I hereby give notice that an extraordinary meeting of the Waitematā Local Board will be held on:
Tuesday, 16 September 2014
Local Board Office
Waitematā Local Board
(Quorum 4 members)
11 September 2014
Contact Telephone: (09) 307 6071
Waitematā Local Board
16 September 2014
1 Welcome 5
2 Apologies 5
3 Declaration of Interest 5
4 Leave of Absence 5
5 Acknowledgements 5
6 Petitions 5
7 Deputations 5
8 Public Forum 5
9 Extraordinary Business 5
10 Notices of Motion 6
11 Submissions on the Draft Waitemata Local Board Plan 7
12 Consideration of Extraordinary Items
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 Leave of Absence
At the close of the agenda no requests for leave of absence had been received.
At the close of the agenda no requests for acknowledgements had been received.
At the close of the agenda no requests to present petitions had been received.
Standing Order 3.20 provides for deputations. Those applying for deputations are required to give seven working days’ notice of subject matter and applications are approved by the Chairperson of the Board. This means that details relating to deputations can be included in the published agenda. Total speaking time per deputation is ten minutes or as resolved by the meeting.
At the close of the agenda no requests to speak had been received.
At the close of the agenda no requests for deputations had been received.
8 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.
9 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.”
10 Notices of Motion
At the close of the agenda no requests for notices of motion had been received.
Waitematā Local Board
16 September 2014
File No.: CP2014/21156
1. This report presents a more detailed analysis of the submissions received on the Waitematā Draft Local Board Plan.
1 The consultation period for the Waitematā Draft Local Board Plan ended on 6 August 2014.
2 In total 213 submissions on the Draft Waitematā Local Board Plan were received. Of these 33 submitters were heard at the hearings on 2nd and 3rd September 2014.
3 The key themes arising from the submissions are:
a. Improve and increase pedestrian, cycling and public transport options and connections
b. Improve safety for all road users
c. Deliver “on road” greenway connection projects
d. Develop and deliver a series of local plans to reinforce local character, ensure quality design, good access and to enhance local centres and neighbourhoods
e. Protect and enhance the natural environment
4 Areas for consideration for inclusion in the Draft Waitematā Local Board Plan arising from the hearings or submissions:
a. Consider the amenity values which are distinctive to areas in Waitematā
b. Align the Boards smokefree policy in the Local Board Plan to the Auckland Councils Smokefree Policy
c. Support the sinking lid policy to mitigate gambling harm
d. Mitigate noise pollution in the inner city
e. Protect and enhance the natural environment through improving water quality and waterways
f. Increase provision and actively support passive and informal activity in Waitematā for young people and seniors
g. Include stronger recognition of organised sports in the Local Board Plan
h. Expand the residential parking zones further than the four identified areas in the Plan
i. Recognise the role of volunteers in delivering the Local Board Plan outcomes
j. Consider further initiatives to strengthen the protection of heritage characteristics in Waitematā
k. Reduction of single plastic bag use
l. Further consideration towards pest and plant management
m. Support towards migrant communities and newcomers when they first come to Auckland
That the Waitematā Local Board:
i) Thanks the submitters for their submissions on the Waitematā Draft Local Board Plan.
ii) Agree what areas to investigate potential changes to in the Waitematā Draft Local Board Plan,
· Mitigate noise pollution in the inner city
· Include stronger recognition of the benefits of both organised and informal sports
· Align the Boards smokefree policy in the Local Board Plan to the Auckland Council’s Smokefree Policy
· Consider the amenity values which are distinctive to areas of Waitematā
· Support the sinking lid policy to mitigate gambling harm
· Protect and enhance the natural environment through improving water quality and waterways
· Support passive and informal activity in Waitematā for young people and seniors
· Recognise the role of volunteers in delivering the Local Board Plan outcomes
· Consider further initiatives to strengthen the protection of heritage characteristics in Waitematā through scheduling
· Support the reduction of single plastic bag use
· Consider pest and plant management
· Support migrant communities and newcomers when they first come to Auckland
Public submissions relating to the Waitematā Draft Local Board Plan
5 Overview of the feedback from submissions
A large number and variety of submissions were received from a range of submitters: residents, community groups, clubs, landowners and other organizations with an interest in the future prosperity of Waitematā.
158 individuals, 14 businesses, 4 business associations (Parnell Inc.,Uptown, Grey Lynn and Ponsonby Business Associations), 7 residents groups (Western Bays Community Group Inc, Parnell Community Trust, Arch Hill Residents, Western Bays Community Group, Parnell Community Committee Inc, St Mary’s Bay Association Inc., Grafton Residents Association, Freemans Bay Residents Association), 28 other groups representing different sectors (Health, Sports, Environment, Heritage, Community/Social Justice.) and ranging from local to regional significance.
The majority of the submissions endorsed the general direction and priorities of the Waitematā Local Board. Where contrary views were held, they tended to relate to the nature, scope, scale, relative weighting, cost or prioritisation of specific projects/initiatives within a given priority, rather than the priority itself.
The following report provides a general overview of the submissions and identifies some of the dominant themes emerging from the submissions. It does not attempt to capture the full diversity and detail of each individual submission. For simplicity, the themes are organised in line with each of the Draft Plan’s priorities. Submissions in support or opposition to priorities and projects listed in the Draft Plan are presented as either majority or minority views depending on the level of support or opposition of the priority. New suggestions or ideas are covered under ‘additional ideas, initiatives and comments’.
6.1 A distinctive, high quality urban environment that embraces our heritage
Submitters sent a strong and clear signal that they support the Board’s priority for a “distinctive, high quality urban environment that embraces our heritage”. There was strong support towards protecting and preserving heritage with a request for greater weighting to be placed on maintaining the character of the area and balancing historic areas with rising populations. This priority outcome was the third most submitted on (119 submission points) compared to “connected, accessible and safe transport choices” priority (170 submission points) and “protecting and enhancing the natural environment (135 submission points).
Many of the submissions suggested the Board go further in the Plan to protect and preserve heritage buildings with one submitter suggesting an audit to be undertaken on all buildings and another suggesting that the Board considers advocating for some buildings to be promoted from category B to category A.
The majority of submitters on this outcome recognised the need to allow intensification in the inner city areas but felt that the interests of heritage protection should be balanced and the design of new developments to be considered and well planned.
A number of submissions related to the importance of well-designed development (one used the word superbly designed) and the need for consideration of traffic management, sustainable design, safety and the activation of the developments ground level for use by businesses.
A clear theme across many of the submissions related to the importance of protecting amenity values as a result of further development and intensification. This included the provision of attractive streetscapes e.g. turning Great North Road into a boulevard, ensuring there is adjacent green spaces and gathering places, mitigation of excess shading, protection of views to the harbour and privacy.
There was support towards the completion of a special character assessment of Grey Lynn and Arch Hill and the preservation and adaptive re use of Carlile House, Myers Park Caretaker’s Cottage, Highwic House, Ewelme Cottage and Albert Park House.
Views by a Smaller Proportion of Submitters
A small number of submissions sought stronger recognition in the plan for the role that private individuals play in protecting and maintaining heritage features for the public good. In addition it was suggested that there should be incentives or compensation to achieve the ongoing preservation of regionally and locally significant heritage sites.
One submission raised concern over the noise implications of intensification in the City Centre. The submitter stated that the existing rules allow for construction and other city related noise to occur seven days a week, 24 hours a day and therefore do not take into account the increased presence of residents in these areas.
One submitter commented on the need to not only preserve heritage buildings but also make these useable in their current context. “The architecture shouldn’t sit there as a monument of the pass”.
One submission stated that there was no mention of Grafton in the plan and the submitter felt there needed to be more interest taken to ensure the neighbourhood remains viable for families to enjoy living there.
It was suggested that the heritage characteristics of the buildings across Waitematā should be accentuated with up lighting as well as an investigation into what buildings, streets and neighbourhoods may qualify for Unesco World Heritage Listing.
Places of importance to Tangata Whenua, Pacifica, Gay/lesbian and religions should be given full recognition and be supported and mana whenua should be consulted in order to protect sites of significance to mana whenua
A request for a guidebook to be developed for home owners with dwellings sited on cliff edges on how to protect and safely maintain the cliffs.
Provision for the establishment of permanent monuments at Emily Place and the Parliament Street lawn to commemorate and celebrate the founding of Auckland and its role as New Zealand’s first capital and birthplace of Parliamentary democracy.
There were mixed views on the Local Board’s initiative to promote cost efficiency in strengthening earthquake prone heritage buildings and the proposal to develop a guidebook. One submission stated that this initiative duplicated an existing guide whilst another felt that the seismic upgrading required needed to be specific to individual buildings. There was also concern over the cost of earthquake proofing due to the potential to discourage owners from maintaining and upgrading their properties. It was suggested by one submitter for the Board to lobby to Government to ease restrictions to the Upper North Island and introduce better incentives to help mitigate the cost for those owners.
- Community led development of high quality urban environment – Introduce community based design panels
- Encourage the preservation of the Parnell Diesel Depot (remove the reference to Mainline Steam Building in the plan)
- Consider and implement “Tomorrow Parnell – A structure Plan” (2012)
o Champion the old wool store area of Parnell as a historic area
o Formal steps to create a precinct around the Parnell Centre
- Uplight characteristics of heritage buildings
- Review the noise regulations in the City Centre
- Consider what amenity values need to be protected in the Plan
- Develop a guidebook for home owners on how to protect and safely maintain the cliffs
- Advocate against the commercialization of Queens Wharf and retain as open space
- Use of Carlile House as a cultural museum, decorative arts museum, meeting rooms, project rooms and workshop areas for arts and crafts
- Develop Great North Road into a boulevard
- Creation of an early Auckland history museum by 2017
6.2 Connected, accessible and safe transport choices
The Board received a large number of submissions for this priority. 170 submission points mentioned this theme. Largely the submissions were supportive of the outcome with most comments related to its delivery and reiterating the importance of key aspects such as pedestrian friendly, cycling infrastructure both on and off road, accessible and frequent public transport and traffic management.
The majority of submitters supported pedestrian friendly street design and improved cycling and public transport options through initiatives such as the creation of greenways and the expansion of the cycling network. Key themes included:
· the need to ensure public transport was accessible and frequent to increase patronage
· the building of a safer walking environment including better and wider footpaths
· improved pedestrian crossings
· better traffic calming and
· safer cycling.
There was largely support for Greenways and the expansion of the cycle way network. Two submissions made the point that cycle paths through the parks should not be at the expense of proper on road cycle lanes. A number of the submissions who referred to cycling also had a preference towards buffered or separated cycle ways.
There was strong support for the lowering of speed limits to create more livable street environments but this needed to coincide with traffic calming initiatives so that the actual speeds reflected the posted speeds.
Effective parking and traffic management was a key theme within this priority. There was varying views on the solution to parking with some submissions recognising the need to ensure public transport is efficient and accessible before being able to reduce the impact of commuter parking. Some submissions felt that the implementation of the residential parking zones should not be limited to four suburbs as it’s an important amenity issue for all Waitematā Local Board suburbs. A number of submissions were concerned that resident parking was being promoted before the Auckland Transport Parking discussion document had been finalised however there was overall support for carparking to be reviewed with the aim of optimising usage.
Quality street and road design was supported including the creation of two way boulevards in Hobson and Nelson to make them more pedestrian and cycle friendly and turning them into public spaces.
Views by a Smaller Proportion of Submitters
- Support towards the completion of Franklin Road upgrade but with consideration of the safety of cyclists
- The promotion and efficient movement of buses should be prioritised ahead of private vehicle movements and on street parking
- Improvements to Nelson Street through upgrades to the slip lane’s footpath parking areas and paved surfaces, along with screening the cantilevered Nelson Street upper carriageway supports
- Support for the extension of the Wynyard Quarter tramway to provide a loop service, which travels further afield than the Wynyard Quarter.
- Support towards two way cycling on one way streets e.g. Lorne St, High St and Jean Batten Place
- Further consideration towards the use of ferries as part of the public transport network in the plan
- Slow speed zone or speed humps on Tuarangi Road
- Request for the opportunity to evaluate the proposal to install a SkyCabs line from the City to the Airport
- Support towards Board led trial projects
- Expand the network of bus lanes within the Waitematā area
There was mixed views on the prioritisation of cycling vs parking requirements for town centres. One submission raised concerns about the adverse impact that the proposed reduction in vehicle access and parking would have on local businesses on Ponsonby Road whilst another submission quoted a NZTA report which found that active transportation users spent more in local businesses than car users, and are important to the economic vitality of local shopping areas.
There was general support for the City Rail Link with many of these supporting early construction. A number of submissions which related to the CRL raised concerns over the removal of Newton Station and the impact this would have on the economy and public transport accessibility in the area. A clear message from a number of submissions was the importance of ensuring the connection between Newton and surrounding areas is considered and enhanced. Some submissions however felt that due to the high cost of CRL the budget should be re directed to providing core services and reducing rates or alternatively using the rail links as bus highways and other alternative uses for rail corridors.
The Skypath was supported in principle by one submission but some concern was raised over its viability- financial, safety and impact on local communities. Another submission did not support an additional Waitematā Harbour crossing as the submitter felt that there would be reduced traffic volumes in the future over the bridge as a result of a potential tunnel being built under the Harbour which would free up an existing lane on the bridge.
- Continue to consult with community groups, residents on the implementation of Ponsonby Road Plan and 254 Ponsonby Road
- Bike racks on buses initiative
- More provision of public toilets as part of street upgrades
- Connect Grey Lynn local centre with the development plans for Ponsonby and Karangahape Roads
- Create connected cycling and safe pedestrian pathways linking K Rd, Ponsonby, Jervois Rod through Grey Lynn to Westmere and Herne Bay
- City Hop reserved spaces to be provided to incentivize the use of the service
- Deliver the weekend streets concept as an extension to the greenways project
- Adding Newton as part of the link bus route
- Ensure strong linkages between Newton and Eden Terrace Station
- Expand residential parking zones e.g. include Arch Hill
6.3 Waitematā, the innovative economic hub of Auckland
A smaller number of submissions referred to this outcome (40 submission points), however those that did were supportive of the initiatives including. Submitters indicated support towards the outcomes of increasing prosperity for local businesses and economic development including the initiatives to implement the City Fringe Economic Development Action Plan and the development of a Wynyard Quarter Technology Hub.
Views by a Smaller Proportion of Submitters
Concern was raised by submitters over the removal of the Newton CRL station and the impact that this would have on the economy of the area. The submitters felt that compared to other BID areas there was also no key actions directly related to Uptown.
Further support was requested for better transport connections as there were concerns about being bypassed by transport as a result of the station at Mt Eden. It was also suggested that a central hub is created in the area to attract, retain and allow businesses to thrive.
A small number of submitters requested that the Board play an active role in helping decide the future of the Ports of Auckland and to make sure that a high quality outcome for Aucklanders is achieved if Ports’ space gets freed up. One submitter referred to the important role that local community groups should play in actively participating in the proposed future of the Ports of Auckland. One submitter suggested that the Plan needed to include specific actions to indicate what the Board is intending to achieve from the future Port review. Another submission referred to the need to mitigate the pollution created from the traffic associated with the Port. A submission was also received from the Ports of Auckland, which requested the Board support the establishment of the Ports planning framework so they can plan for future growth in demand. Ports of Auckland recommended that the wording of the Boards 2011 Plan be used to reflect this.
- Request recognition and support for implementation of the Ponsonby Business Association Strategic Plan
- Tourism Strategy
- Consideration of Uptown BID and the creation of a central hub
- Community based actions to enhance the experience of International Students
6.4 The natural environment is respected and enhanced
135 separate submission points were received for this priority. Of these the submitters either agreed or partly agreed with the priority and its respective projects/initiatives. Many of the submissions felt that the plan made a promising start to protecting, restoring and enhancing the natural environment. Those that partly agreed largely called for a stronger stance on matters already covered under the priority e.g. air quality, improved waterways, zero waste at council funded events or further initiatives such as support towards a ban on plastic bags.
The improvement of air quality and reducing carbon were consistent themes raised and over lapped into the “connected, accessible and safe transport options” priority. Initiatives suggested by submitters included:
· improving transportation networks
· mitigating the effects of the proximity to the motorway systems, and
· planting trees to minimize vehicle exhaust emissions.
Improvement of water quality and waterways was felt to be critical to environmental wellbeing. Particular mention was made of Cox’s Creek and Judges Bay in Parnell.
Submitters indicated strong support towards waste minimisation including the creation of a community-recycling centre. Two submissions suggested that this would sit well within Grey Lynn 2030. Submitters also supported the Boards policy of zero waste practices at all council run events and community centres. A number of submissions received regarded the single use of plastic bags and requested the Board support a plastic bag ban.
Urban food production such as community gardens and fruit tree planting in unused community spaces was well supported by those who referenced this priority.
Views by a Smaller Proportion of Submitters
There was support from community organisations for the placement of a sound barrier along the North Western Motorway to reduce noise levels in Arch Hill.
A small number of submitters identified the need for further wayfinding signage and support towards ecological restoration of Waipapa Stream and Ayr St Reserve.
It was suggested that the Board could support businesses to adopt low carbon practices through the Board’s procurement chain.
Request from one submitter to protect Maui Dolphins from human activity.
Support towards the Board taking more of an active role in protecting urban forest.
Support to maintain the return of native bird life in parks.
Suggestion to integrate sustainability requirements in the scoping document for the design of future developments/projects before going out to procurement. (#6145)
- Support and incentivize further tree planting and community garden initiatives
- Transform the Arch Hill reserve into eco systems to restore biodiversity
- Confront pollution at Cox’s Bay
- Opportunity to utilize on street pedestrian refuges to enhance the natural environment
- Actively encourage residents to undertake local park predator and weed control where needed on a volunteer basis
- Advocate for the installation of a sound barrier along the North Western Motorway
- Support a Predator Control Programme for possums and rats
- Install signage and develop a management plan for Alberon Reserve
- Install wayfinding signage for ecological restoration areas
- Integrate sustainability aspects into the initial design scope before the procurement of projects
6.5 Quality parks, open spaces and community facilities created for people to use and enjoy
110 separate submission points were received for this priority. Of these points most were in agreement with the priority and initiatives. As with other priorities the submissions were largely in agreement with the priority and its respective projects/initiatives.
In general there was strong support from submitters for the creation of an inner city community hub at Pioneer Women’s and Ellen Melville Hall. One submitter commented that it was important to encompass good design to ensure urban connection whilst another submitter requested the heritage integrity of the building is considered as part of the design.
With the projected increase in population and in particular the number of young people it was felt that more attention needed to be given to improving and increasing outdoor areas and facilities. A number of submissions raised the need to recognise the importance of passive and informal recreation to activate the open space environments for both children and seniors. There was support for the provision of infrastructure such as skateboard facilities, basketball hoops, courts and indoor facilities and courts and also support towards encouraging the safe and active use of informal recreation opportunities by seniors to enhance their physical and mental wellbeing e.g. senior parks (#794)
One submission received from a sports organisation also supported the widening of this priority outcome description to recognise organised sports and the role sports play to bring communities together.
The development programme for Pt Erin Pool was supported but a request was made that local communities are consulted at an early stage.
Submitters indicated support for Grey Lynn Park upgrade, Home St playground, the upgrade of the Auckland Domain sport fields and playground in Outhwaite Park, Myers Park upgrade and the Pt Resolution/Tauarua Reserve upgrade.
Submitters requested continued investment in sports infrastructure to make sure that they are adequately maintained including sports fields to achieve the necessary increase in capacity to cope with current and future demand.
Views by a Smaller Proportion of Submitters
A submission was received which did not support the walkway across Cox’s Bay as it was felt that it was already possible to walk the waterfront at low tide.
A small number of submissions referred to and supported the improved connection between Myers Park and Aotea Square.
Three submissions were received from individuals requesting that the domain become more pedestrian friendly and less car dominated. It was suggested that a pedestrian pathway should be installed around the existing circular road which would make the area safer for pedestrians.
It was suggested that Arch Hill Reserve be further developed into open areas / informal team sport meeting points and mountain bike tracks and community led cultural initiatives.
One community group submission supported improved accessibility for disabled persons to Ponsonby Community Centre and Leys Institute Gymnasium.
The inner city youth hub also received support from a small number of submissions.
Two submissions raised the need to increase the number of off leash areas for dogs and options for inner city dogs.
Consideration of protecting the volcanic heritage of Auckland of which the Domain is part of.
Opposing views were surfaced in the submissions received on 254 Ponsonby Road. One community group submission did not support the site being converted to a full open space site and felt that the wording of the initiative implied that the site would be completely open. Two other community group submissions supported a full open space at this site, with another submission supporting an open civic space or an area which contained both a civic space and well-designed apartments.
One submission raised concerns over the safety in local parks in the central city at night (Albert Park and Myers Park) while a multi board submission received commented against the increased lighting being advocated across local board draft plans. This was in relation to increased light pollution and a diminished view of the night sky. The submission requested that the installation of lights be of a type that did not increase sky glow or light pollution.
- Improved drainage at Basque Park to be made into a more family friendly park with better access and facilities
- Support hireage of Auckland Council Community Facilities for CAB to be at community rates, not at commercial rates
- Restore St Stephens Chapel cemetery
- Scope for an appropriate irrigation system and improved lighting at Victoria Park
- Pedestrian pathway installed around the existing circular road in the Auckland Domain
- Increase off leash areas for dogs
6.6 Strong communities that are inclusive, vibrant and engaged
95 submission points were received about “Strong Communities that are inclusive, vibrant and engaged”. A large proportion of these were regarding smoke free.
A large number of submissions received were appreciative of the leadership the Board had played to date in supporting the Auckland Councils Smokefree Policy. Many of the submissions however asked that the Board prioritise the implementation of the policy through the allocation of budget for effective signage, communication and early adoption of town centres, beaches and outdoor dining areas (phase 3).
There was largely support for the provision of cultural activities and entertainment which were low cost and affordable with mention of Art Week, Grey Lynn Festival, Art in the Dark, and Festival of Roses
Two organisation submissions (#7622, #7850) were received regarding gambling harm. The submitters requested that the Plan acknowledges the social harms of gambling and supports the adoption of the sinking lid policy on gambling machines.
Views by a Smaller Proportion of Submitters
A small number of submitters recommended the inclusion of objectives that supported the prevention of gambling related harm.
One submission requested that police foot patrol occurs in the city centre to reduce petty crime and improve quality of life for inner city residents.
There was support for community led development and place making as a lead item in the plan.
It was suggested that the plan should refer to actively engaging with established community groups, including Mana Whenua on a partnership basis.
A submitter recommended further emphasis on community cohesion, given the speed and intensity of change
Two submissions referenced the issue of homelessness and felt that this topic was missing from the draft Local Board Plan. One submitter suggested that the plan needed to recognise the relationship between homelessness and mental health in addition to the role of employment and affordable housing. The other submitter supported the reduction of homelessness in the city centre.
Promote and support volunteering by considering volunteering when developing policy, plans, actions and funding programmes and recognize the role of volunteers in delivering the priorities of the Local Board Plan.
Cultural diversity of the local population was raised as well as the need to balance the needs of new migrants, international students with those of well-established residents.
A request for accessibility for people with disabilities to be specifically addressed in the plan.
The need to connect with the tertiary age bracket and involve them in the community.
There was one submitter who did not support the funding of local arts and events via rates payers and felt that these should be self-funding.
- Seek to improve health outcomes through reducing health inequalities. This links to ensuring access to affordable housing, minimising transportation costs, providing opportunities for employment, opportunities for social engagement and social support and culturally appropriate and enabling infrastructure such as access to public areas).
- Improving housing quality and affordability
- Restricting access to unhealthy food retailing premises, such as fast food outlets
- Work with mana whenua to ensure their needs are met as part of ensuring the health and wellbeing of mana whenua
- Encourage local community groups to hold community events that would foster understanding and vibrancy
- Early adoption of smoke free in town centres, beaches and outdoor dining areas
- Advocate increased police foot patrols in the city centre
- Address homelessness in the plan
- Support the sinking lid to mitigate the harm of gambling in Waitematā
- Actively promote living wage and ensure organisations who receive community grants apply living wage
- Community Recycling Centre to be an accredited living wage employer
6.7 Budget and Funding
Some submitters were concerned over the cost of the initiatives in the plan and felt that funding should be directed to core services. It was suggested that there should not be an increase in rates to cover the initiatives proposed.
The submissions reflected a clear desire from the community to see greater partnership with community groups, increased active community engagement and transparent decision-making.
Local board views and implications
7. The Waitematā Local Board will consider its final Draft Waitematā Local Board Plan 2014 at the Tuesday 14 October.
Māori impact statement
8. The Waitematā Local Board has given consideration to Māori outcomes throughout the development of the Waitematā Draft Local Board Plan; consequently the implementation of the plan has the potential to contribute to positive outcomes for Māori.
9. The outcomes, objectives and initiatives included in the plan will support the delivery of the Auckland Plan. The entirety of the plan will benefit Māori as part of the board’s community. As part of the draft plan the board intends to work closely with mana whenua on a number of initiatives such as those focusing directly on issues of importance to Māori such as improving and maintaining the natural environment e.g. improving our parks and open spaces at Grey Lynn Park and Western Park.
10. Implementation issues on the various matters raised in submissions will be considered when making decisions at decision-making meetings on the Draft Waitematā Local Board Plan on 14 October 2014.
There are no attachments for this report.
Trina Thompson - Senior Local Board Advisor - Waitemata
Judith Webster - Relationship Manager