Agenda of Whau Local Board

Whau Local Board

16 July 2014

Auckland Transport Update Report – Whau Local Board

File No.: CP2014/14766

Purpose

1. To respond to Whau Local Board requests on transport related matters and to provide information to elected members about Auckland Transport’s activities in the board area.

Recommendation

That the Whau Local Board:

a) Receives the Auckland Transport update report.

Comments

INFORMATION REPORTS

PARKING STRATEGY CONSULTATION

2. Following on from cluster workshops which were attended by Local Board Members in early-mid May, Auckland Transport has now distributed copies of the Parking Strategy discussion document to Elected Members and key stakeholder groups, including community organisations.

3. The discussion document is the first to comprehensively review issues associated with parking region-wide. Key elements of the discussion document include an analysis of issues associated with the city centre, the city fringe, metropolitan and town centres and residential streets across the region. There is a clear link to the region’s public transport strategy through consideration of the role of park-and-rides, and the needs of the forthcoming (bus) Frequent Transport Network, and the possibility that the AT HOP card may be able to be used for payment for parking, in some situations.

4. The discussion document was made publicly available on-line on 31 May in anticipation of a month-long period of public consultation that will extend until 31 July.

5. The review looks at the use of Park and Rides, residential parking zones, managing on and off street parking in the central city, clearway times on arterial roads and parking in town centres.

6. Auckland Transport is aiming to set a clear and consistent direction for Auckland’s parking in future, which will be good for all road users, adjacent businesses and residents and, Auckland Transport wants to make sure they are making the right decisions for Auckland’s future.

7. It is important to note that as the city grows and develops rapidly, now is the time to take a look at how Auckland Transport most effectively manage the range of parking options for the city. Parking affects everyone in the region in one way or another. The submissions Auckland Transport receives, will inform the development of a Parking Strategy for Auckland.

8. Parking is not only vital to the safe and efficient operation of that network, but also supports economic development and has a major impact on place making, public transport, walking and cycling.

9. Auckland Transport is keen to get the public’s thoughts on a range of recommended 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

Arterial roads (phasing out on-street parking)

Parking permits

Park and rides

PUBLIC TRANSPORT FARE CHANGES FROM 6 JULY

10. Auckland Transport has completed its Annual Fare Review which sees ticket prices on buses, trains and ferries change from 6 July. From that date adults who use the AT HOP card for their travel will receive a 20% discount off the single trip adult cash fare (excluding Nite Rider , 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 (some AT HOP fares for ferries will also increase).

11. The annual 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 and this is due to be completed towards the end of the year.

12. Auckland Transport believes that Public transport must be seen as a viable alternative to the car if Auckland is to even begin to resolve its transport problems and by making travel even more attractive on the AT HOP card it is hoped that more people will switch to public transport.

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

14. From 6 July when the new fares are implemented, cash fares will be in 50 cent multiples which will reduce cash handling on buses in particular (with the exception of the City LINK child cash fare which will remain at 30 cents). Auckland Transport is hoping 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.

INSTALLATION/REPLACEMENT OF NZ POLICE FIXED SPEED CAMERAS

15. Auckland will be the recipient of six of the twelve new digital Fixed Speed Cameras released by the New Zealand police to help reduce speed-related crash risk across the country.

16. This is a significant national and regional milestone for road safety as a whole, and attached is the NZ Police media release for your info, as you may get public enquiries in response to this.

Key points include:

· 12 new digital Fixed Speed Cameras announced, six of which are in Auckland: two replacing old sites and four new sites (locations in media release below)

· New robust digital and wireless Fixed Speed Camera technology

· Proven to reduce speed and crash-risk at high-risk locations

· Located at high-risk crash sites, & based on robust site assessment

· Site selection included input from Police, NZTA, Auckland Transport, Councils, AA

· Part of national Safe Journeys Action Plan to create Safe Speeds

· 76% of New Zealanders support speed enforcement to help reduce fatalities on the roads

· Speeding tickets do not generate revenue for Police

· Another 44 digital speed cameras to be rolled out nationally in the next 18 months

· Progress also underway on three Red Light Cameras based on a similar methodology and technology

17. The New Zealand Police will be installing and replacing six Fixed Digital Speed Cameras at the following high-risk speed-related crash locations:

18. Replacement of Existing Wet-film Fixed Speed Camera with New Digital Fixed Speed Camera:

· 620 Great South Road, Otahuhu: Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board

· 3236 Great North Road, Fruitvale: Whau Local Board

19. Installation of New Digital Speed Cameras:

· 57 Mill Road, Totara Park: Manurewa-Papakura Local Board

· 79 Murphys Road, Totara Park: Howick Local Board

· 174 Candia Road, Waitakere: Waitakere Ranges Local Board

· 3 Tamaki Drive, Orakei: Orakei Local Board

RESPONSES AND PROGRESS REPORTS

No Stopping at all times (Broken yellow lines) – Bolton Street

20. Auckland Transport has received a request from a bus operator to investigate installing Broken Yellow lines on the entry and exit to the bus stop located outside 118/120 Bolton Street.

21. Auckland Transport acknowledges that this proposal will result in a loss of 1 on-street parking space. However, the addition of the broken yellow lines either side of the bus stop is necessary to ensure that the bus can safely enter and exit the bus stop. Currently, buses have trouble entering/exiting the bus stop, this is creating a safety issue as buses are sticking out into the traffic lane or the buses are unable to pull into the kerb properly which is creating an unsafe environment for bus passengers boarding and exiting the bus.

Response from the Local Board

22. The Transport Portfolio Leads support the proposal.

RICHARDSON ROAD CLEARWAY RESOLUTION CONSULTATION

23. Auckland Transport is proposing to install a clearway for 7:00-9:00 am, weekdays on Richardson Road between the intersection of Maioro Street and Malcolm Street.

24. Auckland Transport has received multiple enquiries from locals driving along Richardson Road regularly requesting, either No Stopping At All Times (NSAAT) restrictions, or Clearway restrictions on Richardson Road from no. 321 Richardson Road onwards. If a vehicle parks between no. 323 to 355 Richardson Road, vehicles travelling straight ahead at the intersection are obstructed and have to wait in long queues due to the heavy demand of right turners onto Maioro Street from Richardson Road in the morning peaks of week days. This results in congestion and unsafe driver behaviours.

PARKING ISSUES IN DRURY STREET NEW LYNN

25. A request for Auckland Transport to look at the parking issues that are occurring in Drury Street, New Lynn.

Update

26. This further investigation does require more time, and as such you can expect an update regarding this matter by early August 2014.

ENCROACHMENTS ON LAND OWNED BY AT - THE WHAU BRIDGE ON GREAT NORTH ROAD.

27. A request for Auckland Transport to investigate the encroachments.

Response

28. Some Auckland Transport and Auckland Council land near the bridge is currently used by private businesses and property owners. Auckland Transport is unable to locate any records to see whether the private properties have got licenses to occupy Auckland Transport land near the bridge. However, AT will send a letter to the property owners requesting them not to use Auckland Transport land for parking. A letter was sent and a follow up inspection will be conducted to ensure the area is cleared of encroachment.

29. This further investigation does require more time, and as such you can expect an update regarding this matter by early September 2014.

REQUEST FOR A PEDESTRIAN CROSSING AT THE TOP OF HEAPHY STREET NEAR THE ROUNDABOUT

29. A request through the Local Board for a pedestrian crossing at the top of Heaphy Street near the roundabout.

Response

30. An Auckland Transport Engineer has visited the site and undertaken an initial review of the issues that have been raised. Further detailed investigation now needs to be undertaken to ensure a comprehensive review of this issue. This investigation has been prioritised and programmed for review, with an expected completion date of mid July 2014. Following this Auckland Transport will be able to provide an assessment and their recommendations.

REQUEST FOR SPEED CALMING MEASURES ON RIMU STREET

31. A request for Auckland Transport to look at installing speed calming on Rimu Street.

Update

32. Auckland Transport needs more time to complete its investigation as currently there are rehab works occurring on Rimu Street and this means that it would be difficult to get accurate results on the tube count that is required. The rehab construction works is taking longer than expected to complete, after which time AT will be able to carry out the required tube counts. An update will be available by the end of August 2014.

ASH STREET CLEARWAY REQUEST

33. A request has been received for Auckland Transport to extend the Clearway on both sides of Ash Street from the Whau Bridge up to Rosebank Road.

Update

34. An Auckland Transport Engineer has visited the site and undertaken an initial review of the issue raised. A further detailed investigation now needs to be undertaken to ensure a comprehensive review of this issue. This investigation has been prioritised and programmed, with an expected completion date of early August 2014, following this AT will be able to provide the Board with the outcome and, recommendations based on their assessment.

VICTOR STREET SPEED TABLE

35. Auckland Transport has received a request from the Avondale police to look at the Speed Table on Victor Street as it is causing major confusion to pedestrians and motorists alike, and there has now been a traffic accident resulting from that confusion.

Update

36. Auckland Transport is undertaking pedestrian surveys to identify whether it meets a warrant to upgrade the facility to a zebra crossing. It will update the Board on the outcome of the survey. This will take approximately 2-3 weeks. Also, Auckland Transport is investigating the option of installing signs to inform pedestrians that they need to give way to traffic, as vehicles have right of way in the current arrangement.

LOCAL BOARD’s ISSUES FOR INVESTIGATION BY AUCKLAND TRANSPORT
Subject Name	Location	Decription	Auckland Transport Response
3107-3119 Great North Road Footpath Repair	Great North Road, between Thai Gardenia and Cycle Shop, north end of shopping area	Short-term repair of footpath surface and holes. Currently in bad state of repair. Water blast and re-sand bricks	Would recommend to the Local Board that it be changed to concrete not paving. Board need to consider.
10 St Leonards Shop Footpath Replacement	10 St Leonards Road: shops opposite Kelston Boys High School	Repair of hotch/potch paving along footpath in front of shops;	Part of the 14/15 Footpath Renewal programme.
Remove Kelston Shops Planter Boxes	10 St Leonard Road: shops opposite Kelston Boys High School	Remove Planters installed by SLIPS team	The Local Board will need to refer this request through AC Parks for consideration.
Rua Road Footpath Replacement	5 Tomo Street Outside Humbug Café	Tidy up footpath	Being considered as part of the 15/16 Footpath Renewal programme
Blockhouse Bay TC Paving Matchups	Blockhouse Bay Village and Blockhouse Bay Road	Match up the paving outside shops	Auckland Transport will look at this. Local Board please provide physical location.
Blockhouse Bay TC Footpath Replacement	Blockhouse Bay village, Blockhouse Bay Road	Red asphalt outside Baroness Barber shop on corner in need of replacement.	Being considered as part of the 15/16 Footpath Renewal programme
2004-2016 Great North Road Tree Base	Between 2004 & 2016A Great North Road, Avondale Town Centre	There is a tree landscaped into the sidewalk/footpath. The concrete at the base of the tree is lifting and may prove hazardous to passers-by. Request that pathway around this tree be fixed.	Trees are going to create ongoing issues. Parks to review trees prior to repairs to be made.
34 Delta Ave Footpath Lift	34 Delta Ave, outside Salvation Army	Customer Service request. Cones put in but no grinding or replacement has occurred.	This request has been actioned and is now repaired.
3094 Great North Road To 12 Titirangi Road Footpath Renewal	Footpath renewal between Cambridge Clothing and the new Bunnings Warehouse	This footpath renewal needs to be programmed for when Bunnings development has been completed. Development contributions?	This request will be considered as part of the 15/16 Footpath Renewal programme
Avondale Pedestrian Crossing Rehabilitation	Avondale Primary School Improvements	Pre Scheme	Part of the 14/15 Footpath Renewal programme.
New Lynn Traffic Light Review And Rephrasing	SH20 to Clark St	17 sets of lights not required, needs review and rephrasing	Been forwarded to Auckland Transport JTOC Specialistfor consideration
Mitre 10 Entry Realignment	Great North Road	Safety issue	Being investigated by Auckland Transport Road Corridor Operation Team.
Rosebank Road Pavement Rehabilitation	Rosebank Road from the corner BHB Rd down to Great North Road		Work is now in progress by Auckland Transport
1661-2180 Great North Road Footpaths	Whau Bridge to Heron Park	Footpath Renewal request	Part of the 14/15 Footpath Renewal programme.
2002 Gt Nth Rd	Avondale Town centre outside boarding house	Damage to footpath due to illegal driveway crossing over pedestrian crossing	Maintainance work has been undertaken and work is completed
2060 Gt Nth Rd	Mobile petrol station	Huge hole in foot path	Maintenance work has been undertaken and work is completed
Cnr Crayford St & Gt North Rd	Avondale Town Centre	Sink hole in footpath	Maintenance work has been undertaken and work is completed
Cnr Rosebank & Gt Nth Rd	Avondale Town Centre	Asphalt patched sink hole in foot path	Maintenance work has been undertaken and work is completed
Slippery Pavers	Avondale Town Centre	on exposed Slopes	Auckland Transport is investigating this request.

ISSUES PENDING
Subject Name	Description	Date Requested	Due Date
Roading Corridor Weed Control In The Whau Ward	The Local Board has requested information on weed control in the road corridor. Auckland Transport will arrange a workshop with the Local Board to discuss weed control in the Whau Ward.	19 February 2014	August 2014
Antisocial use of Cars in Lansford Crescent	Auckland Transport is processing a Bylaw “Car Curfew” which will assist the police to undertake enforcement in the commercial areas to mitigate the antisocial use of cars.	25 November 2013	August 2014
Avondale Town Centre Parking Assessment	A request from the Local Board that they be part of the assessment process in regards to the Avondale Parking Plan.	4 February 2014	October 2014
Proposed Waterview To New Lynn Shared (Cycle And Pedestrian) Path	Our program for the New Lynn to Waterview Shared Path Activity Dates Background and options developed for the scheme · May 2014 Ranking of option · June 2014 Local Board Engagement and introduction · July 2014 Comprehensive investigation of Archaeological Archaeological, heritage, arboriculture, ecological, contamination NES, pavement/civil geometric, bridges and flooding assessment of effects, lighting, visual amenity and urban design. · August2014 Draft SAR · August 2014 Consultation · September 2014 Outcome of consultation · October 2014 Final SAR · November 2014 Deed of grant from Kiwirail agreed in principle subject to detailed design of the bridge at Whau River and Trent Street. · November 2014	April 2014	July 2014
Blockhouse Bay Town Centre Parking Management	Auckland Transport in conjunction with Auckland Council will be undertaking a workshop with the Local Board on this request in the near future. Auckland Council is reviewing town centres parking management currently.	March 2014	August 2014
Roading Network Totara Avenue Road Completion	Local Board would like an update on this project.	‘	August 2014
Delta Avenue and Stock Street, New Lynn	Private Use of land. Keep as a Public Assess request from the Local Board. Auckland Transport Property and AC Parks are working through this.	March 2014	August 2014

ISSUES COMPLETED
Subject Name	Decision Description	Date Requested	Completion date
Canal Road Angle Parking	A request has been received from a resident in Canal Road for angle parking at the end of the cul-de-sac of Canal Road in Avondale. Auckland Transport considers this change as a positive outcome.	April 2014	June 2014
Olympic Park - Bus Rotation Safety	Auckland Transport ensures that bus stops are located to allow passengers to board and alight safely, conveniently and as close as possible to main shopping and business areas, transport interchanges and other main origins and destinations such as the Olympic Park and the Maritime Museum. AT also locate bus stops close to existing crossing facilities, including signals, so that pedestrians, adults and children alike, are able to cross safely.	April 2014	June 2014
Removal Of Grass Verges Beatrix St Avondale	Auckland Transport does not consider this to be justifiable, and therefore have no plans to alter the parking arrangement on Beatrix Street at this time.	March 2014	June 2014
Auckland Transport Variable Message Signs (Vms) Proposal	The Local Board Transport Portfolio Lead was consulted on the proposal and was happy with what was being proposed.	April 2014	May 2014
Kelwyn Road – Proposed Safety Improvement	The Local Board Transport Portfolio Lead was consulted on the proposal and was happy with what was being proposed.	April 2014	May 2014
Proposed Bus Stop – 147 Astley Avenue, New Lynn And Proposed Bus Stop Upgrade – 168 Astley Avenue, New Lynn	The Local Board Transport Portfolio Lead was consulted on the proposal and was happy with what was being proposed.	April 2014	May 2014
Heaphy Street – Pedestrian Crossing Request	The investigation has concluded that a zebra crossing facility on Heaphy Street will result in significant pedestrian and vehicular safety benefits, providing easier and safer navigation of the roundabout for pedestrians, and encouraging care and awareness of pedestrians by drivers. A zebra crossing facility on Heaphy Street has been proposed and added to the ‘Minor Improvements Programme’ in the 2014-2015 financial year.	April 2014	May 2014

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	The NZ Police media release - Static Camera Expansion programme	23

Signatories

Author

Owena Schuster - Elected Member Relationship Manager - West, Auckland Transport

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon - Elected Member Relationship Team Manager, Auckland Transport

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

Whau Local Board

16 July 2014

Whau Local Board Smoke-free Policy Implementation

File No.: CP2014/13637

Purpose

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

Executive summary

2. 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.

