group have requested an extension
in drawdown funds and they are still seeking balance of funds for project.
|
Recommend
to accept the entity change from Royal Akarana Yacht Club to Akarana Marine
Sports Trust (AMST).
Extension of Akarana Marine Sports Trusts drawdown be granted for 1 year –
expiry date 30 June 2015
|
|
Mt Albert Aquatic Centre
|
Albert-Eden
|
Learn to swim pool
|
30-Jun-14
|
$650,000
|
Mt Albert Aquatics Centre Trust have confirmed in writing that
the project will not proceed
|
Withdraw the $650,000 grant and reallocate funds into 2014/15
Central Facilities Partnership fund
|
|
Tri Star Gymnastics club
|
Puketapapa
|
Stage two developments and fit out of the mezzanine section.
|
30-Jun-14
|
$650,000
|
All funding now in place for project. Resource consents have
been received. Due to delays in Building Consent the club now requests an
extension in drawdown funds.
|
Extension of Tri Star Gymnastics club project be granted for 1
year - expiry date 30 June 2015
|
|
Avondale School Swimming Pool
|
Whau
|
Learn to swim pool
|
30-Jun-14
|
1,000,000
total grant = $853,854 Balance ($146,146.00 spent on project management and
design)
|
Project is not in a position to commence construction as the
required funding is not secured. A request for an extension from the school
has not been received. Council staff are working with the school to
investigate alternative options to meet the outcomes outside of the current
project scope
|
Withdraw the $853,854 grant balance and reallocate funds into
2014/15 Central Facilities Partnership fund.
|
Update on 2012/2013 Central
Facility Partnerships projects
A number of
projects allocated funds in 2012/2013 have been completed and others are
progressing as planned, two have been completed under the budget allocated and
so it is recommended these small balances ($11,528 total) are included for
reallocation in this round.
Attachment 2
provides an update on the progress of these projects.
Funding
Applications for 2013/2014
11. A funding
round for the Facility Partnerships scheme was advertised between July and
September 2013.
12. A total of 23
applications were received, three of which were asked to develop up a
feasibility study application and nine were progressed to a stage two
application.
13. Total funding
support requested is $3,831,845. The total project cost submitted is
$10,878,095. Total funding available is $1,511,528
14. Grant
recommendations are based on the Central Facility Partnership Fund guidelines.
(Attachment 1)
2013/14
Feasibility Applications
15. Below is a
summary of each of the five feasibility study applications, including
background, analysis and recommendations.
Auckland
Basketball Services Limited (ABSL) (Sub regional application)
16. Project:
To identify opportunities and determine options to remedy basketball court
capacity shortage within central Auckland
ABSL have requested an investment of
$20,000 for a total project cost of $25,000.
17. Background:
Auckland Basketball Services Limited
administers basketball services on behalf on the Auckland Basketball
Association and the Counties Manukau Basketball Association.
ABSL’s “Strategic Plan
2014-2016” links directly to Basketball NZ’s plan and outlines their key
strategic pillars and KPI’s which show how they will service their members.
ABSL indicate that there approximately
39,000 participants within their catchment area and that large growth is being
experienced in the 6 to 15 age group with basketball being one of the fastest
growing in secondary schools.
Auckland has the fourth highest ratio of
people per court (29,000) in New Zealand, which is significantly higher than
the national average (23,000).
18. Analysis
The National Facilities
Strategy for Indoor Sports (Sport NZ, 2013) indicates that there is
currently a shortage of indoor court space of approximately 24 courts for
basketball, rising to a projected 41 courts by 2031.
The proposal supports the strategic
outcomes of the Auckland Sport and Recreation Strategic Action Plan (SARSAP)
and the Auckland Plan, and is supported by both the Regional Sport Trust (Sport
Auckland) and Basketball New Zealand.
According to Sport NZ 2012 participation
data, basketball is 17th highest ranked sport and recreation
activity. Basketball is also the largest indoor sport in New Zealand.
Staff support the feasibility study
application as it shows strategic alignment and addresses a clear demand for
indoor court space.
Recommendation
19. That
the Committee fund ABSL $20,000 towards a feasibility study.
Ellerslie
Eagles Rugby League Club (Orakei Local Board)
20. Project:
To identify options to upgrade and redesign the Ellerslie Eagles club
facilities for extended use by members/users/community groups
The club has requested an investment of
$25,000 for a total project cost of $30,000.
21. Background
Ellerslie Eagles Rugby League Club was
founded in 1912 and is based at Ellerslie Domain. The club indicate that they
had approximately 320 members in 2013. In addition to use by club members and
supporters, the club also host an annual tag football tournament that attracts
500 people and is also the home of the Ellerslie Aikido club which has a
membership of approximately 35.
The club lodged an Expression of Interest
to the Central Facility Partnership Fund for a building upgrade project in
September 2013 but were advised by the Committee to develop up an application
for a feasibility study to widen the scope of the project beyond the club’s
initial identification and assessment of building issues.
The club refers to a Ground Condition
Report undertaken in 2013 in their application which highlighted that the club
room building was in a state of disrepair and in need of a major upgrade.
The club’s board is in the process of developing
a strategic plan and several board members are undertaking training with Sport
Auckland around governance, operational management and strategic planning.
22. Analysis
Although the building condition appears
to be a priority, the club needs to formally identify partners who are likely
to utilise an upgraded facility, to make a stronger case for how a partnered
project would meet the needs of other sports groups and the community. No user
information has been provided for the adjoining netball and tennis courts.
Feedback indicates that the club’s
feasibility scope would need to be wider than currently proposed and would need
to identify operational structures and models for the sustainability of a
future multi-use club.
A lack of an Auckland Rugby League
facilities plan has made it difficult to assess the needs of Ellerslie Eagles
Club against those of other rugby league clubs. There is no evidence of support
from Auckland Rugby League as to the priority of this project as against other
clubs’ needs.
This feasibility study application as
submitted is not supported. Further work needs to be completed on partnership
opportunities with additional groups and support gained from Auckland Rugby
League.
It is recommended that Council staff work
with the club, Sport Auckland and Auckland Rugby League to redevelop the
application with a view to re-submitting it in a future funding round.
Recommendation
23. That
the Committee decline this application
Marist
Rugby Club Incorporated (Albert-Eden Local Board)
24. Project:
To scope a redesign and rebuild of club facilities.
The club has
requested an investment of $25,000 for a total project cost of $30,000.
25. Background
The club was formed in 1919 and has a
long history of success. It has been based at Murray Halberg Park in Mt Albert
since 1974. Currently the club has 440 members and fields 20 teams.
The club has been working with Sport
Auckland and has recently undertaken a strategic planning process. Obtaining a
feasibility study for options to rebuild the clubrooms is identified in the
club’s strategic plan.
A Marist Rugby
League Ground and Building Condition report (Selwyn Pearson
2009) showed that the club room buildings were in very poor condition and
recommended that the building be demolished and replaced.
26. Analysis
Although the building condition report
recommended a rebuild of the clubrooms, the club has not gained formal support
from other potential users of a new facility, to make a stronger case for how a
new clubrooms facility would meet the needs of the wider community.
There is no evidence of support from
Auckland Rugby League as to the priority of this project against other clubs’
needs. A lack of an Auckland Rugby League facilities plan has made it difficult
to assess the needs of Marist Rugby League Club’s needs against those of other
rugby league clubs.
Feedback indicates that the club’s
feasibility scope would need to be wider than currently proposed and would need
to identify operational structure and models for the sustainability of a future
multi use club.
This feasibility study application as
submitted is not supported. Further work needs to be done to identify needs and
partnership opportunities in Marist’s catchment area.
It is recommended that Council staff work
with the club, Sport Auckland and Auckland Rugby League to redevelop the
application with a view to re-submitting it in a future funding round.
Recommendation
27. That
the Committee decline this application.
Remuera
Bowling Club Incorporated (Orakei Local Board / Sub Regional)
28. Project
: To scope the potential for a “Centre for Bowls” to be developed in central
Auckland that would incorporate both indoor and outdoor greens to create year
round access for playing bowls, as a well as central headquarters, office space
and clubroom facilities
Remuera Bowls have requested an
investment of $25,000 for a total project cost of $30,000.
29. Background
The Auckland Regional Bowls Facility plan
indicates a need to create a “home for bowls” within Auckland. The plan
originally identified Mt Eden as a potential site for an all-weather facility
and headquarters for the sport.
However, due to issues arising from the
complexity of the Mt Eden site, an alternative proposal from Remuera Bowling
Club has become the preference due to its proximity to transport links and the
size of the land owned by the club.
Auckland Bowls have indicated their
support of the Remuera site. Auckland Bowls have agreed to
financially contribute $5000 towards this project.
30. Analysis
A feasibility study to evaluate the
proposed Remuera site against the Mt Eden site would investigate the
requirements for a bowls high performance centre, include a survey of
attributes that would be required to host international bowls events, and would
consider the potential impact of the proposed facility on existing bowling
clubs within Auckland.
The proposed project would contribute to
the goals of both the Auckland Plan and the Auckland Sport and Recreation
Strategic Action Plan (SARSAP) with a particular emphasis on providing fit for
purpose facilities.
Council staff supports the concept and
endorse the strategic development of an enhanced indoor or covered facility for
bowls in Central Auckland. The recommendation is that Auckland Bowls be the
driver of the project rather than Remuera Bowling Club.
Recommendation
31. That
the committee fund Auckland Bowls $25,000 towards this feasibility study.
YMCA of
Auckland Inc. (Waitemata Local Board)
32. Project:
to identify options or opportunities for the YMCA around the potential to
increase the capacity and the footprint of the YMCA City Stadium in Pitt St.
YMCA has requested an investment of
$35,000 for a total project cost of $40,000.
33. Background:
The YMCA Pitt St stadium
is over 40 years old and currently attracts around 60,000 visits per year.
The proposal aims to develop a
feasibility study that will identify reconfiguration options for the facility
with a view to increasing capacity by addressing future needs of a changing
population and changing patterns of use.
34. Analysis
The National Facilities
Strategy for Indoor Sports (Sport NZ, 2013) indicates that there is a shortage
of indoor court space throughout Auckland. The strategy recommends that an
additional 24 courts are required to meet current demand. Previous Auckland
City Council recreation centre plans indicate a shortfall in provision in the
central city.
The Auckland City Centre Master Plan
signals that the resident population of central Auckland is growing and will
continue to grow significantly and in 18 years the population will have almost
doubled. An upgrade of the YMCA Pitt St facility would support the council in
meeting Outcome 3 of the plan: “A city centre meeting the needs of a growing
and changing residential population”.
The feasibility study proposal supports
the strategic outcomes of the Auckland Sport and Recreation Strategic Action
Plan (SARSAP) as well as the current Waitemata local board plan by examining
options to increase use of the facility by children and young people.
Council staff support the feasibility
study application as it shows strategic alignment and addresses a clear demand
for indoor court space and growth in the inner city.
Recommendation
35. That
the Committee fund YMCA of Auckland Inc. $25,000 towards a feasibility study.
Stage Two
Applications
Below is a
summary of each of the nine Stage Two applications, including project
description, background information, analysis against the criteria and
recommendations.
Aotea
Boardriders Club (Great Barrier Local Board)
36. Project:
To build a small multi use clubrooms for the club and other affiliated water
based and water safety groups on Great Barrier Island.
Aotea Boardriders Club have requested an
investment of $71,991 for a total project cost of $84,241.
37. Background
The Aotea Boardriders
Club is a small (approximately 80 members), long-established surf club
operating out of an old stationary bus located on private land on Great Barrier
Island. The club hosts a number of competitions and events for local surfers
encouraging locals to participate in national surfing circuits.
The club’s intention is
that a clubroom building would provide a home for long boarders as well as a
place for other like-minded organisations to use. The club has developed up an
informal understanding with other key user groups such as Sea Education Aotea
and Aotea Family Support Group, but need to provide evidence of an increased
level of support.
In March 2014, the Great
Barrier Island local board proposed that the Aotea Board Riders project take
place on council land, instead of the land where the stationary bus is now
housed. If this proposal goes ahead there may be a time delay where land owner
approval is prepared and approved.
38. Analysis
Quotes and plans
for the project of three kitset buildings around a communal deck area have been
provided but are not supported by QS estimates.
While the scale of the project is
relatively small it is recognised that the needs and fundraising ability of the
island are different from those of the central isthmus. It is understood that
many of the gaming charitable trusts do not fund projects on Great Barrier
Island thus reducing the number of funding agencies clubs can apply to.
Council staff also understand that the
club is not yet a legal entity and therefore not able to request or receive any
other funding as yet.
Council staff support
the concept and the merit of the project. However, it is recommended that the
club re-apply to the fund once they have become a legal entity; have some
funding to contribute to the project and have confirmed a site for the club
rooms.
Recommendation
39. That the Committee decline this
application
Auckland
Grammar School (Albert-Eden Local Board)
40. Project:
To develop an artificial turf with lights to release pressure on the existing
grass fields at Auckland Grammar School
Auckland Grammar School has requested an
investment of $500,000 for a total project cost of $1.6 million.
41. Background
Auckland Grammar School’s number 3 field
is situated at the intersection of Clive Road and Normanby Road in Mount Eden.
It is proposed that the artificial turf could host a number of recreational
sports including rugby, football, touch rugby, lacrosse, cricket fielding
practice.
Auckland Grammar School has indicated
that they will contribute $150,000 to the project and secure an additional
$600,000 loan. The school appear to have the ability to service the loan.
The school has also recently received $150,000 towards the project from the New
Zealand Community Trust.
42. Analysis
Auckland Council’s sports field demand
model calculates and matches field demand with field capacity. The model
indicates a significant shortfall in the central area for playing field time
even taking into account council’s proposed significant investment into
artificial turf as part of the Sports Ground Capacity Development programme.
The Auckland Regional Football Facility
Plan 2011–2021 identifies maximising the use of existing field resources as a
priority and highlights the need for an additional 19 artificial turfs (or
equivalent capacity hours) to meet demand by 2021. The Albert-Eden local board
area has been identified as the area with greatest shortfall of playing field
capacity in central Auckland.
The proposal contributes to the outcomes
of the Auckland Sport and Recreation Strategic Action Plan with direct
alignment with the priority area of infrastructure. The proposal is endorsed by
both the Auckland Rugby Union and the Auckland Football Federation.
The application states that community use
of the proposed artificial turf would be between 30 and 35 hours per week with
Auckland Grammar seeking exclusive use between 7am to 8-30am and 3pm to 4-30pm
on week days. Council would have oversight of the community use managed via
Council’s field booking system. Community access hours available would be
outlined in the funding agreement.
Council staff support the project as it
helps address the shortfall of playing fields in the Albert-Eden local board
area and represents a good return on investment for council. If further funding
was available, the Committee, may consider further investment in this project.
Recommendation
43. That the
Committee fund Auckland Grammar School $361,528 (includes $350,000 plus $11,528
reallocated from 12/13) towards construction of the artificial turf.
Auckland
Rowing Association Incorporated. (Regional)
44. Project:
Stage 1 of a regional water sports centre to create water access for rowing and
other aquatic sports, through the installation of hardstands, a jetty and a
floating pontoon.
Auckland Rowing Association has requested
an investment of $800,000 over two years ($400,000 in 2013/14 and $400,000 in
2014/15). The total project cost of the first stage is $1.8m. This would form
part of a larger $5.5m project.
45. Background
A regional facility for rowing was
identified in the Auckland Regional Physical Activity and Sport Strategy (2009)
as a priority for Auckland.
Auckland Rowing Association Incorporated
has been in discussions with Council representatives over several years
regarding the development of a new water sports facility (accommodating rowing,
waka ama, canoe, kayak and other clubs) at Highbrook, East Tamaki in the Howick
local board area.
The proposed facility will be built on
land currently owned by the Highbrook Park Trust. The land will be vested to
council in 2015. This site would be the base for regional high performance
crews as well as school based crews.
The proposed development includes the
provision of a 2000m rowing training course along the Tamaki River (on which a
number of central clubs are based). The Proposed Auckland Draft Unitary Plan
has identified the Tamaki River as a water sports precinct.
46. Analysis
The proposal contributes to the outcomes
of the Auckland Sport and Recreation Strategic Action Plan with direct
alignment with the priority areas of infrastructure, participation and
excellence in sport and recreation. The project is endorsed by Rowing New
Zealand.
Strategic plans and business plans for
both the organisation and the facility have been developed, presented and
articulated at a high level and highlight the increase in capacity and
capability that will follow the development of a regional facility in this
setting.
Based on current user figures presented
by the Auckland Rowing, it is anticipated that 55% of the users of the facility
will be from the central local board areas. This is followed by 26% from north
local board areas, 16% from south board areas, 2% from west board areas.
Auckland Rowing has signalled their intention
to seek additional funding for the project from other Auckland Council local
board areas in particular the Howick local board.
Assessment of the proposal ranks it a
high priority against the criteria of the fund: it is aligned to high level
strategic outcomes; it helps address the issues of growth in the sport and
addresses the lack of regional water sport facilities within Auckland.
Although the request from Auckland Rowing
is for $800,000 spread over two years, it is recognised that funds cannot be
committed beyond the 2013/14 financial year.
Recommendation
47. That the
Committee fund the Auckland Rowing Association $400,000 in the 2013/14
financial year towards Stage 1 of the project
Eastern
Suburbs Gymnastics Club (Maungakiekie-Tamaki Local Board)
48. Project:
To expand and improve current facilities based on options reported through the
recent feasibility study in order to meet the demand for gymnastics.
Eastern Suburbs Gymnastics Club has
requested an investment of $400,000 of a total project cost of $2.5million.
49. Background
The club own a property
on Apirana Avenue, Glen Innes. Auckland City Council approved a Facility
Partnership grant of $600,000 towards the $1.8 million purchase and fit out of
the new premises.
During the 2013/2014
round the Committee approved a feasibility study grant for $25,000 for the club
to investigate how best to cater for growth. The feasibility study has now been
completed.
50. Analysis
The club has worked with
Sport Auckland to develop its strategic planning and organisational capability
in order to cope with the increase in club members, new programmes and
increasing demand from new residents within their catchment area. The club has
been identified by Gymsports NZ as a pivotal facility for gymnastics in
Auckland.
The feasibility study
outlined the following options for the club: a) expand its current premises or
b) to look further afield to scope a development opportunity, either aligned to
another sport with co-location possibilities or c) to sell their current
premises and relocate to a nominated site.
The club have not
indicated in their application which option in the feasibility study that they
wish to pursue and therefore assessment is challenging.
It is understood that if
the club were to sell their current premises, then they would bring a
considerable amount of investment to their next building project.
It is recommended
Council staff work with Eastern Suburbs Gymnastics Club to re-submit another
application in a future funding round once it is clear which option the club
prefers.
Recommendation
51. That the Committee decline this
application.
Ellerslie Sports Club Inc. (Orakei Local Board)
52. Project:
To build club rooms for both cricket and football on Michaels Ave Reserve as
part of the Stage 3 of the Michael Ave Reserve Concept Plan.
Ellerslie Sports Club
has requested an investment of $1.037million with a total project cost of
$2.3million.
53. Background
The Ellerslie Sports
Club is the umbrella organisation for the Ellerslie Association Football Club
Incorporated and Ellerslie Cricket Club Incorporated and is currently leasing
the top floor of the Ellerslie Recreation Centre to use as the sport clubs club
rooms. The current lease expires with Council in December 2015.
Council adopted a master
plan for Michaels Ave in 2008. The implementation of the concept plan is a
staged approach to provide quality playing surfaces, greater field capacity and
improved amenities. Stages 1 & 2 have been completed. A new club room
space is Stage 3 of the concept plan.
Council budget allowed
for the development of the designs for Stage 3 (the new
building) with the intention that council would fund the public amenities on
the lower level and the club would raise funds for the top level. There is
currently no budget available for the public amenities renewals.
Council has led the
design process for the sportsfields and club rooms upgrade in partnership with
the club, to tie in with the total re-development plan of the Michaels Ave
Reserve. While the Orakei local board has confirmed
its support in principle for the project and for funding the construction of
the lower half of the building, it does not, at this stage, have budget allocated for this.
54. Analysis
The construction of a
shared club rooms is identified in the Ellerslie AFC’s Strategic Plan
2013-2015. The project also contributes to the outcomes of the Auckland Sport
and Recreation Strategic Action Plan. (SARSAP).
It is proposed under the 2015-2025 Long
Term Plan that some renewals funding will be available and/or new capital works
expenditure (yet to be determined) for the construction of the amenities
block/ground floor of the proposed building.
Council staff support
the project but the request for $1.037m funding from this facility partnership
budget is unrealistic given the amount of funding available. The club have
currently raised $125,000 towards the project and are yet to lodge additional
funding applications with other community funders.
It is recommended that
this project be seed funded to allow the club to continue to fund raise towards
its total target and to complete the redevelopment project.
Recommendation
55. That
the Committee fund the Ellerslie Sports Club Inc. $340,000 as a contribution to
the project.
Great Barrier Island Community Heritage and Arts Village Trust
(Great Barrier Local Board)
56. Project:
To complete the renovation and refurbishment of the Gray Homestead as a
heritage museum.
Great Barrier Island
Community Heritage and Arts Village Trust have requested an investment of
$87,854. This is the total project cost.
57. Background
The Great Barrier Island Community
Heritage and Arts Village Trust were established in 2002. The trust’s role is
to promote and showcase the art and heritage of the island. The trust focuses on
the promotion of art, education, lectures, classes and seminars through the
gallery and the preservation of three heritage buildings.
The building project is part of a wider
development for a heritage village that includes Mabey house as an art gallery,
an old school master’s house that is set up as workshop space and a multi-use
venue, and a third building that is currently used for storage. The trust has
undertaken renovation of the Gray Homestead and now requires a larger space for
display of heritage items, within the museum part of the heritage village.
The museum building layout has been
designed to have a research room in order to allow for future facilities such
as computers and printers for individuals or community groups to do their own
historical research. It is anticipated that the interactive parts of the museum
project will increase numbers to the village by encouraging visitors to record
oral history and to research genealogy.
Figures provided by the trust indicate
that the facilities attract around 8000 visitors per annum. Membership of the
trust is currently 200, with 126 of the island’s 900 residents (or 14%) being
members.
58. Analysis
This application for Stage 4 of the wider
development (repairs to internal walls, ceilings and insulation) is estimated
to cost $87,854, with the trust seeking full costs from the fund for this part
of the upgrade project.
The overall Gray Homestead project has
taken three years of consistent work and progress by volunteers and members,
and has so far cost $132,048. Council has previously invested in earlier stages
of the project: (Dec. 2012 - $47,894 to weatherproof the house and Dec 2013-
$37,504 to insulate the exterior and first fix wiring) while other funding
partners (including Sky City $5000 and ASB Community Trust $37,650) have
contributed $84,154.
Further evidence has been sought from the
trust and this supporting evidence indicates that volunteers contribute
approximately 2,500 hours of volunteer work per annum to running the Heritage
Village. While there is no anticipated volunteer involvement in the next stage
of construction or renovation, volunteers do help in steering committees,
cataloguing, liaising with old farming families on the island, sourcing display
and arranging trips.
The supporting information from the trust
shows that the plan for the museum is to collaborate with community members and
groups to create a building and events which can showcase the diversity of the
island’s art, history and heritage.
59. Recommendation
Whilst a worthy
project, it does not show significant increases in participation numbers and
wide community access and therefore within the existing budget available
Council staff do not recommend supporting this project at this time.
The Committee
may give special consideration due to the unique nature of Great Barrier and
low population and isolation. In this case Council staff would recommend
funding up to $50,000 (the Trust has indicated it will seek other funding from
others that have supported them in the past).
The committee could consider
allocation from the 2013/2014 budget or the additional funding available in the
2014/15 to allow for this.
The
Auckland Performing Arts Centre of Western Springs (TAPAC)
(Waitemata
Local Board)
60. Project:
To install a disability access ramp at the entrance to TAPAC and to install an
accessible and safe theatre seating block.
TAPAC has requested an
investment of $85,000 with a total project cost of $138,000.
61. Background
TAPAC is a performing
arts centre that opened in 2003, as the result of a
partnership between Western Springs College, the Performing Arts School of NZ,
and a facility partnership grant of $1,150,000 from Auckland City Council.
The centre currently
provides four dance and drama studios, and a flexible theatre space for
community performing arts education, secondary school students and members of
Auckland’s professional performing arts and dance communities. The facility is
open for 95 hours a week and use has grown to 135,500 visits per annum.
TAPAC’s proposal to
install a disability ramp at the entrance and to install an accessible
and safe theatre seating block (164 seats) is seen as a way to increase
both the audience capacity and the usability of the venue. The trust refers
to specifically increased use of the centre by young people.
62. Analysis
In 2010, TAPAC were
granted $100,000 from the facility partnership to upgrade the disabled access
to the building and carry out alterations to the theatre. However, this
funding was subsequently used on a foyer upgrade project in June 2012.
Further evidence needs
to be submitted to support the view that the proposed project would increase
the patronage and would allow a more diverse range of young people to be
involved in projects and performances.
Council staff recognise
the impact of TAPAC on the arts community and its strong track record of active
engagement. The building currently meets the building
code for disabled access although it is not ideal as the access ramp is at the
side of the building.
It is recommended that
this project not be supported at this stage: it is not signaled as being a high
priority in the Trust’s own Strategic Plan for asset maintenance, and there is
limited evidence as to this project’s ability to increase community participation
outcomes.
Recommendation
63. That the Committee decline this
application
Three
Kings United Football Club (Puketapapa Local Board)
64. Project: To build a new clubhouse in
accordance with the council developed Keith Hay Park plan.
Total project cost is
$3.9 million and the club is requesting $1.5 million.
65. Background
The Three Kings United
Football Club is New Zealand’s largest football club with 7,300 members and
players. Their clubrooms are located at Keith Hay Park, a significant local and
regional sports park covering 22.7 hectares.
The club has been
planning a re-development of the club rooms over a number of years: The
redevelopment was first contemplated in the original Keith Hay Park Concept
plan 2003. Due to the club’s growing membership and its level of use of the
park the club is looking to replace their clubrooms on a new and larger
footprint. The current facilities are inadequate given the growth of the club
and the number of members.
In 2010, the club was
declined Auckland City Council Facility Partnership scheme funds for a new
clubroom development because the proposal was not sufficiently progressed.
The club has further developed its plans and has a new
location for the clubrooms, aligned to the new artificial playing surfaces within
the overall concept plan for the park.
Council adopted a Keith Hay Park Concept
Plan in 2012 which includes new car parking, an upgrade of the fields, a new
playground, a proposed new Three Kings United clubrooms and other associated
works.
66. Analysis
The Auckland
Regional Football Facility Plan 2011-2021, identifies Keith Hay Park as a
potential site to address the lack of playing fields in Mt Albert, Morningside
and Mt Eden
The project was initially estimated to
cost between $2.5million and $3million, but now due to increasing costs and
increasing compliance issues, it is estimated it will total $3.924 million.
The club has secured $230,000 towards the project. Staff have signalled that a
Facility Partnership grant of $1.5 million is unlikely. The shortfall of
approximately $2 million is planned to be raised from applications to other
sport and community funding agencies.
The club’s current plans include the
building of an amenities block which would provide public toilet facilities and
changing rooms. This would make up the lower level of the building with the
clubrooms to be built on the top floor.
It is proposed that under the 2015-2025
Long Term Plan some renewals funding could be available and/or new capital
works expenditure (amount yet to be determined) for the construction of the
amenities block on the ground floor of the proposed building.
This project shows high alignment with
the criteria. It is in-line with Council’s re-development plans and the
programme of works for Keith Hay Park. If this project is funded (even in
part), it would signal to other funding partners that this is a well-developed,
long term strategic partnership with Council, to increase provision and
participation in sport and recreation.
Recommendation
67. That the committee
part fund $340,000 as seed funding to allow the Three Kings United Football
Club to continue to fund raise towards its total target.
Waiheke
Island Rudolf Steiner Education Trust (Waiheke Local Board)
68. Project: To
establish a family support and education centre alongside the Rudolf Steiner
Fossil Bay Kindergarten in Oneroa.
Total project cost is $236,845 and the
trust is requesting $150,000.
69. Background
The Trust operates a
small licensed kindergarten, on private land in Fossil Bay near Oneroa. The
Trust provides support and education to parents through classes and education
sessions.
The Trust intends to
expand its facility and operations to serve as a community resource and a hub
for child focused education and parenting. The Trust seeks to partner with
other like-minded groups who need meeting spaces for healthy living,
sustainability and environmental matters.
The key aim of the
project is to establish a family support centre where parents can access a wide
range of activities for parents, caregivers and children. Through partnering
with other community groups the centre will aim to offer a range of classes and
seminars that promote sustainable and healthy living.
70. Analysis
Under the eligibility
criteria for the Central Facility Partnership Fund guidelines, projects that
are primarily health, education, welfare facilities or places of worship, are
not eligible. The nature of this organisation and this project appear primarily
for educational purposes.
In November 2012, a community facility survey was undertaken to assess use of community
facilities on Waiheke Island. Although responses were low, the results
indicated generally that the current facilities on Waiheke met the activity
needs of the submitters. The results did not support a case for further
facilities or the need for a community centre.
Community occupancy
figures from July 2013 to March 2014 for the existing council owned facilities
on Waiheke are low: Old Blackpool Hall 18%; Old Surfdale Post Office 12.1%;
Ostend War Memorial Hall 21.8% and Surfdale Hall at 29.1%. This indicates
that there is significant spare capacity at existing facilities.
The survey did however
indicate that there is a need for improved networking
amongst groups and better communication and coordination between facilities.
The trust has indicated that they would like to have a role in facilitating
increased cohesion.
The facility proposed is
located on private land, whilst the land owner supports the development, the
Trust currently only have a 2 year lease with right of renewals until 2019.
This signals a potential risk to Council’s investment.
The Trust has raised
$22,300, is anticipating a donation for $10,000 and is seeking $55,000 from the
Lotteries Facility Fund (Nov 2014). If the trust were not to receive the full
amount they are requesting from council, they would need to change the amount
they are seeking from other funders.
Recommendation
71. The facility is on private land, there is a lack of evidence of need
for community space and given the primarily educational purpose of the project,
Council staff do not recommend supporting this project
within the existing budget available.
Should the Committee wish to support this application, given the
projects strong family focus and ability to support community space for
environmental and sustainability focused groups on Waiheke, Council staff would
recommend funding up to $75,000 and ensuring a longer term lease is secured.
The committee could
consider allocation from the 2013/2014 budget or the additional funding
available in the 2014/15 to allow for this.
Consideration
Local board views and implications
72. The Central
Facility Partnerships Committee is represented by a member of each of the seven
central local boards. The projects were discussed at a workshop of the
committee on 12 May 2014.
Views of the locals boards have been
sought regarding support for extension of project funding drawdown dates.
Maori impact statement
73. The Facility
Partnership scheme is a general programme of interest that is accessible to a
wide range of groups, including Maori. No particular implications for the
Maori community or Maori stakeholders have been identified as arising from this
report.
Implementation
74. All Facility
Partnership grants are subject to the development of a Facility Partnership
Agreement. All the terms and conditions must be jointly agreed upon before the
sign off by both parties.
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
aView
|
Central Facility Partnership Fund Guidelines 2013/14
|
25
|
|
bView
|
2012-13 Round project updates
|
29
|
|
cView
|
Great Barrier Island Supporting Information
|
31
|
Signatories
|
Authors
|
Suzanne Dennehy - Sport and Recreation Advisor
Sharon Rimmer - Manager Recreation Partnerships
Programmes and Funding
|
|
Authorisers
|
Ian Maxwell - Manager Parks, Sports & Recreation
Judith Webster - Relationship Manager
|
|
Central Facility Partnerships Committee
16 June 2014
|
|
Central Facility Partnership Guidelines
Background
The
Facility Partnership fund is a grant scheme available to organisations to
assist with facility development projects. Auckland council has inherited
several different approaches for managing and providing community facility
partnerships from the former Auckland, North Shore, Manukau and Waitakere City councils. A new regional policy is being developed to consolidate these
inherited approaches and create a consistent, integrated approach. This policy
is not yet completed.
In
the absence of an integrated regional policy, and to enable facility
partnership funding to be allocated, the Regional Development and Operations
Committee (RDOC) resolved on 24 May 2012 that an interim approach be
implemented for 2012/2013. In February 2013 the Regional Development and
Operations Committee resolved that the interim community funding arrangements
in place be continued for 2013/2014.
Introduction
These
guidelines have been developed to assist local boards and /or funding
committees in making decisions regarding the allocation of facility partnership
funding. The guidelines are based on legacy council policies with some
operational improvements.
The
guidelines are also intended to provide community groups wishing to apply to
the Facility Partnership Fund with an overview of:
· eligibility criteria
· the application process
Fund
scope
The
purpose of facility partnerships is to support not-for-profit community groups
develop community accessible facilities that deliver on council outcomes.
The provision of
council funding assists organisations to leverage additional grants from other
donors and develop a better facility than may otherwise have been possible.
Where a proposal
fits with the council’s identified strategic priorities and other relevant
criteria, the council may contribute, by way of a grant, to the capital cost of
the project. The level of council assistance is informed significantly by the
level of benefit and access the wider public will have to the completed
facility.
Facility
Partnership projects benefit the council by supporting it to meet strategic
outcomes through the provision of quality, publicly accessible facilities
without the council having to provide all the funding.
Principles
The
Facility Partnerships Fund is underpinned by a number of principles. Projects
should demonstrate the following:
· partnership approach
· evidence based demand
· maximum community use of facilities
· increase participation
· easy accessibility by the wider community
· partner organisations have the capability to deliver
the project and community outcomes
· project viability (funding plan, feasibility, business
plan)
· multiuse projects
· improved levels of service
· facility sustainability.
Eligibility
criteria
To
be eligible for facility partnership funding, projects must:
· be applied for by legal entities that have
not-for-profit status (e.g. be registered as an incorporated society or
charitable trust), or are a school or educational institution
· be for a facility development
· be in the Central area or if in a neighbouring area be
of proven regional significance with high use by Central area residents
· be a partnership project with multiple funders,
including self-funding from the applicant
· have a total project value of over $50,000 (GST
exclusive)
· align with and have support from regional/national
bodies (as applicable/where relevant) and
· the project could also be a feasibility study for a
facility.
Not
eligible
· proposals from individuals, commercial and/or profit
orientated organisations
· projects that are primarily health, education, welfare
facilities or places of worship
· retrospective applications/projects that have already
started
· debt funding
· on-going operational cost
· maintenance/asset renewal
· design, architectural or technical reports as part of
a feasibility study.
Prioritisation
In
addition to alignment with the Principles the following criteria should be used
to prioritise projects:
· the extent to which the proposal will
increase community participation
· the degree to which the proposal caters for
council’s priority targeted communities and activities
· whether existing facilities meet local and
regional needs whether the proposed facility will meet proven local and
regional and needs
· potential partners and their involvement in
the project
· allocation of the potential partners own
resources, including a financial contribution and the level of access the
partner has to other sources of funding/resources
· the financial sustainability of the new
facility to ensure that the ongoing operational costs of the facility can be
met without council assistance
· who is likely to benefit from the facility
· the status of any resource and/or building
consent applications already lodged
· a track record that shows an ability to
undertake and complete the proposal and operate the facility as put forward
· capacity building of the community (grows
skills within the community)
· the amount of community support for, and
involvement in, the project
· acceptable community access to the facility
· positive spin-offs for the community, with
minimal negative effects
· potential for funding from other providers
· the overall cost of the project is credible
and funding is achievable
· the proposed start and finish dates for the
project and whether they span more than one financial year
· how advanced the project planning is
· how advanced the funding plans are
· whether the proposal covers prospects and
timing for funding from other agencies
· the appropriateness of the scale of the
proposed project including the amount of funding sought from council
· the willingness of the potential partner to
develop and engage in a shared vision for the facility.
Parameters
and minimum requirements for facility partnerships
· Successful applicants will be required to
enter into a Memorandum of Understanding and/or Facility Partnership Agreement.
· The Memorandum of Understanding and/or
Facility Partnership Agreement will clearly state the intentions of each party,
shared objectives and the outcomes each party wishes to achieve.
· Council’s contribution to the facility is
to be acknowledged on publicity material and signs commensurate with the level
of council’s funding.
· The facility must be promoted for community
use.
· Affordable hire charges should be
comparable to, and sometimes approved by council.
· Regular reports are to be provided to
council on community use, hire fees, promotions, income and expenditure of the
facility.
· If requested, council access to the
facility for customer surveys or community research is to be provided.
· If requested, the facility is to be made
available as a welfare centre in the event of an emergency.
· Evidence must be provided of an agreed
minimum level of funding raised by the organisation.
· The funding mix will be discussed and
agreed by both parties. Council needs to know as soon as possible if there are
any proposed changes to this mix.
· The start and finish dates of the project
need to be within the timeframes agreed to at the time of executing the
Memorandum of Understanding and/or Facility Partnership Agreement.
· If funds are not uplifted by the agreed
dates, approved funding may lapse at council’s discretion.
· Appropriate business processes for
tendering and all aspects of work associated with developing the facility are
to be used.
· That “NZS 3910:2003 Conditions of Contract
for Building and Civil Engineering Construction”, or a variation thereof, will
be the basis of any construction contract, given the conditions of contract
contained therein are well known and widely accepted by contractors as industry
standard
· Facilities are to be insured to full
replacement value.
· Council will monitor the terms of the
agreement in line with good management practices.
· Council will have input into the sale/lease
of the facility’s naming rights.
· Council will recover some of its financial
contribution if the use of the facility changes significantly within the terms
of agreement or agreed timeframe.
· Council takes no liability for ongoing
operational or maintenance funding, nor responsibility for long-term asset
replacement. It may, at its discretion, agree to contribute to operational
funding based on a maximum level of council assistance. The future operational
model will be agreed prior to construction commencing.
· No council funding will be released until
all funding is in place for the project to be completed.
· Payment will be in instalments based on
work completed.
In
addition, the term of community access will be commensurate with the grant
approved as per the table below:
|
grants for
$25,000 - $100,000
|
· The partners will negotiate and agree to
a minimum level of community access of at least 5 years
|
|
grants for
$100,001 - $250,000
|
· The partners will negotiate and agree to
a minimum level of community access of at least 10 years
|
|
grants for
$250,001 - $750,000
|
· The partners will negotiate and agree to
a minimum level of community access of at least 15 year
|
|
grants for
$750,001+
|
· The partners will negotiate and agree to
a minimum level of community access of at least 20 years
|
Process
There
will be one funding round per financial year consisting of a two stage
approach.
Stage 1 Expressions of Interest
· groups submit a high-level proposal
(expression of interest)
· proposals are screened to ensure they meet
the guidelines, align with the council’s strategic needs and that they will
benefit the community
· proposals are summarised and presented in a
workshop and to the Central Facility Partnership Committee
· some proposals will be declined at this
point, while others will progress to stage 2
· officers will work with groups identified
by the Committee to develop a full proposal
· no funding decisions are required at this
stage
· unsuccessful proposals can be re-submitted
for consideration in subsequent years.
Stage 2 Further assessment and funding decisions
· council officers will work with the
successful organisations to gather further information in respect of the
proposal
· selected proposals are assessed against
criteria
· full proposals are discussed in a workshop
and formally considered by the Committee who will make a funding decision
If a proposal is unlikely to be progressed
through the Facility Partnership Fund, a clear signal should be provided to the
project proponents including whether a project may be of interest to council in
subsequent years. This allows those projects to be progressed independent of
council and/or revised where possible and re-presented at a later stage.
