|
Resolution number HB/2014/200
MOVED
by Deputy Chairperson AG Sayers, seconded by Member J Fitzgerald:
That the Hibiscus
and Bays Local Board:
a)
Provide
the following feedback on the Mayor’s Proposal for the Long-Term Plan
2015-2025 and Strategies:
i) Acknowledges the
Mayor’s Proposal and the key focus areas but expresses concern about the justification,
implementation and timing of the City Rail Link and commencement should be
dependent on timing of the government funding contributions.
ii)
Notes
the spatial priorities and request that planning for the future addresses
high growth areas across Auckland which have not been included in the spatial
priorities.
iii) Requests that the Uniform
Annual General Charge (UAGC) be increased to the highest legislative level to
more adequately contribute to the provision of core council services and this
be a high priority.
iv) Notes that when the
detailed analysis from the revaluation data is available that the local board
may propose and recommend the UAGC level.
v)
Requests
that any decision to set an average rate increase not be limited to 2.5% if
an increase up to 3.5% and a higher level UAGC reduces the rating burden on
the residential ratepayer.
vi) Agrees to the proposal to
move to fully fund depreciation on capital assets and request the governing
body consider a staged approach to reach the 100% over the later years of the
Long-term Plan 2015/2025 rather than the proposed commencement in the
2015-2016 financial year.
b)
Provide
the following feedback on the Parks, Community and Lifestyle departmental
responses to the Mayor’s Proposal:
Parks, Sport and Recreation
i)
Expresses
concern that the Mayor’s Proposal and the departmental responses to achieve
the proposal significantly impact on the Auckland Plan deliverables including
becoming the world’s most liveable city by limiting Auckland-wide and local
projects that make this vision possible and the Auckland Plan should be
reviewed as a result.
ii)
Acknowledges
that revenue is a key component of cost to service for council activities and
requests that public good elements continue to be considered as a core part
of Parks, Sport and Recreation service delivery.
iii) Seeks assurance that the
Development Contributions policy approach will clearly identify projects
required in the growth areas (which are outside the spatial priority areas),
will clarify the catchment areas, provide the details of those catchment
areas for the local boards to review, and will set contribution levels that
fully respond to the costs of projects that are required by growth.
iv) Agrees that the renewal
of existing assets are a top priority and requests that visitor numbers and
non-resident users at key locations, including popular beach areas and
reserves, be included in the consideration of future funding allocations.
v)
Notes
some areas have high level of use therefore funding needs to reflect the
impact of that demand and use on those key locations.
vi) Requests that high-use
demand of assets and asset areas are included in asset management
considerations not just the life cycle of assets, as condition assessments
should define the need for and timing of renewals.
vii) That the renewals budgets
reflect the actual cost of renewals including the funding of parks foundation
infrastructure for approved specialist facilities e.g. hockey and other
specialist turf areas.
viii) Agrees that the
priorities for non-renewal project categories includes; contractually
committed, land acquisition (funded by development contributions), projects
falling into geographic areas and/or special housing areas, other projects
identified in network planning and includes the extent of community
engagement, commitment and partnerships as a further method for a shared
delivery model.
ix) Expresses concerns that
the proposal to cut key operational service delivery and proposing a one size
fits all approach does not provide good outcomes or savings.
x)
Does
not support:
a) chemical
spraying in parks and reserve areas
b) standard approaches which do not respond to local climatic
conditions in local board areas e.g. coastal areas.
xi) Supports Strategic Asset
Management Plans (SAMP) if they:
a) acknowledge each facility and park asset,
including those in high growth areas where the demand for those parks and
recreation areas are fully realised, and
b) includes levels
of service, which do not decrease aspects of community safety in those areas
and facilities.
xii) Seeks confirmation that
local boards will be involved in the development of Community Facilities
Strategic Asset Management Plans and acknowledge the importance of providing
high quality multi-purpose assets across all of Auckland.
xiii) Seeks confirmation that
local boards will be involved in any Open Space Strategic Asset Management
Plan as local boards are best placed to contribute to the information on
asset and community performance.
xiv) Agrees and welcomes the
opportunity to be involved in the Property department’s development of
baseline asset standards of service for the build renewal programme.
xv) Considers that the
proposed reduction in Parks, Sports and Recreation capital project spending
will limit the council’s ability to deliver on the Auckland Plan.
xvi) Considers there has been
a failure to allocate funding for non-built assets in the Parks, Sports and
Recreation departmental response to the Mayor’s proposal and this needs to be
addressed to include those local board areas with extensive coastlines to
include an adequate response budget to address any urgent and emergency
coastal protection works.
xvii) Disagrees with
harmonising or reducing levels of service for local and sports parks
maintenance and management that:
a) results
in park mowing service levels being standardised and aligned across Auckland
as our local board area is impacted by coastal and climatic conditions and
therefore service levels need to be set at levels that address those coastal
and climatic differences
b) results
in chemical spray control on local and sports parks and requests that a clear
and detailed cost analysis be undertaken and reported back to the local board
prior to any decisions being made that affect the local board area
c) results in the removal of some street gardens in the local board area
and would request that council alternatively reviews the traffic management
processes, compliance costs and requirements and look at the opportunities
for community partnerships. (Noting the concern that compliance costs appear
to be coming an Auckland response as not an issue across other parts of New
Zealand).
xviii) Agrees in principle with
the following reduction of service levels for local and sports parks
maintenance and management including:
a) reduced
mowing service levels in lower use parks
b) removing
up to 20% of shrubberies in local parks with replacement by grass and mowing
and reducing maintenance frequencies in other gardens/shrubberies
c) the
reduction in the number of litter bins in low use parks as long as any
littering issues are quickly addressed
d) to
the non-renewal of some underperforming parks assets such as playgrounds,
furniture and toilets but seek assurance that the local board will be
consulted early prior to any decisions being made.
xix) Agree to the ‘business of
leisure’ efficiencies and revenue benefits from the pools and leisure
networks that:
a) focuses
on membership retention and the leveraging of the advantage to a network of
facilities to increase membership numbers
b) more
efficient purchases of goods and services such as cleaning services and pool
chemicals (but consider that this should already be happening)
c) growing
the early childhood education opportunities but only if this is part of core
business and associated with the activity within a network facility which
doesn’t directly compete with commercial facilities
d) extending
opportunities such as corporate membership or commercial partnerships
e) targeting
strategic investment in facility renewals and pool and leisure plant and
maintenance to support both growth and improved operational efficiency
f) allowing
renewal investment to be allocated regionally based on condition need and
with a focus on systematic upgrades of facilities across all Auckland
ensuring that there is no risk to facilities failing and that realistic
thresholds are set
xx) Agree to
introducing user-charges for commercial activities on parks ensuring that
sporting codes (particularly not for profit groups) are not charged for
funding their own fund-raising activities and request further information
about what constitutes a “commercial activity” within a park.
xxi) Agrees
in principle to land acquisition and development (parks and open space) that
utilise development contributions to cover growth related costs associated
with the purchase and development of parks where it includes those growth
areas outside of, as well as, the spatial priorities.
xxii) Agrees
that development contributions be used to fund the growth component of
certain development works on parks including toilets, playgrounds, sports
fields, and greenways and that local boards’ be consulted on the options and
scenarios for the identification and funding of these types of development
works.
Community
Development, Arts and Culture
i) Agrees
in principle that renewals for community facilities, arts facilities and
social housing units that are close to the end of their life, in poor
condition or badly in need of upgrading be assessed at to whether they are
fit for purpose.
ii) Agrees
that low-utilisation areas or non-performing areas are reduced but would like
to ensure that the local boards are consulted and informed on how this
process will work prior to its implementation.
iii) Urgently
requests detailed information on community facility hireage and usage
necessary to enable the local board to assess the levels of fees for
community facilities and notes that until that information is made available
is not supportive of any increase in hireage fees across local community
facilities.
iv) Requests that any process to harmonise event
permitting fees is simple and that there is no charge for community events as
they provide wide community benefits and support place-shaping.
Libraries
i) Supports having seven (7)
days a week service in libraries and request that regular and updated
information is provided to the local board on usage and numbers to ensure
that the local board can make an informed decision and validate any approved
expenditure.
ii) Agrees that any
decision by the local board to extend hours of operation for seven (7) days a
week library opening needs to be carefully looked at in terms of the cost to
deliver this service.
iii) Supports the library facility network review
to increase library space at Browns Bay including the potential for a new
facility within the Upper Harbour Local Board area and in the future at
Silverdale.
iv) Supports that the library model is changing and
that it is important for libraries to be fit for purpose and be able to
provide a range of different functions including community hubs and in some
areas social service provision without blurring the core business lines and
functions.
v) Supports the assessment and investigation of
different partnership models with other providers for library services to be
delivered across Auckland.
vi) Requests further information on the costs to
maintain library hours at the levels proposed in the local board plan (seven
(7) days a week).
vii) Supports the planned investment in library
technology in accordance with the department’s response to the Mayor’s
Proposal.
viii) Supports the 10 year plan for regional
collections in accordance with the department’s response to the Mayor’s Proposal.
ix) Agrees that targeted quality events that
connect diverse communities can bring value but would seek to ensure that
libraries do not move away from the core business and needs of library
services.
x) Agrees with the department’s proposal to reduce
the opening hours of 4 local history research centres.
xi) Supports the integration of the corporate
library service subject to no loss in the flexibility, value and delivery of
the service.
xii) Supports the charge for the request for items
which are not picked up from libraries.
xiii) Supports the
option to reduce the delivery time of collection items to libraries.
Environmental Management and
Regulation
i) Does not support
the sale of Te Waka Korero (the big rig) as it provides a key focus and
location for community engagement.
ii) Agrees to
introducing a user charge for inorganic collections based on $25, and 10%
participation and requests further information on how cost effective this
model will be.
iii) Agrees to the
proposed increases in regulatory fees and charges subject to a value for
money exercise and confirmation that any increases will not result in
increased costs of compliance.
Auckland
Development - CPO Division
c. Provides the
following feedback on the Auckland Development – Chief Planning Office (CPO)
departmental responses to the Mayor’s Proposal:
i) Considers
that any reductions in the CPO division will be locally irrelevant as the
local board will receive limited benefit from the CPO division as a result.
ii) Acknowledges
that the bylaw programme is a priority but the potential for further
delegations to local boards without the adequate funding and dedicated
support for any delegations is of concern.
iii) Considers that the spatial priorities do not reflect
where growth is occurring and the impacts of high growth in the local board
area.
iv) Is opposed to the absence of spatial planning or urban
design work being undertaken outside of the spatial priority areas as this
fails to acknowledge and respond to where growth is currently occurring.
v) Does not support any reduction in marine spatial plans
especially within the Hauraki Gulf as this impacts on liveability and could
result in potential impacts for the adjoining coastal environment.
vi) Seeks confirmation as to how the impact of Special Housing
Areas on the local board and neighbouring areas will be monitored and
assessed particularly as the Special Housing Areas impact on existing and the
future need for local and community facilities.
vii) Does not support charging council administration costs to
Business Improvement Districts, or to businesses within a local board BID
area without the approval of the businesses, as this will impact on funding
capabilities, effectiveness and deliverables and would result in the
detriment of BID’s.
viii) Supports the reduction in funding to
COMET.
CARRIED
|
