|
Resolution number HM/2014/206
MOVED
by Member BA Brady, seconded by Member WW Flaunty:
That the
Henderson-Massey Local Board:
a) Provides
the following feedback on the Draft Community Facilities Network Plan
i.
Supports in principle the draft Community Facilities Network
Plan.
ii.
Supports the common purpose of ‘Vibrant and welcoming places at
the heart of where and how communities connect and participate’
iii.
Supports the four outcomes of places for communities to
connect, places for communities to participate, places for community led
action and places for community organisations, but notes there is some
conflict in the outcomes with the Mayoral direction for a more commercial
approach to the operations of aquatic and recreational facilities
iv.
Suggests a diagram to clarify the community facilities covered
by the plan might aid interpretation of the plan by readers.
v.
Supports the approach of a prioritised listing as this provides
transparency for communities across Auckland.
vi.
Observes that sometimes information in the text of the plan
does not match information contained in the tables. For example Ranui
Community House is classified as Business As Usual in the tables but on page
15 is described as one of the facilities under development.
vii.
Notes that West Wave pool and Leisure centre has the
characteristics of a regional if not national facility and this should be
acknowledged in the document.
viii.
West Wave Pool is deteriorating due to overuse and should be
categorised as investigate in appendix I.
ix.
Map number 150, Facility name should be Global Café (ZEAL is
the contractor).
x.
Map number 210, Moire Road Community Hall is not rural.
xi.
Notes that the plan assumes communities across Auckland have
the same requirements and the model used appears to be a moderately well off
urban community.
xii.
Requests staff ground truth the plan against the needs of
different communities, particularly rural communities, less well-off
communities and diverse communities.
xiii.
Notes that the proposal to no longer invest in venues for hire
will disadvantage rural communities.
xiv.
Notes limiting the size of new community facilities to 600m2 –
800m2 will disadvantage low income communities whose needs are better served
by small community hub facilities.
xv.
Endorses the emphasis on fitness for purpose as this will
improve the utilisation of community facilities.
xvi.
Cautions against Council using the plan to take over asset
management from community groups as this will be more costly in the long run
and is not consistent with the Mayoral direction of community-led
development.
xvii.
Requests staff review the plan to ensure the role third
parties, such as community trusts or the Ministry of Education, play in
achieving community outcomes is supported by specifically mentioning third
party relationships and providing guidelines for the nature of the
relationship in the plan.
xviii.
The board supports the intention to address under performing
assets but notes from its experience that the process of divestment can be
complicated. The board recommends establishing a best practice process for
divestment to
xix.
be included in section 6 of the plan to guide staff, boards and
the community through the divestment process.
xx.
Is concerned that the aquatic facilities classification does
not include provision for local dive training (not scuba), limiting the base
of this sport to people with access to Westwave.
xxi.
Supports the inclusion of an aquatic facility for the
north-west in the high priority project list.
xxii.
Requests a leisure facility for the north west be included as a
high priority project to cater for accelerated growth in the area as a result
of the implementation of the Housing Accord.
xxiii.
Supports the transfer of assets to community organisations
provided the process is approached with caution and rigor as asset transfer
has resulted in poor community outcomes and high cost to council in the past.
xxiv.
Notes that the Community Facilities Network Plan is neutral on
the Mayor’s direction to increase the commercial activities of aquatic and
recreational facilities and may not provide guidance to boards or staff
implementing this direction.
xxv.
Generally supports multi use arts and culture facilities but
requests that single use facilities not be discounted where a clear community
benefit has been shown.
xxvi.
Particularly supports the business improvement actions as they
will establish the evidence base so council and local boards can provide
community facilities that meet the needs of communities.
xxvii.
Commends the plan for including Corban Estate Arts Centre.
xxviii.
Requests staff amend action point 19 to read ‘ Investigate
options to improve Corban Estate Arts Centre to address fit for purpose, heritage,
and condition issues.
xxix.
Notes that the board is negotiating with the governing body for
funding to address fit for purpose issues at Massey Community House and
expects this work to begin before 30 June 2015.
CARRIED
|