3. 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.

4. 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.

5. 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.

6. In May 2014, a workshop with the Whau Local Board was held to confirm high priority sites for the immediate installation of additional smoke-free signage. At this workshop, 6 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 $2,500-$3,320. These values might vary depending on signage printing, size and installation.

7. 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.

Recommendations

That the Whau Local Board:

a) Allocates budget for printing and installation of additional smoke-free signs in 6 high priority sites which include:

i) Avondale Central Reserve area

ii) Blockhouse Bay Recreation Reserve

iii) Olympic Park

iv) New Lynn Library

v) Blockhouse Bay Library

vi) Avondale Library

b) Promotes the smoke-free status of smoke-free public places in Whau as the Board deems appropriate.

Comments

Background

8. 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.

9. 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.

10. 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.

11. According to the 2013 census, Whau local board area has a smoking rate of 13.5 percent which is similar to the regional smoking rate (13 percent for the region).

12. 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

13. 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.

14. 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.

15. 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.

16. 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

17. Staff had prepared recommendations on the high priority (Category A) and medium priority (Category B) sites within the Whau local board area. In May 2014, a workshop with the board was held to gather feedback and confirm these high priority sites.

18. Table two outlines the high priority smoke-free sites in the Whau local board area.

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

Site Name

Rationale

Est sign cost

Avondale Central Reserve

· Well used space adjacent to high profile Avondale Racecourse

· Links to town centre space

· Approximately 2 signs

· Est. cost $250

Blockhouse Bay Recreation Reserve

· Well used sports park with multiple active sporting facilities

· High use for play and passive recreation by all ages

· Approximately 2 signs

· Est. cost $250

· To install additional smoke-free signs as part of signage replacement program over next 3 years

Olympic Park

· Site contains a destination playground

· Park is popular and well used in community

· Well used sports park

· Large volume of users

· Approximately 3 signs

· Est cost $370

· To install additional smoke-free signs as part of signage replacement programme over next 3 years

New Lynn Library

· Opposite the train station, very visible community asset in town centre

· Well frequented with high foot traffic

· Approximately 2 signs

· Est cost $250

Blockhouse Bay Library

· Close to the park and school

· Libraries are very visible council asset, well used by range of user groups

· Approximately 3 signs

· Est. cost $370

Avondale Library

· Frequented by children and young children

· Popular and well used by the community

· Located within an area of heavy foot traffic

· Libraries are very visible council asset, well used by range of user groups

· Approximately 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

19. 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.

20. For the Whau local board area, the medium priority sites are:

1. Ambrico Reserve

2. Archibald Park

3. Blockhouse Bay Beach Reserve

4. Brains Park

5. Craigovan Park

6. East dale

7. Green Bay Beach

8. Green Bay Community Centre

9. Ken Maunder Park

10. La Rosa Garden Reserve

11. Lawson Park

12. Manawa Wetland Reserve

13. Mason Park

14. Riversdale Reserve

15. Sister Rene Shadbolt Park

16. Valonia Reserve

17. Waikumete Cemetary

21. ‘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

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

23. 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

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

25. In May 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.

26. At the workshop, the board had made the following comments:

· it is supportive of a Smoke-free Auckland Council

· it considers playgrounds and sports parks as important spaces for smoke-free implementation

· that Avondale Racecourse should not be considered for smoke-free implementation

· it does not support implementing the Policy in the town centre area.

Maori impact statement

27. 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).

28. 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.

29. 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

30. 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.

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

32. The approximate cost of additional smoke-free signs in the 6 identified sites (Table two) in Phase one is between $2,500 to $3,320. 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

33. 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

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

Whau Local Board

16 July 2014

Local Alcohol Policy Project - Draft Policy for Local Board Feedback

File No.: CP2014/13515

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

That the Whau 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:

o 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

o 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 Whau 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. Whau Local Board feedback

Topic

Local Board feedback

Officer response

Density

· Supported the cumulative impact approach as a way of ensuring that local neighbourhoods are considered as part of decision making

· The draft LAP directly incorporates this feedback. The Environmental and Cumulative Impact Assessment, recommended in the draft LAP, would require the DLC to consider the following in relation to the proposed site and the surrounding area when determining certain licence applications:

o land use

o socio-economic, demographic and alcohol-related harm indicators

o existing premises

o sensitive sites.

Hours

· Want to see some level of consistency between hours in neighbouring areas to avoid/minimise migration (with risks of drink driving) and displacement.

· The draft LAP directly addresses this feedback. The hours recommended for on-licences are generally consistent across the region with only two variations.

· Hours for on licences have been recommended as follows:

o CBD (Broad Area A): 9am – 3am with trial extensions of up to two hours available for best practice on-licences.

o Rest of Auckland (Broad Area B): 9am – 1am with trial extensions of up to two hours available for best practice premises.

· The inclusion of the trial extensions within the draft LAP will help to minimise the risks of displacement and migratory drinking by allowing good operators that currently trade late to apply for an additional two hours. This will encourage patrons to stay local rather by providing alternative late night trading options to the central city.

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 mataa waka 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	61
b View	Regional Strategy and Policy Committee meeting May 2014 - Resolutions on draft Local Alcohol Policy	177
c View	A3 Copies of Tables 7 and 8 from report	179
d View	Key Topics for Feedback from Local Boards	181

Signatories

Author

Belinda Hansen - Principal Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Penny Pirrit - Regional & Local Planning Manager

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

Whau Local Board

16 July 2014

Local Board Role in Alcohol Licence Applications – Issues and Options

Introduction

The Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012 (the Alcohol Act) establishes processes for alcohol licence applications. Some local boards wish to have input into the application process, due to concerns about alcohol-related harm within some Auckland communities. This issues paper considers the options available for local board input for discussion.

Roles of the governing body and local boards

The governing body has a number of roles under the Alcohol Act.

· It sets a local alcohol policy for the region, with input from local boards. This establishes the overall policy framework, covering matters such as location of licenced premises and maximum trading hours. The governing body has developed a draft local alcohol policy for public consultation.

· It establishes District Licensing Committees, which have responsibility for all uncontested and contested licensing applications.

· It has the statutory power to object to licence applications (although it is unlikely that the governing body would exercise this power).

Local boards provide input into the development by the governing body of the local alcohol policy. Local board members can also be appointed to sit on District Licensing Committees. Under current Auckland Council policy, they cannot hear applications relating to their local board area.

Local boards do not currently have the power to object to licence applications. Local boards receive their powers from the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act in three different ways:

· Statutory powers – these include providing input into governing body strategies and policies (such as the local alcohol policy), developing local board plans, and agreeing local board agreements with the governing body. The Auckland Council Act does not provide local boards with the statutory power to make objections on licence applications.

· Allocated powers – local boards are allocated non-regulatory decision-making powers for a wide range of local activities. This allocation is set out in the Long-term Plan. It does not include the power to make objections on licence applications.

· Delegated powers – the governing body can delegate powers to local boards. While it has done this for certain matters (such as swimming pool fencing), it has not delegated power to make objections on alcohol licence applications.

Local boards have standing under the Alcohol Act to object to licence applications, as a local board can be expected to have a greater interest in the issue than the public generally. However, in order to exercise this, the governing body must first allocate or delegate the power to object to local boards.

Local boards are in many ways the face of local government in their communities. They play an important role in understanding, representing and advocating for community priorities and preferences. This includes providing the “community voice” on social issues. While local boards cannot speak for all members of their communities, they have gained, through consultation on their local board plans, local board agreements, and other engagement activities, a good understanding of the significant community issues.

Concern about alcohol related harm is one such issue which has been raised in a number of local board areas, with harm minimisation a consistent strategic priority in a number of local board plans. This is in many ways consistent with the alcohol reforms, as reflected in the Alcohol Act. These reforms aim to improve New Zealand's drinking culture and reduce the harm caused by excessive drinking. In doing so, the Alcohol Act also seeks to increase the ability of communities to have a say on local alcohol licensing matters, as well as providing for local-level decision-making for licence applications, through District Licensing Committees.

Given the role of local boards as advocates for their communities and the strategic importance placed on managing alcohol related harm by a number of them, it is reasonable to expect that at least some local boards will wish to express a view on alcohol licence applications.

Licence application process

The applicant for a licence is required to attach notice of the application to a conspicuous place on or adjacent to the site to which the application relates and give public notice of the application. A person may object to the grant of a licence only if he or she has a greater interest in the application for it than the public generally. An objection must be in writing and filed with the licensing committee within 15 working days after the first publication of the public notice of the making of the application.

Once an application is made, an inspector makes inquiries and files a report with the District Licensing Committee. The police and medical officer of health for the area also file a report if either has any opposition to the application. Local board members receive a weekly list of applications for their local area, which is downloaded by democracy advisors from the Auckland Council intranet.

The District Licensing Committee determines whether a hearing will be convened. If there are any objections to the application, a public hearing is required unless the objection is considered vexatious or outside the scope of the Alcohol Act, the objector does not require a public hearing, or the application is withdrawn. If no objection is received, then the District Licensing Committee can consider the application based on the papers, without requiring a public meeting.

The Alcohol Act sets out the criteria to be considered by the District Licensing Committee when considering a licence application. Any objection to an application must also relate to these criteria, otherwise it will be outside the scope of the Alcohol Act. A copy of the relevant section is attached. As well as considering objections, a District Licensing Committee can seek views from other parties on a licence application (including local boards), if it is of the opinion that the information may assist it to deal with the application. The Alcohol Act also provides for an appeal process to the Alcohol Regulatory and Licensing Authority.

Options for local board involvement

1. Local board input into the development of the local alcohol policy

Local boards have had significant early engagement on the draft local alcohol policy and will now be providing formal feedback to the governing body. Policy development is a key governance role and sets the framework for subsequent operational decision-making. The local alcohol policy is the appropriate place to address the broader concerns about alcohol-related harm and put in place measures to manage the impact on specific communities, through for example, more stringent controls for specific areas. A well developed policy arguably avoids the need for political involvement in specific licence applications.

2. Local board views are provided to the District Licensing Committee

District Licensing Committees have broad powers to seek information on licence applications. A committee can receive a local board’s views on a licence application if it is of the opinion that the information may assist it to deal with the application. There is no statutory obligation on a District Licensing Committee to seek out or to receive and take into account local board views. However, there has been an openness on the part of District Licensing Committees to obtain local board views.

One way to achieve this is to attach local board views on particular licence applications to the inspector’s report to the District Licensing Committee. This is similar to the resource consent application process, where any local board views are appended to the officer’s report. It is then up to the District Licensing Committee to determine whether it takes into account the local board views and the weight given to it. This approach can lead to a situation where an inspector’s report attaches a contrary local board view, but it does provide an avenue for local boards to express a view on particular licence applications without the requirement for a specific allocated or delegated power from the governing body.

3. Local board are either allocated or delegated the power to object

The governing body could either allocate or delegate to local boards the power to object to licence applications. While an express power contained in the allocation provides clarity and certainty to local boards and their communities, it is time consuming and requires the use of the special consultative procedure. The allocation is reviewed as part of the long-term plan, meaning that local boards would not receive this power until 1 July 2015. Alternatively, the governing body could delegate the power to object to licence applications to local boards. A delegation can be put in place at any time by governing body resolution, but it can also be revoked at any time.

The resourcing implications for the Auckland Council organisation is an important consideration when weighing up the pros and cons of providing local boards with the power to object to licence applications. From 18 December 2013, there have been over 3,800 licence applications across the Auckland region and 26 hearings. Of these licence applications, 119 were for off-licences, 387 for on-licences, and 1158 for special licences (with most of the remainder relating to managers certificates). During this period only three local boards have sought to object to licence applications under the Alcohol Act (representing five objections in total). While this small number of objections is unlikely to pose any significant resourcing issues for the organisation, this would change if there was a major increase in local board objections. Local boards will need to be resourced to prepare objections with appropriate supporting evidence. Local board members will also need to prepare for and attend hearings. Depending on the number of local board objections, this could require considerable officer and local board member time.

Another issue is the reputational implication for council if a local board inappropriately objects to licence applications. This is likely to be an issue if a local board decides, as a matter of principle, to object to all licence applications, without appropriate evidence to demonstrate that the objection falls within the scope of matters that can be raised under the Alcohol Act. Reputational issues also arise if local boards seek to appeal a decision by the District Licensing Committee, as effectively one arm of Auckland Council (the local board) is objecting to decisions made by another arm of Auckland Council (the District Licensing Committee).

The Alcohol Act establishes a new regime, which is in its early stages of development in Auckland. The local alcohol policy is not yet in place and the District Licensing Committee structure will be reviewed after its first year of operation. If local boards were to be given the power to object to licensing applications, a delegation may be the better short-term option as it enables the implications to be tested alongside the monitoring and review of the District Licensing Committee structure. A longer term approach can then be considered within the broader context of the alcohol management regime. Issues associated with appeal rights could also be considered at that time.

4. Local boards supporting community involvement in licensing process

The Alcohol Act seeks to bring communities closer to decision-making around alcohol licensing. The licensing processes need to be accessible to communities. Currently there is little support available to empower communities to take an interest or participate in the process. Further work is needed to make it easier for the community to access information and receive advice and support on alcohol licence applications. Local boards could focus on supporting and building the capability of community groups to object to licence applications, where appropriate, and to present to District Licensing Committees at hearings. This can be done alongside any of the options raised above for local board involvement in the licensing process.

Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012

Section 105 - Criteria for issue of licences

(1) In deciding whether to issue a licence, the licensing authority or the licensing committee concerned must have regard to the following matters:

(a) the object of this Act:

(b) the suitability of the applicant:

(d) the days on which and the hours during which the applicant proposes to sell alcohol:

(e) the design and layout of any proposed premises:

(f) whether the applicant is engaged in, or proposes on the premises to engage in, the sale of goods other than alcohol, low-alcohol refreshments, non-alcoholic refreshments, and food, and if so, which goods:

(g) whether the applicant is engaged in, or proposes on the premises to engage in, the provision of services other than those directly related to the sale of alcohol, low-alcohol refreshments, non-alcoholic refreshments, and food, and if so, which services:

(h) whether (in its opinion) the amenity and good order of the locality would be likely to be reduced, to more than a minor extent, by the effects of the issue of the licence:

(i) whether (in its opinion) the amenity and good order of the locality are already so badly affected by the effects of the issue of existing licences that—

(i) they would be unlikely to be reduced further (or would be likely to be reduced further to only a minor extent) by the effects of the issue of the licence; but

(ii) it is nevertheless desirable not to issue any further licences:

(j) whether the applicant has appropriate systems, staff, and training to comply with the law:

(k) any matters dealt with in any report from the Police, an inspector, or a Medical Officer of Health made under section 103.

(2) The authority or committee must not take into account any prejudicial effect that the issue of the licence may have on the business conducted pursuant to any other licence.

Whau Local Board

16 July 2014

Portfolio Update: Member Susan Zhu

File No.: CP2014/15373

Purpose

1. This report provides an opportunity for Member Susan Zhu to give an update with regards to activity within her portfolio areas.

2. Portfolio holders are responsible for leading policy development in their portfolio area, proposing and developing project concepts, overseeing agreed projects within budgets, being active advocates, accessing and providing information and advice.

3. Member Zhu has lead for the portfolios of Transport, Urban Design Champion Forum and alternate for Planning, Regulatory and Bylaws, Ethnic, Events, Community Development, Facilities and Leases, Youth and Youth Connections, Town Centre Development, Economic Development, Financial oversight – Budget.

Executive summary

4. Following are some specific activities, projects and issues that I wish to highlight for board members’ interest.

Whau’s Youth Representative confirmed (Other members involved: Simon Matafai)

5. Whau Local Board hosted a confirmation meeting on June 17, 2014 at the Local Board Office. At the meeting, Aileen Zhou has been confirmed as the Whau’s youth representative to the Auckland Council Youth Advisory Panel (YAP).

6. Aileen is a year 11 student attending the Auckland International College (AIC) with wide interests especially in youth enterprise. Aileen will be a great voice for the Whau Youth in the next couple of years.

7. YAP will have its induction night on Monday, 21 July 2014 at the Town Hall. Board Member Simon Matafai, also the Youth portfolio lead and I are looking forward to support Aileen at the induction.

Youth Connections – joint project between Henderson-Massey and Whau Local Boards (Other members involved: Simon Matafai)

8. Following three meetings in the last two months, the two Local Boards now agreed to form a Steering Committee include leaders from local high schools, iwi, post compulsory education providers, Work and Income and local businesses. The first task of the Steering Committee is to work out a strategic plan to move almost ¼ of our youth whom are currently unemployed into jobs. I was nominated as the Chairperson to lead the Youth Connections project.

Community Safety Meetings - following death of the Henderson Dairy Owner Arun Kumar (Other members involved: Ami Chand and Simon Matafai)

9. Arun Kumar lost his life in a tragic incident on 10 June 2014 at his dairy shop in Henderson. Two young boys, aged 12 and 13 have been charged. Communities in Henderson were totally shocked.

10. Following the incident, there were three meetings organized in Henderson among Police, Council, schools, iwis, communities and youth support organizations. WEB has organized a safety meeting on 3 July 2014. Communities got together to discuss solutions and support each other. People understand that there is no quick fix on this issue. Poverty, family violence and lack of Police resources are key problems in the west. Police now has put more resources in Henderson CBD area with much higher visibility.

Community Facilities Tour in the Whau Local Board area (Other members involved: Catherine Farmer, Ami Chand and Simon Matafai)

11. On 2 July, Local Board Members and Officers visited key community centres and facilities in the Whau area: New Lynn Community Centre, Kelston Community Hub, Green Bay Community House, Blockhouse Bay Community Centre and Avondale Community Centre.

12. It was a great opportunity for the members and officers to get the first-hand information about the programmes and activities held at those community facilities. We are very grateful that there are many great community facilities in the Whau area managed by some wonderful people who are so passionate and dedicated to the work they do for the communities.

13. I was once again reminded that the Avondale communities deserve better community facilities.

Susan Zhu's photo.

Community Open Day at the New Lynn Community Centre (Other members involved: Catherine Farmer)

14. On 3 July, Community Waitakere organized the first community open day at the New Lynn Community Centre. Over 30 people from 17 community organizations who are based in New Lynn, Avondale and Kelston have attended the event, including officers from CAB, Library, Youth Horizon, Work Bridge, Generation Ignite, Lifewise etc.

15. Community Waitakere is planning to organize similar events in the other areas in Whau.

New Lynn Night Market has celebrated its one year anniversary (Other members involved: Catherine Farmer, Ami Chand, Simon Matafai and Ruby Manukia-Schaumkel)

16. New Lynn Night Market turned one on 26 June 2014. The Night Market team has put on a special celebration on that night. TV33, a Chinese TV crew has interviewed the Whau LB members.

Council Bylaw Submission – Cemeteries and Crematoria Bylaw Hearing (Other members involved: Ami Chand)

17. Board Member Ami Chand and I have attended the Bylaw Hearing on 16 June 2014. The Human Rights Commission, Indian communities, Muslim communities, Jewish communities and along with other people who work in the industry have made submissions on the day. Ami and I have made a submission to support the community’s views to be included in the draft bylaw before presenting it to the full Council for approval.

18. This is a very sensitive topic. The subject of burial and cremation in cultural and religious manner are of immense significance to many ethnic communities of this city. Although the consultative process for the subject matter was followed by Council to some extent, many of the ethnic community felt they were not adequately notified about the process.

Wrap up of project – Make Believe

19. Make Believe was a project led by Kathy Waghorn, Lecturer of the Architecture School of the University of Auckland over a period of two years’ time. This project is part of an experimental concept planning which will lead into the design and procurement phase for the Crown Lynn Urban Park. It has led a new way of engaging publics in imagining the urban realm.

Transport portfolio updates: (Other members involved: Duncan McDonald, Catherine Farmer & Ami Chand)

20. Road safety issues in relation to footpath by the Kelston Boys and Kelston Girls College. This will be included in the AT footpath maintenance programme (I was advised that it is the fastest way to improve the current situation).

21. Rosebank Road roundabout studies have completed – the report shows that convert from roundabout to traffic lights are not going to improve congestions. AT will look at widening road towards to the motorway onramp in the near future to ease the traffic.

Community Development portfolio updates: (Other members involved: Ruby Manukia-Schaumkel)

22. Multi-premises lease for kindergartens is approved. Council may in the future follow the same approach for CAB and Plunket.

23. Changeover of the booking system for all community facilities in Whau starts from 1 July – central booking system.

24. CAB has won a national wide contract from the Immigration NZ in delivering face-to-face settlement support services from 1 July 2014. ARMS has been awarded the regional contract for running migrant networks meetings.

25. To scope two new initiatives – asset mapping project focusing on the diverse communities in the Whau areas; and develop an inter-faith dialogue in Whau.

26. Coordinator’s role for the New Lynn Night Market has been advertised.

27. Welcome to the new residents of the New Lynn high rising apartments is postponed to late August as the construction won’t finish until August.

Recommendation

That the Whau Local Board:

a) Receives the portfolio update from member Susan Zhu.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Author

Member Susan Zhu – Whau Local Board

No.	Title	Page
a View	Record of Workshop 5 March 2014	241
b View	Record of Workshop 7 March 2014	243
c View	Record of Workshop 12 March 2014	245
d View	Record of Workshop 19 March 2014	247
e View	Record of Workshop 26 March 2014	249
f View	Record of Workshop 2 April 2014	251
g View	Record of Workshop 9 April 2014	253
h View	Record of Workshop 16 April 2014	255
i View	Record of Workshop 23 April 2014	257

	Item	Presenter(s)	Time
1.0	Local Board Catch-up	Mark Allen Glenn Boyd	9.30 am -11.00 am
Notes: The Board discussed standing Orders and the upcoming Anzac Day Services/Parades 2014
2.0	Cycleways and Greenways in the Whau	Jenny, Ian Lamont, Allan Howard-Smith	11.00 am -12.00 pm
Notes: The Board considered the priority Whau Greenways projects to go to concept phase, received information from AT on their cycleways link along the Rail Corridor and related AT projects. It also discussed upcoming public consultation on the draft Greenways Report, the site specific consultation for the priority projects once concepts have been developed, the potential budget requirement in the long term and the process from here.
LUNCH BREAK (12.00 pm – 12.30 pm)
3.0	Waste services to apartments, units and other intensive housing	Michelle Whitaker, and Parul Sood	12.30 pm – 1.15 pm
Notes: The Board received a briefing on provision of waste services to apartments and units.
4.0	Local Board Plan	Mark Allen	1.15 pm – 2.00 pm
Notes: The Board discussed its engagement so far and considered draft work on developing the outcomes, objectives and initiatives,

	Item	Presenter(s)
1.0	ACPL Property rationalisation consideration process	Letitia McColl
Notes: Letitia McColl of ACPL provided background to the Board on the property rationalisation process noting that staff have input through the Portfolio Review Steering Group and that the decision-making is through the Finance and Performance Committee (F and P) of the Governing Body. The Board’s views are conveyed to the Governing Body through the report prepared by ACPL. The Board are able to attend the F and P meeting and request speaking rights to support their position.
2.0	ACPL : 42 Bancroft Crescent	Letitia McColl
Notes: Confirmed that the site in question is the balance of area not required for radio-controlled car use. The Board had previously considered the site and reconfirmed its position that there was no service need and that the site could be included in the rationalisation.
3.0	ACPL : 24-26 Racecourse Parade	Letitia McColl and Mike Bush
Notes: The site is within the Avondale Transformation Project area and the Board had previously requested it be considered within the scope of that project. The Board generally wished the site to NOT be considered at this stage, pending consideration of the Avondale development and the service needs for the community centre, library, open space, leisure activities and roading network through the Avondale Transformation Programme and the Whau community and recreation facility needs assessment. The latter items are being reported to the Board in April 2014 and then Council to enable consideration in time for the Annual Plan and Long Term Plan.
4.0	ACPL : 1815, 1817 and 1823 Great North Road	Letitia McColl and Mike Bush
Notes: Mike Bush updated the Board on Housing New Zealand not supporting a comprehensive development across the wider set of sites at this time. He noted the potential for the site’s development to catalyse development around it including the HNZ site. The Board confirmed its previous input that it desired widening of the connection on the northern from the Peace park to Tait Park along Ash Street and they supported Auckland Transport’s request for deepening the road edge into the sites along Great North Road. The Avondale Master Plan considered the three sites as potential contributors to redevelopment of the whole of Highbury Triangle. The Board generally recognised the catalysing effect of progressing the development of the sites and the Board with the exception of one member, supported the three sites completing the rationalisation consideration process. The Board did desire it be conveyed that the documents calling for external Expressions Of Interest should reflect the direction of the Avondale Master Plan and that the Board be given the opportunity to have input into the E.O.I.s.

	Item	Presenter(s)	Time
1.0	Portfolio Administration & updates	Board Members	9.30 am – 10.00 am
Notes: Board members updated each other on their portfolios and considered portfolio coverage.
2.0	To discuss the Local Board Plan	Mark Allen	10.00 am – 11.00 am
Notes: Board members provided preliminary feedback and input into the draft priorities and programmes being developed.
3.0	Whau economic development planning To consider the draft economic development plan and the first draft of the economic development section of the local board plan	Mark Allen and Jonathon Sudworth	11:00 am - 12:30 pm
Notes: Board members received an update on the draft economic development plan to be adopted by the Board at an upcoming meeting.
LUNCH BREAK (12.30 pm– 1.00 pm)
4.0	Outcome of consultation for the Whau Community Facilities	Jan Brown	1.00- 2.00 pm
Notes: Board members received a briefing on the recent research which is covered in the upcoming formal report to the Board. It noted the need for facilities in the Whau and identified New Lynn and Avondale as principal sites for future consideration. This material will inform the development of the region-wide Community Facilities Network planning to be reported to elected members later this year.

Item	Topic
1.0	Historic Heritage Plan and Heritage Assets Stewardship Policy
Notes: Heritage team made a presentation to the Whau LB regarding the development of a heritage policy for Auckland to ensure that council manages its historic assets.
2.0	Local Boards Funding Policy
Notes: The Board were updated on the development of the local board funding policy, the present policy options and invite discussion to inform the policy
3.0	Local Board Plan process
Notes: The Board were briefed on the next steps and identified departments the board wishes to meet within the development process

Chairperson	Catherine Farmer
Deputy Chairperson	Susan Zhu
Members	Derek Battersby, QSM, JP
	Ami Chand
	Duncan Macdonald, JP
	Ruby Manukia-Schaumkel
	Simon Matafai

Author	Mark Allen - Senior Local Board Advisor
Authoriser	Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

Author	Alastair Child – Principal Local Board Advisor
Authorisers	Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau