I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board will be held on:
Date: Time: Meeting Room: Venue:
|
Tuesday, 16 September 2014 6.00pm Local Board
Office |
Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board
OPEN AGENDA
|
MEMBERSHIP
Chairperson |
Simon Randall |
|
Deputy Chairperson |
Chris Makoare |
|
Members |
Josephine Bartley |
|
|
Brett Clark |
|
|
Bridget Graham, QSM |
|
|
Obed Unasa |
|
|
Alan Verrall |
|
(Quorum 4 members)
|
|
Philippa Hillman Democracy Advisor, Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board
4 September 2014
Contact Telephone: (09) 570 3848 Email: philippa.hillman@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
|
Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board 16 September 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
10 Extraordinary Business 5
11 Notices of Motion 6
12 Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board Discretionary Community Funding: Round One 2014/2015 7
13 Proposed Allocation of 2014/2015 Environment Budgets 11
14 Manukau Harbour Stormwater Network Discharge Consent – Stormwater Priorities Consultation 17
15 Jubilee Bridge Structural Renewal - Concept Design Development 77
16 AT Monitoring and Enforcement of Mobility Parking Spaces in Parks Reserve Car Parks 83
17 Review of Alcohol Control Bylaw - Proposed bylaw for local board feedback 91
18 Deferral of 2014/15 capital projects 123
19 Auckland Transport Monthly Update Report – September 2014 131
20 Report from Onehunga Foreshore Dog Access Panel 147
21 Regional Facilities Auckland Fourth Quarter Report 2013/14 157
22 Auckland Council Property Limited Local Board Six-Monthly update 1 January to 30 June 2014 183
23 Record of Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board Workshops August 2014 199
24 Board Members' Reports 205
25 Chair's Report to the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board 215
26 Governing Body Member's Update 217
27 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 Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board: a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Tuesday, 19 August 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
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.
At the close of the agenda no requests for public forum had been received.
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.
Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board 16 September 2014 |
|
Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board Discretionary Community Funding: Round One 2014/2015
File No.: CP2014/13671
Purpose
1. To present applications received for round one of the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board Community Funding Programme 2014/15. The Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board is required to fund, part-fund or decline these applications.
Executive summary
2. For the 2014/15 financial year, the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board set a total community funding budget of $80,000. This is the first round for the financial year. If the budget is split across the three rounds for the year, the budget for this round is $26,667.
3. Twenty five applications were received in this round, with a total requested of $125,964.
That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board: a) considers the applications listed in Table 1 and agrees to fund, part-fund or decline each application in this round. Table 1: Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board Community Funding Applications
|
Comments
4. Three community funding rounds are scheduled for this financial year. This first round closed on 31 July 2014.
5. Through community grants, the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board aims to build social capital within the local community by supporting projects that provide a community benefit, are equitable and inclusive and result in an ongoing gain to the local area. When reviewing applications, the local board should be guided by the following criteria (these are not eligibility criteria; rather they are guidelines to help the local board when considering the merits of each proposal):
a) the proposal’s benefit to the local area
b) the applicant group’s role in the local area
c) the proposal’s alignment with the board’s priorities, such as:
i) young people
ii) Maori
iii) the environment
iv) ulture and arts
v) social cohesion
vi) recreation and sport
vii) heritage
d) whether the group applies to receive the proceeds of gaming machines.
6. This fund is allocated at the local board’s discretion. In accordance with its fiduciary duties, the local board is to act honestly, avoid conflicts of interest and act in what the local board believes to be the best interests of the community.
7. Round one of the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board Community Funding closed on 31 July. The fund was advertised through local community networks and on the Auckland Council website.
8. For the 2014/15 financial year the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board set a total community funding budget of $80,000. None of this budget has been allocated to date. If the budget is split across the three rounds for the year, the budget for this round is $26,667.
9. Fourteen applications were received in this round, with a total requested of $125,964.
Consideration
Local Board Views and Implications
10. Local board feedback on the community funding applications was sought at a workshop with the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board on 9 September.
Maori Impact Statement
11. Community funding is a general programme of interest and accessible to a wide range of groups, including Maori. Maori are therefore likely to benefit alongside other groups in the community.
General
12. The allocation of grants to community groups is within the adopted annual plan.
13. The decisions sought by this report do not trigger the Auckland Council Significance Policy.
There are no attachments for this report.
Signatories
Authors |
Sarah Zimmerman - Community Funding Advisor |
Authorisers |
Kevin Marriott – Acting Manager Community Development Arts and Culture Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager |
Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board 16 September 2014 |
|
Proposed Allocation of 2014/2015 Environment Budgets
File No.: CP2014/18555
Purpose
1. To seek approval for the allocation of the 2014/2015 Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board budgets for Manukau Harbour water quality improvements ($40,400) and Tāmaki Estuary Panmure Basin water quality improvement ($40,400) and ongoing ecological restoration ($65,650).
Executive summary
2. The Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board have allocated budget for Manukau Harbour water quality improvements ($40,400), Tāmaki Estuary Panmure Basin water quality improvement ($40,400) and on-going ecological restoration ($65,650) for the 2014/2015 financial year.
3. Infrastructure and Environmental Services (I and ES) department officers have been liaising with officers across Auckland Council to discuss recommendations for the best allocation of these budgets, and provide the recommendations below.
4. The recommended projects contribute to the local board aspirations for The Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board plan i.e: “The Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board will prioritise projects that look after and restore our maunga, buildings, water, open spaces and wahi tapu. Improving the water quality and the foreshore of the Manukau Harbour and Tāmaki Estuary are areas of particular focus”.
5. This report seeks approval for the allocation of the two water quality improvement budgets, for the Manukau Harbour and Tāmaki Estuary Panmure Basin, and the ongoing ecological restoration budget for 2014/2015.
That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board: a) receives the report b) approves the allocation of $40,400 from the Manukau Harbour Water Quality Improvements budget to the Arthur Street restoration project and the expansion of the water sensitive Onehunga project. c) approves the allocation of $40,400 from the Tāmaki Estuary Panmure Basin Water Quality Improvements budget to the industry pollution prevention programme, Ko Au Te Awa (KATA) and the Water Sensitive Glenn Innes projects. d) approves the allocation of $65,650 to ecological restoration of Apirana Reserves North and South and Captain Springs and Bycroft Springs Reserves. e) requests officers seek the approval of the local board for any substantial variations to the agreed projects, if required, during implementation. |
Comments
Manukau Harbour water quality improvements ($40,400)
6. At its business meeting held 19 August 2014, Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board resolved to allocate $8,500 of this budget to support the Manukau Harbour Forum work programme.
7. It is recommended the remainder of this budget be allocated to the following projects:
Budget Allocation $8,500 - (resolved at 19 August 2014 meeting). Manukau Harbour Forum 2014/2015 work programme. |
· To support the Manukau harbour Forum work programme as adopted by the forum at its June 2014 business meeting. · Note that financial contributions to the three year work programme adopted by the forum are being considered by all nine local boards on the Manukau Harbour forum. |
Budget Allocation $25,000 - Implementation of the first stages of Arthur Street restoration project concept plan |
· The Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board allocated 2013/14 budget to the Onehunga Community Restoration Project in Arthur Street. A community day called “Stream to Sea” was run on 2 August 2014 in order to obtain local resident input into the design principles and co-design process. A workshop is planned for mid-September (to which the local board members will be invited) to present community feedback gathered on the day and to workshop design options. · The outcome of the design workshop will be a landscape concept, including a preliminary planting plan and schedule, and a potential staging methodology for site improvements which will be shared with community members and the local board. · Project specifics will be based on the outcomes of the concept design plan from the September workshop. · Because the site is held under a short term lease, proposals for this area need to balance community aspirations, with the temporary nature of the site. Based on initial analysis of the Stream to Sea feedback, the budget in the first stage is likely to be spent on weed clearance and stream side planting. · As well as riparian planting, the area for restoration includes approximately 4500m2 of upland and 3000 m2 of wetland type planting. · Work for this project will be carried out through the procurement of a local social enterprise and community involvement. Funding partners will also be sought from within Council to contribute to water quality improvement outcomes. Note: based on initial analysis of the Stream to Sea feedback, it is estimated that the total funding requirement to carry out weed clearance and stream side planting is $50,000 with the possibility of another $5,000 to install some specimen trees at 40L sizes. |
Budget Allocation $6,900 - Expansion of Water Sensitive Onehunga project |
· The Water Sensitive Onehunga project is underway utilising funding from the 2013/14 financial year. This project was informed by two key pieces of work: The Regional Stormwater Education Implementation Plan – Fostering a Water Sensitive Auckland and The Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board Household Stormwater Initiatives – scoping study. · The Onehunga project has already identified four households actively engaged in the Arthur Street Restoration Project as ideal candidates for the project and the scoping and engagement phase is underway. At the Streams to Sea community feedback day held on 2 August six additional residents expressed an interest in the project. This additional funding would allow for up to four more homes to become part of the Water Sensitive Onehunga project. |
Total estimated allocation: $40,400 |
Tāmaki Estuary Panmure Basin water quality improvements ($40,400)
8. It is recommended that this budget is allocated to the following projects as discussed with the local board environment portfolio holders.
Budget Allocation $15,400 – Industry Pollution Prevention (IPP) Programme |
To extend the Industry Pollution Prevention programme (IPP) through a large industrial area in Penrose and Onehunga (comparable in size to East Tāmaki). The IPP programme was started in this catchment at Southdown and Ann’s Creek. Extending this programme would be of more value than revisits to previously visited areas as there is a need to avoid visitation fatigue when dealing with industry. This amount would allow for approximately 100 more businesses to be engaged with the programme in this area. Note: Two significant potential pollution prevention areas have been identified for this catchment. If additional funding was available, it would be possible to increase the area of the currently proposed programme (from $15,400 to $20,000). A second stream of work would also be possible in this area to the value of $20,000. A detailed project plan would be presented to the local board for review before any funding was allocated. |
Budget Allocation $10,000 – Ko Au Te Awa (KATA) |
Ko Au Te Awa (KATA) is a community led restoration project to restore the Omaru River which flows through Glen Innes and into the Tāmaki Estuary. KATA 2014 involved 158 people participating over the four celebrations held each Saturday in July. In total 2,900 trees were planted along the banks of the Omaru River in Maybury, Eastview and Apirana Reserves, and the Council’s Sustainable Catchments team came on as a funding partner to support creative engagement. The key partners involved in Ko Au Te Awa (KATA) in 2014 were; Mad Ave Studios, the Maungakiekie Tāmaki Local Board and the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board Youth Panel , the ROOTs Creative Entrepreneurs, Tāmaki WRAP (Waste Reduction Action Programme) Auckland Council (Wai Care, Sustainable Catchments and the Environmental Initiatives teams) and the Glen Innes Community. It is recommended that $10,000 is allocated to the KATA project in 2014/15. Officers from the Environmental Services Unit will work to ensure a cohesive and collaborative approach is taken between funding partners and community groups. In addition the Sustainable Catchments team has indicated that they are interested in remaining funding partners for this project in the 2014/2015 year. |
Budget allocation $15,000 - Water Sensitive Glenn Innes |
Outreach and engagement with schools during the Ko Au Te Awa 2013 and 2014 project and feedback from the community navigators (including MAD Ave and The Roots Creative Entrepreneurs) suggests that young leaders are emerging who have a passion for their local water ways. It is recommended that the local board fund a water sensitive project based on the residential Panmure pilot, applied to a local school in Glenn Innes. To ensure that energy and enthusiasm created through the KATA events is harnessed, a school with an existing relationship to the Omaru Creek (via Waicare programmes or the KATA event itself) will be prioritised. The project will educate students about the impact of stormwater from residential properties on receiving environments and retrofit devices on their school property incorporating low impact design such as timers and irrigation drip lines to gardens, installation of water tanks and stormwater planter boxes). It is recommended that an appropriate community based organisation is contracted to provide the school coordinator role ($5,000) and that Stormwater Solutions be contracted to provide design and installation services ($10,000). Officers will seek to source funding partners to increase the scope of this project; however this figure would be satisfactory to run the project alone. Note: If additional funding became available, an additional $10,000 would allow for installations in a second school in the Omaru River catchment. |
Ongoing ecological restoration budget ($65,650)
9. Officers are currently seeking tenders for a contractor to continue the on-going ecological restoration on priority reserves identified in the ‘Ecological restoration priorities on local parks within the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board’ report.
10. The recommendations for the 2014/2015 work programme are contained in the table below:
Apirana Reserve (North and South) |
· Continue controlling weeds throughout the reserve to ensure the process of natural regeneration continues. · Maintain the wetland at the eastern end of management unit (MU) 5, (note: neighbouring residents have planted natives here and are keen to see the area restored). · Control Kikuyu along the northern boundary of MU5 to allow planting. · Control exotic canopy species as the understory develops. Particularly in MU5 where exotic trees dominate the canopy. More planting will need to be undertaken and allowed to establish before further tree removal. Removal of all crack willow throughout the reserve should be considered in the longer-term. · Monitor planting in MUs 4 and 5 for signs of browsing by rabbits. Some control may be required if significant damage is occurring. Feral cats are also a problem in the reserve and control considered to protect birds. · Continue revegetation throughout the reserve, prioritising infilling previous plantings, under planting the exotic canopy and filling any further gaps created by weed control. · An area of MU1 along the fence line has been cleared during housing development. Planting of this area in 2015 is recommended. MU5 also requires more plants, especially the northern boundary as a priority. · The area of stream that flows over the boundary between MUs 4 and 5 should be protected as a part of the reserve or by an agreement with landowners if possible. This area of the stream is very weedy and has been covered over in one section. Larger specimen trees could be planted along the fence line inside the reserve to assist with this protection in the meantime. · Fencing of MU6 is recommended, weeds controlled and planted to increase protection of areas in the reserve and provide further habitat for native fauna. |
Bycroft Reserve |
· Continue controlling priority weeds throughout the reserve to ensure plant establishment is allowed to continue. Tradescantia and madeira vine require control in Fissidens MU around the water channel, and a grey willow requires further control in the north east corner of the Wet MU. · Begin controlling areas of pampas in 2014/2015 and continue planting the cleared areas. · Revegetation to be continued as programmed in the plan, prioritising infilling previous plantings and cleared pampas areas. |
Captain Springs Reserve |
· Continue controlling weeds throughout the reserve to ensure that the process of natural regeneration continues. Pampas and brush wattles continue to be an issue, as well as some remaining gorse. · Continue revegetation throughout the reserve, prioritising infilling previous plantings and any gaps created by weed control. · Create a safe-haven for native butterflies through further diversity plantings. · Control wasps in the reserve. |
11. Officers from the I and ES department biodiversity team are working with local parks staff to identify a suitable contractor to carry out the above works on these priority reserves. Once identified and scoping for the recommended works is complete the outcomes will be reported to the local board.
Consideration
Local board views and implications
12. This report is prepared to seek approval from the local board for the allocation of budgets for the 2014/2015 financial year to projects to be delivered by the I and ES Department.
13. The projects have been discussed with Maungakiekie-Tāmaki environment portfolio holder members. Due to time constraints they were unable to be discussed with the entire local board before the business meeting.
Maori impact statement
14. This report provides information for anticipated environmental programmes, it is recognised that environmental management, water quality and land management has integral links with the mauri of the environments and concepts of kaitiakitanga.
15. Many of the identified activities are of interest to mana whenua and iwi and provisions for mana whenua participation, contribution, and consultation will be incorporated.
Implementation
16. Implementation of the projects will be regularly reported to the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board in quarterly update reports to the local board. A more detailed report on the outcomes and achievements will be presented to the local board at the end of the 2014/2015 financial year.
There are no attachments for this report.
Signatories
Authors |
Theresa Pearce - Relationship Advisor |
Authorisers |
John Dragicevich - Manager Infrastructure and Environmental Services Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager |
Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board 16 September 2014 |
|
Manukau Harbour Stormwater Network Discharge Consent – Stormwater Priorities Consultation
File No.: CP2014/18693
Purpose
1. To inform the local board about the Manukau Harbour stormwater network discharge consent consultation process, and request feedback on priorities and criteria for the management of Auckland Council’s public stormwater network to mitigate its existing and potential future effects on Auckland’s environment.
Executive summary
2. The stormwater unit is seeking feedback on priorities for stormwater management in the Manukau Harbour consolidated receiving environment (CRE); the area of land draining to the Manukau Harbour.
3. A number of stormwater issues have been identified around the Manukau Harbour. These include:
a) effects from aging and under-designed infrastructure and assets,
b) effects from poorly managed growth, flooding (or the risk of flooding),
c) effects to urban streams, contamination of the harbour and coastal inlets,
d) effects to groundwater, and
e) stormwater effects on the operation of the wastewater network.
4. The Manukau Harbour CRE stormwater priorities consultation process is focusing on two specific questions:
a) from the stormwater issues identified, what does the local board consider are the priorities for the Manukau Harbour CRE and what must be most urgently addressed?
b) from the stormwater unit’s responsibilities, what does the local board consider to be the criteria that Council should use for selecting stormwater management priorities?
5. A workshop with local board representatives was held on 30 July 2014 to discuss these questions in detail. Feedback from this workshop is briefly summarised in this report.
6. Formal feedback received from the consultation process will be summarised and assist with setting priorities for the network discharge consent application.
7. Based on priority issues and the selected criteria for prioritisation, a “best practicable option” to managing stormwater discharges from the public network will be developed for consideration as part of the network discharge consent application.
That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board: a) receives the report. b) provides feedback to the stormwater unit by the 30 September 2014. c) indicates whether they would like to receive further updates on the outcomes of the Manukau Harbour Stormwater consultation process. |
Comments
The Auckland-wide Stormwater Network Discharge Consent
8. Auckland Council is required under the Resource Management Act (1991) to obtain resource consents to discharge stormwater from the region’s stormwater network into the natural environment (a stormwater network discharge consent).
9. A high level, broad-scale assessment approach to the stormwater network discharge consents is being proposed through an Auckland-wide network discharge consent.
10. Within this consent, 10 Consolidated Receiving Environments (CREs) have been identified for the Auckland region and are the focus for consultation. Consultation on the Waitematā Harbour CRE and Greater Tāmaki CRE has been completed. This agenda report considers consultation on the Manukau Harbour CRE (See Figure 1).
11. The Manukau Harbour CRE covers an area of about 879 km2. Approximately 145 km2 or 16.5% of this total area is considered urban. The harbour itself is 4.5 times the area of the Waitematā Harbour, occupying an area of some 340 km2, and is the second largest harbour in New Zealand. The catchment also includes a number of different types of significant regional infrastructure, such as the Auckland Airport, Manukau Wastewater Treatment Plant (MWTP), North Island Main Trunk Railway line (NIMT), and state highways.
12. Auckland Council has published three documents explaining consultation surrounding the Manukau Harbour network discharge consent stormwater priorities, issues and criteria:
a) The Manukau Harbour CRE: Stormwater Priorities Consultation - Information Brochure and Request for Feedback, Attachment D to this report.
b) Frequently Asked Questions – including a list of detailed responses to the frequently asked questions about this project, Attachment C to this report.
c) The Manukau Harbour CRE: Stormwater Priorities Consultation Summary Report – a detailed technical report regarding the challenges of managing the stormwater draining throughout the Manukau Harbour CRE. This report contains details regarding key issues within the Manukau Harbour CRE consolidated receiving environment, along with an explanation of the potential criteria for prioritisation.
How will the stormwater network discharge consents affect you?
13. The stormwater network consent will set parameters around priorities for stormwater management. It will also provide a framework to authorise where works will be undertaken to improve stormwater management through physical projects and sub-catchment initiatives (i.e. individual stream catchments within the greater consolidated receiving environment).
14. The stormwater network consent will also form one of the tools to control the type of stormwater assets to be vested to Auckland Council from urban development. The type and scale of various development activities, which take place around the Manukau Harbour, will still be governed by the limitations already set in the existing plans and proposed planning documents (e.g. the Unitary Plan).
The Consultation Process
15. In order to implement a consultation process which facilitates quality engagement with stakeholders, a “Manukau Harbour CRE Stormwater Consultation Plan” was developed. This plan outlined the core issue under consideration: In managing stormwater discharges for the Manukau Harbour CRE, what should the high-level management priorities of the Auckland Council be?
16. The plan also identifies key stakeholders, as well as the proposed methodology for consulting with stakeholders. A list of external stakeholders contacted through this consultation process is Attachment A, to this report.
17. All feedback will be fully reviewed, consolidated and considered in the application documents. It is envisaged that outcomes from this consultation process will inform the development of the best practicable option for managing stormwater discharges in the Manukau Harbour CRE.
18. A comprehensive background report and a summary of the consultation programme, key findings, and changes made as a result of consultation will be provided to the relevant council committees towards the end of 2014.
19. The stormwater unit will then formally lodge the Auckland-wide Stormwater Network Discharge consent with Auckland Council’s regulatory department.
Local Board Workshop - Feedback
20. A workshop with local board members, representatives of the Manukau Harbour Forum and ward councillors to introduce the consultation information was held 30 July 2014.
21. Feedback at the workshop indicated a high level of concern for the current state of the health of the streams, harbour and the aquifers within the Manukau Harbour CRE. Some members were also concerned about the effects of stormwater and illegal cross-connections within the wastewater network. The stormwater unit advised that programmes are in place to identify and remedy this issue.
22. Board members expressed concern that lack of detailed information available for the Manukau Harbour CRE constrained their ability to accurately prioritise the issues. A benefit some members expressed was that the consultation process could inform Council’s priorities and assist in gaining funding for identified issues.
23. Members requested information on how many stormwater outlets discharge to the harbour in the different local board areas. The assets within Manukau Harbour CREs 32 subcatchments include approximately 1,277km of stormwater drains (including pipes, ditches and open drains), 26,042 manholes and 19,954 catchpits, plus additional stormwater fittings. The current asset database also includes 90 stormwater treatment ponds or wetlands and 72 other types of stormwater treatment devices (rain-gardens, sand-filters, gross pollutant traps; excluding ground soakage devices). This information can be accessed and viewed in detail on Auckland Council’s internet maps. Please follow this procedure in order to access and view the maps:
a) Go to http://maps.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/aucklandcouncilviewer/
b) Click on “Map Content” to right of screen, with the folder icon
c) Click “Underground Services” button. This will take you to a new screen showing a list of items with tick boxes adjacent. To view the stormwater pipes and outfalls, ensure the following items are ticked: “underground services” and “stormwater”.
d) The stormwater infrastructure should be shown as green lines on the map, with outfall located at the end of these lines as they reach the coast. To view this infrastructure well, the map will need to be at large scale.
As noted in the workshop, the accuracy of this data is limited due to the differing asset databases and information held by legacy councils. It is currently being reviewed and updated by the stormwater unit.
24. Some local boards requested information on planned projects and infrastructure improvements for their area to assist with prioritisation of issues.
Questions for Consultation
25. The Manukau Harbour CRE stormwater priorities consultation process is focusing on two specific questions:
a) From the stormwater issues identified, what does the local board consider are the priorities for the Manukau Harbour CRE and what must be most urgently addressed?
b) From the stormwater unit’s responsibilities, what does the local board consider to be the criteria that Council should use for selecting stormwater management priorities?
26. a) From the identified stormwater issues around the Manukau Harbour which are the highest priorities?
ISSUE* |
Your Priority Ranking (please rank 1 – 7, where 1 is the most urgent and 7 the least urgent) |
Managing growth |
|
Managing our infrastructure/ assets |
|
Managing flooding (or the risk of flooding) |
|
Managing urban streams |
|
Contamination of the Manukau Harbour |
|
Managing s/water discharges to groundwater |
|
Reducing s/water effects on the w/water network |
|
27. b) Local board views on criteria that guide how, through this network discharge consent process, Auckland Council selects its priorities for stormwater management in the Manukau Harbour and its associated sub-catchments (i.e. stream catchment areas) are sought. These criteria are tabulated below and can be ranked according to priority:
BUSINESS AS USUAL CRITERIA# |
Growth |
Assets |
Flooding |
Stream Management |
Contamination of the Harbour |
Groundwater |
S/water Effects on the W/water Network |
||
Cost-benefit analyses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Risk-based analyses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Redevelopment opportunities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Multiple benefits |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
MANAGING GROWTH |
|||||||||
Proposed Criteria for selecting priorities* |
Your Ranking (H, M, L) |
||||||||
Prevent/ minimise effects from future development |
|
||||||||
(a) Council-identified priorities |
|
||||||||
(b) Partnership led |
|
||||||||
(c) Developer led |
|
||||||||
(d) Sensitivity of the receiving environment |
|
||||||||
Intensification and re-development: |
|
||||||||
(a) Council-identified priorities |
|
||||||||
(b) Partnership led |
|
||||||||
(c) Developer led |
|
||||||||
(d) Sensitivity of the receiving environment |
|
||||||||
(e) Easy wins |
|
||||||||
MANAGING OUR INFRASTRUCTURE / ASSETS |
|||||||||
Proposed Criteria for Selecting Priorities* |
Your Ranking (H, M, L) |
||||||||
Asset condition, age and criticality (i.e. a potential for asset failure) |
|
||||||||
(a) Below ground built assets (such as pipes) |
|
||||||||
(b) Above ground built natural assets (such as treatment devices & overland flow paths) |
|
||||||||
(c) Stream assets |
|
||||||||
Impacts on existing communities (not meeting expected levels of service) |
|
||||||||
MANAGING FLOODING AND THE RISK OF FLOODING |
|||||||||
Proposed Criteria for Selecting Priorities* |
Your Ranking (H, M, L) |
||||||||
Frequency of flooding (a risk based approach to managing flooding occurrence) |
|
||||||||
Existing flooding and damage |
|
||||||||
Public safety and protecting critical infrastructure |
|
||||||||
MANAGING URBAN STREAMS |
|||||||||
Proposed Criteria for Selecting Priorities* |
Your Ranking (H, M, L) |
||||||||
Ease of intervention (zoning, ownership and access) |
|
||||||||
Greatest ecological benefit (potential for enhancement) |
|
||||||||
Level of active community support |
|
||||||||
Opportunities to leverage outcomes (linkages with other projects) |
|
||||||||
Landscape integration and enhancement (create a community focal point) |
|
||||||||
Holistic stream management |
|
||||||||
CONTAMINATION OF THE MANUKAU HARBOUR |
|||||||||
Proposed Criteria for Selecting Priorities* |
Your Ranking (H, M, L) |
||||||||
Existing contaminant levels (to limit further degradation) |
|
||||||||
Actual trends in contamination (where the highest level of change is predicted) |
|
||||||||
Contaminant loads |
|
||||||||
Marine ecology (using benthic/seabed animals as an indicator of priority) |
|
||||||||
Focus on areas of amenity, aesthetics and use |
|
||||||||
Holistic contaminant management (within Council as well as other organisations and agencies) |
|
||||||||
GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT |
|||||||||
Proposed Criteria for Selecting Priorities* |
Your Ranking (H, M, L) |
||||||||
Improved soakage performance in groundwater take areas |
|
||||||||
Treatment of stormwater into ground in targeted areas |
|
||||||||
REDUCING STORMWATER EFFECTS ON THE WASTEWATER NETWORK |
|||||||||
Proposed Criteria for Selecting Priorities* |
Your Ranking (H, M, L) |
||||||||
Public health risk (needs alignment with Watercare Services) |
|
||||||||
Environmental risk (needs alignment with Watercare Services) |
|
||||||||
Watercare opportunities taken as they arise (to work with council’s CCO) |
|
||||||||
28. A description of the identified issues and criteria can be found in the Manukau Harbour Consolidated Receiving Environment: Stormwater Priorities Consultation - Information Brochure, Attachment D to this report.
29. If this project is considered of interest, a feedback form, Attachment B, of this agenda report can be completed. Alternatively, general feedback and comment through the meeting would be welcomed.
Consideration
Local board views and implications
30. A cluster workshop with local board representatives was held for 30 July 2014 to introduce the consultation process and discuss these questions in detail. Feedback received from the consultation process will be summarised and will help to inform the setting of priorities for the network consent application.
31. Consultation with key identified stakeholders within the Manukau Harbour catchment area (including internal Auckland Council staff, advisory panels, council-controlled organisations, government departments, environmental and recreational groups, community and business groups) is currently being undertaken via a series of consultation workshops.
Maori impact statement
32. Feedback is being sought from mana whenua and iwi. Consultation workshops were held in July 2014. Overall, the workshops highlighted the holistic approach that iwi have with the three waters, their interest in enhancing and improving the water quality, their concern with contamination to stormwater; and their frustration with the legacy of degradation of the Manukau Harbour.
Implementation
33. Three risks with respect to implementation of feedback from local boards have been identified. Firstly, it is noted that a wide range of stakeholders are being consulted. As a result, it is likely that there will be differing opinions with respect to stormwater management priorities. Secondly, there is a risk that there will be a lack of funding to implement all identified priorities. Thirdly, since the Auckland-wide stormwater network discharge consent application will be going through a regulatory process under the Resource Management Act (1991), any outcomes may be open to challenge through this process.
No. |
Title |
Page |
aView |
Attachment A - Manukau Harbour CRE - Stakeholder List |
25 |
bView |
Attachment B - Manukau Harbour CRE - Feedback Form |
29 |
cView |
Attachment C - Manukau Harbour CRE - Frequently Asked Questions |
33 |
dView |
Attachment D - Manukau Harbour CRE - Information Brochure |
55 |
Signatories
Authors |
Theresa Pearce - Relationship Advisor |
Authorisers |
John Dragicevich - Manager Infrastructure and Environmental Services Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager |
Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board 16 September 2014 |
|
Jubilee Bridge Structural Renewal - Concept Design Development
File No.: CP2014/18304
Purpose
1. To seek approval to develop concept design options for renewal of Jubilee Bridge.
Executive summary
2. Jubilee Bridge which spans the Tāmaki Estuary inlet to Panmure Basin, has been recommended for renewal following a structural assessment by engineers after an act of vandalism.
3. The bridge provides connections to Panmure town centre, bus and train connections and is located on a circular pathway around Panmure Basin which is a popular recreation area.
4. The bridge is an important connection and forms part of the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki local board’s adopted greenways network plan which aims to provide off-road walking and cycling routes. The bridge is also part of Auckland Transport’s (AT) walking and cycling network.
5. The existing bridge is too narrow for simultaneous use by pedestrians and cyclists and the local board has requested that the renewed bridge is wide enough to provide for shared-use.
6. This report seeks approval from the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki local board to commence concept design for renewal of the Jubilee Bridge which is part of the agreed FY15 Local and Sports Parks Renewals Programme. Concept designs will identify the most appropriate locations for bridge renewal and provide the local board with costs and options for a wider structure suitable for shared-use.
7. Jubilee Bridge forms part of the agreed FY15 Local and Sports parks renewals programme. Engineer’s best estimates indicate bridge renewal will cost $1,115,000 from an available renewals budget of $877,950 leaving a budget shortfall of $237,000.
8. The project plan indicates expenditure from renewals budget of $150,000 for FY15 for concept design development, with $891,625 in FY16 for bridge construction and $73,000 scheduled for FY17.
That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board: a) Approves the development of concept designs for the Jubilee Bridge renewal project.
|
Comments
Background
9. Jubilee Bridge is a 1.2m wide, 60m long structure traversing the entrance to Panmure Basin over the Tāmaki Estuary inlet, Attachment A. The bridge links Lagoon drive on the eastern side of Panmure Basin to the McCullough Walkway on the west, and provides a commuter link to Panmure town centre.
10. The McCullough Walkway is a contiguous circular pathway surrounding Panmure Basin and encompasses the Jubilee Bridge. Panmure Basin and Jubilee Bridge are popular locations for recreational visitors, joggers and cyclists making use of the circular pathway.
11. Jubilee Bridge was built in 1984 with an anticipated design-life of fifty years. An act of vandalism in 2012 resulted in council engaging engineers to structurally assess the bridge to determine its condition rating. The resulting engineers report identified a series of structural issues and recommended renewal of the bridge. The report also provided advice on temporary repairs to the structure to ensure public safety while the replacement bridge is developed.
Walking and cycling connection
12. The Jubilee Bridge is an important connection over the Tāmaki Estuary inlet providing access to and from Panmure town centre from Watene Road and completes the circular McCullough walkway around Panmure Basin (see attachment A).
13. The McCullough Walkway is part of the local board’s adopted Greenways Strategy which seeks to provide off-road walking and cycling connections through parks reserve space to increase recreational and commuter options. The Jubilee Bridge is an integral link in the greenways strategy.
14. The bridge is also identified in Auckland Transport’s regional walking and cycling network connecting Lagoon Drive to Watene Road. The strategic importance of the bridge will be further enhanced by Auckland Transport AMETI (Auckland Manukau Eastern Transport Initiative) busway which will be located at Lagoon Drive providing increased access to public transport.
Issues
15. The current bridge is 1.2m wide and is too narrow for simultaneous use by cyclists and pedestrians. The local board has expressed a desire for the new bridge to be wide enough for walkers and cyclists and is part of the agreed FY15 Local and Sports Park Renewals Programme.
16. Initial desktop cost estimates identified a renewals budget shortfall to develop a wider bridge and the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki local board sought additional funding from the Governing Body in May 2014. Under resolution number GB/2014/46 the Governing Body provided a further $150,000 to progress the project.
17. Engineers were engaged to provide more detailed costs which were tabled with the board at a workshop in August 2014. The estimated cost to renew the bridge with a three metre wide deck is $1,115,000.
18. The total amount available from renewals including the additional $150,000 from the Governing Body is $877,950, leaving a budget shortfall of $237,000.
19. The cost estimate of $1,115,000 is the engineer’s best estimate and includes professional services of $381,000. The total cost estimate includes a contingency of 25% which is best practice based on the high risk nature of bridge projects. It is however, considered there are possible cost savings in either professional services or contingency.
20. However, there are significant constraints and risks to the bridge renewal project which may increase costs including; difficult topography, geotechnical stability, potential unknown archaeology and cultural sensitivities.
Concept Design
21. The concept design phase will identify options and costs to develop a wider bridge suitable for walking and cycling use. The local board requested the concept plan considers whether there are more appropriate locations for the bridge renewal. Bridge relocation will be restricted by site constraints and its strategic connectivity to transport links (AMETI, AT’s Walking & Cycling Network).
22. On completion of the concept design the board will be presented with options and costs for a renewed bridge between 2m and 3.5 wide.
Consideration
Local board views and implications
23. A series of workshops were held with the local board in 2013 to discuss the future of the Jubilee Bridge. The local board resolved to renew the bridge on 12 September 2013 (resolution number MT/2013/72-c) stating the new bridge must provide for simultaneous use by pedestrians and cyclists.
24. The local board has expressed the following views in relation to the renewal of the Jubilee Bridge and the concept plan:
a) Options and costs for bridge deck widths – Provide costs for various deck widths to enable simultaneous use for walking and cycling.
b) Bridge renewal location – the concept plan must consider the most appropriate location for bridge renewal (local board member request during an August 2014 workshop).
c) Fishing: The Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board supports the on-going presence of the shags at Panmure Basin and would like to see fishing from the renewed bridge eliminated as it presents a hazard to feeding shags.
Maori impact statement
25. The foreshore is a culturally significant area for Mana Whenua, and consultation with Iwi will form part of the bridge renewal project and the bridge is in close proximity to culturally sensitive areas. There may be a requirement to conduct a cultural values assessment as part of this renewals project.
26. The following Iwi groups potentiall have an interest in this reserve and will form part of any consultation: Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whātua, Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara, Ngāti Whātua o Ōrākei, Ngāi Tai Ki Tāmaki, Te Kawerau a Maki, Ngāti Tamaoho, Te Akitai Waiohua, Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua, Ngāti Paoa, Ngāti Maru, Ngāti Whanaunga, Ngāti Tamaterā, Te Patukirikiri
27. Renewal of the Jubilee Bridge will ensure continued access to recreation in Panmure Basin and the circular McCullough Walkway providing health benefits for Maori and the wider community.
Implementation
Project plan
28. The project will be developed in 2 phases. The following timeframes indicate project milestones for the delivery of the renewed bridge:
Phase 1: Professional services for the bridge design (Sept 2014 – Aug 2015):
a) Site investigation and background research: Aug 2014
b) Consultation and communication with stakeholders: Aug 2014
c) Report to the board to approve commencement of concept design: Sept 2014
d) Concept Design and cost estimates: Sep - Mar 2015
e) Local board concept design workshops: Jan – Mar 2015
f) Report to the local board progress to adopt preferred design: Jan – Mar 2015
g) Developed and detailed design and cost estimates: Apr 2015 - Aug 2015
h) Consent applications: Apr – Aug 2015
i) Tender documentation: Jul – Aug 2015
Phase 2: Physical works (Sept 2015 – Jun 2016):
a) Tender out physical works
b) Physical works (including demolition of existing bridge) and handover
No. |
Title |
Page |
aView |
Jubilee Bridge Location |
81 |
Signatories
Authors |
Steve Owens - Parks Advisor Jane Aickin - Manager Local and Sports Parks Central |
Authorisers |
Ian Maxwell - Manager Parks, Sports & Recreation Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager |
Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board 16 September 2014 |
|
AT Monitoring and Enforcement of Mobility Parking Spaces in Parks Reserve Car Parks
File No.: CP2014/18858
Purpose
1. To seek approval for $14,000 discretionary funding for the enforcement of mobility parking spaces in Jellicoe Reserve and Fergusson Domain.
Executive summary
2. Complaints have been received regarding non-permitted vehicles using the mobility parking spaces at Jellicoe Park and Fergusson Domain car parks preventing disabled people using the spaces and gaining access to recreation.
3. It is recommended that the local board approves the expenditure of up to $14,000 SLIPs Opex for AT to carry out an assessment of the suitability of conducting enforcement of non-permitted vehicles using mobility spaces at Jellicoe Park and Fergusson Domain. The cost of report production includes mobility space marking and signage installation.
4. It is considered there are potential cost savings as mobility spaces are already marked, however appropriate signage will need to be installed and a Parking Resolution Report must be produced recommending appropriate actions, if any, to establish enforcement restrictions.
5. Approval of this report will ensure continued access to recreation and parks facilities for disabled people at Fergusson Domain and Jellicoe Park.
That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board: a) Approves up to $14,000 SLIPs Opex funding to request Auckland Transport to assess suitability of mobility parking spaces to enforce parking restrictions of non-permitted vehicles using designated mobility spaces at Fergusson Domain and Jellicoe Park.
|
Comments
6. Non-permitted vehicles parking in mobility bays at Jellicoe Park and Fergusson Domain prevent legitimate use by disabled people.
7. The Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board has received complaints from disabled park users who are unable to access mobility parking spaces due to non-permitted vehicles parking in the spaces.
8. Auckland Transport does not carry out monitoring and enforcement activity on car parks or access roads located within the boundary of a reserve. Parks do not have enforcement powers and are unable to carry out enforcement against non-permitted vehicles using mobility spaces.
9. It is recommended that the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki local board approve the expenditure of up to $14,000 SLIPs funding to request AT to carry out an assessment of the mobility spaces at Fergusson Domain and Jellicoe Park to enable enforcement activity to take place.
Fergusson Domain
10. The car park at Fergusson Domain is accessed from Waitangi Road and provides parking for visitors to the park and the facilities which include; Oranga Community centre, Onehunga Harriers Athletics Club (OHAC) and the Oranga Kindergarten, Attachment A. The car park also acts as spill-over car parking during rugby matches when the car park adjacent to the Te Papapa Rugby Club located on western side of the reserve is at capacity. The car park has five mobility spaces, two of which are located adjacent to the kindergarten and three near to the OHAC building.
11. The car park at Jellicoe Park accessed from Park Gardens off Quadrant Road located in the north-east corner of the reserve provides parking for leisure centre users and park visitors. The car park has two designated mobility car parking spaces located near the entrance to Onehunga War Memorial swimming pools, Attachment B. When the car park is at capacity, non-permitted vehicles park in mobility spaces and on the pedestrian crossing.
12. Demands on parking space at Jellicoe Park and Fergusson Domain car parks exceed capacity particularly at weekends when visitors to the park recreating, taking part in sport or using facilities at the reserve are at their highest. During these times, demand for parking space is at a premium resulting in able-bodied people parking their non-permitted vehicles in designated mobility spaces. Disabled visitors are then unable to park in the designated mobility spaces potentially depriving them access to recreation or facility use.
13. Auckland Transport (AT) is responsible for enforcement of illegally parked vehicles on the public highway, but is unable to carry out enforcement action in car parks or access roads within the boundary of a reserve. Therefore, AT does not monitor parks reserves car parks and non-permitted vehicles using designated mobility parking spaces cannot be fined or towed.
14. Local and Sports Parks (LSP) is unable to take action when non-permitted vehicles park in designated mobility spaces as it does not have enforcement powers.
15. In 2013 the Regional Development Operations Committee (RDOC) resolved to enable AT to carry out enforcement in parks reserve car parks. Subsequently, a process was established whereby a request can be made from the LSP Manager following endorsement from the local board to AT to conduct on-going monitoring and enforcement activity in a park reserve car park. This request is then assessed by AT and appropriate signage and road markings are set in place to enable enforcement action against vehicles failing to display a mobility badge when parked in a designated mobility car parking space.
16. The following options are available to the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki local board.
a) Option 1. Status quo: This will result in the continuation of non-permitted vehicles parking in designated mobility spaces when the park is at its busiest. This is not recommended as it will not resolve the problem. There is no cost associated with this option.
b) Option 2. Request Auckland Transport to assess suitability of mobility parking spaces to enforce parking restrictions of non-permitted vehicles using designated mobility spaces at Fergusson Domain and Jellicoe Park: This will ensure vehicle parking is provided for mobility badge holders to access recreation and facilities located at the park. The cost of implementation is up to $7,000 for each park (up to $14,000 for Fergusson Domain and Jellicoe Park) which includes signage and alterations to the painted parking spaces if necessary. However, it is considered that there are possible cost savings as the mobility spaces are already marked and alterations are potentially at minor cost.
17. The monitoring and enforcement by AT of mobility parking spaces will ensure continued access to recreation for disabled people at Fergusson Domain and Jellicoe Park. It is recommended that the local board approve the expenditure of up to $14,000 SLIPs Opex funding to implement this process.
Consideration
Local board views and implications
18. This issue has been discussed with the Parks Portfolio holder of the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki local board who is in support of AT conducting monitoring and enforcement activity at Jellicoe Park and Fergusson Domain Waitangi Road car park.
Māori impact statement
19. Iwi have not been consulted as part of this proposal. However, enforcement of mobility parking spaces at Jellicoe Park and Fergusson Domain will have a positive benefit to the health and wellbeing or Maori and the wider community through continued access to recreation for disabled members of the community.
Implementation
The process to enable AT to carry out enforcement on Parks car parks is as follows:
Identification of issues
20. When complaints in relation to parking infringements are received, the Parks Advisor is notified, to investigate, monitor and assess the scope of the issue. If a problem is identified, the Parks Advisor will take action by making a recommendation for parking restrictions to the local board.
Report and endorsement for restrictions
21. The Parks Advisor will prepare a decision making report for the local board outlining the following information:
a) The reason why the enforcement is required
b) The location of the car park
c) Estimated cost to install signage and process a parking report via AT
d) Request local board funding
Request to AT to establish enforcement of non-badged vehicles parked in mobility bays
22. If the local board endorses the report, the Parks, Sport and Recreation manager will formally request AT to enforce parking restrictions in the identified park, providing the report and the local board resolution endorsing the restriction to the AT Parking Design Team.
Resolution of AT’s Traffic Control Committee
23. The Parking Design Team will prepare a parking resolution report for the Traffic Control Committee (TCC) outlining the current situation and recommending appropriate actions to establish and enforce parking restrictions. This report will be shared with the Parks, Sport and Recreation manager prior to going on the Traffic Control Committee agenda for a decision.
Installation of signs and any markings
24. If the report is endorsed by the TCC, installation of signage including any alterations to the existing mobility spaces will be arranged by AT’s Parking & Enforcement Team and is included in the cost. Mobility spaces are already marked at Jellicoe Park and Fergusson Domain which presents possible cost savings.
No. |
Title |
Page |
aView |
Fergusson Domain Mobility Parking Spaces |
87 |
bView |
Jellicoe Park Mobility Spaces |
89 |
Signatories
Authors |
Steve Owens - Parks Advisor Jane Aickin - Manager Local and Sports Parks Central |
Authorisers |
Ian Maxwell - Manager Parks, Sports & Recreation Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager |
Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board 16 September 2014 |
|
Review of Alcohol Control Bylaw - Proposed bylaw for local board feedback
File No.: CP2014/19088
Purpose
1. The purpose of the report is to provide local boards with a copy of the proposed Auckland Council Alcohol Control Bylaw 2014 and to request formal feedback by resolution.
2. Local boards are also requested to appoint a review panel to make recommendations to the local board on the review of the local alcohol bans.
Executive summary
3. On 22 July 2014, the Regulatory and Bylaws Committee recommended to the governing body to adopt the Statement of Proposal for the proposed Alcohol Control Bylaw 2014, Attachment A, for public consultation (resolution number RBC/2014/27). The governing body formally adopted the Statement of Proposal on 31 July 2014 (resolution number GB/2014/70). Following this discussion, the council commenced public consultation (using the special consultative procedure), on 15 August 2014.
4. In addition to the public consultation process, staff are seeking feedback from local boards on the proposed bylaw.
5. The proposed Alcohol Control Bylaw 2014 will establish the bylaw structure and delegation that will be used to make, review, amend or revoke alcohol bans. Decisions on existing and new alcohol bans will be made by local boards after a new bylaw is adopted. This ensures decisions meet the proposed new requirements in the bylaw.
6. Regardless of the final form of the bylaw and delegations, local boards have an important role in the review of alcohol bans and the appointment of an alcohol ban review panel is sought.
7. Details of the proposed bylaw are outlined in the report.
That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board: a) provides formal feedback (by passing resolutions) on the proposed Auckland Council Alcohol Control Bylaw to the hearing panel, including whether the local board wish to meet with the hearing panel. b) appoints a local alcohol ban review panel comprised of up to three local board members to make recommendations on the review of the alcohol bans in the local board area. c) appoints one member as a chairperson of the local alcohol ban review panel. d) delegates to the chairperson of the local board the power to make a replacement appointment to the review panel in the event that any member appointed by the local board under resolution (b) is unavailable. |
Comments
Legislative Framework
8. The Local Government (Auckland Transitional Provisions) Act 2010 requires the review of all seven legacy alcohol control bylaws (previously called liquor control bylaws) and associated alcohol bans (previously called liquor bans) by 31 October 2015.
9. In December 2012, Parliament enacted the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012. This in turn amended the Local Government Act 2002. The requirements for making or continuing individual alcohol bans has changed significantly with the passing of the Local Government (Alcohol Reform) Amendment Act 2012 (the Act).
10. The Act introduced a higher threshold to be met for alcohol bans to be made or continued. The higher threshold requires that the council is satisfied that there is evidence to show a high level of crime or disorder is caused or made worse by the consumption of alcohol in that public place and that the alcohol ban is a reasonable restriction on people’s rights in light of that evidence.
11. The process for making a bylaw under the Local Government Act 2002 requires that the council determine if a bylaw is the most appropriate response to a problem. A bylaw must also be in the most appropriate form and must be consistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990. All bylaws must meet the legal requirements as set out in the Bylaws Act 1910, including not being unreasonable, providing rules that are proportionate to the issues being addressed and not being beyond the powers of the enabling legislation.
Current Auckland regulation
12. Currently, there are seven legacy alcohol control bylaws and more than 1,600 individual alcohol ban areas across Auckland. The legacy bylaws significantly differ in their drafting style and presentation.
13. In general, all legacy bylaws provide the structure used to make alcohol bans. Some legacy bylaws enable the making of alcohol bans by resolution while others require a change to the bylaw itself. Making alcohol bans by resolution means the level of consultation is determined on a case by case basis and can result in more effective and efficient decisions compared to amending the bylaw.
14. An assessment of the appropriateness of the legacy bylaws indicate that:
a) A single bylaw is necessary to enable the adoption of alcohol bans that prohibit or regulate or control the consumption or bringing into or possession of alcohol in public places. The New Zealand Police consider that limiting the consumption of alcohol in public places may reduce alcohol related harm.
b) It is appropriate to delegate decisions on alcohol bans in local public places to local boards.
15. Within an alcohol ban area the possession and consumption of alcohol is prohibited during the time the ban is operational. Exceptions enable alcohol to be transported in an unopened container to and from licenced and private premises.
16. Enforcement of the bylaw is the responsibility of the New Zealand Police. The police have powers of search, seizure and arrest, and may issue a $250 infringement notice for breach of an alcohol ban.
Auckland Council’s proposed Alcohol Control Bylaw
The council’s decision to adopt the proposed Auckland Council Alcohol Control Bylaw for public consultation
17. On 22 July 2014, the Regulatory and Bylaws Committee recommended to the governing body the Statement of Proposal for the proposed Alcohol Control Bylaw.
18. On 31 July 2014, the governing body adopted the proposed Alcohol Control Bylaw Statement of Proposal, Attachment A, which includes the proposed bylaw for public consultation (resolution number GB/2014/70).
19. Following the decision, the council commenced the public consultation process (using the special consultative procedure), on 15 August 2014. The key consultation dates are summarised in the table below:
Table 1. Key consultation dates
Date |
Milestone |
15 August 2014 |
Written submission period opens |
15 September 2014 |
Written submission period closes |
September/October 2014 |
Staff will review and analyse all submissions in a report to the hearings panel Report will include all formal feedback received from local boards |
Early/Mid October 2014 |
Public hearings will be held by hearing panel This will include an opportunity for local boards to meet with the hearings panel |
End October 2014 |
Hearings panel will report back to governing body (final bylaw adopted) |
18 December 2014 |
Bylaw commences |
Summary of proposed alcohol control bylaw content
20. This section of the report summarises the key proposals contained in the proposed bylaw.
21. The purpose of the bylaw is to control the consumption or possession of alcohol in public places to reduce alcohol related harm. This aligns to the section 147 (Power to make bylaws for alcohol control purposes) of the Local Government Act 2002.
22. The bylaw proposes that local boards be delegated decisions on making, reviewing amending or revoking alcohol bans in local areas. This supports previous feedback obtained by local boards requesting this delegation from the governing body.
23. Alcohol bans of regional significance will remain the responsibility of the Regulatory and Bylaws Committee. This is consistent with the Auckland Council Long Term Plan where issues of a regional significance are the responsibility of a council committee.
24. It is proposed within the bylaw that prior to making a new alcohol ban, the council be satisfied that the alcohol ban gives effect to the purpose of the bylaw and comply with criteria and decision making requirements Subpart 1 of Part 6 of the Local Governments Act 2002; and section 147B of Local Government Act 2002. This includes that:
a) There is evidence that the area to which the bylaw applies (or will apply by virtue of the resolution) has experienced a high level of crime or disorder that can be shown to have been caused of made worse by alcohol consumption.
b) The alcohol ban is appropriate and proportionate in light of the evidence and can be justified as a reasonable limitation on people’s rights and freedoms.
25. Four different times are proposed in the bylaw for consideration of new alcohol ban areas:
a) 24 hours, 7 days a week (at all times ban)
b) 7pm – 7am daily (evening ban)
c) 10pm – 7am daylight saving and 7pm – 7am outside daylight saving (night time ban)
d) 7pm on the day before to 7am on the day after any weekend, public holiday or Christmas/New Year holiday period (weekend or holiday alcohol ban).
These times are a guide to improve consistency across Auckland. This recognises that in some instances the use of the times specified may be disproportionate to the evidence of the problem and therefore contrary to the statutory requirement that requires alcohol bans to be proportionate in light of the evidence. These times are generally consistent with a number of legacy council bylaws.
26. Enforcement of alcohol bans is the responsibility of the New Zealand Police. The penalty for breaching an alcohol ban is a $250 infringement under the Local Government (Alcohol Ban Breaches) Regulations 2013.
Review of local alcohol bans
27. To ensure local board decision making on the existing alcohol bans is consistent with the new bylaw, local boards will be required to review all bans once the bylaw is adopted. It is a statutory requirement these all be reviewed by 31 October 2015 otherwise the bans will lapse.
28. Staff will support the local board review. The proposed alcohol ban review process is outlined in the table below:
Table 2. Proposed local board review process
Date |
Milestone |
September 2014 |
Local boards establish local alcohol ban review panels to review existing local alcohol bans |
End October 2014 |
Final Alcohol Control Bylaw adopted by governing body |
November 2014 – end February 2015 |
Staff to present information on local alcohol bans to each local alcohol ban review panel and assist the panels in making recommendations on existing local alcohol bans |
March 2015 |
Recommendations of the local alcohol review panels presented to local boards |
April/May 2015 |
Public consultation on alcohol controls (if required by local boards) |
June 2015 |
Alcohol bans adopted by local boards |
October 2015 |
Legacy alcohol bans lapse. |
Consideration
Local board views and implications
29. The review of the legacy bylaws was discussed with local boards in the context of the significant other changes arising from new alcohol-related legislation. In relation to alcohol bans, local boards sought clear decision-making criteria, some form of regional consistency in times while providing for local variation where necessary, provision for temporary changes, and local board delegations.
Māori impact statement
30. Throughout the initial engagement phases of the review project, staff worked with the Community Policy and Planning team, Te Waka Angamua, policy advisors at the Independent Maori Statutory Board (IMSB) and Hapai Te Hauora Tapui to deliver a program for engaging with Māori on alcohol issues.
31. 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 Local Alcohol Policy Project and the Alcohol Control Bylaw Project.
32. There is broad support from the police iwi liaison officers, mana whenua and mataa waka in relation to protecting children and young people from the harms associated with alcohol consumption in public places.
Implementation
33. If adopted as proposed local boards will be required to review all current alcohol bans after the bylaw is adopted by 31 October 2015. This ensures that decisions on alcohol bans meet the proposed new requirement in the bylaw and the enabling legislation.
34. The Policies and Bylaws Unit will assist local boards with this process. Polices and Bylaws staff have been collating evidence from legacy council files, the Police and community safety audits and are working closing with Integrated Bylaw Review Implementation team to ensure practicality and ease in the implementation of the Auckland-wide bylaw. As part of this process, the appointment of local board alcohol ban review panels is sought.
No. |
Title |
Page |
aView |
Statement of Proposal - Alcohol Controls Bylaws |
97 |
bView |
Proposed Alcohol Control Bylaw |
111 |
Signatories
Authors |
Kylie Hill - Policy Analyst |
Authorisers |
Helgard Wagener - Team leader, Policies and Bylaws Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager |
Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board 16 September 2014 |
|
Deferral of 2014/15 capital projects
File No.: CP2014/19694
Purpose
1. To seek agreement from the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board to the list of capital projects outlined in Attachment A that are proposed for deferral from 2014/15, prior to consideration by the Finance and Performance Committee on 18 September 2014
Executive summary
2. Prior to decisions being made by the Finance and Performance Committee regarding a 2014/15 capex deferral programme, engagement was held with all local boards.
3. Between 12 and 19 August 2014, staff attended 21 local board workshops to outline the capex deferral process and obtain feedback on proposed deferrals affecting each local board area.
4. On 21 August 2014, the Finance and Performance Committee resolved that decisions on the deferral of local board capital projects from 2014/15 to 2015/16 be deferred until local boards have formally considered and responded to each project in full (FIN/2014/47).
5. The list of capex projects proposed for deferral is outlined in Attachment A.
That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board: a) considers and agrees the deferral of capex projects outlined in Attachment A to 2015/16. b) notes that any projects where timing has been deferred, but project planning is underway, should be given high priority in the 2015/16 capital programme. |
Comments
Background
6. As foreshadowed in the 2014/15 Annual Plan and LTP workshops, operating budgets for 2015/16 (the first year of the LTP 2015/2025) would need to be reduced by about $90 million to achieve a 2.5 per cent average rates increase.
7. It is not possible to reduce the average rates increase for 2015/16 down to 2.5 per cent solely by reducing or deferring capex in that particular year. The lagged impact of changes in the capital programme on operating budgets means that reducing or deferring capex in 2014/15 will have a greater impact on rates for 2015/16.
8. Since amalgamation the quantum of planned projects each year has exceeded the council parent’s capacity to deliver. While delivery capacity is now increasing, a significant bow wave has built up. This historical underspend is acknowledged in the Annual Plan and factored into council’s rates and debt projections by way of a $207 million assumed underspend. However, the individual projects that will not be delivered are not explicitly identified in the Annual Plan as they had not yet been identified.
9. Council staff have reviewed 2014/15 capex budgets to identify work that must be completed this year as a matter of practical necessity, or where not doing the project in this timeframe would negatively impact existing service levels, external revenue or the realisation of efficiency savings.
10. The specific categories used to develop the list of deferred projects and process undertaken is explained further in Attachment B which was circulated to Local Boards prior to the proposed capex projects for deferral being discussed at a recent workshop.
11. In order to develop a realistic capex programme for 2014/15 and contain pressure on rates in 2015/16, staff recommend that the capex projects included in Attachment A for the council parent be explicitly deferred from 2014/15 to 2015/16, and be included as part of the LTP prioritisation process.
12. Between 12 and 19 August, staff attended workshops for all 21 local boards to obtain feedback on the proposed capital deferral schedules for 2014/15. This engagement provided opportunity for local boards to ask questions, reinforce the reason for deferring capital funds and provide feedback on the status of projects in alignment to criteria used to assess proposed deferrals.
13. Of the total proposed projects for deferral tabled at the Finance and Performance Committee on 21 August 2014, regional projects amounted to $80 million, local projects amounted to $35 million and CCO’s collectively deferred $109m.
14. Staff reduced the total of local projects for deferral by approximately $7 million due to responding to the information provided through the recent workshops held with local boards. These reductions were due to corrections in applying the criteria used for identifying potential deferrals. Attachment A takes into account these reductions.
15. Local boards also identified projects that are discretionary and could be deferred, but which are very important to their local community. Rather than making decisions about removing any high-priority discretionary projects from the deferral list, staff included these comments in the schedule provided to the Finance and Performance Committee.
16. The decisions being made are budget adjustments that represent timing changes only. Any decisions to drop or reprioritise projects should be made as part of the LTP process.
17. Through September and October Local Boards, the Governing Body, CCOs and council staff will all contribute to the development of draft LTP 2015/2025 budgets in response to the Mayoral Proposal. Decisions on discretionary local budgets will be made by Local Boards in October and decisions on regional activities and local asset based services will be made by the Budget Committee on 5-7 November.
18. Local Board Plans, along with the Auckland Plan and the agreed spatial priorities will help inform this prioritisation. Final decisions on which projects are included in the LTP 2015/2025 will be made by 30 June 2015, following full public consultation.
No. |
Title |
Page |
aView |
Attachment A, List of 2014/15 projects proposed for deferral until 2015/16 including Local Board feedback |
125 |
bView |
Attachment B, Local Board memo distributed prior to the workshops on 7 August 2014 |
127 |
Signatories
Authors |
Taryn Crewe – Financial Planning Manager Council Parent |
Authorisers |
Matthew Walker - Manager Financial Plan Policy and Budgeting Karen Lyons - Manager Local Board Services |
Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board 16 September 2014 |
|
Auckland Transport Monthly Update Report – September 2014
File No.: CP2014/20033
Purpose
1. The purpose of the report is to respond to Local Board requests on transport-related matters and to provide information to Elected Members about Auckland Transport (AT) activities in the Local Board area since the last transport report.
Monthly Overview
2. A meeting with the Transport Portfolio leader and deputy took place on 4 August. The following matters were discussed:
a) The Travelwise programme generally
b) Pt England to Panmure cycling project
c) Aliford Street consultation
3. Auckland Transport held a workshop with the Local Board on 19 August to discuss the new bus network and how it might affect the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board area.
That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board: a) receives the report. b) asks Auckland Transport to prepare rough order of costs (RoCs) for the following projects: |
Reporting Back
Consultation Report
4. Consultations forwarded to the Local Board for comment are attached for board members’ information (Attachment A).
Local Board Capital Projects
5. The Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board has a fund available for the construction of transport related projects in its area which is administered by Auckland Transport. Each year, the Local Board’s capital fund allocation is $494,757 and this amount can be consolidated within each electoral term.
6. At the time of writing the unspent transport capital fund budget for the current electoral term was $1.177 million. This comprises of $645,000 allocated toward the Onehunga Mall upgrade and a balance of $532,000 uncommitted. Auckland Transport has previously asked the Local Boards to indicate possible projects before 31 August 2014 to ensure these projects could be delivered in this electoral term as it is unlikely that any unallocated funds will be able to be carried forward into a new term.
7. An update on the delivery of current projects is below:
Paynes Lane
8. These works will begin in the last week of August or first week of September.
Onehunga Mall to Upper Municipal Place
9. Work begun on this improvement in the week beginning 25 August.
Princes Street Pedestrian Enhancements
10. The contract for this project will be let in September 2014 and is anticipated to begin in late September.
Tetra Trap Installation
11. In July 2013, AT gave the Local Board a rough estimate of costs to cover installing tetra traps in three different catchments. This was based on 361 Tetra Traps in Panmure Basin (including Van Damms Lagoon), 18 in Captain Springs Reserve and 21 in Baycroft Reserve. The Local Board approved a budget of $400,000 in July 2013.
12. AT advised the Local Board in March 2014 of an expected reduced cost of $320,000 for the Tetra Trap works due to the prices that were received for the tender being lower than expected. AT can now advise the Local Board that the total cost of the completed works is $290,158. This represents a further saving due to fewer Tetra Traps actually being installed than was anticipated.
13. During inspection and verification, it was decided that some Tetra Traps were not required as some were adjacent to each other and others were in a construction zone managed by different contractors (the AMETI Project) and their installation will be covered in that contract.
14. In total 271 catchpits were installed and five catchpits that had collapsed were rebuilt and fitted with Tetra Traps.
15. This project has now been completed.
AMETI Update
Panmure Station
16. There has been a considerable increase in patronage at the station since it opened in January. The new electric trains have begun service on the Eastern line via Panmure Station, initially at night with daily services to follow; dates for this are to be confirmed.
AMETI Link Road North
17. Concrete footpath and vehicle crossings on Fraser and Morrin roads are near completion.
AMETI Link Road South
18. There will be no pedestrian access from the intersection of the AMETI link road and Mt Wellington Highway. Access will be via William Harvey place onto the new shared path towards Panmure Station. This is due to work that needs to be completed behind NCI.
19. Concrete footpath and driveway pours are substantially complete on Mt Wellington Highway.
AMETI Link Road Opening
20. Auckland Transport will be holding a public open day to celebrate the opening of the new link road which will link Morrin Road in the north with Mt Wellington Highway in the south. AT will announce the date once a finish of works date can be confirmed.
William Harvey Place
21. Drainage works, a wider new shared footpath for pedestrians and cyclists will be constructed on the southern side connecting Mt Wellington Highway to Ireland road via William Harvey footbridge. The landscaping of the William Harvey wetland will be undertaken in the coming months.
Van Damms Lagoon
22. Eastern Interceptor piling works are continuing. Following this, the support structure construction will continue until late 2014. Landscaping and enhancement work are to follow including the construction of two new car parking areas.
Panmure to Pakuranga
23. The Panmure to Pakuranga stage proposes:
a) Upgrading the Panmure roundabout to an intersection with traffic lights and direct pedestrian crossings
b) A busway from Panmure to Pakuranga town centre, the first section of the South Eastern Busway
c) A new Pakuranga bus station
d) A direct link between Pakuranga Road and Pakuranga Highway/Waipuna Bridge via the Reeves Road flyover
e) Cycle lanes and pedestrian safety improvements.
24. Auckland Transport will be consulting with those who are potentially affected by the projects before applying for land designation (Notice of Requirement), which it is aiming to do in April 2015.
25. Panmure to Pakuranga Timeline:
a) Now to early 2015 – design and planning, consultation
b) April 2015 - application to Auckland Council for land designation (Notices of Requirement) and consents.
c) 2015 - public submissions to Auckland Council and hearing by independent commissioners
d) 2017 - construction start (subject to funding and consents).
Pakuranga to Botany:
26. This work is to provide pedestrian and cycle improvements and extend the busway from Pakuranga to Botany.
27. Planning work on the Pakuranga to Botany section will not progress any further until 2015. This is to allow the AMETI project team to focus on the Panmure to Pakuranga section.
Aliford Avenue Parking Consultation
28. As reported last month, Aliford Avenue is close to Great South Road employment centres and One Tree Hill College, and is therefore subject to a high level of commuter parking. To allow for short term parking options for residents, Auckland Transport established a zone of restricted parking (P120). The current layout results in vehicles often being parked on both sides of the street through the middle section of the road providing a traffic calming effect.
29. Some residents have not been satisfied with the current layout and they requested Auckland Transport to review the parking restrictions in Aliford Avenue. Subsequently, a letter was prepared by the Parking Design Team discussing three options and circulated to residents for feedback in May 2014.
30. The results of that consultation have been inconclusive in that none of the proposals have been clearly supported. A petition was signed by some residents requesting a P120 restriction on both sides of the street.
31. After much consideration from Auckland Transport officers, a new layout for Aliford Avenue is being drawn up. This will be discussed with residents at a public meeting, which the Local Board has agreed to chair, to be held in late September.
Onehunga Train Station Walkway and Bus Shelter History Panels
32. Auckland Transport acknowledges assistance from the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board for the reaffixing of the history panels to the bus shelter walls through Small Local Improvement Projects (SLIPs) funding.
33. The panels which were removed to install the bus shelter will be reaffixed to the white walls to deter graffiti and the space around the panels will be treated with anti-graffiti surfacing.
34. This work has been delayed as Auckland Transport is currently constructing a covered walkway from the new bus shelter through to the Onehunga train station. This work has taken longer than first anticipated due to the presence of large boulders sub-surface.
35. However as soon as it is deemed safe to access the area around the bus shelter, the panels will be reinstated.
Glen Innes Safety Around Schools Improvements
36. Auckland Transport is currently working with the Local Schools in the Glen Innes area to implement a Safety Around School Programme. Through surveys and meetings conducted with the school’s community, a number of road safety issues were identified which require upgrading works to occur in the neighbouring streets to improve safety and accessibility.
37. AT has investigated safety improvement options at several locations in Glen Innes. The improvements aims to make the road and footpath environment safer as part of a coordinated plan to develop safer road layouts, promote sustainable travel and ensure the ease of passage for pedestrians. The proposed changes for the Safety Around School Programme in the Glen Innes area are now out for public consultation. A brief outline of the proposals is below.
Castledine Crescent – Local Area Traffic Management (LATM)
38. The pedestrian crossing located outside St Pius School (located at near bottom of the vertical descent) has a high approach speed of traffic. Site observations have revealed that there are a moderate number of pedestrians crossing at this zebra crossing, with the number expected to rise due to the new housing development underway in the area.
39. Castledine Crescent has a U shaped layout and the two straight sections of Castledine Crescent have a gradual descent in the southbound direction. In the past crashes have occurred along Castledine Crescent where a child and a cyclist were hit. To improve safety at the crossing point and along Castledine Crescent following improvements are proposed by AT:
a) Install existing pedestrian crossing outside the school on a new speed table,
b) New speed table outside no. 15, 43 and 71 Castledine Crescent.
Epping Street – Local Area Traffic Management (LATM)
40. A walkway (adjacent to #15 Epping Street) connects Epping Street with the zebra crossing on Line Road and is used primarily by students going to Glen Innes School from areas east of the school. As the school children exit out of the walkway on to Epping Street, they then cross at various locations along Epping Street. The number of children crossing the road is high and at times children were also observed to be playing on the carriageway.
41. Observing the nature of crossing activity taking place on Epping Street, a single crossing facility along Epping Street would not be utilised significantly by children. To mitigate the issue AT proposes to improve safety by providing a slower speed environment for the section of Epping Road where the majority crossing activity occurs. The slower speed environment would be created using a horizontal speed calming treatment either side of the location of the walkway, the treatments would also combine a message to warn of children presence on the road, “SLOW’ road markings on red road surface.
Overlea Road – Splitter Island at intersection with Elstree Avenue
42. The intersection of Overlea Road and Elstree Avenue is located at close proximity to Glen Taylor Primary School. A high number of children from Glen Taylor School cross the Overlea Road leg of its intersection with Elstree Avenue. Elstree Avenue has a gradual descent in the southbound direction from its roundabout with West Tāmaki Road. Overlea Road also has a descent towards Leybourne Circle intersection. Overlea Road at its intersection with Elstree Avenue is 14.6m wide which allows vehicles turning left into Overlea Road from Elstree Avenue to make the turn at high speed. The result of all these factors makes the Overlea Road leg an unsafe point for crossing. To improve safety at the intersection of Overlea Road and Elstree Avenue, AT proposes to install splitter island at the intersection of Overlea Road leg of the intersection.
43. The installation of a new splitter island on Overlea Road at intersection with Elstree Avenue will:
a) reduce the crossing distance for pedestrians,
b) slow down traffic turning left into Overlea Road from Elstree Road.
Leybourne Circle – Pedestrian refuge and speed table
44. Glenbrae School is located directly opposite the Fenchurch Street leg of its intersection with Leybourne Circle. An existing zebra crossing is located outside Glenbrae School, east of the intersection of Leybourne Circle and Fenchurch Street. The pedestrian crossing outside the school is heavily utilised however school children also cross Leybourne Circle outside Elstree North Reserve using the walkway through the park to access Elstree Avenue.
45. Leybourne Circle at this location has a wide carriageway. As part of traffic calming along Lebourne Circle, Auckland Transport has decided to install a new speed table at the zebra crossing outside the school and install a horizontal traffic calming measure outside the Elstree North Reserve.
46. However, when upgrading or installing pedestrian facilities such as this, there may be the inevitable loss of on street parking. Auckland Transport would be pleased to receive any comments from the Local Board on the proposals and the transport portfolio holders have been asked to respond by 11 September.
47. Auckland Transport will consider all feedback and information received prior to making a final decision on the proposals. The feedback will be considered with the broader community benefits that the proposals will bring.
Auckland Transport News
Manukau Line Goes Electric
48. The roll-out of electric trains in Auckland steps up in late August with the introduction of the new trains on the Manukau Line. Initially, electric trains will run on some off-peak services and they will be introduced to all services over the next month.
49. The new trains have been very popular since their introduction on the Onehunga Line in April but with any transition there may be “teething problems”. To ensure customers who use the trains to Manukau are getting a reliable service AT will be gradually increasing the number of electric trains over the next month.
50. Meanwhile, testing continues across the rail network following an intermittent power fault which saw some Onehunga services affected. AT would like to stress that there are no safety issues associated with the fault.
New Otahuhu Bus and Train Interchange
51. A new bus-train interchange sited at the existing Otahuhu Train Station is on track to begin construction later this year with completion targeted for the middle of next year. The new interchange is expected to transform the way people travel in South Auckland. This new transport facility will be a critical hub in the delivery of a new integrated public transport network in South Auckland.
52. Key features include continuous cover along bus and rail platforms, an elevated and enclosed concourse connecting the existing rail platform with new bus platforms, multiple pedestrian access options, escalators, lifts and stairs, WiFi, CCTV, kiss and ride and bicycle parking/storage. The facility will be built to accessible standards, including provision of limited parking for disabled users.
53. New on street bus stop facilities will be built on Avenue Road replacing the existing Otahuhu bus station. New, modern bus shelters will also be constructed on Mason Avenue to serve the new Otahuhu Recreation Precinct with regular and frequent bus services connecting the interchange with the new town centre bus stops.
54. The detailed design for Otahuhu can be viewed at www.aucklandtransport.govt.nz/otahuhu-interchange.
Streamlining Funding Model Developed between AT and NZTA
55. The Transport Agency funds that are distributed to local bodies and their organisations like Auckland Transport are gathered from excise duties on fuel, road user charges and vehicle registration fees and re-invested in transport-related projects. These funds help councils and their organisations deliver a range of public transport, roading and cycling and walking projects for their communities.
56. A new process has been developed by the NZ Transport Agency and Auckland Transport to allow more efficient use of staff time and resources in the assessment and prioritisation of funding proposals. Previously, both the Transport Agency and Auckland Transport would separately assess and prioritise/rate requests for funds.
57. Under the “one stop shop” designed by the two organisations, Auckland Transport can now assess projects up to $5m against the Transport Agency criteria itself without having to send its applications to the NZTA. Previously, funding requests required two separate assessments – one from NZTA and one from Auckland Transport – a process that sometimes led to duplicated effort.
58. Auckland Transport can now manage the new process for projects up to $5m on its own. The NZ Transport Agency’s confidence in AT reflects the strong relationship staff from the two organisations have developed, and the fact that both organisations have a good understanding of each other’s objectives and priorities.
59. The new process is expected to speed up approvals and result in lower administration costs. A station upgrade at Swanson on the western line is the first project to be approved under the new process.
Issues Raised through/by Board Members
Location or Name of Issue |
Description
|
AT Response |
Gavin Street |
Residents prepared a deputation to the Local Board meeting in May in regard to their concerns about heavy traffic using Gavin Street as a short cut between two arterial routes. This issue has been ongoing for several years. |
Auckland Transport is considering several possible remedies for Gavin Street.
29/08/14 A report back on this matter is expected in the October LB agenda. |
Stonefields School |
It’s been reported that there is great difficulty with children crossing Merton Rd to access Stonefields School. There are roundabouts at each end of Merton Road and both of these have a high traffic volumes. AT has been requested to investigate a safe crossing facility.
|
An Auckland Transport engineer has undertaken an initial review of the issue. 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 October 2014 .
29/08/14 This matter is still awaiting further feedback from Auckland Transport.
|
Lunn Avenue |
There is a strip of on-street parking at 72 Lunn Avenue where the rest of the street has mostly yellow lines and there is ample off-street parking for all the commercial premises. When vehicles park here it makes it difficult for vehicles to turn safely out of the Mitre 10 off-street parking. Can this be investigated?
|
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 late October 2014 following which AT will be able to provide you with the outcome and recommendations of the assessment.
29/08/14 This matter is still awaiting further feedback from Auckland Transport.
|
Trafalgar Street |
Complaint received about vehicles parked over a private drive way access on Trafalgar Street, Onehunga.
|
On investigation, a new development has taken place here and the kerbline has not been reinstated in line with the building consent. The developer has been asked to reinstate the kerb line and when this is completed, parking lines will be painted in. |
Glen Innes Library and Glen Innes Music and Arts Centre |
Request for extra bollards to be placed on the road reserve to prevent cars from driving on to the pedestrian area by the library and GIMAC.
|
Still under investigation. |
No. |
Title |
Page |
aView |
Attachment A, Consultation update |
139 |
bView |
Attachment B, AMETI update |
141 |
cView |
Attachment C, Specifications for Auckland's trains |
145 |
Signatories
Authors |
Lorna Stewart, Elected Member Relationship Manager, Auckland Transport |
Authorisers |
Jonathan Anyon, Elected Member Relationship Team Manager, Auckland Transport Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager |
Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board 16 September 2014 |
|
Report from Onehunga Foreshore Dog Access Panel
File No.: CP2014/18146
Purpose
1. The purpose of the report is to submit to the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board the Onehunga Foreshore Dog Access Panel decision on dog access rules for the Onehunga foreshore on the southern side of Orpheus Drive.
Executive summary
2. The Maungakiekie-Tāmaki and Puketapapa local boards respectively resolved at their business meetings on 28 January 2014 (resolution MT/2014/5) and 30 January 2014 (resolution PKTPP/2014/4) to review the default dog access rules on the new Onehunga foreshore on the southern side of Orpheus Drive via a joint panel.
3. The Onehunga Foreshore Dog Access Panel at a meeting on 19 May 2014 adopted proposed changes to local dog access rules on the new Onehunga foreshore on the southern side of Orpheus Drive.
4. The hearing panel has considered eight submissions in relation to the proposal and has decided to allow dogs under control on a leash on the western side of the new Onehunga foreshore and prohibited from the eastern wildlife areas.
5. Reasons for the decision include that the proposal is the most appropriate way to protect public safety and comfort, to provide for the needs of dogs and their owners, and to protect wildlife on what is expected to be a busy sub-regional destination.
6. The hearing panel acknowledge submissions that sought time and season dog access and note that this can be considered as part of the wider review of local dog access rules by the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki and Puketapapa local boards in 2016 when the actual use of the new Onehunga foreshore is better known.
7. The hearing panel also note that under control off-leash dog access is retained on the adjoining Onehunga Lagoon which includes extensive grass areas and a beach, and that the new Onehunga foreshore will in the future form part of a coastal walkway including Mangere Bridge.
That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board: a) receives the decision report titled “Hearing Panel Report on Dog Access Rules on the new Onehunga foreshore on the southern side of Orpheus Drive 2014”. b) thanks the Onehunga Foreshore Dog Access Panel for their work considering the proposal and submissions on dog access rules for the Onehunga foreshore.
|
Comments
8. The Onehunga Foreshore Dog Access Panel at a meeting on 19 May 2014 adopted proposed changes to local dog access rules on the new Onehunga foreshore on the southern side of Orpheus Drive.
9. The panel considered eight submissions in relation to the proposal.
10. The panel deliberations as contained in the decision report are provided below. A copy of the hearing panel’s decision report is contained in Attachment A and contains details of the proposal, public notification, decision-making considerations, matters raised in submissions and hearing panel deliberations.
Submission Topic 1 – Western side of the new Onehunga foreshore
11. The panel resolved to adopt the proposed dog access rules on the new Onehunga foreshore as publicly notified.
12. Reasons for the decision include that the proposal is the most appropriate way to protect public safety and comfort, to provide for the needs of dogs and their owners, and to protect wildlife on what is expected to be a busy sub-regional destination.
13. The panel acknowledged submissions that sought time and season dog access and note that this can be considered as part of the wider review of local dog access rules by the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki and Puketapapa local boards in 2016 when the actual use of the new Onehunga foreshore is better known.
14. The hearing panel also noted that under control off-leash dog access is retained on the adjoining Onehunga Lagoon which includes extensive grass areas and a beach, and that the new Onehunga foreshore will in the future form part of a coastal walkway including Mangere Bridge.
Submission Topic 2 – Eastern side of the new Onehunga foreshore
15. The panel resolved to adopt the proposed prohibition of dogs from the eastern portion of the new Onehunga foreshore as publicly notified. Reasons for the decision include that it better protects birdlife.
Title |
Page |
|
aView |
Hearing Panel Report on Dog Access Rules on the new Onehunga foreshore on the southern side of Orpheus Drive |
149 |
Signatories
Authors |
Justin Walters - Policy Analyst |
Authorisers |
Helgard Wagener - Team leader, Policies and Bylaws Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager |
Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board 16 September 2014 |
|
Regional Facilities Auckland Fourth Quarter Report 2013/14
File No.: CP2014/20291
Purpose
1. The purpose of this report is to provide local board members with the Regional Facilities Auckland (RFA) Fourth Quarter Report 2013/14 so that all members are well briefed in regard to RFA activities and developments.
Executive summary
2. The report is provided via Attachment A, titled Regional Facilities Auckland Fourth Quarter Report 2013/14 and Attachment B, titled Summary of key points.
That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board: a) receives the Regional Facilities Auckland Fourth Quarter Report 2013-14. |
No. |
Title |
Page |
aView |
Attachment A, Regional Facilities Auckland fourth quarter report 2013/14 |
159 |
bView |
Attachment B, Summary of key points |
181 |
Signatories
Authors |
Philippa Hillman - Democracy Advisor, Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board |
Authorisers |
Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager |
Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board 16 September 2014 |
|
Fourth Quarter Report 2013-14
Summary of Key Points
1. Operational highlights include the full integration of Bruce Mason Centre to the RFA group and the transfer of QBE North Harbour Stadium to RFA - full integration is expected in the next quarter.
2. Four Tasmanian Devils were welcomed to Auckland Zoo, there was again record visitor numbers and a visitor satisfaction rating of 95%.
3. A record number of events and external revenue was achieved by Auckland Conventions.
4. Auckland art gallery continues to require further funding and the operational model will be reviewed again. Despite this challenge there have been outstanding exhibitions.
5. Key priorities of the RFA capital programme include: renewals at Auckland zoo to begin to address the issues of an infrastructure that is over 90 years old, weather-tightness work at The Civic and Aotea Centre, renewals at Mt Smart and Western Springs to meet health and safety and other requirements.
6. The Edge was rebranded to Auckland Live. The Auckland Live focus now extends beyond the central city venues to include arts and entertainment programming at Bruce Mason Centre, QBE Stadium, Mt Smart and Western Springs. This wider focus will lead to improved strategic planning and coordination, and better economic returns including operating efficiencies.
7. Key deliverables outlined in the report include the Aotea Centre weather tightness project, the Vodafone events centre project, Auckland stadiums strategy, programme for reducing greenhouse gas emissions at all sites, the collections storage project, sustainable grants to minimise the burden on ratepayers, and projects to support the Maori Engagement Framework.
8. The financial report shows that operational funding was close to budget and some underspend on the capital budget due to consent and other delays mostly related to projects at Aotea Centre. Visitors to RFA events and venues from outside Auckland contributed $169m, compared to $103m last year.
9. Performance measures for the year include participation by Auckland communities. This is expressed as: “Level of reach across (usage by) Auckland communities (visits/resident population).” While this measure is included in all quarterly reports, as yet systems have not been implemented to enable reporting against this measure.
10. There are many exciting events in the upcoming year including The Sound of Music, the Volvo Ocean Race, NZ Fashion Week, the Cloud festival, The Eagles and The Rolling Stones, Taste of Auckland and Soulfest. As new programming develops throughout the year local boards will be kept informed.
Judy Lawley
Manager, Local Board Engagement
DDI 8180442, M 0272931747
Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board 16 September 2014 |
|
Auckland Council Property Limited Local Board Six-Monthly update 1 January to 30 June 2014
File No.: CP2014/20043
Purpose
1. To give the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board an overview Auckland Council Property Limited’s (ACPL) activities for the six months 1 January to 30 June 2014.
Executive summary
2. ACPL’s vision is to be a ‘centre of excellence’ that provides commercial expertise and value for money to the council in managing its property portfolio, acquisition and disposal activities, and the delivery of projects that implement council development initiatives.
3. This report sets out a summary of ACPL activities for the past six-months that contribute to our seven key outcomes as outlined in our Statement of Intent 2014 to 2017 and noted below. Activity detail is broken down by business unit or work-stream, with a focus on local board specific activities where applicable.
4. ACPL’s seven key outcomes:
a) Properties managed for the council and Auckland Transport (AT) are maintained to be fit for purpose and achieve optimum net returns.
a) Place-shaping projects involving other sector partners are efficiently planned and managed to help achieve a quality compact Auckland.
b) ACPL contributes exemplar housing developments to increase the supply of housing in Auckland, particularly in the more affordable spectrum of the market, working with partners.
c) Council business interests are managed to protect long term value and achieve budgeted net income.
d) Property acquisitions are undertaken in a commercially robust manner and in accordance with the council and AT agreed requirements and relevant legislation.
e) Properties are disposed of for the council in a commercially robust manner once declared surplus.
f) The council is provided with a commercial perspective on planning and development initiatives to support effective implementation of those initiatives.
5. Local board specific supporting detail is included in Attachments A, B, and C.
That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board: b) accepts the Auckland Council Property Limited Local Board six-monthly update 1 January to 30 June 2014.
|
Comments
6. A schedule of Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board workshops and meetings attended by ACPL representatives from January to June 2014 is included as Attachment A. The list includes property specific meetings and workshops relating to general property management and the ongoing portfolio Rationalisation Process.
Property Portfolio Management
7. ACPL manages all Auckland Council or AT owned non-service properties. These are properties that are not immediately required for service delivery or infrastructure development.
8. The property portfolio continued to grow during the last six-months and now totals 1185 properties, an increase of 90 since our February 2014 update. The current property portfolio includes industrial sites and buildings, retail tenancies, cafés, restaurants, offices and a substantial portfolio of residential properties.
9. ACPL’s specialist property knowledge and understanding enables us to optimise revenue streams and identify future opportunities. ACPL’s return on the property portfolio for the quarter ending 30 June 2014 provides the shareholder a net surplus of $1.9 ahead of budget, with an actual surplus of $25.4m against budget of $23.5m. During the quarter the average monthly collectable arrears rate and vacancies rate were respectively 2.1% and 2.4%. Well under the SOI targets of 5% and 3%.
10. A Properties Managed schedule is included as Attachment B of this report. The schedule details:
a) current ACPL managed commercial and residential property within the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board.
b) each property’s classification or reason for retention.
c) the nature of the property, such as a café within a library, or a residential property with a tenancy in place.
d) the budget under which operating expenditure and lease revenue for the property is reported, e.g. regional or local board.
11. A report indicating portfolio movement in the local board area is attached as Attachment C. The report details all new acquisitions including the reason for acquisition, any transfers and the reason for transfer, and any disposals.
Portfolio Review and Rationalisation
Overview
12. ACPL is required to undertake ongoing rationalisation of the council’s non-service assets. This includes identifying properties from within council’s portfolio that may be suitable for potential sale and development if appropriate. ACPL has a particular focus on achieving housing outcomes. Identifying potential sale properties contributes to Auckland Plan outcomes by providing the council with an efficient use of capital and prioritisation of funds to achieve its activities and projects.
Performance
13. January to June 2014 Targets
UNIT |
TARGET |
ACHIEVED |
COMMENTS |
Portfolio Review |
$12.3m disposal recommendations |
$14.8m |
These recommendations include $5.6m of sites that have been identified for development projects. |
14. In setting future disposal targets ACPL is working closely with the council and AT to identify potential surplus properties.
15. 2014/2015 Targets
UNIT |
TARGET |
COMMENTS |
Portfolio Review |
$30m disposal recommendations |
These targets will include disposal recommendations and sales for sites that are identified for place-shaping and housing development projects |
Development & Disposals |
$30 net sales |
Process
16. Once identified as a potential sale candidate a property is taken through a multi-stage Rationalisation Process. The agreed process includes engagement with; council, CCOs, local board and mana whenua. This is followed by ACPL Board approval, engagement with local ward and the Independent Maori Statutory Board and finally a governing body decision.
Under review
17. Properties currently under review for future use opportunities via the Rationalisation Process in the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki area will be listed here as and when they arise. The list includes any properties that may have recently been approved for sale or development and sale by the governing body. Further details are included in Attachment B.
PROPERTY |
DETAILS |
52/7, 53/7, 54/7 Rowlands Ave, Mt Wellington |
These properties were approved for disposal by the Governing Body on 6 June 2013 with the potential to negotiate a sale with HNZC. However an HNZC sale did not progress at the time. ACPL is, in conjunction with council and with input from the local board, continuing work evaluating the best long-term outcome for these properties. The properties have been tenanted in the interim. |
Maurice Road, Penrose (Deeds Plan 850 |
Vacant land – partial site transferred from Auckland Council Property Department (ACPD) as non-service. ACPL to review future use options via the Rationalisation Process. |
5 Rayma Place, Mt Wellington |
Vacant land – transferred from Auckland Council Property Department (ACPD) as non-service. ACPL to review future use options via the Rationalisation Process. |
Lot 1 DP 74245, Victoria St, Onehunga |
Vacant land – transferred from Auckland Council Property Department (ACPD) as non-service. Currently functioning as accessway. ACPL to check requirements with AT ahead of further review. |
Place Shaping and Housing Initiatives
Overview
18. ACPL is contributing commercial input into around 48 council-driven place-shaping and housing initiatives region wide. Involvement extends from provision of initial feasibility advice through to implementation, with projects ranging in size from $400k to in excess of $100million. ACPL works closely with the local boards on ACPL lead developments to ensure we give effect to the local boards’ place-shaping role.
19. An increasing focus for ACPL is property optimisation. In this we are keen to work with local boards on development opportunities that facilitate upgrades within the service portfolio. For example a community facility upgrade may be funded by incorporating the facility into a mixed-use development that makes better use of the overall site.
20. ACPL is also actively contributing to the Housing Action Plan Group, which is a council initiative focusing on non-regulatory efforts to encourage and increase affordable residential development. We have a Statement of Intent (SOI) target to undertake five housing development projects with an affordable housing component over three years which would encompass Community Housing Organisation (CHO) involvement. We are currently actively working on 13 such projects.
Local Activities
21. A high level update on place-shaping and housing initiative and proposal activities in the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki area is outlined in points below.
22. Tāmaki: A Transformational area impacted by AMETI. The council is a significant stakeholder via the Tāmaki Redevelopment Company. ACPL attends the company’s monthly Liaison Group meeting for information purposes but has no actual involvement in the project at this stage.
23. Onehunga: A mixed industrial and residential area that has been identified as over time becoming a significant residential area. ACPL is holding a watching brief over the area - noting there are three SHAs in the area: George Terrace, Tuata Street and Jordan Avenue Onehunga. ACPL attended a site visit in Onehunga with the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board Chair in April 2014 to discuss potential development concepts west of the town centre. ACPL will continue to maintain a watching brief over the area and coordinate with other council units as appropriate to activate any opportunities as and when they arise.
24. Tāmaki TOD: AT is reviewing the need for a new rail station at Tāmaki. However this is subject to the delivery of a satisfactory station by the developer and sufficient residential development around the station to deliver the required numbers. ACPL continues to provide commercial advice to council units as requested on aspects of this proposition, which is at the conceptual stage.
Acquisitions
Overview
25. ACPL continues to support Council and Auckland Transport programmes and projects by negotiating required property acquisitions. All such acquisitions are funded through approved Council or Auckland Transport budgets. We also provide advice to assist with budgets, business cases and strategy to support an acquisition.
26. By the end of the financial year 2013 to 2014 two hundred and seven property purchases were completed for the council and AT to the value of $132.4m. All of the property acquisitions met independent valuation thresholds agreed with AT, the council and Public Works Act 1981 requirements.
Council Acquisitions
27. Over the past six months 14 properties were acquired to meet council open space and storm water requirements and to contribute to City Transformation projects. These included the following acquisitions in, or neighbouring, the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board area.
PROPERTY |
STAKEHOLDER |
PURPOSE |
LOCAL BOARD |
52 Waitangi Road, Onehunga |
Parks, Sports & Recreation |
Open Space |
Maungakiekie-Tāmaki |
2/48 Michaels Ave, Ellerslie |
Community, Policy & Planning |
Open Space |
Orakei |
1/48 Michaels Ave, Ellerslie |
Community, Policy & Planning |
Open Space |
Orakei |
80-100 Ascot Road, Remuera |
Stormwater |
Stormwater |
Orakei |
Auckland Transport Acquisitions
28. 72 properties were also acquired over the past six-months on behalf of AT. The focus was on acquisitions to support major transport projects such as AMETI (30 acquisitions) Dominion Road (7 acquisitions) Te Atatu Road (9 acquisitions) and City Rail Link (16 acquisitions). Full details of relevant AT projects and associated acquisitions will come to the local board directly from AT.
Business Interests
29. ACPL manages eight business interests region wide on council’s behalf. This comprises two forestry enterprises, two landfills and four quarries. There are currently no ACPL managed business interests in the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board area.
Consideration
Local Board Views
30. This report is for the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board’s information.
Maori Impact Statement
31. The importance of effective communication and engagement with Maori on the subject of land is understood. ACPL has accordingly developed robust engagement with the 19 listed Tāmaki region mana whenua groups for our core business activities.
32. Key engagement activities include: identifying cultural significance concerns regarding disposal properties, flagging commercial interests, development partnering discussions and issues relating to property management such as protection of waahi tapu or joint management relating to Treaty Settlements. ACPL also engages with relevant mana whenua in respect of development outcomes for ACPL lead projects where appropriate. ACPL will advise the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board as appropriate of any discussions that arise in the local board’s area.
33. ACPL has additionally undertaken to be part of council’s Maori Responsiveness Plan (MRP) pilot programme. The project’s key output is an operational document outlining ACPL’s contribution to council’s strategic and operational commitments to Maori. The Improvement Planning Phase of this project is nearly complete. We anticipate finalising our MRP in October/November 2014.
Implementation Issues
34. There are no implementation issues.
No. |
Title |
Page |
aView |
Attachment A, Schedule of meetings and workshops |
189 |
bView |
Attachment B, Properties managed by ACPL in the local board area |
191 |
cView |
Attachment C, Property movement in the local board area |
197 |
Signatories
Authors |
Philippa Hillman - Democracy Advisor, Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board |
Authorisers |
Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager |
Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board 16 September 2014 |
|
Record of Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board Workshops August 2014
File No.: CP2014/19775
Executive summary
1. The attached workshop records provide a summary of the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board workshops.
2. These sessions are held to give an information opportunity for board members and officers to discuss issues and projects, and note that no binding decisions are made or voted on at workshop sessions.
That the record of Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board: a) receives the workshops report for August 2014. |
No. |
Title |
Page |
aView |
Record of workshops for August 2014. |
201 |
Signatories
Authors |
Philippa Hillman - Democracy Advisor, Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board |
Authorisers |
Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager |
Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board 16 September 2014 |
|
RECORD OF WORKSHOPS
Record of workshop proceedings for 5 August 2014 10am-5pm
Held at the Local Board office, 7-13 Pilkington Road, Panmure
Members present for all or part of the workshops:
Simon Randall (Chairperson)
Chris Makoare (Deputy Chairperson)
Josephine Bartley
Brett Clark
Bridget Graham
Alan Verrall
Apologies: Obed Unasa
1.0 |
Long Term Plan |
|
Workshop to discuss the Long Term Plan. |
|
Officers present: Nina Siers, Mary Binney |
|
|
2.0 |
Glen Innes Music and Arts Centre |
|
Update to the Local Board on project progress. |
|
Officers present: Kathy O’Connor, Sarp Egene, Alasdair Nelson |
|
|
3.0 |
Onehunga Foreshore Restoration |
|
Update to the Local Board on project progress. |
|
Officers present: Taala Shane, Steve Owens, Roger Jolly, Jenny Wood, Neill Forgie |
RECORD OF WORKSHOPS
Record of workshop proceedings for 12 August 2014 12pm-7pm
Held at the Local Board office, 7-13 Pilkington Road, Panmure
Members present for all or part of the workshops:
Simon Randall (Chairperson)
Chris Makoare (Deputy Chairperson)
Josephine Bartley
Brett Clark
Bridget Graham
Obed Unasa
Alan Verrall
1.0 |
Long Term Plan |
|
Workshop to discuss the Long Term Plan. |
|
Officers present: Mary Binney |
|
|
2.0 |
Jubilee Bridge |
|
An update on bridge renewal project. |
|
Officers present: Steve Owens, Jenny Wood, Greg Hannah |
|
|
3.0 |
Community Facilities Network Plan |
|
To discuss the draft Community Facilities Network Plan. |
|
Officers present: Anita Coy-Macken, Beverly Fletcher |
|
|
4.0 |
City Transformation – Tāmaki Redevelopment Company |
|
Update from the City Transformation team. |
|
Adam Johnstone |
|
|
5.0 |
Tāmaki Redevelopment Company |
|
Update from the Tāmaki Redevelopment Company. |
|
Officers present: Adam Johnstone |
|
|
6.0 |
Tāmaki Redevelopment Company Board |
|
Relationship meeting. |
|
Officers present: Adam Johnstone, John Dunshea |
RECORD OF WORKSHOPS
Record of workshop proceedings for 19 August 2014 11am-5pm
Held at the Local Board office, 7-13 Pilkington Road, Panmure
Members present for all or part of the workshops:
Simon Randall (Chairperson)
Chris Makoare (Deputy Chairperson)
Josephine Bartley
Brett Clark
Bridget Graham
Obed Unasa
Alan Verrall
1.0 |
Construction Bylaw Review |
|
To discuss the construction bylaw review. |
|
Officers present: Mark Dance |
|
|
2.0 |
Bus route changes in the Onehunga-Eastern area |
|
To discuss the bus route changes in Maungakiekie-Tāmaki area. |
|
Officers present: Anthony Cross, Olivia Barton, Lorna Stewart |
|
|
3.0 |
2014/15 Capex Review |
|
To discuss the 2014/15 capex review |
|
Officers present: Kate Marsh, Sugenthy Thomson, Steve Owens, Kay Glamuzina |
RECORD OF WORKSHOPS
Record of workshop proceedings for 26 August 2014 10am-5pm
Held at the Local Board office, 7-13 Pilkington Road, Panmure
Members present for all or part of the workshops:
Simon Randall (Chairperson)
Chris Makoare (Deputy Chairperson)
Brett Clark
Bridget Graham
Josephine Bartley
Obed Unasa
Apologies: Alan Verrall
1.0 |
Onehunga Foreshore update |
|
Update to the Local Board on project progress. |
|
Officers present: Neill Forgie, Greg Hannah, Peter McGregor, Julie Pickering, Jenny Wood |
|
|
2.0 |
Libraries Network Review |
|
To discuss the Libraries Network Review. |
|
Officers present: Kim Taunga |
|
|
3.0 |
Auckland Council Property Ltd |
|
To provide the Local Board with an update on activities. |
|
Officers present: Caitlin Borgfeldt |
|
|
4.0 |
Local Board Plan |
|
Update and preparation for Local Board Plan hearing. |
|
Officers present: Mary Binney, Nina Siers |
|
|
5.0 |
Ways of working |
|
To discuss the local board ways of working. |
|
Officers present: Nina Siers, Victoria Villaraza |
Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board 16 September 2014 |
|
File No.: CP2014/19777
Purpose
Providing Board members with an opportunity to update the local board on the projects and issues they have been involved with since the last meeting.
That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board: a) receives the board member reports. |
No. |
Title |
Page |
aView |
Deputy Chairperson Chris Makoare report |
207 |
bView |
Board member Josephine Bartley report |
211 |
cView |
Board member Bridget Graham report |
213 |
Signatories
Authors |
Philippa Hillman - Democracy Advisor, Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board |
Authorisers |
Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager |
Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board 16 September 2014 |
|
Meeting and Events Attended
12/8- Local Board Workshop
14/8- Attended Housing Meeting at Panmure Bridge School- presented by Phil Twyford.
19/8- Local Board Workshop
18/8- Dunkirk Road, Panmure Network meeting
19/8- Local Board Workshop
19/8- Local Board Business meeting
20/8- Glen Innes Music and Arts Centre site tour
26/8- 9am- Catch-up with Chair Randall
26/8- 10am Local Board Workshop
27/8- Swimming Pools fencing exemption meeting.
27/8- Community Facilities Catch up
28/8- Simon /Victoria- Catch up.
30/8- Family Day-Moon Festival 2014: Panmure Community Centre.
1/9- Long Term Plan-Mayors Proposal.
2/9- Local Board Plan Submissions.
Portfolio Update
Portfolio |
Lead |
Alternate |
Community Facilities |
Chris Makoare |
|
Libraries |
Chris Makoare |
Bridget Graham |
Youth |
Chris Makoare |
|
Community Networks and Outside Appointments
Organisation |
Primary |
Alternate |
Glen Innes Community Network |
Chris Makoare |
Josephine Bartley |
Glen Innes Drug and Alcohol Group |
Chris Makoare |
Josephine Bartley |
The Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Youth Connections Steering Group |
Simon Randall, Chris Makoare, Obed Unasa |
|
Other Matters
Represented and spoke on behalf of the Board at The Moon Festival in Panmure. It was an enjoyable day, with an opportunity to look over some of the children’s art on display. I must say that I was surprised at the very high standard and would like to say congratulations to the Chinese New Settlers Services Trust for an excellent event.
Among those at the event were Jenny Wang of the Chinese New Settlers Services Trust, the Chinese Consul General, the Honourable Michael Woodhouse Minister of Immigration, the Honourable Peseta Sam Lotu-Inga Minister of Pacific Affairs, Labour MPs Carol Beaumont and Raymond Huo, Auckland Councillor Denise Krum and Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board Member Josephine Bartley.
Attended the Pacific Showoff event in Mangere Arts Centre with member Bartley, this event had artists and performers from Maungakiekie-Tāmaki, on reflection when I have compared this to events I have seen it would be right up there with my top 5 shows/events. The event was also sponsored by companys within our Local Board area. Congratulations to member Obed Unasa who was one of the organisers for the pacific experience I will not forget. I can only hope that some of the performers and artists can be used in the opening of the GI Music and Arts Centre next year
It was also a great opportunity to visit the Arts Centre to gauge the performance and seating size and to be able to compare it to what GIMAC will be able to offer.
View from the top of the Glen Innes Music and Arts Centre building site.
Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board 16 September 2014 |
|
Board member Bartley report for August 2014
Date Meeting
5 August Local board workshops
12 August Local board workshops
13 August Glen Innes Business Association meeting
19 August Local board workshops and business meeting
20 August Behind the scenes tour of Glen Innes Music and Arts Centre site
26 August Local board workshops
30 August Chinese New Settlers Services Trust – Family Day and Moon Festival Panmure
30 August Polynesian Show Off – featuring Pacific talent from Onehunga
Portfolio update
2 August Arthur Street Reserve restoration project community day
12 August environment portfolio meeting
15 August Tāmaki Policing and Security Community Liaison Group meeting
21 August Maungakiekie Police catch up with Constable Allan
26 August Alcohol Plan hearing
27 August Alcohol Action plan meeting and Safety portfolio update
28 August Tāmaki Police monthly meeting – cancelled
30 August Launch of Tāmaki Waste Reduction Action Plan
Other matters
· Youth issues in Tāmaki – working group to look at coordinated community response.
· GI Rail tunnel mural project
Chinese Moon Festival
Arthur Street Restoration
Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board 16 September 2014 |
|
6 August |
Maungakiekie Team catch up with Onehunga Community News Heritage catch up with Mary
|
7 August |
Fenchurch Street Neighbourhood launch at Glenbrae School
|
11 August |
Onehunga CAB Leadership Team meeting City Rail Link briefing for Local Board members
|
12 August |
Local Board workshops
|
14 August |
Onehunga Dog Access Hearing Panel Seasons meeting
|
15 August |
CABAC meeting
|
18 August |
Ellerslie Residents’ and Ratepayers’ Association meeting Oranga Community Committee meeting
|
19 August |
Local board workshops Local Board Business meeting
|
20 August |
CABAC AGM Maungakiekie Health working group
|
22 August |
Local Board briefing on Significance and Engagement Policy Local Board briefing on commercial sponsorship
|
26 August |
Central Joint Funding Committee workshop Local Board workshops Onehunga Community House Management Committee meeting
|
27 August |
Local Board Swimming Pool Fencing Exemption Committee
|
Portfolio Update
6 August - Catch up with Mary regarding missed Heritage workshop
16 August - Central Joint Funding Committee workshop
Site visits and recommendations: -
295 Penrose Road
862 Great South Road
Community Networks: -
Oranga Community Committee.
18 August - Monthly meeting.
Onehunga Community House
26 August - Management Committee Meeting.
Maungakiekie Health Working Group
20 August - monthly meeting
Onehunga CAB
11 August - Leadership Team meeting
CABAC
15 August - monthly meeting
20 August - AGM
Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board 16 September 2014 |
|
Chair's Report to the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board
File No.: CP2014/19778
Executive summary
Providing the Chairperson, Simon Randall, with an opportunity to update the local board on the projects and issues he has been involved with since the last meeting.
That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board: a) receives the Chairperson’s report. |
There are no attachments for this report.
Signatories
Authors |
Philippa Hillman - Democracy Advisor, Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board |
Authorisers |
Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager |
Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board 16 September 2014 |
|
Governing Body Member's Update
File No.: CP2014/19779
Executive Summary
Providing the Governing Body Member, Denise Krum, the opportunity to update the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board on projects, meetings, events and issues she has been involved with since the last meeting.
That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board: a) receives the Governing Body Member’s report. |
There are no attachments for this report.
Signatories
Authors |
Philippa Hillman - Democracy Advisor, Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board |
Authorisers |
Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager |