Agenda of Howick Local Board

Howick Local Board

14 July 2014

Auckland Transport Update – July 2014

File No.: CP2014/14783

Purpose

1. Providing an update on transport matters for the information of the Howick Local Board and a register of transport issues in the Howick Local Board area, as collated by Auckland Transport’s Elected Member Relationship Manager (South).

Executive summary

2. This report covers matters of specific application and interest to the Howick Local Board and its community; matters of general interest relating to Auckland Transport activities or the transport sector; and Auckland Transport media releases for the information of the Board and community.

3. In particular, this report provides updates on:

· the Howick Local Board’s transport capital fund (both current and new projects)

· Feedback on Howick village parking review

· Huntington Drive update

· Chapel Road/Town Centre Drive intersection improvements update

· Bike rack installations

· Watercare project updates

· Mill Road corridor update.

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a) That the report entitled ‘Auckland Transport Update – July 2014’ and the attached issues register from Auckland Transport’s Elected Member Relationship Manager (South) be received.

b) That the Howick Local Board approves the following projects to progress to detailed design and costing stage, to be funded from the Local Board Transport Capital Fund:

i) Little Bucklands Beach walkway – based on a rough estimate of cost of $300,000 (plus a further $9,000 if including a footpath through Grainger Point);

ii) Paparoa Road/Four Trees intersection improvements – based on a rough estimate of cost of $70,000;

iii) Chapel Road pedestrian signals – based on a rough estimate of cost of $200,000.

c) That the Howick Local Board approves the following projects to progress directly to construction stage, to be fund from the Local Board Transport Capital Fund:

i) Ormiston Road loose metal footpath – based on a rough estimate of cost of $50,000;

ii) East Tamaki streetlighting upgrade – based on a rough estimate of cost of $58,000.

d) That the Howick Local Board endorses the feedback on the Howick Village Parking Review as shown at item A2 of the report, having chosen option X (being either 1 or 2) in relation to recommendation b of that feedback

Discussion

Howick Items

A1. Local board transport capital fund (LBTCF)

4. The Howick Local Board’s funding allocation under the LBTCF is $871,903 per financial year. Following Auckland Council approval last year to roll-over the 2012/13 LBTCF budget into the subsequent electoral term and then the recent elections, the Board is able to access funding across five financial years.

5. The Board’s active projects are included in Table 1 below (NB: ROC = rough order of costs; FEC = firm estimate of cost):

Table 1:

ID#

Project Description

Progress/Current Status

009

Improvements at Half Moon Bay (HMB) Marina

· $27,000 allocated from 2011/12 Discretionary budget in Aug-13

· $100,000 allocated from LBTCF in Sep-13

· FEC estimate of $229,470 (construction only)

· $17,185 incurred to date in detailed design phase

· Firm estimates ($229,470) and detailed designs were reported to the Board’s transport portfolio meeting on 6-May-14. This estimate is for construction only and does not include design and consultation costs.

· The Board’s transport portfolio holders met with the BBYC on 20-May-14 as it wished to provide input into the design proposal. Stakeholders met again on 24-Jun-14 to discuss the scope for such input.

· AT’s project manager will meet with the BBYC’s consultant on 1-Jul-14 to discuss the additional scope or scope change to the project. Those additions or changes will be minuted and provided back to the Board’s transport portfolio holders.

· As at 6-May-14, $17,185 had already been incurred during detailed design. Further design costs will be incurred due to the scope change.

152

Driver Feedback Signs x3

· FEC estimate of $27,000

· On 12-Aug-13, the Board approved construction of driver feedback signage at three sites – Bradbury Road, Gracechurch Drive, and Cryers Road.

· Construction was completed in Jun-14.

153

Pedestrian Safety Improvements to the Meadowlands/Whitford/Millhouse intersection

· FEC estimate of $460,000

· On 9-Sep-13, the Board approved the project for construction.

· Construction on the project began after Easter and as at 30-Jun-14 was substantially complete with the exception of line markings (to be installed once weather permitted) and commissioning of the signalised pedestrian crossing.

154

Crooks Road streetscape improvements

· FEC estimate of $95,000

· On 9-Sep-13, the Board approved a streetscape-only project for construction at $129,000.

· Current cost estimates are in the order of $95,000.

· The contract has been let and construction will begin in Jul-14.

155

Burswood Business Area enhancements

· FEC estimate of $196,000

· On 9-Sep-13, the Board resolved that engagement with affected parties and representative groups be undertaken on the project.

· Detailed designs and planting plans have been prepared for consultation, which is proposed to be undertaken in Aug-14.

156

Highland Park bus shelter installation

· FEC estimate for duplicate shelter $22,000

· On 9-Sep-13, the Board approved a duplicate shelter for construction based on a ROC of $15,000. A FEC of $22,000 has since been provided.

· Discussions with Adshel concerning the possibility of installing a second shelter continue and further information should be available prior to the July Board meeting.

· Other installations (a phone box and a VMS sign) immediately next to the existing shelter means that side-by-side installation of the duplicate shelter is not possible without significant cost. AT is now looking at nearby alternative position.

210

New bus shelters x2 (at Ti Rakau Drive and Cockle Bay)

· FEC estimate for Ti Rakau $20,000

· FEC estimate for Cockle Bay $26,000

· On 9-Sep-13, the Board requested AT to investigate the provision of bus shelters at 298 Ti Rakau Drive and outside Cockle Bay Primary School.

· The Board approved the Ti Rakau Drive shelter for construction based on the FEC on 10-Feb-14, and on the Cockle Bay shelter on 10-Mar-14.

· Construction of both shelters is expected in the first week of Jul-14.

217

Pigeon Mountain Road metering signals and bus lane

· ROC estimated at $165,000

· An AT study into safety improvements at the Prince Regent Drive/ Pigeon Mountain Road/ Sunderlands Road intersection also recommended installation of metering signals on the southbound lane of Pigeon Mountain Road, and including a small bus lane.

· While the intersection improvements were prioritised for implementation in the 2013/14 financial year, the metering signals/bus lane components were not.

· On 10-Feb-14, the Board approved the metering signals project to proceed to detailed design and costing stage based on the ROC of $165,000.

· The project is currently in detailed design. Feasible options will be reported to and feedback sought from a meeting of the Board’s Transport and Planning portfolio team in Aug-14.

6. The Howick Local Board’s transport capital fund to date is summarised below:

Howick Local Board transport capital fund summary:

Total funding available (across 5 FYs)	$4,359,515
Completed projects reporting actual costs (none as yet)	-
Firm estimates for projects given construction approval (3x driver feedback signs; pedestrian improvements at Meadowlands/Whitford/Millhouse; Crooks Road pedestrian and streetscape improvements; Highland Park duplicate bus shelter; Ti Rakau Road and Cockle Bay School bus shelters)	684,000
Projects with committed funding awaiting detailed estimates (Half Moon Bay walkway/ pedestrian improvements)	100,000
Estimates on projects awaiting construction approval (Burswood Business Area enhancements, Pigeon Mountain Road metering signals and bus lane)	361,000
*Funding still available to allocate*	$3,214,515

7. The new projects in Table 2 were identified at a Transport and Planning portfolio meeting held on 20 May:

Table 2:

ID#	Project Description	Progress/Current Status
272	Little Bucklands Beach walkway – both north and south of Grainger Point · ROC estimated at $300,000 · ROC estimated at $9,000 for footpath through Grainger Point	· Project would be a piled cantilever walkway structure over the seawall with rock rip rap underneath, which will require specific design, consultation and consents. · ROC estimated at $150,000 for 150m north of Grainger Point · ROC estimated at $150,000 for 150m south of Grainger Point · The Board may also wish to consider a 1.8m footpath through Grainger Point – ROC estimated at $9,000 for 50m · Board approval is sought to progress this proposal to detailed design and costing stage.
273	Ormiston Road loose metal footpath · ROC estimated at $50,000	· Proposal is for a 1m loose metal footpath on the south side of Ormiston Road from the Ormiston town centre site to Ormiston College. · Board approval is sought to proceed directly to construction.
274	Point View Drive footpath	· Proposal is for new footpath on western side of Point View Drive between Caldwells Road and #130 Point View Drive · Under assessment.
275	Howick Tetratrap installation	· Proposal is for potential installation of Tetratrap stormwater quality devices in road catchpits, particularly covering the Highbrook industrial area east of Harris Road. · Under assessment. · A catchment study funded by a local board opex budget would likely be required first, following which the LBTCF may be used for installation. ROCs will vary depending on catchments selected.
276	East Tamaki streetlighting upgrade · ROC estimated at $58,000	· Proposal includes Kerwyn Ave, Andromeda Crescent, Lorien Place and Arwen Place in East Tamaki. · Board approval is sought to proceed directly to construction.
277	Bus shelter lighting improvements	· Proposal is for lighting improvements as necessary at all bus shelters throughout the Howick ward. · Under assessment.
278	Paparoa Road/Four Trees intersection improvements · ROC estimated at $70,000	· Proposal is for pedestrian facilities at this intersection, including footpath and pram crossings. · Board approval is sought to progress this proposal to detailed design and costing stage.
279	Chapel Road pedestrian signals · ROC estimated at $200,000	· Proposal is for a new signalised pedestrian crossing at the existing caged pedestrian refuge on Chapel Road north of Baverstock Road · Preliminary design is complete. ROC estimated at $200,000. · Board approval is sought to progress this proposal to detailed design and costing stage
280	Half Moon Bay secure bike parking facility	· Under assessment.

8. The Portfolio team also identified a new section of footpath on Argo Drive, Half Moon Bay, and expressed interest in funding its construction. However, Auckland Transport advises that this section of footpath was recently constructed in June, funded by the regional new footpath/cycleway budget.

A2. Howick village parking review

9. The Howick Local Board’s feedback below on the Howick village parking review was prepared by the Howick Local Board’s Transport and Planning portfolio team for endorsement by the Board prior to being submitted to Auckland Transport:

On the understanding that, prior to implementing any changes to parking restrictions in Howick, Auckland Transport will be preparing an area-wide proposal for parking changes and directly consulting on that proposal with the Howick Village Association and all businesses and residents within the defined area-wide zone, and that any other interested parties will also have the ability to submit feedback online, the Howick Local Board provides the following feedback on Auckland Transport’s Howick Village parking review report 2013-14:

#	*Report Recommendations:*	*Howick Local Board feedback:*
a.	Introduce parking restrictions in the car park located at 9 Wellington Street.	The Board supports the introduction of P180 restrictions at this location. (P120 was initially discussed in this and other locations below but it was considered that, as parking restrictions would be completely new in these locations, that longer P180 restrictions would be less objectionable to the local community.)
b.	Introduce parking restrictions in remaining parts of Uxbridge Road car park.	The Board supports that existing P60 restrictions on one side at the top end of the Uxbridge Road car park should be duplicated on both sides at the top end of the car park. In the remainder of the Uxbridge Road car park, the Board EITHER 1. does not support any restrictions OR 2. supports the introduction of P180 restrictions.
c.	Introduce parking restrictions in Walter MacDonald Street.	The Board supports the introduction of P180 restrictions at this location.
d.	Remove parking restrictions from the lower part of the Fencible Terrace car park.	The Board does not support the removal of existing parking restrictions in this location.
e.	Remove time restrictions and manage turnover through price	The Board opposes this recommendation.
f.	Rationalise existing restrictions and adopt universal parking restrictions.	The Board opposes this recommendation.
g.	Mobility parking as per NZ Standards requirements in off-street car parks.	The Board does not support this recommendation as it generally considers there is ample mobility parking within the village. However, the Board notes that there is only one existing mobility parking space on the north-eastern side of Picton Street, and proposes that another mobility parking space should be installed outside #108 Picton Street.
h.	Introduce motorcycle parking in Fencible Terrace car park.	The Board does not support this recommendation. As motorcycles do not appear to have any trouble finding space to park in the village, the Board does not support converting any car parking spaces into motorcycle parking spaces.

10. Since the release of Auckland Transport’s draft Parking Discussion Document for public consultation at the end of May (for which the consultation period has now been extended to the end of July – see item C3 below), concern has been raised in the Howick community about the possible introduction of paid parking in Howick village.

11. Paid parking is a tool used to manage parking in areas of high parking demand where time restrictions are not effective. It is considered to be an effective Parking and Travel Demand Management tool.

12. At this stage, Auckland Transport has no plans to introduce paid parking in the Howick town centre. However, it could be an option that may need to be considered in the future if the demand for parking increases and time restrictions are no longer effective. Before introducing any paid parking, Auckland Transport would consult extensively with the local community and directly affected stakeholders.

13. The draft Parking Discussion Document proposes a consistent approach to managing parking in the city centre, metropolitan and town centres through the development of a series of Comprehensive Parking Management Plans (CPMPs) for each centre. The inclusion of Howick in the list of ‘other locations’ for the first stage of CPMPs is because Auckland Transport has already been working on the Howick village parking review for some time. The draft Parking Discussion Document notes that “In smaller centres the CPMP may only consist of a review of the parking restrictions and recommendations for improvement.”

A3. Travelwise Awards for Howick Local Board area schools

1. Auckland Transport’s Travelwise programme is about encouraging schools and students to travel more actively, safely and sustainably to and from school. It aims to raise road safety awareness and to improve the overall health and wellbeing of the school community.

2. About one third of all traffic at peak times is school related. Travelwise schools therefore make a real contribution towards reducing school car travel, as well as other positive benefits like daily exercise, improved safety and reduced congestion and pollution outside school gates.

3. The annual Travelwise Awards were held at Eden Park on 26 June (see item C6 below), where schools were presented with certificates by Mayor Len Brown.

4. Schools in the South collected 11 gold awards. Gold is the highest award, reserved for schools that achieve a 4% or more reduction in the number of car trips to school. It also recognises schools that make a significant difference to traffic congestion, road safety and the well-being of their students, communities and the environment.

5. Schools from the Howick Local Board area that received awards were:

· Gold – Baverstock Oaks School, Elim Christian College, Howick Primary School, Macleans Primary School, Our Lady Star of the Sea School, Wakaaranga School.

· Silver – Botany Downs School, Bucklands Beach Intermediate School, Bucklands Beach Primary School, Mission Heights Junior College, Mission Heights Primary, Pigeon Mountain Primary School, Point View School, Riverina School.

· Bronze – Anchorage Park School, Farm Cove Intermediate School, Macleans College, Riverhills School, Willowbank School.

6. There were also 13 special award winners on the night, including the “Partnership with Community 2014” Award given to Our Lady Star of the Sea School.

A4. Huntington Drive update

7. The Huntington Park Residents and Ratepayers Association (HPRRA) has previously raised concerns regarding safety at the intersection of Huntington Drive and Ti Rakau Drive due to vehicles from Ti Rakau Drive turning right into the first driveway south of the intersection, and the negative impact on following through traffic.

8. Following discussions with elected members and representatives of the HPRRA, Auckland Transport has implemented a new right turn bay at the driveway as shown in the diagram below.

A4. Chapel Road/Town Centre Drive intersection improvements update

9. At its monthly meeting held on 9 June, the Howick Local Board passed the following resolution in respect of the above intersection improvements:

“That the Howick Local Board:

c) advises Auckland Transport that adequate signage is in place to alert people to the Chapel Road/Town Centre Drive intersection improvements.”

10. In the week beginning 23 June, Auckland Transport delivered a notification letter regarding the proposed works to immediately affected parties and also residents within 100m south of the intersection. Electronic signage (variable messaging signs or VMS) warning of the upcoming works was also put in place that week, with project signage boards being installed at the northern and southern ends on Chapel Road. It was expected that work would commence in the first week of July, with the expected hours of work being between 9am and 4pm on weekdays and between 9am and 5pm on any weekends required.

A5. Bike rack installations

11. Auckland Transport is installing bike racks in town centres and other locations across the Auckland region.

12. The bicycle parking project seeks to improve the cycling experience within Auckland and to support cycling as part of an integrated transport system. Auckland Transport wants to provide secure and convenient bike parking where it is needed most and will be installing bike racks on footpaths and reserves around local business and/or recreation areas.

13. Locations selected for new bike racks are usually selected from requests submitted from adjacent business owners who have seen the demand by cyclists, or where cycle groups or Auckland Transport have identified the need.

14. The table below lists where Auckland Transport plans to install bike racks in the Howick Local Board area.

Subdivision	Specific location	No. of Racks
Pakuranga	Outside shops at 117 Cascades Road	2
Pakuranga	Outside shops at 44 Fortunes Road	2
Howick	159 Botany Road - Next to Bus stop	2
Howick	9 Gooch Place, Northpark	2
Howick	119 Meadowland Drive - next to the bus stop shelter	2

15. The bike racks are constructed of tubular stainless steel, standing 750mm high and 350mm wide, and will be installed at locations across Auckland throughout June. Installation work will not require heavy machinery and will cause minimal disruption to the community.

A6. Watercare project updates (as provided by Watercare)

16. Watermain (Flat Bush):

· This project has now been completed and the contractor left the site in the first week of June

· Auckland Transport now has possession of the site

· The project was a success financially and was completed ahead of schedule.

17. Panmure Wastewater Main Project:

· Due to unforeseen ground conditions, Watercare is now expecting to complete the works at the Millen Avenue/Pakuranga Road corner in mid-August. Works are progressing on the other side of the Panmure Bridge

· Night works by the Panmure Bridge (on the Pakuranga Road side) were to commence on the night of 29 June and run for five nights.

18. Howick Watermain Installation:

· Watermain installations in Kilkenny Drive, Chapel Road and Bucklands Beach Road have been completed.

· The installation of valves, fire hydrants and fittings is almost complete.

· Pressure testing of the installed pipes at the above locations is programmed for the first two weeks in July

· Sterilisation and main connection to existing reticulation system is programmed for July/August

· Reinstatement of the carriage way will commence as soon as the above three items of work are completed

· Installation of watermain in Ridge Road is programmed to commence in late July

· The forecast date for completion of the project at all four locations is 15 November 2014.

A7. Mill Road Corridor update

19. The Notices of Requirement are expected to be lodged in early September 2014. Additional cycling and pedestrian provisions have been added to the scheme, which added some delay due to altering plans, additional analysis and costings.

20. The ecological surveys and data collection has been completed, and further analysis is now underway. Auckland Transport is expecting the report to be completed in the near future, although the final report may not be issued until closer to lodging.

21. All other expert reports and plans are being completed and undergoing final reviews.

A8. Consultation documents on proposed improvements

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

23. Proposed ‘No Stopping At All Times’ parking restrictions (NSAATs), Bleakhouse Road, Mellons Bay – vehicles parking in front of property number 162 and 187 are parked in close proximity to a tight bend, which obstructs forward visibility of motorists travelling around the bend and reduces the available road width to a single lane. In order to maintain sufficient driver visibility and two-way access for traffic around the bend, Auckland Transport proposes to extend existing NSAATs as shown on the plan at Attachment A.

24. Proposed removal of redundant bus stops, Chapel Road, Flat Bush – Auckland Transport proposes to remove two redundant bus stops on Chapel Road that should have been removed some time ago, presently located outside 29R Frank Bunce Grove and outside 169 Ormiston Road, both immediately south of the shops located at 150 Chapel Road, as shown on the plan at Attachment B. These two stops are not identified on the Auckland Transport PT website and do not have bus stop numbers assigned to them. There are another pair of bus stops located outside and opposite 170 Chapel Road which are about to be relocated slightly and upgraded. The redundant stops will be removed when these other stops are relocated in the near future.

25. Proposed improvements for visually impaired users, Picton Road pedestrian crossing, Howick – upon receipt of a customer request, Auckland Transport is proposing to improve the zebra crossing on Picton Road for visually impaired users through the installation of directional tactile pavers on the footpath leading to the zebra crossing, and reflective strips at the top of the bollards flanking the crossing, as shown in the picture below.

General Information Items

B1. Wiri Depot wins award

26. At New Zealand's prestigious Property Industry awards on 13 June, Auckland Transport’s Wiri Electric Train Maintenance and Stabling Facility (Wiri Depot) building was entered for the Warren and Mahoney Special Purpose Property Award and received an ‘Excellence’ Award in that category.

27. Evaluation criteria included economic and financial factors, project vision and innovation (including degree of difficulty), design and construction, owner and user satisfaction, sustainability and efficiency of operation.

28. The Wiri Depot is considered a state of the art facility and one of the very best anywhere in the world. It was delivered on time and on budget in 2013.

B3. Land Transport Amendment Bill report

29. Parliament's Transport and Industrial Relations Committee has reported back on the Land Transport Amendment Bill and recommended that it be passed with amendments proposed by the Committee. If passed into law as recommended, the changes will come into force on 1 December 2014.

30. The Land Transport Amendment Bill proposes a number of amendments to the Land Transport Act 1998, to address the problem of alcohol-impaired driving. The bill seeks to:

· lower the adult legal alcohol limits from 80 to 50 milligrams per 100 millilitres of blood, and from 400 to 250 micrograms per litre of breath

· create an infringement regime for adult drivers who return an evidential breath test result in the range of 251 to 400 mcg per litre, with proposed penalties of an infringement fee of $200 and 50 demerit points (There would be no right to request a blood test in these circumstances.)

· set a higher infringement fee of $500 plus 50 demerit points, plus the costs of the blood test, for adult drivers who fail or refuse to undergo the breath test, and whose blood test results are in the infringement range (51 to 80 mg per 100 ml), and

· address a loophole in the Act regarding drivers who cannot give blood samples for medical or physical reasons, by allowing prosecution of a driver for refusing to permit a blood specimen to be taken on a subsequent occasion, if a required blood specimen again cannot be taken for physical or medical reasons.

Media Releases

C1. Save money and help the environment by carpooling

31. Carpooling is a great way to reduce daily transportation costs, and the more people included in the carpool, the more money can be saved. In Auckland, commuters could save around $10 per day when sharing a car between two.

32. To calculate your savings, use the cost calculator on the Let’s Carpool website – www.letscarpool.govt.nz

33. The website also enables visitors to find people living and working near them who are looking to join a carpool, or talk to friends and colleagues about setting up their own carpool.

34. As well as cost savings, carpooling also reduces the number of cars on the road, easing congestion and making it a faster trip for everyone. Having another person in the car also makes journeys more enjoyable and interesting. Another benefit of having two people in the car is the ability to use T2 transit lanes.

35. There are just under 5000 people registered in Auckland for Let’s Carpool, so there’s a good chance of a suitable match.

C2. Public Transport Fare Changes from July 6

36. Auckland Transport has completed its Annual Fare Review which will see ticket prices on buses, trains and ferries change from 6 July 2014.

37. From that day, adults who use the AT HOP card for their travel will receive a 20% discount off the single trip adult cash fare (excluding NiteRider, Airbus Express and Waiheke ferry services). Child and tertiary AT HOP users will also continue to receive discounts on most services, when compared to the equivalent cash fares. In contrast, most cash fares for bus and train and some cash fares for ferry will increase, though some AT HOP fares for ferries will also increase.

38. The annual fare review takes into account operator cost increases (e.g. fuel and wages), revenue and patronage movements. Auckland Transport is also undertaking a strategic review of all public transport costs and pricing, which is due to be completed towards the end of the year.

39. By making travel even more attractive on the AT HOP card, Auckland Transport is hoping even more people will switch to using public transport. In March there was a jump in the number of people using public transport in Auckland with 7.3 million trips, an increase of 3.9% on March last year. The financial year to March also saw strong growth overall with just over 71 million trips.

40. In addition to an increased discount on AT HOP, from 6 July Auckland Transport will also remove the 25 cent top-up fee and reduce the minimum top-up amount on the card from $10 to $5. The card itself will also remain at $5 until at least 31 January 2015.

41. From 6 July, cash fares will be priced in 50 cent multiples to reduce cash handling on particularly buses, with the exception of the City LINK child cash fare which will remain at 30 cents. Auckland Transport also hopes to move to implementing an exact fare/no change given policy in the future and will investigate the potential of removing cash fares altogether, as has recently been introduced in Sydney.

42. For more information on AT HOP, visit www.at.govt.nz

C3. Extension of consultation period for draft Parking Discussion Document

43. It was announced on 24 June that, due to the level of interest in Auckland’s draft Parking Discussion Document, Auckland Transport has extended the public consultation period to 31 July.

44. Auckland Transport’s General Manager Strategy and Planning, Peter Clark said, “For the first time in decades we have an opportunity to look at parking requirements and principles right across the region. Auckland Transport was approached by a number of organisations and asked to consider extending the consultation period due to the importance of the subject.

45. “We are seeking high level views at this stage with an opportunity for more localised, detailed and specific feedback following later”.

46. During August and September, Auckland Transport will collate and group submissions and will develop proposed responses. Recommendations will be put before the Auckland Transport Board in September/October to make a decision on key principles to form a Parking Strategy for the region. The document will be finalised by the end of the year. In 2015 detailed, localised public consultations will begin on each principle. Some principles may take effect in months, other larger principles may be phased in over a number of years.

47. Auckland Transport is keen to get the public’s thoughts on a range of suggested approaches to improve Auckland’s parking, but specifically those relating to:

· The city centre, metropolitan and town centres

· Residential streets

· Off-street parking facilities (parking buildings)

· On-street parking restrictions

· Parking permits

· Park and rides.

48. For more information and to have a say on improving Auckland’s parking, please visit https://at.govt.nz/parkingfeedback where there are more details about possible solutions, as well as an online feedback form to fill in by 31 July. Alternatively, to be sent an information pack, contact Auckland Transport on 09 355 3553.

C4. What do you want from bike parking?

49. Designs for cycle parking at the new Panmure Railway Station could be wheeled out across the region, as Auckland Transport announced on 26 June it was seeking feedback on its designs for safe, dry and secure bike parking at Panmure station.

50. “We think we have created a simple functional structure that provides cyclists with secure and sheltered bike parking, now we want to know if it works for cyclists and other users of Panmure Station,” said Community Transport Manager Matthew Rednall.

51. “Bike parking is going to be rolled-out to stations across Auckland and it’s important we give people something they want and they will use.”

52. Cycle Action Auckland chairperson Barbara Cuthbert is keen on developing a practical template for developing bike parking facilities across Auckland. "Good bike parking will encourage more people to combine public transport and cycling and reduce pressure on park and ride. It’s good timing to do this survey while the public is responding to Auckland Transport’s review of city-wide parking policies. Well done, Auckland Transport.”

53. Visit www.at.govt.nz/panmurebikepark to view the designs and give feedback. Feedback closes on 4 July.

C5. Opening up Manukau for students

54. The public opening of the new $100 million Manukau Institute of Technology Campus on 28 June showcased another world-class facility for Auckland.

55. Since the Manukau railway station opened in April 2012, commuters have been using a temporary entrance as the MIT Tertiary Hub was completed above. However, commuters and students can now access the station through an atrium the size of a rugby field with soaring views through six floors of the 14,000m2 education facility above. It is decorated in a cultural theme by artists led by MIT lecturers making it one of the most impressive transport interchanges in Auckland.

56. The partnership between MIT and Auckland Transport sees a station complex matching the new commuter friendly transport facilities at other major centres such as Britomart, Panmure and Newmarket.

57. The Manukau Station and Education Hub complex will be complemented with a bus interchange, parking improvements and access to the Manukau City Centre. Already apartment buildings and shops are being built near the new building and changes to surrounding parks and car parks have been made to accommodate the surge in commuters.

58. The university will attract around 120 staff and 6000 students, and many of them will use public transport which will bring them to the door. A 250-seat auditorium and theatre in the complex will also be available for community activity. These will boost use of the transport interchange and the businesses on the ground floor of the building.

59. Estimates of passenger numbers suggest that the Manukau Station and Bus interchange will grow to be one of the busiest in Auckland. A public open day held at the new Manukau MIT education and transport hub on Saturday 28 June.

C6. More than 200,000 young Aucklanders signed up to Travelwise

60. Young Aucklanders are getting the Travelwise message with more than 200,000 students now taking part in the programme.

61. Since last year’s awards, 75 new schools have joined Travelwise bringing the total number of participating schools in Auckland to 400, which is a 23% increase since last year.

62. The success of the programme was celebrated on 26 June at an awards ceremony at Eden Park where schools were presented with certificates by Auckland Mayor Len Brown.

63. Schools north of the bridge came out on top last night with 31 gold awards. Schools in the South collected 11 gold awards, while Central/West schools took home five golds. A total of 241 awards were presented on the night, including 13 special awards.

64. Over all of Auckland, 70% of school aged students attend a Travelwise school. Broken down by sub-region, 83% of North schools, 78% of Central/West schools and 58% of South schools are Travelwise schools.

Issues Register

65. The regular monthly issues register is Attachment C to this report.

Consideration

Local Board Views

66. The Howick Local Board’s views will be incorporated during consultation on any proposed schemes.

Implementation Issues

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

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Plan of Proposed "No Stopping At All Times" parking restrictions Bleakhouse Road, Mellons Bay	25
b View	Plan of proposed removal of redundant bus stops, Chapel Road, Flat Bush	27
c View	Issues Register - July 2014	29

Signatories

Author	Jenni Wild – Elected Member Relationship Manager (South); Auckland Transport
Authorisers	Jonathan Anyon – Elected Member Relationship Team Manager; Auckland Transport

Howick Local Board

14 July 2014

Local Alcohol Policy Project - Draft Policy for Local Board Feedback

File No.: CP2014/13489

Purpose

1. To request formal feedback from local boards on the draft Auckland Council Local Alcohol Policy.

Executive summary

2. The purpose of this report is to provide local boards with a copy of the draft Auckland Council Local Alcohol Policy (LAP) and to request formal feedback by resolution.

3. On 13 May 2014, the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee adopted the LAP Project: Statement of Proposal (Attachment A), which includes the draft Auckland Council LAP, for public consultation (resolution number REG/2014/60(a). Following this decision, the council commenced public consultation (using the special consultative procedure), on 16 June 2014.

4. In addition to the public consultation process, council staff are seeking feedback from local boards on the draft LAP. Throughout June 2014, staff have facilitated workshops with local boards to discuss the content of the draft LAP. This report is a follow up to those workshops and provides local boards with an opportunity to pass formal feedback on the proposals. A list of key topics for local boards to consider passing resolutions on is included as Appendix D.

5. The draft LAP includes proposals relating to the following:

· location of licensed premises by reference to broad areas

· location of licensed premises by reference to proximity to premises or facilities of a particular kind or kinds

· whether further licences (or licences of a particular kind or kinds) should be issued for premises in the district concerned or any stated part of the district

· maximum trading hours

· the issue of licences, subject to discretionary conditions.

6. The details of these proposals are outlined in the body of this report.

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a) provides formal feedback (by passing resolutions) on the draft Auckland Council Local Alcohol Policy, noting that the resolutions will be included in the officers’ report to the Local Alcohol Policy Project Hearings Panel.

Comments

Legislative framework

Background: law reform

7. In December 2012, Parliament enacted the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012 (the Act). The Act introduced a new national framework for regulating the sale and supply of alcohol.

8. One of the key policy drivers behind the new legislation was an increased focus on local decision-making. In line with this, the Act removed the ability for council staff to consider alcohol licence applications under delegation and instead established new, strengthened local decision-making bodies (district licensing committees; “DLCs”). The Act also introduced the ability for local authorities to tailor some of the new national provisions (such as maximum trading hours) to their own local circumstances and to create additional regulations (such as the regulation of licence density) through the development of local alcohol policies (“LAPs”).

9. Whilst LAPs are not mandatory, the Act specifically empowers local authorities to develop them. The Act also explicitly requires licensing decision-makers, including DLCs and the new appellate body, the Alcohol Regulatory and Licensing Authority (“ARLA”), to have regard to the content of LAPs when making decisions under the Act. This statutory recognition represents a significant change from the previous system and allows local authorities, in consultation with their communities and stakeholders, to have greater influence over their local licensing environments.

Scope of LAPs

10. The Act restricts the scope of LAPs to the following licensing matters (section 77 of the Act):

· location of licensed premises by reference to broad areas

· location of licensed premises by reference to proximity to premises or facilities of a particular kind or kinds

· whether further licences (or licences of a particular kind or kinds) should be issued for premises in the district concerned or any stated part of the district

· maximum trading hours

· the issue of licences, subject to discretionary conditions

· one-way door restrictions.

11. Rules relating to each of these matters can be applied to: on-licences (e.g. bars, restaurants, taverns); off-licences (e.g. bottle stores or supermarkets) and club licences (e.g. sports clubs, RSAs) through the LAP. For special licences, a LAP can only include rules on hours, discretionary conditions and one-way door restrictions.

Effect of LAPs

12. The Act specifies when a LAP must be considered by licensing decision-makers (i.e. the DLC and ARLA). It also stipulates the effect that LAPs can have on the outcomes of different types of applications. The provisions of the Act relevant to these matters are summarised in the table below.

Table 1. Application of a LAP in licensing decisions

	Summary
When LAP to be considered	· The Act requires the DLC and ARLA to “have regard to” the LAP when deciding whether to issue or renew a licence.
Effect of LAP on applications for new licences	· The Act provides that where issuing a new licence would be inconsistent with the LAP, the DLC and ARLA may refuse to issue the licence (section 108) · Alternatively, the DLC or ARLA may issue the licence subject to particular conditions to address the inconsistencies with the LAP (section 109)
Effect of LAP on existing licences	· For applications to renew a licence, the DLC and ARLA cannot refuse to issue the licence on the grounds that it is inconsistent with the LAP. They can however, impose conditions on the licence to reduce the inconsistency (section 133). o The main implication of this is that location and density policies contained within a LAP will not apply to existing licences, meaning it will take time to give effect to the intention of location and density policies. · Provisions of a LAP relating to maximum hours and one-way door policies will apply to all licensees at the time that those provisions come into force (section 45). o This cannot be less than three months after public notice of adoption of the LAP, providing all appeals have been resolved. o The effect of this is that licensees with longer hours will have to revert to the maximum trading hours stated in the LAP, while licensees with shorter hours will not be affected.

Statutory process for developing LAPs

13. The Act prescribes the process for developing a LAP. In particular, it:

· outlines the matters that local authorities must have regard to when developing a LAP (section 78(2))

· requires local authorities to consult with the Police, inspectors and Medical Officers of Health before producing a draft LAP (section 78(4))

· requires local authorities to develop a draft LAP (section 78(1)), to give public notice of the draft LAP and to use the special consultative procedure to consult with the public (section 79(1)). (The draft policy then becomes the provisional policy.)

· requires local authorities to publicly notify the provisional policy and to allow submitters to appeal against the provisional policy (section 80).

14. The Act also sets out an appeal process and states that:

· only those who have made a submission on the draft LAP may appeal

· the only ground on which an appeal can be lodged is that the provisional LAP (or a part thereof) is unreasonable in light of the object of the Act.

15. The object of the Act (section 4) is that:

a) the sale, supply, and consumption of alcohol should be undertaken safely and responsibly; and

b) the harm caused by the excessive or inappropriate consumption of alcohol should be minimised.

16. The Statement of Proposal (Attachment A), as well as the sections below, provide information on the process Auckland Council has followed in developing its draft LAP, in line with the statutory requirements.

Auckland Council’s Local Alcohol Policy Project

Council’s decision to develop a LAP

17. In 2012, in anticipation of the new Act, Auckland Council completed the LAP Research Project, which focused on gathering and analysing information to support the development of a LAP. In May 2012, staff presented the Regional Development and Operations Committee (RDOC) with a copy of a research report, which was structured around the information requirements as set out in the then Alcohol Reform Bill (and that were later carried through into the final legislation).

18. After considering the research report, the RDOC approved the development of an Auckland Council LAP, subject to the passing of the Bill (resolution number RDO/2012/78(d)). This decision was later confirmed by the Governing Body in January 2013, after the new Act received Royal assent on 18 December 2012.

19. Project plan: key steps for developing council’s LAP

20. Auckland Council has followed an extensive process in preparing its draft LAP. The key steps are outlined in the table below. (Step 8 onwards will occur after the consultation process).

Table 2. Project plan overview

Step	Description	Timeframe
1. Project organisation / governance	· Established stakeholder reference groups and Joint Political Working Party	Complete
2. Issues analysis	· Reviewed, updated and analysed information gathered as part of Local Alcohol Policy Research Project in accordance with statutory requirements	Complete
3. Options analysis	· Identified assessed options available, within the parameters of the Act, to the council for addressing the issues identified at step 2. · Develop an issues and options paper with input from political working party and stakeholder reference group	Complete
4. Initial engagement period	· Initial engagement with internal, external and political stakeholders on issues and options paper	Complete
5. Engagement on staff position	· Developed a position paper with staff recommendations based on issues and options analysis, and feedback received through initial engagement period · Reported position back to internal, external and political stakeholders involved in the initial engagement period for further feedback	Complete
6. Develop and gain approval of draft policy	· Analysed outcomes of steps 2 to 5, completed detailed impact assessment, completed final engagement with elected members and developed draft policy · Present draft policy to the Committee for approval · Publicly notify draft policy	Complete
7. Special consultative procedure	· Follow special consultative procedure as set out in the Local Government Act 2002, which includes receiving written submissions, holding hearings and deliberating in public (i.e. full public consultation) · Parallel process for local boards and council advisory panels to provide feedback on the draft LAP	Current – September 2014
8. Provisional policy	· Work with Hearings Panel to report back to Governing Body with Provisional LAP · If the Governing Body endorses the provisional policy, give public notice of: o the provisional policy o rights of appeal against it o the ground on which an appeal may be made.	October / November 2014
9. Appeals	· Appeals will be dealt with in accordance with the Act	TBC
10. Adopt final policy	· Adopt final policy in accordance with the Act · Timing will depend on whether appeals have been lodged and if so, when they are resolved.	TBC
11. Implementation	· Work with officers from Licensing and Compliance and other relevant areas of council on the implementation of the policy. Officers will also develop a monitoring and evaluation framework.	TBC

Auckland Council’s draft Local Alcohol Policy

Council’s decision to adopt the draft Auckland Council LAP for public consultation

21. On 13 May 2014, the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee adopted the Local Alcohol Policy Project: Statement of Proposal (Attachment A), which includes the draft Auckland Council LAP, for public consultation (resolution number REG/2014/60(a); a full copy of the resolutions is provided in Attachment B of this report).

22. Following this decision, the council commenced the public consultation process (using the special consultative procedure), on 16 June 2014. The key consultation dates are summarised in the table below:

Table 3. Key consultation dates

Date	Milestone
16 June 2014	Written submission period opened
16 July 2014	Written submission period closes
July/August 2014	· Officers will review and analyse all submissions and report to Hearings Panel. · This report will include all resolutions passed by the local boards and council advisory panels with feedback on the draft policy.
Late August/ September 2014	· Public hearings will be held · Local Boards will be invited to attend a meeting with the Hearings Panel.
October 2014	Hearings Panel will report back to Governing Body with a provisional LAP

Background to draft LAP: stakeholder feedback

23. The following paragraphs provide an overview of the feedback received on the key issues associated with the project. A detailed summary of the feedback received from different feedback groups on the specific policy levers and proposals outlined in the staff position paper is provided in Attachment C.

24. There was a reasonable level of agreement across the different feedback groups on the following matters:

· Variation by licence – That the draft LAP needs to set different rules for different kinds of licences (i.e. on-licences, off-licences, club licences and special licences).

· Local variation – That given the size and diversity of the Auckland region, the draft LAP should provide a degree of local variation. Most agreed that at least the Central City should be treated differently, particularly in relation to on-licence hours.

· Club licences – Staff received very little feedback on how the LAP should regulate club licences, at both the issues and options stage and in response to the position paper. Of those that did comment, most agreed that issues with club licences are typically related to the operation and management of the premises, rather than location or density. Feedback also focused on wider issues beyond the scope of the LAP, such as the interrelationship between alcohol and sport.

· Discretionary conditions – There was strong support for the LAP to specify a range of discretionary conditions, even from industry groups, provided the conditions are clear (both in terms of compliance and the rationale), practical and reasonable.

25. Feedback varied across the different groups on most other matters, particularly the following:

Off-licence density

· Most agreed that the proliferation of off-licence premises across Auckland is one of the most pressing issues to be addressed through the LAP. Statutory stakeholders, public health sector stakeholders, community groups, residents and local boards (especially the southern boards) were all particularly concerned with this issue and wanted to see strict density controls through the LAP. The on-licence industry also expressed concern about clusters of off-licences within close proximity to on-licences and the issues this can create with pre- and side-loading.

· The off-licence industry however, opposed the use of density controls. Supermarkets in particular, argued that whilst density and clustering of premises may be an issue for other types of off-licences, it is not a concern for supermarkets.

· Other off-licensees (such as bottle stores), as well as umbrella organisations representing different retailers (e.g. business associations) acknowledged that there are issues with off-licence density in some parts of Auckland, but suggested that blanket rules would not be appropriate. These groups argued that the issues associated with off-licence clusters would be better managed through policy approaches designed to improve compliance combined with greater monitoring and enforcement of the Act. The main concern here was that blanket (‘umbrella’) rules penalise ‘good’ operators rather than targeting those with poor compliance.

On-licence density

· By contrast, most feedback groups seemed supportive of on-licence clustering, although comments tended to focus on positive notions of vibrancy and economic development associated with clusters of restaurants and cafes.

· Statutory stakeholders expressed concerns that the clustering of other types of on-licences (particularly late night bars) can have negative amenity effects and cumulative impacts on an area, ultimately leading to increased alcohol-related harm. The Police and Medical Officer of Health advocated for strong regulation of on-licence density.

· Licence inspectors acknowledged there can be issues with on-licence clusters but also suggested concentrating on-licences in certain areas can allow for easier enforcement.

Off-licence opening times

· Most stakeholders, community groups and residents were supportive of the LAP reducing off-licences hours across the region. Statutory stakeholders and public health sector stakeholders were particularly supportive, and some wanted to see trading hours even further restricted than those recommended by staff.

· The off-licence industry (with the exception of supermarkets) were also generally supportive of reduced trading hours for off-licences, provided that all types of premises were treated the same (i.e. that restrictions should be applied to bottle stores and supermarkets).

· Representatives for the supermarkets were strongly opposed to any restrictions on off-licence hours provided under the Act. They were especially opposed to the proposed opening time of 9am. The supermarkets argued that alcohol sales between 7am and 9am are minor and that this would inconvenience their shoppers.

· Other stakeholders, members of the community and elected members had mixed views on whether supermarkets should be treated separately.

On-licence closing times

· The topic of on-licence closing times has been the most contentious issue throughout the policy development process. Almost all groups (except the hospitality industry) were supportive of the shift away from 24 hour licensing that the Act has provided. However, in terms of ‘which parts of Auckland should close when’, the feedback was very mixed.

· The Police argued strongly for 3am closing in the Central City with 1am closing everywhere else. The Medical Officer of Health also shared these views, although on occasion suggested even more restrictive hours.

· Public health sector stakeholders were mixed. Some supported the Police recommendations, others suggested very strict closing times and others still, supported the staff position paper recommendations.

· The on-licence industry’s feedback was that ideally the LAP would override the 4am default position set in the Act, but if not, then no further restrictions to the default hours are required. The on-licence industry was also opposed to the idea of restrictions based solely on location as this fails to take account for the quality of individual operators (in terms of host responsibility etc).

· Community views were very mixed. Staff met with some community groups that wanted to see certain types of premises open late, whereas other groups were comfortable with 3am or 4am closing.

One-way door policy

· Throughout the initial engagement period, there was some support for the use of the one-way door policy. However, other stakeholders raised concerns about the practicality of this tool and the potential for other unintended consequences such as:

o Risks to individual safety (e.g. if an individual is separated from their group of friends)

o Increased drinking in public places

o Higher risk of conflicts for security staff (e.g. large queues just before one-way door commences, issues with outside smoking etc.)

Background to draft LAP: local board feedback

26. Throughout the development of the draft LAP, staff regularly engaged with, and considered the views and preferences of local boards. In particular, staff:

· reported to the Alcohol Programme Political Working Party, which included local board membership

· provided local boards with individualised research summaries on alcohol-related issues within their local board areas

· held workshops with local boards on the issues and options paper

· reported to local boards to gather feedback on the position paper.

27. Table 4 below summarises the feedback received from local boards on the position paper, which was released prior to the development of the draft LAP. (Note: This summary represents an overview of the feedback received. Some individual boards may not have agreed with the majority views).

28. Feedback received specifically from this local board is included, along with a response from officers, in the “Local board views and implications” section of this report (below).

Table 4. Summary of local board feedback

Position paper proposal	Summary of Feedback
Policy lever 1 – Location: Broad Areas
Establish six broad policy areas; five based on zoning in the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan and a sixth “high stress/high risk” overlay.	Mixed views. · Some supported in principle · Others preferred a regional approach · Some suggested that some areas needed to be shifted between areas 2 and 3 (e.g. Devonport/Takapuna re-categorised as Area 3) · Some wanted local boards to be able to make rules in their area.
Use of a high stress overlay to identify problem areas or vulnerable communities	Mostly very supportive.
Policy lever 2 – Location: Proximity
Indirectly regulate the location of off-licences in relation to schools: · through the cumulative impact process · by delaying off-licence opening times until 9am · by regulating advertising through the signage bylaw	Mixed views. · Most supported the cumulative impact assessment including this as a consideration. · Southern boards supportive of buffer zone, others happy to rely on discretionary conditions · Concern around advertising
Policy lever 3 – Density
Allow clustering of on-licences in urbanised/ business focused areas (Broad Areas A and B)	Unclear. · General agreement that there is a case to treat the CBD differently, less certain on metropolitan centres · Some local boards considered that clusters of on-licences (e.g. restaurants) could be beneficial from an economic perspective and in terms of creating vibrancy etc.
Temporary freeze on off-licences in the CBD and high stress areas	Mostly supportive. · Mostly concerned with density of off-licences · Support for combination of cumulative impact approach and area based temporary freezes · A minority did not like this approach
The use of cumulative impact assessments to limit the establishment of new licences in other areas	Mostly supportive. · Many supported in principle but requested more information · Some suggested this should be required across the whole region. · Others wanted stronger density controls such as a sinking lid or cap
Policy lever 4 – Maximum trading hours
Maximum hours of 9am to 10pm for off-licences across the region	Supportive · Some boards, especially Southern boards, would prefer even greater restrictions · The rest were generally supportive of the proposed regional approach
Maximum hours of 8am to 1am for club licences across the region	Negligible feedback on club hours.
Maximum on-licence hours varied across the region: · CBD: 8am to4am · Metro centres:8am to 3am · Rest of Auckland (including high-stress areas):8am to 1am	Mixed views. · Some were happy with the hours proposed · Some Southern boards wanted earlier closing but would be happy if this was picked up through the high stress overlay · There was reasonable support for having localised entertainment hubs (i.e. metropolitan centres) to reduce migration to CBD
Trial extensions for operators in Broad Area A and Broad Area B	Mixed. · Some supported extended hours based on good behaviour.
Policy lever 5 – One-way door
No one-way door	Very mixed.
Policy lever 6 – Discretionary conditions
A range of discretionary conditions based on licence type	Supportive. · General support for a range of conditions, especially those that support good host responsibility

Summary of draft LAP content

29. This section of the report summarises the proposals contained within the draft LAP. The proposals:

· are evidence-based

· align with the object of the Act

· as far as possible, respond to feedback and concerns from elected members and stakeholders.

Purpose (section 1 of draft LAP)

30. The purpose of the draft LAP is to provide guidance to the DLC and ARLA on alcohol licensing matters in a manner that:

· is appropriate to the Auckland Council region

· reflects the views and preferences of Auckland’s communities and stakeholders

· is consistent with the object of the Act.

31. Overall, the draft LAP aims to reduce Auckland’s issues with alcohol-related harm by:

· prioritising areas where the LAP can have the greatest impact on harm reduction

· controlling where new licences are allowed

· controlling how many new licences are allowed

· reducing the hours that licensed premises can sell alcohol

· identifying additional conditions that the DLC can apply to licences to help improve the consistency of standards across Auckland’s premises.

32. This purpose aligns with the object of the Act, the requirement for the LAP to be reasonable in light of this object and the policy intent of the Act to provide greater local input into licensing decisions.

Location and density of licences

33. Auckland’s differing communities and areas means a blanket approach to policy provisions is not suitable. The draft LAP categorises the Auckland region into three broad areas each of which has different rules (reference to draft policy: Part B: Section 2 and appendices).

Table 5. Policy areas

Area	Overview
Broad Area A (City Centre, Ponsonby, Newton)	The three centres included in this broad area function as the region’s main entertainment hub. However, these areas also experience high levels of alcohol-related harm, including crime and anti-social behaviour.
Broad Area B (rest of the region)	The intended outcomes across the region are relatively consistent and therefore can be achieved through consistent policy tools.
A priority overlay which provides additional rules.	The priority overlay identifies areas that have high numbers of existing licences and communities that experience higher levels of alcohol-related harm. These are termed priority areas. The overlay will help protect these areas from further harm by imposing specific policies and rules.

34. The draft LAP also proposes the following policy tools to manage location and density issues.

35. Temporary freeze: The distribution of off-licences across Auckland is uneven and some areas have much higher licence density than others (e.g. the City Centre and many centres captured by the Priority Areas Overlay). Evidence shows that these areas also tend to experience disproportionate levels of alcohol-related harm. The draft LAP therefore, proposes that the DLC and ARLA should refuse to issue new off-licences in these specific areas for a period of 24 months from when the policy is adopted.

36. International case studies show that the temporary freeze is a useful policy tool, not only to allow time for saturated areas to recover but it can also lead to improved compliance. These are both important in achieving the object of the Act.

37. Environmental and Cumulative Impacts Assessment Process: Staff are proposing that certain applications for new licences would need to undergo an Environmental and Cumulative Impacts Assessment (ECIA) to help the DLC or ARLA in determining a licence application. Whether an ECIA is required would depend on the location of the proposed site and the risk profile of the premises under the Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Fees) Regulations 2013.

38. The process would build on the decision-making criteria under the Act to provide a more comprehensive framework for the assessment of new licence applications. In particular, it would ensure that following matters were fully considered, in order to better manage location (including proximity to sensitive sites) and density issues arising from applications for new licences:

· The risks associated with the location (including external and environmental risks such as the existing licence environment and the current levels of alcohol-related crime); and

· The individual risks associated with the proposed licence (such as the type of premises, the risk profile etc).

39. A key advantage with this approach is that rather than requiring absolute policy provisions (which would be very difficult to apply in an area as vast as Auckland), it allows the DLC and ARLA to exercise discretion and consider applications in the Auckland context, yet in a consistent and transparent manner.

40. The ECIA process is applied in the draft LAP in different ways, depending on the kind of licence and the location, but ultimately the process would assist the DLC and ARLA to determine which of the following outcomes is most appropriate:

· That the licence should be issued

· That the licences should be issued subject to certain discretionary conditions

· That the licence should not be issued.

41. Rebuttable presumption: The rebuttable presumption is the most restrictive way that the ECIA process is applied through the draft LAP. Staff have recommended that it be used in specific parts of the region where there is evidence that the alcohol licensing environment has a negative cumulative impact on the area (e.g. to restrict the establishment of new off-licences in neighbourhood centres). The effect of the rebuttable presumption would be that applications for new off-licences would generally be refused, unless the DLC or ARLA was satisfied that the operation of the premises would not unreasonably add to the environmental and cumulative impacts of alcohol on the area.

Maximum trading hours

42. The draft LAP proposes regional hours for club and off-licences, and hours based on location for on-licences. The hours proposed are as follows (reference to draft policy: Part B: Section 3.4; and sections 4 to 7):

Table 5. Proposed maximum trading hours

Licence	Proposed hours
Off-licences	9am to 10pm
On-licences	· Broad Area A: 9am to 3am · Broad Area B: 9am to 1am · Priority Overlay: Same as underlying broad area.
Club licences	9am to 1am
Special licences	Case by case, with consideration for location and nature of event/risks associated with event

43. Restricting the hours that alcohol is available can help to decrease alcohol-related harm. The licensed hours proposed in the draft LAP:

· represent a reduction from the national default hours (implemented in December 2013)

· reflect the views of the statutory stakeholders (Police, medical officers of health and licence inspectors)

· accommodate a majority of club and on-licence premises’ existing licensed hours

· will help to decrease inappropriate consumption (e.g. “side-loading” – leaving a bar to purchase cheaper alcohol from an off-licence before returning to the bar).

Trial extensions of hours for on-licences

44. The draft policy allows for on-licences (except those in the priority overlay) to apply for a two-hour maximum trial extension of hours.

· These will be granted on a trial basis, at the DLC’s discretion and following the completion of an environmental and cumulative impact assessment.

· Applicants will have a history of best-practice operation, and will need to continue to demonstrate high levels of compliance to keep the extension.

· Trial extensions will be preferred in the city centre for Broad Area A and in the metropolitan centres for Broad Area B.

· No extensions will be allowed in the priority areas.

Additional discretionary conditions

45. The draft LAP recommends a range of discretionary conditions for the DLC to apply. These conditions strengthen provisions already in the Act, and will help minimise harm to individuals and the community from inappropriate and excessive drinking.

Table 6. Discretionary conditions

Conditions recommended for all licences	Conditions which can be applied on a case-by-case basis	Where in draft LAP
Includes: · an onsite incident register · host responsibility policies for club and on-licences · prohibition on single unit sales for off-licences	Includes: · Restrictions on drinks prior to closing · Clean public areas outside · Certified manager to be onsite at BYO and club licences (already required for on- and off-licences) · CCTV · Monitoring of outdoor areas for late-trading premises (on-licences).	Part B: Sections 4 to 7

Conditions recommended for all licences

Conditions which can be applied on a case-by-case basis

Where in draft LAP

Includes:

· an onsite incident register

· host responsibility policies for club and on-licences

· prohibition on single unit sales for off-licences

Includes:

· Restrictions on drinks prior to closing

· Clean public areas outside

· Certified manager to be onsite at BYO and club licences (already required for on- and off-licences)

· CCTV

· Monitoring of outdoor areas for late-trading premises (on-licences).

Part B: Sections 4 to 7

Summary of on-licence provisions

46. The table below demonstrates how the policy tools described above are applied to on-licences within the draft LAP. This on-licence policy package is designed to:

· reduce alcohol-related harm by:

o requiring greater scrutiny of new on-licence applications, taking into account not only the applicant’s proposals but also the surrounding environment and existing licences.

o significantly reducing licence hours from the previous 24-hour licensing regime, and only allowing best practice on-licence operators to trade later. These operators will also be subject to higher standards.

· provide targeted policy interventions and additional protection for vulnerable communities from alcohol-related harm in Priority Areas

· improved practices amongst the off-licence industry through a range of discretionary conditions.

Table 7. Summary of draft LAP provisions for on-licences

Policy lever	Policy tool	Risk profile	Broad Area A	Broad Area B			Priority Areas
Policy lever	Policy tool	Risk profile	Broad Area A	Metro Centres	Neigh- bourhood centres	Rest of Broad Area B	Priority Areas
Location / density	ECIA	Very High	Required	Required	Required	Required	Required
		High	Required	Required	Required	Required	Required
		Medium	NA	NA	Required	Required	Required
		Low	NA	NA	Required	NA	Required
		Very Low	NA	NA	NA	NA	Required
Proximity to sensitive sites	ECIA	Risk profile is one of the triggers	DLC & ARLA directed to consider proximity to sensitive sites as part of ECIA
Hours	Standard maximum hours	-	9am- 3am	9am - 1am			· Hours to align with underlying area · LAP encourages even more restrictive hours
Hours	Trial extension for best practice operators	Risk is a factor in considering applications for extensions	Up to 2 hours Morning or evening (not both)	Preferred over other parts of Broad Area B	Directs DLC not to grant extensions in these areas	Up to 2 hours Morning or evening (not both) Centres preferred	Directs DLC not to grant extensions in these areas
Conditions	-	-	Range of conditions

Note: An A3 version of this table is provided in Attachment C.

Summary of off-licence provisions

47. The table below demonstrates how the policy tools are applied to off-licences within the draft LAP. This off-licence policy package recommended is designed to achieve the following:

· Enable the direct consideration of proximity issues by ensuring that the DLC and ARLA are made aware of any sensitive sites and existing premises relevant to an application, allowing them to make an informed decision as to what is appropriate

· Reduced access to alcohol from off-licences and reduced issues with pre and side-loading, especially in the Central City

· Strong regulation of off-licence density in areas with the greatest density and greatest levels of alcohol-related harm (e.g. the Central City and Priority Areas) and in neighbourhood centres, to align with feedback that ‘bottle stores on every corner’ are not appropriate or desirable

· Improved practices amongst the off-licence industry through a range of discretionary conditions.

Table 8. Summary of draft LAP provisions for off-licences

Policy lever	Policy tool	Risk profile	Broad Area A		Broad Area B		Priority Areas
			First 24 months	After 24 months	At all times policy in force		First 24 months	After 24 months
					Neigh- bourhood centres	Rest of Broad Area B
Location / density	ECIA	Very High	Temporary freeze	ECIA required Presumption against approval	ECIA required Presumption against approval	ECIA required DLC to “take into account”	Temporary freeze	ECIA required Presumption against approval
		High
		Medium
		Low
		Very Low				NA
Proximity to sensitive sites	ECIA	Risk profile is one of the triggers	DLC & ARLA directed to consider proximity to sensitive sites as part of ECIA
Hours	Reduced hours	-	9am to 10pm regional maximum
			6am to 10pm remote sales by off-licence (e.g. online sales) (Note: transaction can occur at any time but delivery times restricted)
Condition	-	-	Range of conditions

Note: An A3 version of this table is provided in Attachment C.

Special licences

48. The draft LAP proposes the following for special licences:

· Maximum hours should be determined on a case-by-case basis but should generally be in accordance with the policies that would apply to the Broad Area within which the event will be held

· A range of discretionary conditions designed to improve host responsibility and to reduce the overall alcohol-related harm associated with events.

Other options considered

49. Staff have not recommended the use of the one-way door policy, as overall, there is insufficient evidence to show its effectiveness in reducing alcohol-related harm. Key points from the research are summarised as follows:

· Some studies report displacement of patrons from area to area as an unintended consequence of the one-way door policy. This could result in increased drink driving if patrons then travelled across the city.

· When looking at case study examples, staff found that Melbourne has experienced issues with two ‘swills’ due to the one-way door approach: one as people leave one area to get to another area with longer hours before the one-way door commences; and then a second at closing time. Other research has even shown that the one-way door approach may increase some types of alcohol related harm such as damage to licensed premises, and vehicle-related offences.

· In areas where there was a decline in harm following the implementation of a one-way door, this tended to be for a short period before behaviours adjusted and incidence of harm returned to previous levels or increased.

50. Staff considered a range of other options throughout the development of the draft LAP. These are detailed in the attached Statement of Proposal.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

51. The table below outlines the feedback received from the Howick Local Board in 2013 on the Issues and Options paper and/or the Staff Position Paper and provides a response from officers to show how the feedback has informed the draft LAP, or if not, why this is the case.

Table 9. Howick Local Board feedback

Topic	Local Board feedback	Officer response
Location and proximity	· The Howick Local Board's preference is that licenses are granted with the use of discretionary conditions based on the proximity to sensitive sites or other premises. · Residents should be consulted and be able to apply conditions and proximity restrictions particularly in areas close to schools, residential and historic sites where vandalism may occur. · Licences should be considered on a case by case basis with particular reference to land use.	· The proximity of sensitive sites in the area is one of the criteria the Environmental and Cumulative Impact Assessment report will detail for the DLC. Discretionary conditions could then be applied to mitigate any potential issues. · Residents are able to submit objections to licence applications, as per the Act. · The DLC considers the granting or renewal of every application it receives on a case-by-case basis, with regard to the LAP. · Broad areas identified in the LAP are based on the areas classified from the Unitary Plan. The original 6 broad areas have been reduced for simplicity and consistency across the region, based on feedback received from stakeholders.
Density	· The Howick Local Board's preference on density is that it should include cumulative impacts. · Local boards will need to consider the impact licensed premises will have on the community - being near residences is an issue rather than the number of licensed premises. · It may be that licensed premises can add to the vibrancy of a place or it could have negative effects - the local boards want to be able to review the impacts.	· The Environmental and Cumulative Impact Assessment will consider existing premises in the area, risk ratings of those premises, patron capacity of those current licences, hours as well as surrounding land uses, socio economic, demographic and alcohol-related harm indicators for the surrounding area. Council will prepare a report with all this information and the applicant will have the chance to view and provide comments on this report also. This is expanded in more detail in sections 3.1.1 – 3.1.4 of the draft LAP. Please see section 4.1.3 of the draft LAP for details of which broad areas the ECIA applies. · This approach allows for flexibility and ensures that premises are only operating in areas of Auckland that are suitable and practical, causing the least harm to communities.
Hours	· The Howick Local Board's preference is that hours are varied by location, the kind of licence, premise type, risk and one way door policy.	· Hours have been recommended through location (broad areas) and by licence kind. Premises type and risk of premises is considered through the Environmental and Cumulative Impact assessment. · Hours for on licences have been recommended as follows: o CBD (Broad Area A): 9am – 3am with trial extensions of up to 2 hours available for best practice on licences o Rest of Auckland (Broad area B): 9am – 1am with trial extensions of up to 2 hours available for best practice premises · Hours for off-licences have remained as recommended (9am – 10pm across the region). · Hours for club licences has been recommended as 9am-1am across the region. · Council investigated the use of a one way door policy, however due to lack of evidence to state that the tool is effective in reducing alcohol-related harm, and possible unintended consequences, it was not included in the draft policy.
Discretionary conditions	· The Howick Local Board's preference is that discretionary conditions should not be too restrictive, that there is a need for flexibility when applying conditions	· The draft LAP recommends certain discretionary conditions for certain licence kinds. This is flexible and the DLC or ARLA can decide upon which conditions are appropriate in which circumstances.

Maori impact statement

Research and data on Maori and alcohol

52. Where possible, staff have gathered data on alcohol-related issues by ethnicity. For example, data collected from the three Auckland-based district health boards (2012) showed that for the 2010/11 fiscal year, Maori had proportionately higher rates of alcohol-related emergency department presentations.

53. Throughout the initial engagement phases of the project, staff worked with the Policies and Bylaws team, Te Waka Angamua (Maori Strategy and Relations Department), policy advisors at the Independent Maori Statutory Board (IMSB) and Hapai Te Hauora to deliver a program for engaging with Maori on alcohol issues.

54. As part of this, staff ran a workshop with rangatahi (youth), organised a rangatahi engagement session as part of the Atamira event and held a hui with mana whenua and mataawaka to discuss both the LAP Project and the Alcohol Control (Liquor Ban) Bylaw Project.

55. The IMSB was represented on the Political Working Party. Hapai Te Hauora Tapui was represented on the Public Health Sector Reference Group.

56. There are no specific references in Iwi Management Plans to alcohol or alcohol policy, other than a statement about general health and well-being.

Implementation

57. Community Policy and Planning staff have worked closely with Licensing and Compliance Services throughout the development of this draft LAP.

58. As part of the options analysis, staff carefully considered practicality and ease of implementation. The proposals included in the draft LAP meet these criteria.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Draft Local Alcohol Policy 2014: Statement of Proposal	49
b View	Regional Strategy and Policy Committee meeting May 2014 - Resolutions on draft Local Alcohol Policy	165
c View	A3 Copies of Tables 7 and 8 from report	167
d View	Key Topics for Feedback from Local Boards	169

Signatories

Authors

Belinda Hansen - Principal Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Penny Pirrit - Regional & Local Planning Manager

Teresa Turner - Relationship Manager

Howick Local Board

14 July 2014

Smoke-free Policy Implementation- Howick Local Board

File No.: CP2014/14343

Purpose

This report is to provide the Howick Local Board (‘the Board’) with recommendations on the implementation of the Auckland Council Smoke-free Policy 2013 (‘the Policy’) in its local board area

Executive summary

The Policy sets out a regional position on smoke-free public places and events. The exact detail of the implementation will be a matter for local board discretion, as local boards have been allocated non-regulatory decision making responsibilities for local activities.

Local Boards can:

· choose to progress the implementation of smoke-free public places wider and faster than identified in the Policy

· determine the exact signage requirements for promoting local smoke-free public places and any additional budget allocation for this

· decide on promotion and communication activities for smoke-free public places in their local area

· determine the extent of smoke-free messaging and promotion at local board events.

To assist local boards progress the implementation of the Policy, staff have made recommendations pertaining to the extent of smoke-free public places, signage requirements, promotion activities and other matters.

In terms of signage for smoke-free public places, staff do not recommend smoke-free signage in all areas affected by the Policy. Instead, placing additional smoke-free signs in certain ‘high priority sites’ will bear greater benefits in promoting smoke-free public places.

In June 2014, a workshop with the Howick Local Board was held to confirm high priority sites for the immediate installation of additional smoke-free signage. At this workshop, 18 high priority sites were confirmed. Staff recommend additional budget be allocated for the printing and installation of smoke-free signs in these sites. The cost of additional signage is estimated at $4,000-$7,000 These are fairly high estimates of cost, these values will vary depending on signage printing, size and installation.

In order to promote the smoke-free status of these sites, staff recommend that the Board publicizes smoke-free public places in their local board area as the Board deems appropriate.

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a) allocate budget for printing and installation of additional smoke-free signs in 18 high priority sites which include:

i) Barry Curtis Park

ii) Bucklands Beach Domain

iii) Bucklands and Eastern Beach Hall site

iv) Cockle Bay Reserve

v) Eastern Beach Park and Macleans Park site

vi) Howick Domain

vii) Howick Library, Uxbridge Arts Centre and Garden of Memories site

viii) Howick Leisure Centre

ix) Highland Park Library

x) Lloyd Elsmore Park, leisure centre and Howick Little Theatre site

xi) Mangemangeroa Reserve

xii) Meadowland Park

xiii) Millhouse Reserve

xiv) Murphys Bush Reserve

xv) Pakuranga Library

xvi) Paparoa Park

xvii) Ti Rakau Park and Pakuranga Leisure centre site

xviii) William Green Domain

b) requests staff to investigate options to implement the Smoke-free Policy in Howick Village

c) promotes the smoke-free status of smoke-free public places in Howick as the Board deems appropriate

Comments

Background

The Auckland Council Smoke Free Policy 2013 (‘the Policy’) sets out council’s position on smoke-free public places, events, tobacco control advocacy and workplace smoking cessation.

As local boards have been allocated non-regulatory decision making responsibilities for local activities, the implementation of the Policy at a local level is a matter for local board discretion.

Local boards can:

· choose to progress the implementation of smoke-free public places wider and faster than identified in the Policy

· determine the exact signage requirements for promoting local smoke-free public places and any additional budget allocation for this

· decide on promotion and communication activities for smoke-free public places in their local area

· determine the extent of smoke-free messaging and promotion at local board events.

According to the 2013 census, Howick Local Board (‘the Board) area has a smoking rate of nine percent which is similar to the regional smoking rate (13 percent for the region).

The Auckland Plan and the Policy has a goal of a Smoke-free Auckland by 2025. This is a five percent smoking rate in the region by 2025.

Policy Implementation

Smoke-free Public Places

Smoke-free in public places aims to discourage the community from smoking in certain public outdoor areas to de-normalise smoking behaviour. As the Policy is non-regulatory, compliance is voluntary and relies on the public being well informed about these smoke-free areas. As such smoke-free signs need to communicate the smoke-free status of a space.

However, the cost of installing smoke-free signage in all public places identified in the Policy outweighs its benefit. Therefore, staff recommend placing smoke-free signs in certain areas where the smoke-free message will have the greatest impact.

In order to identify these sites, staff developed a criteria based on the objectives and principles of the Policy. The criteria focused on:

· areas that are frequented by children and youth

· council-owned facilities

· areas that are well used and popular within their community

· sites where several smoke-free public places are clustered in close proximity.

Based on scores against the criteria, sites were then divided into four categories. Smoke-free signage implementation varies according to the categories. Sites that are scored highly are ‘Category A sites’ or high priority sites, where there is an opportunity for a higher level of smoke-free signage installation. Table one summarises these categories and smoke-free signage installation.

Table 1 Site priority and level of signage installation

Category		Level of smoke-free signage installation
A	High priority sites	· additional smoke-free signs + · temporary smoke-free stickers to be installed on existing signs, until signage replacement or upgrades occurs
B	Medium priority sites	· temporary smoke-free stickers to be installed on existing signs, until signage replacement or upgrades
C	Low priority sites	· smoke-free logo incorporated onto signs as they are replaced or upgraded
D	No priority sites	· no smoke-free signage installation

High priority smoke-free sites

Staff had prepared recommendations on the high priority (Category A) and medium priority (Category B) sites within the Howick local board area. In June 2014, a workshop with the Board was held to gather feedback and confirm these high priority sites. Table two outlines the high priority smoke-free sites in the Howick local board area.

Table 2 High priority smoke-free sites for Howick local board area

Site Name	Rationale	Est sign cost
Barry Curtis Park	· Premier park with playground, skate park and several sports fields · Smoke-free messages promoted here will raise awareness of smoke-free public places in Howick	· Est. 3 signs · Est. cost $370
Bucklands Beach Domain	· Destination park in Bucklands beach area · Playground and passive recreation park	· Est. 1 sign · Est. cost $123
Bucklands and Eastern Beach Hall	· Well used community hall, centre space in Howick · Popular venue for hire for range of classes/courses	· Est. 3 signs · Est. cost $370
Cockle Bay Reserve	· Well used passive recreation reserve · Diversity of user groups-particularly well used by families	· Est. 1 sign · Est. cost $123
Eastern Beach Park and Macleans Park	· Eastern beach park area has a playground and is adjacent to Macleans Park · Macleans Park surrounds Macleans College grounds which is already smoke-free · Could extend the smoke-free area to the beach front	· Est. 3 signs · Est. cost $370
Howick Domain	· Large sports park – includes hard courts and sports green · Diversity of codes and user groups	· Est. 3-4 signs · Est cost $370- $500
Howick Library, Uxbridge Arts Centre and Garden of Memories	· High profile site contains large library building, new arts centre and public park · Diversity of user groups and signage reiterates smoke-free message	· Est. 3-5 signs · Est. cost $370-$615
Howick Leisure Centre	· Large leisure centre space located next to school · Diversity of age groups and raises profile of smoke-free message to youth · Has issues with smokers	· Est. 2 signs · Est. cost $250
Highland Park Library	· Libraries are important areas to communicate smoke-free message because of diversity of users and children and young people	· Est. 1 sign · Est. cost $123
Lloyd Elsmore Park, leisure centre and Howick Little Theatre	· Premier park in the area with playground, fitness equipment, leisure centre sports fields and skate park · Howick Little Theatre is a well-used space · Raise the profile of smoke-free public places in Howick	· Est. 8-10 signs · Est. cost $900- $1000
Mangemangeroa Reserve	· Lush parkland in Howick. Can reiterate the fire risk and litter from cigarette butts · Premier park in Howick	· Est. 2 signs · Est. cost $250
Meadowland Park	· Large sports park contains playground, hard courts, club house and sports greens · Diversity of user groups and codes	· Est. 4-5 signs · Est. cost $500-$615
Millhouse Reserve	· Large well used sports park	· Est. 3 signs · Est cost $370
Murphys Bush Reserve	· Murphys Bush Scenic Reserve space is a premier park · Awareness of the fire and litter risk from cigarette butt litter	· Est. 2 signs · Est. cost $250
Pakuranga Library	· Large library site draws a diversity of user groups · Proximity to Pakuranga Leisure Centre and Ti Rakau Park	· Est. 1 sign · Est. cost $123
Paparoa Park	· Well used sports field- particularly weekends	· Est 1 sign · Est cost $123
Ti Rakau Park & Pakuranga Leisure Centre	· High profile sports park with leisure centre · Proximity to Pakuranga plaza space with the library, local board area · Area to build awareness of smoke-free message	· Est. 4-5 signs · Est. cost $500- $615
William Green Domain	· Important sports field used by football clubs · Used by diversity of ages	· Est. 3 signs · Est. cost $370

Site Name

Rationale

Est sign cost

Barry Curtis Park

· Premier park with playground, skate park and several sports fields

· Smoke-free messages promoted here will raise awareness of smoke-free public places in Howick

· Est. 3 signs

· Est. cost $370

Bucklands Beach Domain

· Destination park in Bucklands beach area

· Playground and passive recreation park

· Est. 1 sign

· Est. cost $123

Bucklands and Eastern Beach Hall

· Well used community hall, centre space in Howick

· Popular venue for hire for range of classes/courses

· Est. 3 signs

· Est. cost $370

Cockle Bay Reserve

· Well used passive recreation reserve

· Diversity of user groups-particularly well used by families

· Est. 1 sign

· Est. cost $123

Eastern Beach Park and Macleans Park

· Eastern beach park area has a playground and is adjacent to Macleans Park

· Macleans Park surrounds Macleans College grounds which is already smoke-free

· Could extend the smoke-free area to the beach front

· Est. 3 signs

· Est. cost $370

Howick Domain

· Large sports park – includes hard courts and sports green

· Diversity of codes and user groups

· Est. 3-4 signs

· Est cost $370- $500

Howick Library, Uxbridge Arts Centre and Garden of Memories

· High profile site contains large library building, new arts centre and public park

· Diversity of user groups and signage reiterates smoke-free message

· Est. 3-5 signs

· Est. cost $370-$615

Howick Leisure Centre

· Large leisure centre space located next to school

· Diversity of age groups and raises profile of smoke-free message to youth

· Has issues with smokers

· Est. 2 signs

· Est. cost $250

Highland Park Library

· Libraries are important areas to communicate smoke-free message because of diversity of users and children and young people

· Est. 1 sign

· Est. cost $123

Lloyd Elsmore Park, leisure centre and Howick Little Theatre

· Premier park in the area with playground, fitness equipment, leisure centre sports fields and skate park

· Howick Little Theatre is a well-used space

· Raise the profile of smoke-free public places in Howick

· Est. 8-10 signs

· Est. cost $900- $1000

Mangemangeroa Reserve

· Lush parkland in Howick. Can reiterate the fire risk and litter from cigarette butts

· Premier park in Howick

· Est. 2 signs

· Est. cost $250

Meadowland Park

· Large sports park contains playground, hard courts, club house and sports greens

· Diversity of user groups and codes

· Est. 4-5 signs

· Est. cost $500-$615

Millhouse Reserve

· Large well used sports park

· Est. 3 signs

· Est cost $370

Murphys Bush Reserve

· Murphys Bush Scenic Reserve space is a premier park

· Awareness of the fire and litter risk from cigarette butt litter

· Est. 2 signs

· Est. cost $250

Pakuranga Library

· Large library site draws a diversity of user groups

· Proximity to Pakuranga Leisure Centre and Ti Rakau Park

· Est. 1 sign

· Est. cost $123

Paparoa Park

· Well used sports field- particularly weekends

· Est 1 sign

· Est cost $123

Ti Rakau Park & Pakuranga Leisure Centre

· High profile sports park with leisure centre

· Proximity to Pakuranga plaza space with the library, local board area

· Area to build awareness of smoke-free message

· Est. 4-5 signs

· Est. cost $500- $615

William Green Domain

· Important sports field used by football clubs

· Used by diversity of ages

· Est. 3 signs

· Est. cost $370

NB: these cost estimates are based on (300x150mm and 300x400mm) sizes from one supplier (Panda Visuals)

Smoke-free signage installation in other areas

Sites that have scored moderately against the criteria, or ‘medium priority’ (Category B) sites will have temporary smoke-free sticker logo attached onto existing signs (in accordance with the council’s signage manual). As signs are replaced and upgraded, the signs will incorporate the permanent smoke-free logo.

For the Howick local board area, the medium priority sites are:

1. Annalog Park

2. Archmillen Park

3. Armoy Park

4. Blue Gum Park

5. Caithness Place

6. Charles Dickens Park

7. Clydesdale Park

8. Elm Park

9. Glennadrew Place Park

10. Huntington Park

11. John Gill Park

12. Juliet Avenue Reserve

13. Megan Park

14. Nimrod Park

15. Pakuranga Domain

16. Pebble Beach Playground

17. Prince Regent Park

18. Redcastle Park

19. Richard Park

20. Robin Brooke Park

21. Tanica Park

22. Wayne Francis Park

23. Whiteacres Park

‘Low priority’ (Category C) sites will have the smoke-free logo incorporated onto signs as they due for upgrades or replacement. ‘No priority’ (Category D) sites are areas that do not currently have any signage installed.

Smoke-free public places promotion

As the Policy is non-regulatory, raising public awareness around smoke-free behaviour and the council’s position on achieving a smoke-free Auckland is important.

To assist the Board in the promotion of the Policy staff suggest the following for consideration:

· an article in the local paper or magazine when most of the smoke-free signs have been installed

· a launch event at one of the high priority sites when most of the smoke-free signs have been installed

· raise awareness through social media (i.e. local board Facebook page or a website).

Consideration

Local board views and implications

Staff consulted with the Board throughout the development of the Policy in 2012-2013.

In June 2014, staff attended a workshop with the Board to confirm the high and medium priority sites for the implementation of the Policy. The Board was also provided with an indicative cost of introducing additional signage in the identified high priority sites.

At the workshop, the Board had made the following comments:

· it is supportive of smoke-free public places and smoke-free behaviour, particularly around children and youth

· it supports building awareness and publicity about these smoke-free public places, in addition to smoke-free signage

· it does not think the smoke-free logo is authoritative enough to discourage smokers

· it is in support of more ‘punchy’ or strong awareness based messaging for its smoke-free signs

· it will investigate promoting smoke-free behaviour in its ‘Healthy Howick’ campaign

· as Pakuranga and Botany town centres are currently smoke-free, it is in support of Howick Village becoming smoke-free.

Maori impact statement

The New Zealand Tobacco Use Survey (2009) found that the smoking rate amongst Maori (44 percent) is significantly higher than that of the non-Maori population (18 percent).

Through the development of the Policy, many stakeholders highlighted the disparity between Maori and non-Maori smoking rates within the region as a cause for disproportionate health outcomes for Maori.

The Policy aims to address Maori smoking rates through:

· the creation of smoke-free public places

· smoke-free signs to contain awareness based messages in Maori

· focus on the Southern Initiative smoke-free work stream

Implementation

There will be additional costs to the local board relating to the printing and installation of smoke-free signage in the high priority sites identified in the report.

Staff recommend wall- mounted smoke-free signage as these are hard wearing, have a longer life span and minimises signage pollution.

The approximate cost of additional smoke-free signs in the 18 identified sites (Table two) in Phase one is between $4,000-$7,000. The exact costs will vary depending on:

· the exact number of smoke-free signs required on each site

· if there are many smoke-free messages (e.g. mass printing of one message is more cost effective)

· the positioning and installation of the smoke-free signs

These estimated costs are one off costs. Any ongoing costs will be covered within signage maintenance and renewal budgets.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Jasmin Kaur - Policy Analyst

Michael Sinclair - Team Leader, Regionwide Social Policy

Authorisers

Penny Pirrit - Regional & Local Planning Manager

Teresa Turner - Relationship Manager

Chairperson	David Collings
Deputy Chairperson	Adele White
Members	Garry Boles
	Katrina Bungard
	Jim Donald
	Lucy Schwaner
	John Spiller
	Steve Udy
	Bob Wichman

Authors	Lynda Pearson - Local Board Democracy Advisor
Authorisers	Teresa Turner - Relationship Manager

Authors	Alastair Child, Principal Advisor, Local Board Services
Authorisers	Teresa Turner - Relationship Manager

Authors	Vanessa Leddra – Local Board Advisor
Authorisers	Teresa Turner - Relationship Manager