I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Orākei Local Board will be held on:
Date: Time: Meeting Room: Venue:
|
Thursday, 7 August 2014 3.30pm St Chads
Church and Community Centre |
Orākei Local Board
OPEN AGENDA
|
MEMBERSHIP
Chairperson |
Desley Simpson, JP |
|
Deputy Chairperson |
Mark Thomas |
|
Members |
Ken Baguley |
|
|
Troy Churton |
|
|
Kate Cooke |
|
|
Colin Davis, JP |
|
|
Kit Parkinson |
|
(Quorum 4 members)
|
|
Georgina Morgan Democracy Advisor
30 July 2014
Contact Telephone: 021 302 163 Email: georgina.morgan@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
|
Orākei Local Board 07 August 2014 |
|
1 Welcome 5
2 Apologies 5
3 Declaration of Interest 5
4 Confirmation of Minutes 5
5 Leave of Absence 5
6 Acknowledgements 5
7 Petitions 5
8 Deputations 5
9 Public Forum 5
9.1 Adam Mercer - Mercer and Mercer Architects Limited 6
9.2 Orakei Youth Advisory Group 6
10 Extraordinary Business 6
11 Notices of Motion 7
12 Naming of a public road at Stonefields - Stage 7 9
13 Local Board Role in Alcohol Licence Applications 31
14 Local Alcohol Policy Feedback 39
15 Application for variation of commercial Leases – Auckland Aquarium Limited (Kelly Tarlton), 22 Tamaki Drive, (aka 23 Tamaki Drive), Orakei, Auckland 59
16 Adoption of the Orākei Local Economic Development Action Plan 65
17 Orakei Local Board Contestable Event Support Fund Process 2014/2015 91
18 Movies in Parks 2014/2015 105
19 Business Association Support Fund Application - Ellerslie Business Association 115
20 Psychoactive Substances – Draft Local Approved Product Policy 133
21 Auckland Transport Update – Orakei Local Board: July 2014 165
22 Chairperson's Report 171
23 Board Member Reports 189
24 Resolutions Pending Action 235
25 Local Board Workshop Record of Proceedings 241
26 Consideration of Extraordinary Items
1 Welcome
2 Apologies
At the close of the agenda no apologies had been received.
3 Declaration of Interest
Members are reminded of the need to be vigilant to stand aside from decision making when a conflict arises between their role as a member and any private or other external interest they might have.
4 Confirmation of Minutes
That the Orākei Local Board: a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Thursday, 3 July 2014, including the confidential section, as a true and correct record.
|
5 Leave of Absence
At the close of the agenda no requests for leave of absence had been received.
6 Acknowledgements
At the close of the agenda no requests for acknowledgements had been received.
7 Petitions
At the close of the agenda no requests to present petitions had been received.
8 Deputations
Standing Order 3.20 provides for deputations. Those applying for deputations are required to give seven working days’ notice of subject matter and applications are approved by the Chairperson of the Board. This means that details relating to deputations can be included in the published agenda. Total speaking time per deputation is ten minutes or as resolved by the meeting.
At the close of the agenda no requests to speak had been received.
At the close of the agenda no requests for deputations had been received.
9 Public Forum
A period of time (approximately 30 minutes) is set aside for members of the public to address the meeting on matters within its delegated authority. A maximum of 3 minutes per item is allowed, following which there may be questions from members.
Purpose 1. Adam Mercer - Mercer and Mercer Architects Limited will be in attendance to provide the Local Board with an overview of the Outboard Boating Club masterplan concept.
|
Recommendation/s That the Orākei Local Board: a) Thanks Adam Mercer – Mercer and Mercer Architects Limited for his presentation.
|
Purpose 1. Representatives from the Orakei Youth Advisory group will be in attendance to update the Board on recent activities and membership composition.
|
Recommendation/s That the Orākei Local Board: a) thanks the Orakei Youth Advisory Group for their presentation.
|
10 Extraordinary Business
Section 46A(7) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:
“An item that is not on the agenda for a meeting may be dealt with at that meeting if-
(a) The local authority by resolution so decides; and
(b) The presiding member explains at the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public,-
(i) The reason why the item is not on the agenda; and
(ii) The reason why the discussion of the item cannot be delayed until a subsequent meeting.”
Section 46A(7A) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:
“Where an item is not on the agenda for a meeting,-
(a) That item may be discussed at that meeting if-
(i) That item is a minor matter relating to the general business of the local authority; and
(ii) the presiding member explains at the beginning of the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public, that the item will be discussed at the meeting; but
(b) no resolution, decision or recommendation may be made in respect of that item except to refer that item to a subsequent meeting of the local authority for further discussion.”
11 Notices of Motion
At the close of the agenda no requests for notices of motion had been received.
Orākei Local Board 07 August 2014 |
|
Naming of a public road at Stonefields - Stage 7
File No.: CP2014/15389
Purpose
1. To endorse name for a public road at Stonefields, for mapping and records purposes.
Executive summary
2. The street naming recommends endorsement of the street name “Hochstetter Place” for a public road at Stonefields – Stage 7.
3. This report seeks the Board’s endorsement of the proposed name, to enable mapping and record keeping, including street numbering, and to assist the public in locating this road.
That the Orākei Local Board: a) receives the report. b) endorses the name “Hochstetter Place” for a public road at Stonefields - Stage 7 (Attachment A).
|
Comments
4. The applicant Todd Property Group is the developer of the Stonefields Development in the former Mount Wellington quarry. It is proposed to the development of 48 new dwellings at Stonefields – Stage 7. This development includes the formation of a short stub road with a “hammer head” which will ultimately end up as a public road. See Attachment A.
5. Preferred name - Proposed Road “Hochstetter Place” – Christian Gottlieb Ferdinand Ritter von Hochstetter, April 30, 1829 – July 18, 1884 was a German geologist. In 1859 he was employed by the government of New Zealand to make a rapid geologist survey of Auckland providence. This was conducted with another notable New Zealander, Charles Heaphy VC. The survey resulted in the first geological map of the Auckland volcanic field. This is commonly known as Hochstetter’s map (1859). Specific to Mount Wellington, Hochstetter also produced a Mount Wellington Area and its Craters Map (1864). See Attachment B.
6. Second Preference - Proposed Road “Lapilli Place” – Lapilli is a size classification term for tephra, which is material that falls out of the air during a volcanic eruption. These are semi-molten lava, ejected from a volcanic eruption that fall to earth while still at least partially molten. Lapilli (singular: lapillus) means “little stones” in Latin.
7. Third Preference - Proposed Road “Ted Josephs Place” is no longer a valid option.
Consideration
Local board views and implications
8. This report seeks to confirm the local board’s view on this matter.
Maori impact statement
9. The applicant contacted the 13 iwi groups which are the relevant Mana Whenua for Orākei Local Board area. See Attachment C. The applicant received a response from Ngati Whatua o Kaipara. The applicant received an initial response from Ngati Whatua Orakei requesting further information. This information was provided however the applicant was unable to get any further response.
Implementation
10. The applicant will install street name signage. Council will update its record systems and inform mapmakers and other interested parties of the street name.
No. |
Title |
Page |
aView |
Locality Map |
11 |
bView |
Road Name Options |
13 |
cView |
Iwi Consultation Letters |
15 |
Signatories
Author |
Ivy Heung - Data Steward |
Authorisers |
Ian McCormik – Manager Building Control Adam Milina - Acting Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards |
07 August 2014 |
|
Local Board Role in Alcohol Licence Applications
File No.: CP2014/15870
Purpose
1. The purpose of this report is to seek local board feedback on the role local boards could play in alcohol licence applications, a process that was established by the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012.
Executive summary
2. 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.
3. To inform the discussion about the role of local boards in alcohol licence applications, Local Board Services has drafted an issues paper for consideration by local boards. Local boards’ formal feedback is being sought on this issue. This formal feedback will inform a report to the governing body on this issue. The report will seek the governing body’s decision on the preferred option for local boards to provide input into alcohol licence applications.
That the Orākei Local Board: a) provides feedback on the preferred option for local boards to provide input into alcohol licence applications.
|
Comments
4. The Alcohol Act establishes processes for alcohol licence applications.
5. 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 (DLCs), 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).
6. 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 DLCs. 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
7. 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.
8. 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.
9. To inform the discussion about the role of local boards in alcohol licence applications, Local Board Services has drafted an issues paper which is attached at Attachment A. The issues paper sets out the role the governing body and local boards currently have under the Alcohol Act, the process for licence applications under the Alcohol Act and options for local board involvement in these.
10. Feedback from local boards is being sought on the preferred option for local boards to provide input into alcohol licence applications. This formal feedback will inform a report to the governing body on this issue. The report will seek the governing body’s decision on the preferred option for local boards to provide input into alcohol licence applications. All formal local board feedback will be compiled into a report and included as an appendix to the governing body report.
Consideration
Local board views and implications
11. Local board views are being sought via this report. An outcome of this process could see local boards playing a different role in alcohol licence applications to what they presently do.
Maori impact statement
12. Māori are likely to be interested in and impacted by DLC decisions on alcohol licence applications. This is an issue for the DLCs when considering alcohol licence applications.
Implementation
13. Local board feedback will be analysed and will inform a report to the governing body. This report will seek a decision from the governing body on their preferred role of local boards in alcohol licence applications.
No. |
Title |
Page |
aView |
Local board role in alcohol licence applications – issues and options |
33 |
Signatories
Author |
Christine Gulik – Policy Advisor |
Authorisers |
Karen Lyons – Manager Local Board Services Rex Hewitt – Relationship Manager |
Orākei Local Board 07 August 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:
(c) any relevant local alcohol policy:
(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.
07 August 2014 |
|
File No.: CP2014/17051
Purpose
1. To enable the Orakei Local Board to resolve on its feedback on the Auckland Council Local Alcohol Policy (LAP).
Executive summary
2. Council’s Community Policy and Planning team are seeking feedback from local boards on the Council’s Local Alcohol Policy, which has been developed within the framework established by the Sale and Supply of Liquor Act 2012.
3. A Special Consultative Procedure is also underway and feedback from local boards and the public will be considered by the Governing Body in October and November this year. Further information about the policy and the process for implementing it is available in the attached report on the LAP.
4. The Orakei Local Board considered the draft policy at workshops on 12 June 2014 and 24 July 2014. The recommendations below are based on the feedback from these discussions.
That the Orākei Local Board: a) agrees with the approach of having broad areas, however: i) in addition to Broad Areas A and B, there should be a third broad area for suburban areas of Auckland such as Orakei where there is little evidence of alcohol-related harm ii) the restrictions on maximum hours and new licenses in the third broad area should be limited, reflecting the low level of harm in these areas iii) the current maximum hours of operation for off-licences, on-licences and club licences should be retained for Orakei and this could form the basis of a new Broad Area regime iv) in the absence of a new broad area which better reflects the needs of the local area, existing business owners will be faced with a likely loss of value in their business as the Broad Area B reduced hours regime is introduced at relicensing b) considers that priority overlays may be a useful tool in specific areas where they are required as a result of high levels of proven alcohol related harm. c) agrees that no priority overlay areas are required in Orakei. d) considers that the temporary freeze proposal may be a useful tool where needed. e) considers that the rebuttable presumption may be a useful tool in areas where there is evidence of high levels of alcohol related harm. f) supports the introduction of Environmental and Cumulative Impact Assessments, and the sensitive site assessments and considers that the proposed list of sites to be considered sensitive is adequate. g) considers that the introduction of Environmental and Cumulative Impact Assessments needs to be efficient and supported with good advice on its use, noting that it is important that it does not deteriorate into a tool for drafting mitigating conditions and that it is used to support a simple yes/no decision on a licence application. h) considers that training be developed and put in place to ensure the proper use and understanding of Environmental and Cumulative Impact Assessments. i) considers that there also needs to be a programme of review and a timetable for the assessment of Environmental and Cumulative Impact Assessments as it is the most experimental element of the proposed policy. j) supports the provision for best practice operators to apply for extensions of hours, and propose that, to encourage responsible owners, they should be able to apply for any reasonable number of additional hours at any time they that consider they require for their business as long as they continue to demonstrate best practice. k) considers that 12 hours is too long a period for ensuring that any litter left by patrons of a licenced premise is removed from the public areas adjacent to or associated with the premises and propose that it be reduced to 2 hours. l) supports the proposed discretionary conditions. m) recommends that the council collect statistics and report on numbers of applications, the proportions that are approved and disallowed, the location of applications, etc. to local boards regularly n) requests that the policy includes the requirement that all applications for new licences and all applications for extensions of hours be publicly notified by the applicant in the predominant news media in the neighbourhood and by way of affixing a notice to the proposed premises. o) requests that local board members who are members of the District Licencing Committee be able to sit on decisions regarding licence applications in their local area so that local knowledge is incorporated into the decision process in a manner consistent with good decision making guidelines. |
Discussion
5. In determining its feedback on the LAP, the Orakei Local Board’s main concern has been the impact of the proposed policy on Orakei, rather than its impact in other areas. As there are low levels of alcohol-related harm in the Orakei area, the board considers that stricter regulations, such as the restrictions on new licenses or maximum trading hours, are likely to be difficult to justify in terms of their costs and benefits.
6. For a local alcohol policy to be effective, it needs to adequately take account of key local conditions otherwise it risks just being a regional policy that is poorly targeted.
Consideration
7. There are no legal or legislative implications as a result of this report.
Implementation
8. There are no implementation issues are a result of implementing the recommendation of this report.
No. |
Title |
Page |
aView |
Local Alcohol Policy Project – Draft Policy for Local Board Feedback. |
43 |
Signatories
Author |
Beverly Fletcher and Kris Munday - Senior Advisors |
Authorisers |
Adam Milina - Acting Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards |
07 August 2014 |
|
Application for variation of commercial Leases – Auckland Aquarium Limited (Kelly Tarlton), 22 Tamaki Drive, (aka 23 Tamaki Drive), Orakei, Auckland
File No.: CP2014/16977
Purpose
1. This report seeks to gain approval from the Orakei Local Board for the application for a change of use by way of variation of the commercial lease agreements over the site at 22 Tamaki Drive, (aka 23 Tamaki Drive), Orakei, and Auckland.
Executive summary
2. Auckland Aquarium Limited (the head lessee) currently holds two commercial leases with Auckland Council over the site at 22 Tamaki Drive, Orakei where they operate Kelly Tarlton’s sea life aquarium (the aquarium). One lease is for the above ground area which includes the Valve House and car parking facility, the second lease is for the sub soil area which houses the holding tanks (Kelly Tarlton’s aquarium facility). The lease agreements are referred to collaboratively as the “head lease”.
3. Both leases commenced on 23 October 1984 with a 25 year term and a 25 year right of renewal; the final date of expiry for both leases is 22 October 2034.
4. The head lessee holds a sub lease arrangement with Jacques Limited (Okahu) who in early 2000 operated a small café within the sub soil lease area; in 2009 onward the aquarium took over this operation. The sub tenant, Jacques Limited continues to manage the operation of the Valve House area known as “Okahu”
5. The lessee has applied for a variation to the head lease and the sub lease to formalise an existing use of the site to include a conference and function venue. Both the head lease and sub lease agreements currently only allow for the operation of a café/restaurant, not specifically a conference and function venue.
6. The Valve House building was originally operated as a restaurant and café to compliment the aquarium’s activity as a visitor attraction. Eventually the Valve House was hired out for private functions, wedding receptions and other types of events. In 2004 the aquarium opened the Stingray Bay area (within the sub soil lease area) which included a small café. This café was operated by Jacques Limited (sub tenant) whilst they continued to operate the Valve House as a private functions and events venue. Eventually the head lessee took over the operation of the small café in Stingray Bay and the sub tenant focused solely on the operation of the Value House as a private functions and events venue, now referred to as “Okahu”.
7. The application to vary the lease agreements is to formalise the conference and function activities that have been taking place for many years within the existing sites. By formalising the operation of conferences and functions within the sub soil and Valve House areas, both Kelly Tarlton and Jacques Limited (Okahu) will have the official remit they require to really drive this aspect of their businesses. This would bring more visitors to Orakei, create more job opportunities in the local area and result in a positive economic benefit for the local area.
8. Parking near the aquarium - Kelly Tarlton has 112 car parks within the premises; there are no car parks within the Okahu site.
9. The use of the car park at Kelly Tarlton reduces substantially on most days after 4.00pm and from 5.00pm onwards, once aquarium staff have left work, the car park is underutilised. During the busy summer evenings demand for parking close to Mission Bay does increase and obtaining a park close to Mission Bay can become challenging. Kelly Tarlton’s car park is around 1.7 kilometres from the Mission Bay village and feedback received by my tenant has reflected that a lot of locals and visitors do not consider this to be a reasonable walking distance to enjoy an evening out in Mission Bay. This would also support why the use of the aquarium car park after 5pm has been underutilised.
10. Okahu (sub tenant) has been operating conferences and functions in the Valve House for many years with the vast majority of these events taking place in the evening. The guests have always made use of the empty car park above the aquarium without any negative impact on the environment. This has ensured use of a car park facility that would otherwise be underutilised.
11. Many of Okahu’s events are not corporate functions but rather more private individual’s events such as “family and friends” functions including wedding ceremonies, receptions, landmark birthdays and anniversary parties. These functions will usually begin in the late afternoon or evening. From my tenant’s past experiences the guests of these types of social gatherings tend to travel together, car-pooling, taking taxis or using public transport, substantially decreasing the number of vehicles that require parking. The Okahu venue is relatively small with a capacity of up to 250 people, for example a wedding reception for 200 people, would only usually require approximately 50-60 car parks.
12. In summary there does not appear to have been any detrimental impact on traffic taking in to consideration that private functions have been in operation in both areas for many years. The vast majority of functions take place in the evening when the car park above the aquarium is mainly empty. Kelly Tarlton has taken in to consideration there may be some added security issues as a result of increased functions going forward and is happy to investigate security options including placing security guards within the car park.
That the Orākei Local Board: a) agrees to a variation of the head lease agreements (Auckland Aquarium Limited) and sub-lease agreements (Jacques Limited) to reflect an amended use over the sites at 22 Tamaki Drive, Orakei subject to the following terms and conditions: i. The head lease agreements shall be amended to reflect that the head lessee shall be permitted to use the site for a conference and function venue ii. The sub lease agreements shall be amended to reflect that the sub lessee shall be permitted to use the site for a conference and function venue iii. Provided that all such permitted uses comply with the District Plan and any statutory requirements iv. All costs relating to the preparation and execution of these deeds shall be paid by the head lessee |
Comments
13. The site is located within the coastal marine area, principally on land reclaimed by the Harbour Board. The Reserves Act does not affect this site. The Local Board has the delegation to approve a change of use over the site
Consideration
Local board views and implications
14. The Orakei Local Board at the workshop on Thursday 24 July 2014 reflected support in principal to the application however requested further information with regards to potential parking issues as a result of the amended use.
Maori impact statement
15. ACPL has a comprehensive Iwi engagement process that engages with the 19 key Mana Whenua groups in the Tamaki region on four fronts: identifying cultural significance concerns regarding disposal and development properties, flagging commercial interests, development partnering discussions and engagement around design outcomes for council driven development projects. ACPL has also undertaken to be part of council’s Maori Responsiveness Plan pilot program. The project’s key output will be an operational document outlining how ACPL will contribute to council’s strategic and operational commitments to Maori. As there is no change to the property, the existing tenants, or re-tender of the property, there has been no Iwi engagement undertaken in respect of the lessee’s new lease application.
Implementation
16. If the Local Board approves the above recommendations Auckland Council Property Limited will enter in to a variation of commercial leases with the tenant.
No. |
Title |
Page |
aView |
GIS extract: 22 Tamaki Drive, (aka 23 Tamaki Drive), Orakei, Auckland |
63 |
Signatories
Author |
Lori Butterworth - Property Manager - Auckland Council Property Limited |
Authorisers |
Margrit de Man - Property Portfolio Manager - Auckland Council Property Limited Adam Milina - Acting Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards |
07 August 2014 |
|
Adoption of the Orākei Local Economic Development Action Plan
File No.: CP2014/16422
Purpose
1. The purpose of this report is to seek adoption of the Orākei Local Economic Development (ED) Action Plan. The report outlines the action plan process to date and progress on implementation of actions within the plan.
Executive summary
2. The local ED action plan has been developed following consultation with a wide range of key stakeholders. Stakeholders have identified a number of challenges and opportunities within the Orākei economy and these have helped shape the actions within the plan.
3. Local boards have an important role to play in local economic development and provide informed input to regional economic development initiatives, where appropriate. Development of a local ED action plan provides a mechanism to identify local economic development issues and opportunities and scope and implement initiatives in response.
4. The board is now being asked to adopt the Orākei Local ED Action Plan. If approved, officers will develop project scopes for the 2014/15 local economic development work programme, to be discussed at a workshop with the board, before seeking formal board approval.
That the Orākei Local Board: a) Adopts the Orākei Local Economic Development Plan (see attachment) b) Requests that officers develop project scopes for the 2014/15 local economic development work programme, to be discussed at a workshop with the board in September/October 2014, before seeking formal board approval. |
Comments
Background
5. In 2012 the local economic development team worked with representatives of the local board to develop a draft Orākei Local Economic Development Action Plan, to maximise the economic future of the Orākei area.
6. Following the consultation on the local ED action plan, officers have undertaken further work with the local board to update the plan to include standard actions that align with the other local economic development action plans.
7. This action plan forms the implementation and work programme for the local board to deliver on its economic development objectives. Each year Auckland Council’s Local Economic Development team will hold a planning workshop with the Orākei Local Board to confirm the work programme for that financial year.
8. The Orākei Local Economic Development Action Plan is now finalised and ready for adoption.
Local economic development – the role of local boards
9. Local boards have an important role to play in local economic development and provide informed input to regional economic development initiatives, where appropriate. The prime role of local boards in economic development is to consider unique local conditions and determine how best to respond to local needs and opportunities.
10. Development of a local ED action plan provides a mechanism to identify local economic development issues and opportunities and scope and action initiatives in response. It also captures relevant regional initiatives and how they relate to specific local circumstances.
11. The Local Board cannot deliver the Orākei Local ED Action Plan alone and will need to partner with key stakeholders from both the public and private sectors, to ensure effective delivery.
Progress on plan implementation
12. Although the Orākei Local Economic Development Action Plan has not been formally adopted by the board, there has been progress on implementation of individual actions, as part of annual economic development work programmes for the Orākei Local Board. This includes:
· Action 7.11 – Inform businesses on town centre retail strategies – this included two reports produced by Retail Consulting Group (RCG – specialist retail consultancy) to identify best practices in town centre retailing and priority actions for business associations. This work has been completed, and was presented to the local board at a workshop on 29 July 2013. The findings were showcased at The Orākei Retail Forum held on 18 November 2013. Members of the BIDs and local business owners were in attendance
· Action 2.1 – Visitor strategy for Orākei Local Board area – this is currently underway and being undertaken by New Zealand Tourism Research Institute (NZTRI) at AUT University. The strategy will align with ATEED’s tourism promotional activities
· Action 5.1 – home based business study - Ben Parsons & Associates (a consultancy specialising in opinion research, community engagement, facilitation and consultation) have been contracted to undertake this work and the project is now well underway. Workshops with home-based businesses are being planned for early August 2014. The findings will be presented at a local board workshop in September 2014.
Consideration
Local board views and implications
13. The Orākei Local Board has been kept up to date with the development of the local ED action plan. A previous draft was presented to a workshop on 14 November 2013 and local board feedback incorporated.
Maori impact statement
14. There are specific actions within the plan relating to Māori. This includes regular engagement with Iwi to understand and collaborate on cultural tourism initiatives within the Orākei area.
Implementation
2014/15 work programme
15. Priority projects for 2014/15, identified in the plan, will form part of the draft local economic development programme for 2014/15. The draft programme will be discussed at a workshop with the board, before seeking formal board approval.
No. |
Title |
Page |
aView |
FINAL Orakei LED Plan July 2014 |
69 |
Signatories
Authors |
Stephen Cavanagh - Local Economic Development Advisor |
Authorisers |
Harvey Brookes - Manager Economic Development Adam Milina - Acting Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards |
07 August 2014 |
|
Orakei Local Board Contestable Event Support Fund Process 2014/2015
File No.: CP2014/14938
Purpose
1. To propose the process for a contestable local event support fund 2014-2015, for the Orakei Local Board to approve.
Executive summary
2. A local events support fund of $13,620 is available to the Orakei Local Board for distribution for community events in 2014-2015. This fund is proposed to be allocated via two contestable funding rounds:
a) round one opening 4 August 2014, closing 22 August 2014
b) round two (if unallocated funds remain) opening 1 September 2014 to 31 October 2014
3. The proposed process for these contestable rounds is as follows:
a) Applications from event organisers will be submitted via an online web management system called Smartygrants. This application process will be coordinated by the Community Development, Arts and Culture (CDAC) events funding coordinator and the event facilitation central team leader.
b) At the close of the round all received applications will be collated from the online system. They will then be submitted to the board for allocation of funds and resolution at the next possible meeting following the close of the round.
c) The event facilitation central team leader will manage the funding agreements, payments to the event organiser and relevant accountability for each successful application.
That the Orākei Local Board: a) approve the proposed process for the Orakei Contestable Local Event Support Fund – 2014/2015.
|
Comments
4. A local events support fund of $13,620 is available to the Orakei Local Board for distribution for community events in 2014-2015 in the 2014-2015 financial year.
5. The local event support fund provides the opportunity for the Orakei Local Board to work in partnership with local event organisers to develop an events programme that reflects the aspirations of the community and supports the local board plan.
6. The contestable local events support fund has two scheduled rounds during which event organisers can apply for funding. These dates are applied across the region and are as follows:
Round |
Applications Close |
Assessment |
Decision Making |
1 |
31 May 2014 |
June 2014 |
July/August 2014 |
2 |
31 October 2014 |
November 2014 |
December 2014/February 2015 |
7. The Orakei Local Board considered the CDAC Work Programme presented on Thursday 3 July 2014. At this stage the board confirmed their intention to fund local events through the contestable process.
8. The scheduled date for the round one of the contestable local event support fund has passed so a proposed “interim” round of funding has been created, the dates for which are as follows:
Round |
Applications Open |
Workshop |
Decision Making |
Interim 1 |
4 – 22 August 2014 |
15 October 2014 |
6 November 2014 Meeting |
2 |
1 September - 31 October 2014 |
20 November 2014 |
5 February 2015 Meeting |
9. Please note the interim round one will be open for a shortened period of 18 days. We will look to engage potential applicants through local board services’ networks and through our database of previously funded events to ensure that all potential applicants are aware of the reduced application period and associated timeframes.
10. Following the close of the each round the following process is proposed:
a) members will receive a copy of all applications for their consideration
b) the events unit will submit a report including details of all applications for formal consideration and decision-making at the local board meeting (timeframes as indicated above). Members will include any specific conditions (such as funds to be used to provide for a zero waste event or traffic management costs) associated with the distribution of the fund in the resolution.
c) Following the board’s resolutions, funding agreements will be sent to event organisers along with the accountability template. The funding agreement will include any specific conditions as identified in the resolution.
d) the events unit will arrange payment, once signed copies of the relevant agreement or contract has been received
e) Following the payment and execution of event, the accountability template is to be submitted by the event organiser. The event accountability template is designed to enable the CDAC events funding coordinator to confirm that the funds granted were used according to the funding regulations. This also provides the board with information on the attendance and highlights of the event. See Attachment B.
f) All accountability information will be circulated to board members for their information.
11. Local event support funding criteria guidelines for 2014-2015 have been established to assist applicants in understanding the focus of this fund and to guide local boards in their decision-making. The applications have been assessed in accordance with the local event support fund guidelines. See Attachment A.
12. The Orakei Local Board has the opportunity to refer applications to another fund or to allocate funding from within its local event fund.
13. The intention for 2015-2016 for the Orakei Local Board events fund if adopted by the board is to align with the regional contestable event funding rounds and dates. The “interim round one” contestable funding is for the 2014-2015 year only.
Consideration
Local board views and implications
14. Local boards are responsible for the decision-making and allocation of local board event funding including the local event support fund. The Orakei Local Board has identified key priorities for the local area within its local board plan, some of which could be achieved through events.
Maori impact statement
15. This fund does not specifically target Maori groups, however Maori communities are likely to benefit from the events supported by the local board, alongside other groups in the community.
16. The decisions sought within this report fall within the local board delegations.
17. The decisions sought do not invoke the Auckland Council Significance Policy.
Implementation
18. Following the Orakei Local Board consideration and allocation of the events funding, council staff will implement the process, as detailed in section 12 (c-f) above.
19. The process of the contestable fund is run regionally and for the most part inflexible regarding dates and timeframes.
20. During the regional round one funding (closed 31 May 2014) a total of five applications were received for Orakei Local Board. These applications are proposed to be considered as part of the interim round one workshop in September 2014 and have been notified of this timeframe.
No. |
Title |
Page |
aView |
Local event Support Fund Guidelines |
95 |
bView |
Accountability Template |
103 |
Signatories
Author |
Carrie Doust - Team Leader Event Facilitation Central |
Authorisers |
Kevin Marriott - Acting Manager Community Development, Arts and Culture David Burt – Manager Events Adam Milina - Acting Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards |
07 August 2014 |
|
File No.: CP2014/15268
Purpose
1. The purpose of this report is to advise the Orakei Local Board of the Movies in Parks programme planned for the 2014-2015 year and seek approval from the local board to part fund a movie in their area.
Executive summary
2. Movies in Parks are a series of free open air film screenings. The events have been popular, well attended and generate very high satisfaction rates amongst attendees.
3. The Event Delivery team is planning the 2014-2015 programme, and seek approval from the Orakei Local Board to host one event in their area.
4. Funding for the Movies in Parks programme is from three sources: the governing body, the local board, and commercial sponsors/partners. The first event is offered at a subsidised rate and each additional event will be offered at full operational cost. The marketing costs will be covered by the governing body.
5. The local board’s financial contribution to the Movies in Parks programme is $6,250 for one event and $8,500 for each additional event.
That the Orākei Local Board: a) approves the hosting of one Movies in Parks events. b) approves a contribution of $6,250 for one Movies in Parks event to be held at Roberta Reserve, Glendowie on Saturday 21 March 2015 from the 2014/2015 Local Events support fund budget. c) delegates authority to the events portfolio holders to work with council staff to tailor the Movies in the Parks scheduled event for the Orakei Local Board community.
|
Comments
6. The outcome of the Annual Plan 2012-2013 reprioritisation process resulted in a $152,000 reduction in the regional events budget and the Movies in Parks programme being removed.
7. The Culture, Arts and Events (CAE) Forum requested that staff report in detail on the 2012-2013 Movies in the Parks programme and identify possible options and alternatives for delivery for a 2013-2014 Movies in Park programme.
8. After consulting with local boards, the wider Auckland community and other interested parties, staff confirmed there was a strong desire to bring back an enhanced Movies in Parks programme for the 2013-2014 season.
9. Events staff then worked with 16 local boards to deliver a successful Movies in Parks programme, to deliver 19 events across Auckland.
10. Movies in Parks are popular events, and are well supported by our communities. Key facts and figures for 2013/2014 programme are:
· 19 local events took place.
· overall attendance was 30,600, with an average attendance of 1,610 per event.
· overall satisfaction with Movies in Parks was high, with 93 per cent stating that they were satisfied with the event overall. This score is above the target for events of 85 per cent (Colmar Brunton survey 2013-2014 Movies in Parks).
11. Funding for the programme will come from three sources: the governing body, the local boards, and commercial sponsors/partners.
12. A total of $50,000 has been allocated from the regional events budget and discussions are currently being held with a commercial sponsor/partner.
13. Local boards are now being asked to consider and approve their involvement in the 2014-2015 programme. The total cost to the Orakei Local Board to host a movie is $6,250 for one event and $8,500 for each additional event.
14. Council staff will work with the chair, delegated local board members and events portfolio holders to tailor the event to increase community engagement.
15. A successful marketing campaign was delivered in 2013-14 resulting in a 50 percent increase in website visits and a 67 percent increase in attendance figures. Local boards were attributed on all local marketing including suburban press ads, billboards, local posters and onsite at events.
16. In 2013-14 the Orakei Local Board hosted a movie at Roberta Reserve which was attended by 900 people. This is a great result as this was the first time an event of this nature has been delivered in this local board area and at Roberta Reserve. A full debrief is attached. See Attachment A.
17. A programme has been drafted for the 2014-2015 Movies in Parks series, taking into consideration
· availability, location, accessibility, current infrastructure, vehicles access, parking and access to public transport at each venue
· feedback from previous movie events successfully held in your community with the view to increase attendance on already established events.
· feedback received from the local board through either the event delivery or event facilitation team
18. The following event for the Orakei Local Board has been scheduled into the draft programme:
Event |
Day |
Date |
Venue |
Movies in Parks |
Saturday |
21 March 2015 |
Roberta Reserve, Glendowie |
Consideration
Local board views and implications
19. The Orakei Local Board showed an interest in supporting the event and requested further information regarding costs.
Maori impact statement
20. The 2014-2015 Movies in Parks programme is designed to benefit the local community as a whole, including Maori.
Implementation
21. Following agreement from the local board to host a movie, discussions around tailoring the event, need be finalised by 30 August 2014, to enable marketing deadlines to be met and ensure a successful campaign is delivered.
No. |
Title |
Page |
aView |
Local Board Event – Post Event Debrief |
109 |
Signatories
Authors |
Eleanor Cooley - Event Organiser |
Authorisers |
Kevin Marriott - Manager Community Facilities |
Orākei Local Board 07 August 2014 |
|
Local Board Event
Post-Event Report
Event: Movies in Parks – Roberta Reserve, Glendowie
Local Board: Orakei
Date: Saturday 22 March 2014
Organisation: Auckland Council, Event Delivery
Contact Person: Eleanor Cooley
PLEASE ENSURE ALL RELEVANT DOCUMENTATION IS ATTACHED
1. ATTENDANCE FIGURES:
Number of Attendees:
900 |
Number of Participants:
n/a |
Number of Staff:
3 |
2. COMMUNICATION AND MARKETING: How was the event promoted? What worked? What could be improved?
This Movies in Parks programme gained good traction in the market with numbers growing as the season progressed. Along with a regional campaign, a localised marketing plan was put in place and overall numbers were up compared to the events held in previous seasons.
The key communications and marketing activities undertaken for the Orakei Local Board are detailed below
Local Board specific communications and marketing
· Outdoor billboard located at Roberta Reserve · Retail Poster drops · Press advert in suburban paper · Facebook promotion – Movies in Parks – Facebook event created · Facebook promotion – Local Board Facebook pages · Online listings – Auckland Council website, Open Air Cinema website and Eventfinder · Media releases
Auckland wide communications and marketing
· Our Auckland listings in January, February and March · Movies in Parks website – www.moviesinparks.co.nz · Movies in Parks Facebook – www.facebook.co.nz/MoviesinParks · Posters distributed to AC Buildings including Local Board offices, community centres and libraries · Mobile Billboard – installed 10 December 2013 · 20,000 programmes distributed 15 December 2013 · T-shirts – worn by crew from 24 January 2014 · Bus posters – in market – 10 January 2014 · Mediaworks – commercials, announcer adlibs, web banners and Facebook · Promotion at prior Movies in Parks events
|
3. FINANCIALS:
The Movies in Parks 2014 programme was jointly funded by the regional event fund, local boards and sponsorship/partnership revenue.
The Orakei Local Board contribution to this event was $6250 and covered costs as outlined in the table below.
The regional and partnership contribution to Movies in Parks 2014 covered event costs for advertising, communications and marketing, event staff, entertainers, sound requirements, face painters, balloon twisters, portaloos, traffic management, parking marshals and event sundries. |
4. OVERALL EVENT EVALUATION: Provide a general overview of the event.
The timing of the event worked well and the event was well received by the community with crowds arriving from 5.30pm, and continued to arrive right up until the start of the movie.
An estimated 900 were in attendance just before the movie started.
This is a great result given this is the first time we have used Roberta Reserve as a Movies in Parks venue, it shows a strong demand from the community for this kind of event. It would be anticipated that if we continue to deliver Movies in Parks in this area the audience with grow.
The crowd consisted of mostly families picnicking with food brought from home. Those who hadn’t brought food were able to purchase coffee, popcorn, ice-cream and Meditterean wraps.
There were plenty of activities for the children prior to the movie starting with inflatables, face painting, balloon twisting and In2it Street games including the wheels and sports modules.
The movie started around 8.45pm and everyone settled for the movie under the stars.
|
4a.What were the key highlights of the event?
Children getting involved and participating in the free pre-movie entertainment
Bringing together the community to make the most of their local park.
Great family atmosphere and spirit of the event added to with hundreds of smiling children with balloon twisted animals and bright face painting. |
4b.What would be your recommendations should the event take place again?
That Movies in Parks returns to Roberta Reserve, Glendowie in March 2015.
That the Orakei Local Board continues to work with the Event Delivery Team in 2015 to deliver a Movies in Parks event for their local community.
|
5. DECLARATION
I, the undersigned, certify the facts and figures included in this post-event report are a true and factual representation of the event named in this document, and all required documentation has been attached.
Event Producer:
Eleanor Cooley, Event Organiser 17 March 2014
__________________________________ ____________________
Name and Title Date
07 August 2014 |
|
Business Association Support Fund Application - Ellerslie Business Association
File No.: CP2014/15856
Purpose
1. This report provides the Orakei Local Board with the Ellerslie Business Association application form received in July 2014 for the Business Association Support Fund.
Executive summary
2. The Orakei Local Board is committed to assisting groups to provide activities, projects, programmes, initiatives and events that make a positive contribution within the Board area. This includes supporting Business Improvement Districts (BIDs) and other business associations with funding on application to the Board, for activities that support economic development in their communities.
3. This report recommends that the Orakei Local Board allocates $5,599.70 towards the Ellerslie Spring Fairy Festival from its 2014/2015 Business Association Support Fund.
That the Orākei Local Board: a) receives the Ellerslie Business Association application to the Business Association Support Fund and approves $5,599.70 from its 2014/2015 Business Association Support Fund to the Ellerslie Business Association for the Ellerslie Spring Fairy Festival. b) notes that there is $14,400.30 remaining in the 2014/2015 Business Association Support Fund for future Ellerslie Business Association applications.
|
No. |
Title |
Page |
aView |
Ellerslie Business Association - Business Association Support Fund Application |
117 |
Signatories
Author |
Georgina Morgan - Democracy Advisor |
Authorisers |
Adam Milina - Acting Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards |
07 August 2014 |
|
Psychoactive Substances – Draft Local Approved Product Policy
File No.: CP2014/16215
Purpose
1. The purpose of the report is to seek local board feedback on the proposed option for the draft Local Approved Product Policy (LAPP).
Executive summary
2. On 6 March 2014 the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee approved a work plan for the development of Auckland Council’s LAPP (REG/2014/34). The LAPP will set rules regarding where retail outlets of psychoactive substances may operate. The Psychoactive Substances Act 2013 provides that a policy may regulate the location of retail outlets by reference to broad areas within a district, proximity to other premises selling approved products and/or distance from certain types of premises such as schools, places of worship and other community facilities.
3. On 3 July the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee considered a report setting out the proposed content for the draft Local Approved Product Policy. The committee agreed the following recommendations (REG/2014/86).
a) endorse the proposed draft Local Approved Product Policy that will prevent the sale of approved psychoactive substances in the following areas:
· high deprivation areas as defined by the Ministry of Health’s Deprivation Index score of 8, 9 or 10 indicating areas that fall in the bottom 30% of deprivation scores
· neighbourhood centers as defined by the unitary plan
· within 300m of a high school
· within 100m of a primary school
· within 300m of the mental health or addiction treatment center
· within 500m of an existing psychoactive substance retail licence
b) forward a copy of this report to local boards to be considered on their agendas
c) note that once all the local board feedback has been analysed, a final draft Local Approved Product Policy (LAPP) will be presented to the committee on 9 October 2014 to be approved for public notification via the special consultative procedure
d) note the special consultative procedure will begin in November 2014 with the expected final adoption of the policy in March 2015.
That the Orākei Local Board: a) provide feedback on the draft Local Approved Product Policy option set out in the attached report (attachment A).
|
Comments
4. On 6 March 2014 the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee approved a work plan for the development of Auckland Council’s LAPP (REG/2014/34). On 3 July the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee endorsed a preferred option for the LAPP (REG/2014/86).
5. The LAPP will set rules regarding where retail outlets of psychoactive substances may operate. The Psychoactive Substances Act 2013 provides that a policy may regulate the location of retail outlets by reference to broad areas within a district, proximity to other premises selling approved products and/or distance from certain types of premises such as schools, places of worship and other community facilities.
6. Six options were considered for the LAPP. Three options were rejected prior to consultation as not being able to achieve the outcomes for a successful LAPP. The remaining three options were discussed with local boards, external stakeholders and council staff. After consideration of feedback and relevant research a preferred option was developed.
7. The preferred option for the LAPP would prevent licences being granted in areas of high deprivation, near high schools and near addiction and mental health treatment centres. It would also limit how close to an existing shop a new shop could open. This option would reduce the availability of these substances in areas where their presence is likely to have the greatest potential for harm. The prevention of harm is achieved while maintaining the intent of the government to allow a regulated sale of these substances.
8. Further details on the rationale for the preferred option for the LAPP are set out in the report that went to the Regional Policy and Strategy Committee on 3 July (attachment A). Local board feedback on this option is being sought through this report. Local board feedback on this preferred option will inform the final draft of the LAPP which will be reported to the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee on 9 October. Local boards will an opportunity to provide feedback on the final draft in November 2014 – February 2015.
Consideration
Local board views and implications
9. Local board views on the draft LAPP option are being sought via this report. Local boards have previously provided feedback on possible options. Workshops on the proposed options were held with all of the local boards except for Great Barrier, Waiheke and Orakei local boards who declined to be involved in the process. Of the remaining 18 local boards Whau declined to attend the workshop and did not provide any feedback.
10. Of the 17 local boards who took part in the LAPP workshops 13 endorsed the specified place option as their preferred option. Four boards that for local reasons preferred either the town centre or industrial option as they felt it provided tighter restrictions in their areas. All of these local boards also provided the specified areas as their second option acknowledging that it was unlikely that all local boards would opt for their preferred option. The Hibiscus and Bays Local Board declined to provide a preferred option. All local board feedback was considered in the selection and development of the option presented for feedback in the current report.
Maori impact statement
11. Māori are over represented amongst the groups of vulnerable people likely to be affected by using approved psychoactive substances. This over representation has two effects. Firstly getting the right option for the LAPP to maximize harm reduction will be more effective for Māori. Secondly, any solutions need to be designed in close collaboration with Māori to ensure they are workable and support wider initiatives aimed at improving Māori outcomes.
12. A workshop has been undertaken with representatives from Hapai Te Hauora Tapui an agency representing Māori health providers in the Auckland region. Council staff will be working with the Independent Māori Statutory Board and Hapai Te Hauora Tapui to set up hui for iwi feedback. Information from the workshop and hui will be central to the development of the LAPP.
Implementation
Step |
Estimated timeframe |
1. Local board and stakeholder engagement on draft option Officers will seek feedback from local boards, internal, external and political stakeholders on the approved draft LAPP option. |
July – September 2014 |
2. Final draft LAPP for special consultative procedure Officers will then present a final draft policy to RSPC for approval for consultation. |
9 October |
3. Special consultative procedure Officers will follow the special consultative procedure set out in section 83 of Local Government Act 2002. This will include public submissions and hearings. |
November 2014 |
4. Local board feedback of final draft Officers will seek formal feedback from local boards on the final draft policy. |
November 2014 – February 2015 |
4. Adopt final policy Following the hearings the draft will be finalised and presented to RSPC for adoption. |
March 2015 |
5. Implementation and review A copy will be sent to Ministry of Health after it has been completed. The LAPP will then be reviewed every five years in accordance with section 69 of the Act. |
Ongoing |
No. |
Title |
Page |
aView |
Psychoactive Substances Draft Local Approved Products Policy |
137 |
Signatories
Author |
Georgina Morgan - Democracy Advisor |
Authorisers |
Adam Milina - Acting Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards |
Orākei Local Board 07 August 2014 |
|
Auckland Transport Update – Orakei Local Board: July 2014
File No.: CP2014/17027
Purpose
1. The purpose of this report is to update the Board on a range of transport related issues in Orakei area during July 2014.
That the Orākei Local Board: a) receives the report. b) requests Auckland Transport to prepare a Rough Order of Cost to investigate the installation of railings along the footpath between Edmund Hillary Retirement Village on Abbots way and the intersection of Lunn Ave. |
Monthly Overview
Orakei Local Board Transport Capital Fund
2. The process for discretionary fund projects:
Either a Rough Order of Cost (ROC) will be provided to the Orakei Local Board for projects, or if a project does not meet the listed criteria it will be declined.
When the Rough Order of Cost is provided the Orakei Local Board must formally authorise the next step in the delivery of these projects, which is detailed investigation, design, and a firm estimate. The Board then approves or not, the project for construction. The costs incurred for detailed investigation, design, consultation and construction of these projects will be deducted from Orakei Local Board’s Transport Capital Fund. Please see commentary above on the progress of current ROC’s also for further updates see attachment D.
3. Remuera
Village Upgrade (REVup), sub-project 2.3: Remuera Road entrance to Village
Green – Footpath upgrade
The ROC previously reported of $45,000 has been increased to $50,000 to
allow for more input to the design of the paving and selection of the
appropriate stone sets.
4. Remuera
Village Upgrade (REVup), sub-project 2.5: Lane upgrade with a design
incorporating coloured concrete at a likely ROC of $108,000.
There has been an additional estimate for the design cost for the artwork
in the concrete paving of approximately $12,000 bringing the ROC up to
$120,000.
5. Remuera
Village Upgrade (REVup), sub-project 2.7: Lane wall: wall
panels of perforated metal screens.
The initial ROC estimate was $25,000. There was concern from the architect
that this was too low. The ROC has therefore been increased to $40,000.
6. Remuera Village Upgrade (REVup), sub-project 2.8: Pedestrian
marking: Clonbern Road, Victoria Avenue and Remuera Road.
This project has had a fixed cost estimate of
$20,000 approved by the Orakei Local Board at the July Meeting. This project
will be completed as part of the other REVup projects. Remuera Road is due to
be upgraded in the next few years. Provided the upgrade is not scheduled in the
next two years then this will proceed as planned.
The four Remuera Village projects above will have a project manager assigned
to deliver them as one project. This manager was not assigned at the writing of
this report. That person is expected to be assigned A.S.A.P.
7. Abbots way
footpath safety
This project has been raised by residents of Edmund Hillary Retirement
Village, the proposal is to install a rail on the roadside of the footpath
between the village and the intersection with Lunn Ave. This has been
investigated by the operations team and it is not high enough on the priority
list to be funded by Auckland Transport in this financial year.
8. Remuera
Railway Station Secure Bike Parking
This project is still being scoped and a ROC is expected to be available
for the August report (for the September meeting).
9. Bike Racks
at Orakei and Meadowbank Station
Further information has been sought on this ROC and has needed to be reassessed
as the request was for a lower level bike rack, similar to those at Britomart,
rather than a full secure facility that has been trialled on the North Shore.
10. Summerhill Footpath Project
This project is no longer able to be implemented by
the footpath team as it did not meet the cut off for new footpaths in 2014/15 financial
year. There has been design changes required, including extending the kerb to
ensure this meets current requirements for mobility access. The current ROC of
$27,000 will not enough to deliver the design approved by our safety team.
Auckland Transport is now seeking a new ROC. This will be available for the
September meeting.
11. Mission Bay
Streetscape
The project team will meet with the designers to finalise the design with the
representative from the businesses, this will lock down the scope of the
project and ensure that all the expectations of the partners are met.
Alongside this the formal legal agreement is being formalised.
12. Tamaki Drive
to Glen Innes Cycleway
The project team is assessing a number of options for this path to take, it
is expected to start at the existing walkway off Felton Matthew Drive and
continue almost exclusively off road until Tamaki Drive. It is important that
each of the options selected are viable and able to withstand construction and
traffic. A meeting with Auckland Council Parks and SLIPs teams has meant that
the project will have synergy with their work programmes. The next step is to
formalise the stakeholders and begin external meetings.
13. Public
Transport Improvement
Auckland Transport is committed to improving public
transport across the Auckland Region. There will be full consultation on
proposals starting in 2015. Before we begin this consultation we are proposing
to begin a trial feeder bus timetable from Stonefields to the Glen Innes Train
Station. This is likely to begin in Novemeber when the new electric trains are
running on the Eastern Line.
14. Parking Strategy
Auckland Transport is grateful for the effort and
energy the Orakei Local Board has given to the consultation of this document.
Making themselves and their associations available to Auckland Transport to
ensure that every opportunity has been made for the community of Orakei provide
informed feedback. Consultation closed on the 31 July.
15. Remuera
The speed indicator sign has been up for 6 weeks now, the speed data is
being assessed and is expected to be available for the next report
16. Stonefields
There were some issues raised from residents of Stonefields around the speed on College Road. This was assessed and the average speed is currently 63km, this is significantly too fast and Auckland Transport proposes to install a permanent speed indicator sign on College Road. The speed will be monitored and if required additional solutions will be looked at.
Within Stonefields its self, Auckland Transport staff believe that speed is not likely to be a significant concern, however there will be speed assessment done. Auckland Transport believe that there may be some benefit to installing gateway signage announcing that Stonefields is a Safe Speed or Low Speed area (wording to be confirmed), this sign is not enforceable but is there to indicate to residents and visitors the intention of the Stonefields development to be more pedestrian and family focused.
There was an
error in last month’s report stating that broken yellow lines were to be
installed at the school, apologies this is incorrect. What will be installed
is a KEA crossing; this is a crossing that is activated at the beginning and
end of the school. To support this work there will also be some clearway signs
for school peak time only. If this is unsuccessful at managing the school gate
issue then further options will need to be considered, like broken yellow
lines.
The residents association has asked Auckland Transport to investigate the
possibility of painting ‘goal post’ at driveways and broken yellow lines at
intersections. This goes against the philosophy of Stonefields and Auckland
Transport are reluctant to begin this process. If cars are parking over
intersections and driveways, this is illegal and residents need to call the
Auckland Transport call center.
17. Ellerslie
The Ellerslie Residents Association have asked for a meeting with the residents association, Auckland Transport and Elected representatives, this meeting is to go through the number of issues that have been presented to Auckland Transport and provide a way forward that hopefully brings some resolution to these issues.
The Orakei Local Board received a deputation from residents in Gavin Street in regard to heavy vehicles using the residential part of Gavin Street as a shortcut between Penrose Road and the Ellerslie Panmure Highway. As Gavin Street lies between two local board areas, the residents have also appeared before the Maungakeikei/Tamaki Local Board. This issue has been around for many years and remedies such as advisory signs and speed calming devices have been implemented but residents are saying that these measures haven’t been wholly successful.
Auckland Transport is relooking at the problems faced by the residents as a result of the deputations. The first step has been to initiate tube counts for both Gavin Street and Eaglehurst Road. The speed figures have shown that Gavin Street has an average of 29 km/h, due to the speed calming devices but that Eaglehurst has an average speed of 56 km/h. This is too fast for the environment especially given that there are heavy vehicles involved. Auckland Transport considers that rather than just a remedy for Gavin Street, a holistic view of the area must be considered as any change in Gavin Street will also affect Eaglehurst Street and others.
Discussions are now centering around the possibility of installing chicanes on both Eaglehurst and Gavin Street and removing the speed calming devices from Gavin Street. There are two options for the chicanes under consideration. The first would only allow cars and light vehicles to use it by creating a narrow entrance and exit. The second option would involve a chicane wide enough to allow for trucks to pass through but also require the implementation of a bylaw that prohibits the use of the chicanes outside of set hours. This second option would require Police enforcement and support.
At this stage, no decision on a way forward has been made and it must be also be noted that there is no budget allocation for delivery of work on Gavin or Eaglehurst Streets in the current 14/15 year.
Implementation
AT Ref # |
TPL Ref # |
Issue |
Discussion |
Action |
AT2012/007954 |
9.8 |
Suggestions for new Pedestrian Crossing layouts in Ellerslie Town Centre |
Auckland Council Urban Design staff has suggested options for improving pedestrian crossings in this town centre. |
June 2014, The road safety team is currently reviewing the implementation of pedestrian crossings suggested by the operations team. July 2014, there is no update at this point.
|
|
9.99 |
Shore Road Median Strip |
A number of safety concerns have been raised about Shore Road, particularly in the area near Bloodworth Park and the Shore Road Reserve. |
This project is on the programme; however, it is unlikely to be delivered until the 2016/2017 financial year. If the board would like to have this refuge delivered before then, it could consider prioritising this as a Transport Capital Fund project. Auckland Transport is looking to provide a pedestrian link from the new walkway across Shore Road, by the entrance to Martyn Wilson Reserve. July 2014 A review will be done on pedestrian connectivity and access to the parks on Shore Road, as an outcome of the Hobson Bay action plan. Once this review is done this will be presented to the board to establish priority. |
N/A |
N/A |
Stonefields Parking |
It has been reported that the high density housing units that are currently being built only have one car park for each three bedroom unit and there are no parking bays on the streets.
Many of the new units are used as rental properties and have multiple vehicles at each residence.
This is resulting in the streets having cars parked down both sides, some partly on the berms and reducing the road width (at times) to one lane only.
|
This issue was discussed at the May 2013, Orakei Local Board Meeting.
Auckland Transport was asked to comment on a memo from Auckland Council.
Auckland Transport has provided comment and has asked for this matter to be removed from the ‘Issues Register’.
At the July 2013 Orakei Local Board meeting members requested that this item remain on the register.
A meeting with Auckland Transport and the Stonefields Residents association is scheduled for 26 March 2014. Preliminary discussions have been held with the parking team and they are happy to support where they can. June 2014, The board approves a resolution for a ROC to install additional parking bays as part of their Transport Capital Fund. This ROC was unavailable at the time of writing the report. |
N/A |
9.98 |
‘The Landing’ Entrance |
The Orakei Local Board has raised safety concerns around the entrance to ‘The Landing’. |
June 2014, a ROC was requested for funding the entrance way in conjunction with Auckland Council. July 2014, The Local Board agreed to fund this project and it will be managed by Auckland Council. |
N/A |
|
Support Orakei Local Board urban design initiatives |
Auckland Transport has been requested to work with Auckland Council’s Urban Design Team on the following issues:
1. Creating a boulevard effect by planting further oak trees on the north side of Remuera Rd around the Victoria Ave shops; and
2. Issues relating to the Village Green project in respect of aspects where Auckland Transport has a role. |
Auckland Transport continues to work with Auckland Council to support development of the Village Green plan on an as required basis. There is no intention for AT to undertake further involvement than as a support and advocate for the Board to deliver these projects.
|
Note: N/A – A Customer Service Reference Number is not applicable to this item because either it was handled directly by the EMRM or it is a legacy issue or the request was for information that was outside the boundaries of a service request.
There are no attachments for this report.
Signatories
Author |
Melanie Dale, Elected Member Relationship Manager, Auckland Transport |
Authorisers |
Jonathan Anyon, Elected Member Relationship Team Manager, Auckland Transport Adam Milina - Acting Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards |
Orākei Local Board 07 August 2014 |
|
File No.: CP2014/15779
Purpose
1. To provide the Chairperson with an opportunity to update the Orakei Local Board on projects and issues they have been involved with since the last meeting.
That the Orākei Local Board: a) receives the Chairperson’s August 2014 report.
|
No. |
Title |
Page |
aView |
Chairperson's Report - August 2014 |
173 |
Signatories
Author |
Georgina Morgan - Democracy Advisor |
Authorisers |
Adam Milina - Acting Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards |
07 August 2014 |
|
File No.: CP2014/17062
Executive Summary
Providing Board Members the opportunity to update the Orakei Local Board on projects and issues they have been involved with since the last meeting.
That the Orakei Local Board: a) receives the Board Member reports. b) notes that a Long Term Plan budget of $2.2M and a sportsfield lights renewal budget of $150,000 have been combined to provide a total budget of $2,350,000 for the upgrade of the Crossfield Reserve and Glover Park sportsfields. c) notes the recent inclusion of growth water charges of $130,000 required by Watercare for the irrigation connection at Glover Park has resulted in total project costs exceeding the anticipated estimates. d) notes that the Orakei Local Board agreed that some of the $300,000 authorised under delegated authority by the Parks portfolio holder originally earmarked for the lighting of two fields at Crossfield Reserve could be used for the irrigation connection at Glover Park. e) notes that the transfer of the funds originally earmarked for the lighting of two fields at Crossfield Reserve (noted in resolution d) will leave a shortfall of approximately $30,000 for the field lighting at Crossfield Reserve. f) notes that Officers intend to start the planning required to install lights on one field at Crossfield Reserve, however the funding shortfall of $30,000 will need to be provided via budget reallocation as part of the Annual Plan process, or Local Board discretionary funding, or if the field will have limited lighting coverage for training purposes only. |
No. |
Title |
Page |
aView |
Board Member Parkinson - August 2014 report |
191 |
bView |
Board Member Churton - August 2014 report |
205 |
cView |
Board Member Davis - August 2014 report |
207 |
dView |
Board Member Cooke - August 2014 report |
229 |
eView |
Board Member Thomas - August 2014 report |
233 |
Signatories
Authors |
Georgina Morgan - Democracy Advisor |
Authorisers |
Adam Milina - Acting Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards |
07 August 2014 |
|
File No.: CP2014/15741
Purpose
1. To provide the Orakei Local Board with an opportunity to track reports that have been requested from officers.
That the Orākei Local Board: a) receives the Resolutions Pending Action report.
|
No. |
Title |
Page |
aView |
Resolutions Pending Action Table - August 2014 |
237 |
Signatories
Authors |
Georgina Morgan - Democracy Advisor |
Authorisers |
Adam Milina - Acting Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards |
07 August 2014 |
|
Local Board Workshop Record of Proceedings
File No.: CP2014/15763
Purpose
1. To provide the Board with the record of proceedings for the Orakei local Board workshops held on 26 June, 10, 17 and 24 July 2014.
That the Orākei Local Board: a) receives the record of proceedings for the Orakei Local Board workshops held on 26 June, 10, 17 and 24 July 2014. |
No. |
Title |
Page |
aView |
26 June 2014 - Workshop Proceedings |
243 |
bView |
10 July 2014 - Workshop Proceedings |
245 |
cView |
17 July 2014 - Workshop Proceedings |
247 |
dView |
24 July 2014 - Workshop Proceedings |
249 |
Signatories
Authors |
Georgina Morgan - Democracy Advisor |
Authorisers |
Adam Milina - Acting Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards |