I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Manurewa Local Board will be held on:
Date: Time: Meeting Room: Venue:
|
Thursday, 13 November 2014 6.30pm Manurewa
Local Board Office |
Manurewa Local Board
OPEN AGENDA
|
MEMBERSHIP
Chairperson |
Angela Dalton |
|
Deputy Chairperson |
Simeon Brown |
|
Members |
Michael Bailey |
|
|
Angela Cunningham-Marino |
|
|
Hon George Hawkins, QSO |
|
|
Danella McCormick |
|
|
Ken Penney |
|
|
Daryl Wrightson |
|
(Quorum 4 members)
|
|
Lee Manaia Local Board Democracy Advisor
5 November 2014
Contact Telephone: (09) 262 5421 Email: lee.manaia@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
|
Manurewa Local Board 13 November 2014 |
|
Manurewa Local Board Portfolios
Portfolio Lead |
Portfolio Associate |
Portfolio Activity and Responsibilities |
Angela Dalton Chairperson C/- Shop 3-5 Email: Angela.Dalton@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
|
Simeon Brown |
· Governance portfolio · Board leadership · Board-to-Council relationships · Board-to-Board relationships · Local Board Plan · Local Board agreements · Civic duties · Advocacy (local, regional, and central government) · Community partnerships · Relationships with Maoridom and youth · Relationships with government departments and agencies · Relationships with Watercare · Relationship with Property CCO · Relationship with Auckland Waterfront Development · Local funding policy Political Working Party · Relationship with ATEED · Relationship with Regional Facilities CCO’s · Relationship COMET · Relationship Southern Initiative |
|
· Regulatory portfolio · Resource consents · Heritage · Gambling · Liquor (Simeon Brown as alternate) · Urban design · Swimming pools · Trees · By-laws · Airport noise · Unitary Plan · Waste management |
|
Simeon Brown Deputy Chairperson C/- Shop 3-5
|
Daryl Wrightson |
· Community and social well-being portfolio · Community development (incl. CAYAD, CAB, and Manurewa Senior Citizens) · Neighbourhood relationships · Funding for neighbourhood projects · Community safety (excl. town centres) · Graffiti removal · Community advocacy · Community facilities · Youth Council · Contact CAB |
Michael Bailey |
· Town centres and economic portfolio · Town centre renewal (incl. branding) · Design and maintenance · Town Centre marketing · Community safety within town centres · Business Improvement Districts (Michael Bailey and Simeon Brown) · Local priorities in relation to regional economic development initiatives
|
|
Michael Bailey 10 Rimu Road Manurewa 2102 Mob: 021 287 4422 Email: Micahel.Bailey@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
|
Danella McCormick |
· Sports parks and recreation portfolio · Stewardship of sports parks · Stewardship of recreation facilities · Relationship with sports clubs · Neighbourhood parks and reserves (incl. esplanade reserves and the coastline) · Design and maintenance · Plantings, playgrounds, bollards, and walkways · Botanic Gardens and Totara Park · Skateparks · Associate for the following portfolios: · Governance · transport |
George Hawkins |
· Libraries and recreation portfolio · Stewardship of Manurewa libraries · Mobile library |
|
George Hawkins |
· Transport portfolio · Local transport projects (incl. roading, footpaths, cycleways) |
|
Angela Cunningham –Marino C/- Auckland Council Private Bag 92300 Auckland 1142 Ph: 266 4729 Mob: 027 504 0884 Email: |
Daryl Wrightson |
· Arts, Culture and Events portfolio · Community celebration · Community identity · Neighbourhood gatherings and renewal · Event compliance · Artistic and cultural service levels · Promoting artistic endeavour (particularly among Manurewa youth) · Regional arts · Producing a music and arts centre for Manurewa |
Simeon Brown |
· Recreation Services portfolio · Contact Manukau Leisure |
|
Danella McCormick |
· Built and Natural Environment portfolio · Restoration of wetlands, streams, and waterways · Local priorities in relation to regional environmental management · Mangroves · Manukau Harbour |
|
Danella McCormick Shop 3-5, 7 Hill
Road |
Angela Cunningham-Marino |
· Civil Defence Emergency Management portfolio · Relationships with the Civil Defence Emergency Management Group · Community preparedness, disaster response, relief, and recovery |
Other Board Members:
George Hawkins, QSO 30 Lakeside Drive |
Ken Penney 146e Great South
Road Email: Ken.Penney@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
|
Daryl Wrightson Shop 3-5, 7 Hill
Road |
ITEM TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE
1 Welcome 7
2 Apologies 7
3 Declaration of Interest 7
4 Confirmation of Minutes 7
5 Leave of Absence 7
6 Acknowledgements 7
7 Petitions 7
8 Deputations 7
8.1 Deputation - Manukau Harbour - Judi Goldsworthy 7
9 Public Forum 8
10 Extraordinary Business 8
11 Notices of Motion 8
12 Manurewa Youth Council Update 9
13 Manurewa Ward Councillors Update 11
14 Portfolio Update 13
15 Chairperson's Update 15
16 Transfer of land to Auckland Transport and potential divestment of road reserve at 173R Browns Rd, Manurewa 17
17 Facility Partnership Fund 2014/2015 27
18 The Auckland Teaching Garden Trust 31
19 Council's Role in Early Childhood Education 79
20 Auckland Transport Update – November 2014 89
21 Auckland Transport Quarterly Update to Local Boards 93
22 Council Controlled Organisation Review, Progress Report to Local Boards 123
23 Draft Community Facilities Network Plan 131
24 Sites proposed for divestment 143
25 Request for feedback on the draft Local Approved Product Policy 153
26 Budget allocation changes - financial year 2014/2015 169
27 Significance and Engagement Policy - Manurewa Local Board feedback 175
28 Manurewa Local Board Submission on the Signage Bylaw 177
29 Manurewa Local Board feedback to Auckland Transport on the Manurewa town centre bus stops, bus route 365, and bus route 366 181
30 Reports Requested - Pending - Issues 187
31 Manurewa Local Board Achievements Register 2013-2016 Electoral Term 191
32 For Information: Reports referred to the Manurewa Local Board 199
33 Manurewa Local Board Workshop Notes 201
34 Consideration of Extraordinary Items
PUBLIC EXCLUDED
35 Procedural Motion to Exclude the Public 229
1 Welcome
The meeting will open with a prayer.
2 Apologies
An apology has been received from Board Member Wrightson.
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 Manurewa Local Board: a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Thursday, 9 October 2014, including the confidential section, as a true and correct record. |
5 Leave of Absence
At the close of the agenda no requests for leave of absence had been received.
6 Acknowledgements
At the close of the agenda no requests for acknowledgements had been received.
7 Petitions
At the close of the agenda no requests to present petitions had been received.
8 Deputations
Standing Order 3.20 provides for deputations. Those applying for deputations are required to give seven working days’ notice of subject matter and applications are approved by the Chairperson of the Board. This means that details relating to deputations can be included in the published agenda. Total speaking time per deputation is ten minutes or as resolved by the meeting.
Purpose 1. Judi Goldsworthy wishes to speak to the board about the health of the Manukau Harbour as there are discharges from other facilities also feeding waste material into the Manukau. Executive summary 2. Judi believes that, although the state of the Manukau Harbour remains the responsibility of both government and Auckland Council, it is also the responsibility of the community living around the Manukau and near the rivers that run into the Manukau to ensure that the quality of the environment is of a high standard. |
Recommendation/s That the Manurewa Local Board: a) Thanks Judi Goldsworthy for her presentation advocating for the health of the Manukau Harbour. |
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.
Manurewa Local Board 13 November 2014 |
|
File No.: CP2014/24501
Purpose
1. Providing an opportunity for the Manurewa Youth Council to update the Manurewa Local Board on matters they have been involved in over the last month.
Executive Summary
2. Nil.
That the Manurewa Local Board: a) receive the verbal report from the Manurewa Youth Council regarding: i) review of past 6 months 1 July – 31 December 2014 ii) proposed plan for 1 January 2015 – 30 June 2015 b) advance the Manurewa Youth Council $10,174.01 to fund their activities for the next six months from 1 January 2015- 30 June 2015. |
There are no attachments for this report.
Signatories
Authors |
Lee Manaia - Local Board Democracy Advisor |
Authorisers |
Rex Hewitt - Relationship Manager |
Manurewa Local Board 13 November 2014 |
|
Manurewa Ward Councillors Update
File No.: CP2014/24503
Purpose
1. A period of time (10 minutes) has been set aside for the Manurewa Ward Councillors to have an opportunity to update the Manurewa Local Board on regional matters.
Executive Summary
2. Nil.
That the Manurewa Local Board: a) receive the verbal reports from: i) Councillor Calum Penrose regarding:
ii) Councillor Sir John Walker regarding:
|
There are no attachments for this report.
Signatories
Authors |
Lee Manaia - Local Board Democracy Advisor |
Authorisers |
Rex Hewitt - Relationship Manager |
Manurewa Local Board 13 November 2014 |
|
File No.: CP2014/24504
Purpose
1. Providing an opportunity for Portfolio Leads to update to the Manurewa Local Board on matters they have been involved in over the last month.
Executive Summary
2. Nil.
That the Manurewa Local Board a) receive the portfolio update from: i)
|
There are no attachments for this report.
Signatories
Authors |
Lee Manaia - Local Board Democracy Advisor |
Authorisers |
Rex Hewitt - Relationship Manager |
Manurewa Local Board 13 November 2014 |
|
File No.: CP2014/24505
Purpose
1. Providing an opportunity for the chairperson to update the local board on issues she has been involved in.
Executive Summary
2. Nil.
That the Manurewa Local Board: a) receive the verbal from the Manurewa Local Board Chairperson regarding: i)
|
There are no attachments for this report.
Signatories
Authors |
Lee Manaia - Local Board Democracy Advisor |
Authorisers |
Rex Hewitt - Relationship Manager |
Manurewa Local Board 13 November 2014 |
|
Transfer of land to Auckland Transport and potential divestment of road reserve at 173R Browns Rd, Manurewa
File No.: CP2014/21762
Purpose
1. To seek Manurewa local board views on declaring part of the road reserve at 173R Browns Rd, Manurewa a legal road, and for the balance (932m2) to be revoked as reserve and sold (if declared as land surplus to council requirements).
Executive summary
2. The site at 173R Browns Road, Manurewa (1039m2) is classified road reserve under the Reserves Act 1977. At present the site is not utilised for any other purpose.
3. Auckland Transport intends to widen Browns Road and requires 106m2 of the road frontage to this site. This is appropriate and consistent with s111 of the Reserves Act 1977 (see Attachment C), which allows for the Reserves Act status to be removed and the responsibility of this land to be dedicated to Auckland Transport as legal road.
4. The remaining portion of the site (932m2) is not required for open space purposes due to limited size, number and proximity of existing parks in the area. If this portion of the site is not required for other council purposes, the reserve classification should be revoked and the land sold.
That the Manurewa Local Board: a) Agrees that the reserve (road) situated at 173R Browns Rd, Manurewa, being 1039m2 (more or less) described in certificate of title NA44A/889 as Lot 1 DP86437 land status be amended in accordance with its purpose, as follows: i. Dedicates part of the reserve for road purposes (106m2 more or less) to form part of Browns Road, shown as Section 3 SO459102, and in accordance with section 111 of the Reserves Act 1977; ii. Revokes the reserve status over the residue of the reserve (932m2 more or less as shown as Section 4 SO459102) in accordance with section 24 of the Reserves Act (subject to approval from the Minister of Conservation), to enable the land to be used for other council purposes, or disposal (if land declared surplus to council requirements). |
Comments
5. The reserve at 173R Browns Rd, Manurewa (see aerial Attachment A) was created and vested in the Crown on subdivision in the 1920s. Subsequent legislation vested the reserve in Manukau City Council and it was redefined as Lot 1 DP 86437 in 1978 with a new title, and is now subject to the Reserves Act 1977 as road reserve (see Attachment B). The land was most likely reserved to provide legal access to the surrounding land which was still to be developed.
6. The surrounding land parcel is owned by the Crown for education purposes but is currently vacant (with one house). The reserve is also vacant and is zoned in the Auckland Council District Plan (Manukau Section) and the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan for residential purposes.
7. Auckland Transport intends to widen Browns Road and requires 106m2 of the reserve to be dedicated as road. This is a simple transfer of land between Parks and Auckland Transport and can be achieved under s111 of the Reserves Act 1977 (see Attachment C). It is unlikely the remaining part of the reserve (932m2) would be required for roading purposes (Note Attachment D:survey office plan).
8. The remaining 932m2 is not required for reserve purposes due to its small size, the number of existing parks in close proximity.
9. If the Reserve Act status is revoked the remaining 932m2 could be used for other purposes, or if declared surplus to requirements could be disposed of.
Consideration
Local board views and implications
10. This report seeks the local board views.
Māori impact statement
11. No specific consultation has been carried out by council staff to date as the intentions for the reserve to be utilised for road purposes are consistent with the use for which it is to be dedicated (s111 of the Reserves Act 1977). In addition, if disposal is supported, iwi will be consulted as part of the statutory processes to revoke the classification and declare the remaining land (932m2) for sale.
Implementation
12. Upon approval being given by the Regional Policy and Strategy Committee, Auckland Council Legal Services will prepare documentation and provide it to Land Information New Zealand (see Attachment D for survey office plan) which will dedicate the land (106m2) as road consistent with section 111 of the Reserves Act 1977.
13. For the balance of the reserve (932m2), the land will be subject to council internal clearance process to check for any other potential use or public work, and if there is none identified, this property will undergo the revocation process as prescribed by Section 24 of the Reserves Act 1977. This process requires approval from the Minister of Conservation (which has not been delegated to council).
No. |
Title |
Page |
aView |
Aerial of site |
19 |
bView |
Certificate of title |
21 |
cView |
Reserves Act 1977 section 111 |
23 |
dView |
Survey office plan |
25 |
Signatories
Authors |
Sarah Mossman - Principal Policy Analyst Allan Walton - Senior Acquisitions and Disposals Advisor |
Authorisers |
Penny Pirrit - Regional & Local Planning Manager Rex Hewitt - Relationship Manager |
13 November 2014 |
|
Facility Partnership Fund 2014/2015
File No.: CP2014/23471
Purpose
1. To advise the Manurewa Local Board of the facility partnership applications received and to consider the recommendation for the 2014/2015 funding allocations.
Executive summary
2. The purpose the facility partnership funding is to assist with the development of accessible multi-use community facilities with an emphasis on maximising use, increased community participation and to support community groups to leverage funds from other funding organisations.
3. The facility partnership fund provides financial support to not-for-profit organisations undertaking asset development work with a total project value over $50,000 or a feasibility study up to $50,000 for a facility upgrade or development.
4. Ten funding enquiries resulted in two facility partnership funding applications; one from Totara Park Equestrian Centre Trust Board which was withdrawn because it did not meet the funding criteria guidelines of projects over the $50,000 threshold.
5. The funding currently available for Manurewa Local Board is $100,000 and there is one application for $35,000 from Auckland Rowing Association. The Board may wish to set aside any unallocated funds to support sport and recreation projects and programmes that are priorities and increase participation in sport and recreation. Staff can support the Board to consider options.
6. The facility partnership fund is operational expenditure and cannot be rolled over into the next financial year.
7. The applications were assessed and recommendations based on the established criteria under the facility partnership fund guidelines.
That the Manurewa Local Board considers the applications listed below and agrees to fund, part fund or decline each application in this round:
|
Comments
8. One application has been received for the facility partnership fund in the Manurewa Local Board area and is being considered in this report. Details of the community group application follow:
i) Auckland Rowing Association in partnership with Auckland Region Outrigger Canoe Association and Canoe Racing New Zealand.
The applicant requests $35,000 towards the development of a Regional Watersports Centre on the Tamaki River at Highbrook, East Tamaki.
Relevant background to the project:
· This is a regional project and all local boards have been approached excluding Papakura and Rodney because they do not have access to the facility partnership fund. To date the Central Facility Partnership Funding Committee has committed $400,000 to this project. This committee is made of Maungakiekie Tamaki; Orakei; Puketapapa; Albert Eden; Waitemata; Great Barrier and Waiheke local boards.
· The facility will have a high profile due to its location within the Highbrook Business Park.
· In terms of the Highbrook Park Trust Deed the Highbrook Reserve land will be vested to Auckland Council’s Parks in August 2015.
· Highbrook Park Trust land falls within the boundaries of both Howick and Otara Papatoetoe Local Boards.
· The Auckland Rowing Association is aware that Nga Hau Maiangi, the organisation representing the combined interests of Auckland Rowing Club (not to be confused with the Association) and the four Waka Ama Clubs based at Ian Shaw Park are in the process of upgrading their water access and improving storage at Ian Shaw Park, Mt Wellington.
· This work is intended to relieve localised capacity issues at Ian Shaw Park, both of which will complement each other by creating a 2,000 meter course which will serve both facilities.
· A comprehensive resource consent application for the proposed new water sports centre has recently begun pre-lodgment process with Auckland Council
Registered organisation/s, make up of groups, membership numbers:
· Auckland Rowing Association was incorporated on 13 December 1968.
· Auckland Rowing Association membership for the 2013/2014 season is 1,190.
· Auckland Region Outrigger Canoe Association membership for the 2013/2014 season is 1,091.
· Canoe Racing New Zealand membership nationally is approximately 800 with 400 coming from the Auckland region.
Group capability:
This appears to be a well organised and professional organisation.
Detail description:
· Concept design and resource consent funding secured; Stage 1 Site Works, retaining hardstands and boat ramp. A concept design has been completed and funding to undertake the resource consent secured (the total cost of this stage is approximately $1,939,000).
· Stage 2 Water Access, pontoons and Stage 3 building works is not included in the total cost of this project. The approximate cost for Stages 2 and 3 is $4,475m.
· Auckland Council has been working in partnership with this organisation since 2013 to progress this project.
Project need:
· The Auckland Regional Physical Activity and Sports Strategy (ARPASS) report on the Tamaki River and the Auckland Regional Paddling and Rowing Facilities Studies (2007 and 2008) supports the potential to develop a regional watersports centre on Digby Point, Highbrook.
Project outcomes/benefits:
· The Auckland Rowing Association represents the interests of the sport of rowing in the Auckland Region. It is the aim of the Association to increase participation in rowing and to improve the performance and experience of those participants.
· The intention of the project is to open up water access to the Tamaki River to the south and eastern parts of the city which will lead to increased participation and promote youth activity.
· The watersports centre will be a training and competition venue for local Manurewa waka ama group Te Pou Herenga Waka Ama who are affiliated to Auckland Region Outrigger Canoe Association. It will also serve the members of Counties Manukau Rowing Club (formerly Weymouth Rowing Club).
· Stage 1 provides water access which benefits the wider communities of the southern region and is not specific to Auckland Association members.
· The envisaged facility will be a premier venue in the southern region providing a straight 2,000 meter course for competitive rowing.
· The benefits of the completed Stage 1 project will give immediate community benefits through better accessibility to the boat ramp and Tamaki River.
Strategic alignment:
· The project is in accordance with the previous Councils’ sponsored ARPASS report which identified the regional need for the proposed facility.
· The project provides an ideal environment for a wide range of water sports and retaining access to our waterways. (Auckland Plan, Chapter 5, 336 refers)
· Develop training hubs that co-locate high performance training centres with community sports venues. (Sport and Recreation Strategic Action Plan 9.3 refers)
Operational sustainability:
· Goodman New Zealand and the Highbrook Park Trust are partners to this project who are both well established and respected organisations with recognized successes.
· Auckland Rowing Association is a long standing regional sporting association since 1968.
· A comprehensive resource consent application to Auckland Council is imminent with funding support from Goodman New Zealand for the proposed new water sports centre.
Any risks:
· As this is a regional facility all local boards are being approached for funding assistance except Papakura and Rodney which do not have facility partnership funding.
· A risk could be the lack of support from other local boards.
· The failure to raise additional support from other philanthropic organisations.
· Failure to receive resource consent. This can be mitigated by making this grant subject to obtaining resource consent.
The applicant is aware that a successful grant does not constitute any regulatory approval, or land owner approval which will be required in the future.
Project budget/financials:
Total Project Cost – Stage 1 |
$1,939m |
Confirmed funding - Auckland Council Central Facilities Partnership Fund 2013/14 - Pub Charity |
$400,000 $141,950 |
Organisation contribution |
$330,000 |
Amount requested |
$ 35,000 |
Recommendation:
To fund $35,000 towards this regionally funded facility which will be a valuable asset for the southern local community.
Consideration
Local board views and implications
9. The recommendations in this report fall within the Local Board’s delegated authority.
10. The timing and implementation of the facility partnership fund will be subject to budget considerations as part of the Long Term plan 2015-2025 process
11. The decisions sought by this report do not trigger the Auckland Council Significance Policy.
Māori impact statement
12. The facility partnership fund assists with the development of accessible multi-use community facilities to increase community participation, including the potential to increased community participation for Māori. No particular negative implications for Māori community or Māori stakeholders have been identified as arising from this report. Given the demographic make-up of the local board area and the nature of the project for which funding is requested it is likely some Māori will benefit from this project.
Implementation
13. A standard Council funding agreement will be developed for any successful applicant and progress towards agreed project outcomes monitored throughout the project.
There are no attachments for this report.
Signatories
Authors |
Kim Squire - Sports and Recreation Advisor |
Authorisers |
Ken Maplesden - Sport and Recreation Adviser Lisa Tocker - Manager, Recreation Facilities & Service Delivery Central Ian Maxwell - Manager Parks, Sports & Recreation Rex Hewitt - Relationship Manager |
Manurewa Local Board 13 November 2014 |
|
The Auckland Teaching Garden Trust
File No.: CP2014/24969
Purpose
1. To seek endorsement from the Manurewa Local Board that the Auckland Teaching Garden Trust will deliver the Teaching Garden Programme.
2. To seek approval for funding the Auckland Teaching Garden Trust so that it can employ mentors and also provide an on-site educational programme for imparting gardening skills and so help in meeting Auckland Council vision of healthy communities.
3. To seek approval to start the process for granting a licence to occupy the site for the purpose of a teaching garden to the Auckland Teaching Garden Trust.
Executive summary
4. The Teaching Garden is a legacy programme that began with the Manukau City Council and continued under the Auckland Council.
5. The programme is funded from Local and Sports Parks South Opex funds allocated by the Board.
6. The Auckland Teaching Garden Trust which was formed by the mentors of the teaching gardens has been registered with the assistance of the Legal Services team and Parks staff and worked with the mentors. (The Trust deed is attached to this report).
7. There is a need to put in place a Service and Funding Agreement for this year and subsequently the next three years to give stability and support for the Auckland Teaching Garden Trust to provide this programme.
8. Approval is being sought from the Manurewa Local Board to fund $10,000 per annum for this programme based on the Trust providing to the Manager Local and Sports Park south an Annual Business Plan in June and a midterm Report of Achievements against the Goals established for the year.
9. The following years grant will be subject to receiving a draft Annual Report and a subsequent audited financial statement of accounts. (The Funding Agreement to be executed is attached to this report).
That the Manurewa Local Board: a) Endorses the Auckland Teaching Gardens Trust to provide this programme at the Maich Road Reserve. b) Receives this report and approves the funding of $10,000 per annum for the provision of Teaching Garden programme at the sites by the Auckland Teaching Garden Trust from the operations budget of Local and Sports Parks. c) Approves that this take effect from 3rd of January, 2015 and so the amount of funds allocated for the service funding in the first year will be $5,000 and thereafter maintained at $10,000 per year for a period of three years when this agreement will be reviewed. d) Seek the Parks Officers to follow the process to progress a licence to occupy this site by the Auckland Teaching Garden Trust who will be required to follow all such conditions and consents required for management of the site. |
Comments
10. The Teaching Garden programme has continued onwards from the legacy Manukau City Council into the new Auckland Council.
11. The programme has been funded from Local and Sports Parks South operation funds allocated by the Board.
12. This has enabled the programme to put in place two mentors per each teaching garden and also to supply all materials and services to enable the sites to deliver the objectives initially established.
13. The legacy council had a different structure with a larger number of Park Rangers available that supported the mentors and within the new structure of Local and Sports Parks it was identified that while the staff resources were available to meet immediate needs, it did not allow for suitable on site assistance.
14. Therefore it was decided to pursue the establishment of the Auckland Teaching Garden Trust to enable the mentors to seek external funding and external expertise to continue to provide this programme and grow it.
15. The Auckland Teaching Garden Trust has been registered with the assistance of the Legal Services team who supported Parks staff and worked with the mentors.
16. There is a need to put in place a Service and Funding Agreement for the next three years to give stability and support for the Auckland Teaching Garden Trust to provide this programme. Approval is being sought from the Manurewa Local Board to fund $10,000 per annum for this programme based on the Trust providing to the Manager Local and Sports Park South an Annual Business Plan in June and a midterm Report of Achievements against the Goals established for the year. The following years grant will be subject to receiving a draft Annual Report and a subsequent audited financial statement of accounts.
17. Site Information:
Location |
Legal Description |
Ownership |
Reserve Classification |
Procedure to Follow to grant lease or licence |
Maich Park, 95R Maich Road, Manurewa |
Part Lot 1 DP 90151 in NA47B/655 |
Auckland Council in fee simple |
Unclassified local purpose (community buildings) reserve |
|
18. The security of the sites will be provided by a licence to occupy and will be administered by Local and Sports Parks South.
19. Procedure for grant of licence pursuant to Section 74(2)
i) Firstly a parks officer should look at the situation and decide whether to recommend the grant of a licence for gardening or other similar purposes.
ii) Parks will then recommend to the appropriate local board to resolve to notify its intention to grant a licence for a teaching garden in one or more newspapers circulating in the Council’s district, and calling for objections in writing.
iii) Consultation with iwi in accordance with Part 3B of the Conservation Act 1987 must be undertaken in respect of Reserves Act lands.
iv) In the notice it must provide at least one month from the date of publication for the public to make any submissions in relation to the proposal. If the time period for receipt of submissions falls within the period 10 December to 10 January, then the date shall be 10 February).
20. As part of reporting The Auckland Garden Trust will provide in the reports the following information:-
i) Number of plots per garden site
ii) Average number of participants per plot
iii) % of plots occupied per garden site
iv) Number of new participants for the season
v) Number of participants starting a garden at home
vi) Ethnicity of participants
vii) Number and type of events held at the gardens
Consideration
Local board views and implications
21. Manurewa’s future will be one that nurtures the needs of our youngest citizens, supports the aspirations of our workers, our entrepreneurs and property owners, and honours the legacy of our elders.
22. The Manurewa Local Board is applying its advocacy and influence to help create an attractive, prosperous and safe community where people want to live, work and do business.
23. Young people will be supported to achieve their aspirations with easy access to appropriate education, training and employment opportunities within and adjacent to Manurewa.
24. Neighbourhoods will be well-designed and attractive, providing an unsurpassed quality of life where residents feel safe and connected. Good roads, footpaths and public transport will provide excellent links to work, services, shopping,
25. Manurewa’s natural environment will be well cared for, clean, valued, protected and enjoyed by our people.
26. Our communities will flourish with people playing, working and participating in community life together. They will be supported by community, leisure and sports facilities, and abundant open spaces that everyone can access and enjoy.
Māori impact statement
27. The site mentors incorporate tikanga practices in the curriculum.
Implementation
28. The project will be implemented by the Specialist and Programmes team of the Local and Sports Parks South and progress will be reported to the Parks Portfolio representatives.
No. |
Title |
Page |
aView |
The Auckland Teaching Gardens Trust Deed and Registration |
35 |
bView |
Draft Funding Agreement |
69 |
Signatories
Authors |
Biran Singh - Team Leader Specialists and Programmes - Local and Sports Parks South |
Authorisers |
Ian Maxwell - Manager Parks, Sports & Recreation Rex Hewitt - Relationship Manager |
13 November 2014 |
|
Council's Role in Early Childhood Education
File No.: CP2014/24946
Purpose
1. National participation rate in early childhood learning prior to primary school for Māori children has increased to 93.0% for the year ending March 2014, up 1.2 percentage points on the March 2013 rate. However, in some Auckland communities, the Māori participation is significantly lower. The Ministry of Education is implementing the Engaging Priority Families initiative which seeks to provide intensive early learning support to families and whānau of three and four year olds in target communities. The priority for this initiative is Māori, Pasifika.
Executive summary
2. Research shows that children who are involved in quality early childhood education (ECE) benefit in many ways, and that these benefits extend to their family/whānau and the wider community. Taking part in ECE builds a strong foundation for children’s ongoing education, learning and development.
3. Auckland Council has signalled its support for ECE services through the Auckland Plan and the Southern Initiative. A target has been identified in the Auckland Plan for all 3 to 4 year olds to participate in, and have access to quality, culturally appropriate ECE services by 2020
4. Council’s main involvement in supporting ECE services to date ranges from being a direct provider to providing community leases for council facilities (land and buildings), programme support, grant funding and use of temporary bookable spaces. The council has no statutory responsibilities or role in the establishment, management or funding of ECE services.
5. There is a growing tension between the use of parks and open space for non-exclusive recreation purposes, and the demand to lease council land for community based ECE provision. There are no policies or guidelines currently in place that provide detailed guidance for decision-makers around ECE services. Applications are therefore assessed on a case by case basis.
6. The Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan permits ECE services up to 100m2 in an existing building in the informal recreation, sport and active recreation and community open space zones. Stand-alone ECE facilities on any open space would be a non-complying activity
7. Staff held a number of workshops with southern local boards between May and August 2014 to discuss options for the council’s role in supporting ECE services. The feedback from the workshops have provided the basis for the development of key guiding principles that will help the board determine how it approaches requests for a lease to occupy parks and open space for the purpose of ECEs in future.
That the Manurewa Local Board: a) Adopt the following principles to guide decisions on requests for lease of public open space for early childhood education provision; i) that central government has the main responsibility for the establishment of early childhood education services. ii) that the establishment of new early childhood education services on council’s parks and open space will not be supported, unless there is a direct benefit to the open space and its users. iii) that existing early childhood education centres seeking expansion may be supported where the impact on the parks and open space provision and its users have been assessed as being no more than minor. |
Comments
8. At local board meetings in August and September 2013, the Otara - Papatoetoe and Mangere – Otahuhu Local Boards requested:
a) an analysis of ECE (Early Childhood Education) demand in the Local Board and The Southern Initiative area.
b) that the governing body develop a strategic approach to the provision of ECEs as a matter of urgency and include this on their work programme.
c) the identification of those open spaces which are suitably zoned and classified to support the establishment of ECEs.
d) the identification of those open spaces which are suitably classified and will be appropriately zoned in the Unitary Plan to support the establishment of ECEs.
9. The resolutions were forwarded to other local boards for their information, and the Manurewa and Papakura local boards expressed an interest in being involved in these discussions.
10. There are three main ways the council currently supports the provision of ECE services:
a) direct provider – the council manages a number of ECE services located in council owned facilities (e.g. Kauri Kids)
b) leasing council facilities – the main focus has been land but includes buildings to generally community based ECE providers
c) indirect provider - through programme support, use of non-exclusive bookable spaces in council facilities and grants.
11. Some southern local boards have raised concerns around the tension between park and open space provision for recreation and the demand for use of these spaces by ECE providers. Much of the land that is appropriately zoned under the District Plan and classified under the Reserves Act in the southern sector is at capacity and applications are being received from ECE providers to use reserve land whose purpose and use is for recreation (informal and active/sports). This is raising concerns around the appropriateness of that land for ECE services and the cumulative loss of public open space.
12. Although council has specified support for ECE services and various directives have been set through the Auckland Plan and the Southern Initiative, there are no policies or guidelines in place that provide detailed guidance for decision-makers around ECE services. This means that applications are being dealt with on a case by case basis.
13. The Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan permits ECE services up to 100m2 in an existing building in the informal recreation, sport and active recreation and community open space zones. They are discretionary activities in the civic spaces zone and non-complying activities in the conservation zone. Stand-alone ECE facilities on any open space would be a non-complying activity. It should be noted that through the submission and hearings process, changes to this aspect of the plan may result.
14. Prior to the workshops with the southern local boards, a discussion paper was prepared which contained ECE data specific to each local board, and some preliminary options on council’s role in supporting ECE services in the future. The options paper is provided in Attachment A.
Consideration
Local board views and implications
15. A cluster workshop was held with representatives from the Manurewa, Otara - Papatoetoe, Mangere - Otahuhu and Papakura Local Boards on 22 May 2014, where local board members discussed council’s current and potential future role(s) in supporting early learning, with a particular focus on the use of parks and open space land. Attendees requested additional information and that individual workshops be held with their boards to ensure members were cognisant of the issues and to inform decision making.
16. Individual workshops were held with the Manurewa, Otara-Papatoetoe, Mangere-Otahuhu and Papakura local boards over August and September 2014. Howick and Franklin Local Boards did not request a workshop but were included in the distribution of discussion documents and briefed on the workshop outcomes.
17. The following themes evolved from these workshops and have been used to inform the recommendations contained in this report:
• New ECEs on parks and open space are generally not supported unless a direct benefit to the open space and its users can be shown (e.g. where the ECE will activate the space and provide for community use outside operating hours)
• Consideration will be given to the expansion of existing ECE facilities, where the impacts on the public open space and its users are assessed to be no more than minor
• Advocate that ECE facilities on parks and open space expand their purpose outside operating hours to accommodate other community opportunities (e.g. adult education)
• Support, in general, the council being a direct provider as part of the provision of a range of holistic activities in council owned facilities. It was suggested that consideration could be given to existing services being contracted out or sold
• The establishment of ECE services is essentially a central government responsibility and as such should be funded by the Ministry of Education
• Advocate for land to be secured in new developments for ECE services to be established, where a need is identified through for example, working with the Housing Project Office and Special Housing Area developers, the Ministry of Education and ECE providers
• Generally not supportive of selling parks and open space for ECE development.
18. It is recommended that the board adopts these as guiding principles to assist decision making on applications for ECEs on parks and open space in the future.
Māori impact statement
19. Specific consultation has not been undertaken with Māori. The Auckland Plan and the Southern Initiative objectives and targets around early learning address all children.
20. The national participation rate in early childhood learning prior to primary school for Māori children has increased to 93.0% for the year ending March 2014, up 1.2 percentage points on the March 2013 rate. However, in some Auckland communities, the Māori participation is significantly lower. The Ministry of Education is implementing the Engaging Priority Families initiative which seeks to provide intensive early learning support to families and whānau of three and four year olds in target communities. The priority for this initiative is Māori, Pasifika and low socio-economic status families.
21. It is expected that any impacts on Maori will not differ greatly to other parties seeking land for the establishment of early childhood education centres.
Implementation
22. Further work will undertaken by council staff to gain further clarity on the preliminary options discussed at the local board workshops, subject to the outcome of the Long Term Plan process and resource availability.
23. Whatever recommendations are adopted, the main stakeholders (e.g. the Ministry of Education) will be advised of the viewpoint for the local board area.
24. Applications from ECE providers for use of public open space that are currently being processed will be progressed on a case by case basis.
No. |
Title |
Page |
aView |
Council's Furture Role in Supporting ECE Services - Preliminary Options July 2014 (material from workshop) |
83 |
Signatories
Authors |
Erin Clarke - Policy Analyst,South Sophie Bell - Principal Policy Analyst |
Authorisers |
Penny Pirrit - Regional & Local Planning Manager Ian Maxwell - Manager Parks, Sports & Recreation Rex Hewitt - Relationship Manager |
13 November 2014 |
|
Auckland Transport Update – November 2014
File No.: CP2014/25169
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.
Executive summary
2. This report covers matters of specific application and interest to the Manurewa Local Board and its community; matters of general interest relating to AT activities or the transport sector; and AT media releases for the information of the board and community.
That the Manurewa Local Board: a) receive the report entitled “Auckland Transport Update – November 2014”.
|
Discussion
Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF):
3. The Manurewa Local Board is allocated $593,314 per annum from the Local Board Transport Capital Fund. These funds can be used annually or rolled together to use the full three years of funding i.e. $1,779,942 for larger projects.
4. During the 2012/2013 financial year only $34,178 was spent leaving $559,136 of the annual budget unspent. This unspent money has been authorised by the Governing Body to be rolled over on a one-time-only basis, giving the Manurewa Local Board a total budget of $2,339,078 available in this electoral term to be spent on transport projects.
5. In 2012/2013 the board allocated $534,000 to seven projects, and in 2013/2014 another $48,000 was allocated to one more project. The estimated final cost of these eight projects that will be spent in the current electoral term is $322,000, the major reason for the reduction in cost being the reduced scope subsequently decided by the board for the Wiri Industrial area footpaths.
6. The balance that still needs to be allocated to new projects in order to fully spend the available budget is therefore $2,017,358.
Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF) – Potential Projects:
7. Auckland Transport has provided the local board with a rough order of cost (ROC) for each of the projects below. Over the next couple of months, the board will prioritise these projects for funding. The projects are packaged up under four themes. These are: arts and plants, Great South Road/railway station connectivity, signage and Great South Road.
The ‘Arts & Plants’ pedestrian and cycle link to Nathan Homestead and Auckland Botanic Gardens:
8. The Manurewa Local Board is investigating a pedestrian and cycle link to Nathan Homestead and Auckland Botanical Gardens. Projects under investigation include: a new shared path, seating, new informative signage and safe crossing treatments.
The Rail Station/Great South Road connectivity:
9. This project will incorporate a range of practical opportunities to better link the Great South Road and the train station. Potential improvements include: Improved entrance from Great South Road, easier movement through South Mall, pedestrian improvements at rear of South Mall, way finding signage, covered walkway over bridge and stairway onto platform and enhanced pedestrian crossing facilitates.
Signage:
10. The board wishes to investigate further signage in and around the town centre and train station to ensure better visibility of areas of interest and the train station to the community and visitors to Manurewa. This may include way finding signage, as well as areas of interest and real time commuter information.
Great South Road:
11. The board is investigating a range of options for making Great South Road, Manurewa more pedestrian friendly. Improvements may include: building a gateway to Manurewa and enhanced pedestrian crossing facilities.
Table 2: Manurewa Local Board project update:
ID# |
Project Description |
Progress/Current Status |
164 |
New Footpaths in Manurewa - arterial roads in Wiri
|
Works will not commence until the intersection upgrade at Wiri Station/Ash/Langly is completed. Works to begin mid – December.
It is expected this work will begin mid-December.
|
176 |
Speed advisory driver feedback signage in the following locations: · Weymouth Road, Manurewa · Alfriston Road, Manurewa · Mahia Road, Manurewa · Hill Road, Manurewa · Charles Prevost Drive |
Speed advisory feedback signage has been installed in all locations except Charles Prevost Drive. These are currently being tested and are expected to be installed by the end of November 2014.
|
Consultation documents on proposed improvements:
12. Consultation documents for the following proposals have been provided to the Manurewa Local Board for its feedback. As the board’s transport portfolio holders provide feedback on the board’s behalf, the material below is included for general information purposes only.
Manurewa town Centre - Proposed bus stop changes:
13. Auckland Transport provided the board the opportunity to comment on proposed bus stop changes in Manurewa Town Centre.
General Information Items:
Budget workshops
14. Over the next month Auckland Transport is holding workshops with all local boards. Cluster workshops will look at the prioritisation of medium to large capital works projects over the next ten years and how these are prioritised within Auckland Transport’s overall work programme.
15. Cluster workshops will be followed by individual local board workshops to discuss the prioritisation in detail. The workshop with Manurewa is scheduled for 27 November 2014. This workshop will look more closely at projects and initiatives over the next three years across: maintenance & renewals, road safety, public transport operations, route optimisation, travel demand management and parking.
Redoubt-Mill Road Corridor update
16. The Notices of Requirement (NoRs) for the northern section of Redoubt Road-Mill Road Corridor project were lodged with Auckland Council on 24 October 2014. The route as lodged is shown in the plan attached.
17. Council officers are currently reviewing the documentation to determine whether further information is needed. Once Auckland Council is content with the documentation content, the NoRs will be publicly notified by Council and any submitter will have an opportunity to be heard. It is likely that notification will occur early in 2015 (February/March), and is anticipated that a recommendation on the NoRs following the Council hearing process will be released mid-late 2015.
18. Additional assessments have been commissioned, including an independent Ecology Assessment which will be completed in October. The assessment has resulted in the lateral shift of the bridge over the Puhinui Creek by 13m further to the east to avoid some significant trees.
19. Letters will be sent out to those parties directly and indirectly impacted by the project, informing them of the process and what rights they have. Drop in appointments will be made available for those wanting to discuss any questions they have in person. These are scheduled to take place in late November.
Media Releases
New Public Transport Campaign “Get On Board with Jerome”
20. On 6 October Auckland Transport launches a major campaign for public transport featuring All Black and Blues rugby player Jerome Kaino. The theme of this campaign is ‘Get on board with Jerome’. In the campaign Jerome Kaino will demonstrate how easy it is to use public transport and the AT HOP card.
21. Jerome Kaino will be acting as an Ambassador for Auckland Transport, with a particular focus on public transport. He has been chosen because of his wide appeal, but particularly for his appeal in South and West Auckland where AT would like to grow HOP card use.
22. The campaign focusses on a number of ‘how to’ videos hosted by Jerome Kaino. The videos are:
· How to use the HOP card
· How to buy and top up your HOP card
· Using the Journey Planner to get around Auckland
· Update on PT developments
23. These videos are on a special ‘Get on board with Jerome’ web page AT.govt.nz/onboard Radio is the main promotional media for the campaign and AT will primarily use MaiFM and Flava, due to their high audience ratings in South and West Auckland.
24. The objective of the campaign is to show how easy it is to use public transport and the HOP card, to encourage AT HOP purchases and to grow PT patronage. The campaign will run during October and November and will be refreshed early in 2015.
New Safety Campaign
25. As school children return from their holidays in October, Auckland Transport's Back to School Campaign reinforces its 'Slow Down Around Schools' message with the help of monsters and children. The campaign opened with radio adverts and press ads in suburban newspapers reminding motorists to ‘Slow Down Around Schools’.
26. The campaign continues with radio advertising and bus backs. A placard campaign is also scheduled where students, together with school staff, will be waving placards at passing motorists to encourage them to be more vigilant and reduce their speed around schools.
27. Speeding cars and drivers around schools are portrayed as ‘monsters’ and the campaign features images of terrified children reacting to the approaching monsters. The aim is to raise awareness of the vulnerability of children on roads near schools and for motorists to ‘Slow Down Around Schools’.
There are no attachments for this report.
Signatories
Authors |
Felicity Merrington – Elected Member Relationship Manager (South), AT |
Authorisers |
Jonathan Anyon, Elected Member Relationship Team Manager Rex Hewitt - Relationship Manager |
Manurewa Local Board 13 November 2014 |
|
Auckland Transport Quarterly Update to Local Boards
File No.: CP2014/25180
Purpose
1. The purpose of this report is to inform local boards about progress on activities undertaken by Auckland Transport in the three months July – September 2014 and the planned activities anticipated to be undertaken in the three months October – December 2014.
Executive summary
2. Attachments include:
A – Auckland Transport activities
B – Travelwise Schools activities
C – Decisions of the Traffic Control Committee
D – Report against local board advocacy issues
E – Report on the status of the local board’s projects under the Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF).
That the Manurewa Local Board: a) receive the Auckland Transport Quarterly Report.
|
Significant activities during the period under review
Key Agency Initiatives
East West Connections
3. Auckland Transport (AT) and the NZ Transport Agency have completed an indicative business case that identified a short list of options to address the transport issues in the Onehunga-Penrose area. Improvements were also identified along the proposed bus route between Mangere, Otahuhu and Sylvia Park.
4. The assessment process to narrow down potential options included the outcomes of the July/August engagement as well as assessing factors such as transport performance; consentability; constructability; natural environment; public health and cultural heritage. The short list contains a range of low to high investment options for further investigation.
5. Public consultation on these short listed options commenced in October. This included public open days and workshops.
Public Transport (PT) Development
Otahuhu Interchange
6. A civil enabling works package has gone to market to enable construction activities in December to capitalise on the scheduled Christmas Block of Line in the rail corridor.
7. The main works package is scheduled to go to market mid-December, with tenders closing end of January and award end of February 2015. Target completion for the interchange is end of September 2015. A public open day was held in Otahuhu Town Hall, attended by 225 people including Local Board members; feedback was very positive. Hui with local mana whenua are on-going with six having been completed to date.
City Rail Link
8. Registrations of interest (ROI) by the construction industry for the Enabling Works design work for the downtown section of the City Rail Link, from Britomart through Queen, Customs and Albert Streets to Wyndham Street were received and evaluated during August.
9. Following an evaluation process, Request for Proposal documentation for two enabling works contract packages were released to the ROI respondents in late August. A series of interface meetings are scheduled with respondents prior to receipt of proposals in November whereby a tender evaluation will be undertaken to procure the preferred tenderer. A project update was provided to manu whenua groups (seven iwi represented) mainly focussing on stormwater mitigation issues.
EMU Procurement
10. There are now 27 units in NZ with 17 units in service. Manukau peak services began mid-September. Electric Multiple Unit (EMU) testing on the Western line to Swanson began on 29 September. Manufacture and delivery is on programme.
Public Transport (PT) Operations
Bus Improvements
11. An on-going programme of bus timetable adjustments, in partnership with AT service providers, continued this year to ensure published timetables more closely reflect actual bus running times. This is driving a significant improvement in bus service reliability, particularly for North Star, Go West, Waka Pacific and Metrolink Outer with implementation scheduled across the entire bus network by September 2014.
12. On-time performance across the entire bus network rose to 91.45% for September and has remained over 90% during the quarter.
13. NZ Bus operated 91.7% of its bus services on time, which is a 10% increase on the previous 12 months. Go West showed the largest improvement with an 11% increase in punctuality since December. On-time performance improved by 5% after delivering a new customer value proposition of services from 7am to 7pm, 7 days a week on 3 August in the west (Green Bay/Titirangi).
14. On time performance for the Northern Express Service also continued to operate at a very high level during August delivering 98.7% and with most of September operating at 99.4%.
Rail Improvements
15. Rail patronage for the 12 months to September 2014 was more than 11.8 million; an increase of 27% on the previous year and a new record for heavy rail in the Auckland region. Rail patronage for the first quarter 2014 was 15% above the same period in 2013.
16. Rail service punctuality was stable at 87.7% for the 12 months to September 2014; an improvement from 86.3% the previous year. This was achieved through a period of operational change to new systems following the introduction of EMUs that have presented some challenges. For the month of August 2014, punctuality was 90.5% - the first month for at least ten years that performance exceeded 90% outside holiday periods .
17. Rail station security was upgraded from May 2014 and a strategic review of rail safety, security and fare enforcement is underway.
Road Design and Development
Dominion Road
18. Construction on the cycle routes is proceeding with the project being close to 50% complete. Tenders for the main Dominion Road works have closed and evaluation is underway. The project has been expanded at the request of Watercare to include water main replacement in the three village centres.
Albany Highway
19. The contract for construction has been awarded to Fulton Hogan. Work will commence on site in November. The construction is expected to be completed early in 2017.
20. An open day will be held in October to give the local community the opportunity to meet the construction team and ask any questions they may have about the project before works begin. A communications and stakeholder management plan will be in place for the duration of the construction period.
Murphys Road
21. Construction of Flat Bush School Road and Murphys Road intersection upgrade is progressing and on track for completion by mid-December 2014. Design of the Murphy’s Road upgrade between Flat Bush School Road and Ormiston Road is on-going and programmed to finish by the end of December 2014.
AMETI
22. Construction of the new Te Horeta Road at Panmure is near complete. Pavement works and line marking were completed during the period and the final integration testing of tunnel systems is in progress. The road is scheduled to open on 2 November when critical activities on Mt Wellington Highway and at the adjacent NCI site are complete.
23. The new William Harvey Bridge footbridge is now fully operational. The upgrade of Van Damme’s Lagoon, NCI and Watercare works are ongoing.
24. Planning and design meetings were held to update Pakuranga town centre stakeholders on the design work for Pakuranga bus station and Reeves Road flyover. Feedback will assist to further develop the design.
Cycle Initiatives
25. The construction of Stage 1 (Churchill Street to Quay Street via Mahuhu Crescent and Tapora Street) was completed ahead of schedule and formally opened by the Prime Minister and the Mayor. A short safety video for cyclists has been produced http://youtu.be/fNlu7xaS2KA. Within a week it had been viewed more than 2,700 times on YouTube.
26. A survey to benchmark the number of cyclists is about to start and will be used to monitor usage. The design of Stage 2 that will make the link through to Britomart Place is progressing with the start of construction planned for early 2015.
27. A number of other cycle schemes are under construction including Portage Road (New Lynn), Swanson Rail Path and St George Street (Papatoetoe). Meanwhile the Spring Cycling Programme has commenced with a series of cycle training and safety events being held throughout the region.
Services
Public Transport ‘Give it a Go’ Scheme
28. Between Late May and the end of September AT has delivered the scheme through 18 businesses and personalised journey planning projects. Through the scheme, individuals have two weeks of commute travel.
29. Results indicate that 6 weeks after the start of the trial 52% are continuing to use public transport and after 8 weeks there is only a slight drop to 41%.
30. An evaluation survey is also undertaken as this allows participants to provide feedback on the service. There has been positive feedback, as shown in the quotes below:
· “Great idea – certainly surprised me how great public transport has become” ASB workplace survey
· “I had never taken public transport before the trial and now find that travelling by train is a lot less stressful than by road… …and thank you for offering the trial pass, you now have a passenger for life.” Health Alliance workplace survey
· “Using public transport was a lot better than I had expected. More trials like this should be done to convince others.” Sovereign workplace survey
Commute Businesses
31. Auckland Council senior management have approved the Auckland Council Travel Plan. A more detailed Action Plan is being co-developed for presentation to the Chief Planning Officer in early November for approval to proceed.
32. Commute awards recognised businesses achieving success in travel planning. The award winners have been promoted in business publications including Auckland Today. The award winners were:
· Progress on Travel Plan – AECOM
· Delivery of Commute Packages – Mahitahi Trust
· Embedding sustainable transport into company practice – MRCagney.
Route Optimisation
33. The 2013 – 2014 Route Optimisation Programme has been primarily focused around the Auckland city centre, aiming to prioritise and optimise network performance for all modes as appropriate. The Programme made use of the detailed Network Operating Plan to translate strategic intent into operational priorities, for the various modes by time of day. Being the city centre, greater emphasis was placed on public transport and pedestrian performance, the latter being particularly noticeable during the day outside of peak periods. As a whole, route optimisation covered approximately 33 km, over 110 intersections.
Variable Message Signs (VMS)
34. Eight variable message signs (VMS) programmed for the 2013-14 year are now in place.
35. The signs are due for final hand-over to the Auckland Traffic Operations Centre (ATOC) during the month of October, and will be available for use for incident management, planned events, multi-modal real time travel time information (including multi-modal travel time where relevant), and any messaging requirements.
Bus route improvements
36. The Operational Planning and Performance Teams have been assisting the Public Transport Operations team to identify and implement quick-win projects to improve the efficiency and reliability of the bus operations. Current projects include:
Route |
Project Scope |
Progress |
Esmonde Road |
Widening to extend bus lane |
Resolution prepared, awaiting tree removal consent |
Khyber Pass Road |
Introduction of additional 90m of bus lane |
Resolution prepared, awaiting Local Board approval |
Crowhurst intersection bus priority upgrade |
||
Wellesley Street East |
Bus lane pocket |
Resolution prepared, awaiting Road Safety Audit sign off |
Park Road |
Investigation of southbound bus lane |
Concept design complete, internal consultation to commerce shortly |
Parnell Road |
Investigation of bus lane |
Concept development with consultants, due imminently |
Urban KiwiRAP (International Road Assessment Programme) Update
37. A specialist engineering team completed vehicle-mounted video-mapping of 2,000 kilometres of the Auckland local road network in September as part of the Safer Journeys Urban KiwiRAP demonstration project. This project is a world first and the video footage will be analysed to establish road safety star ratings for the Auckland urban local road network that will be used to prioritise improvements on high-risk parts of the network.
Road Corridor Delivery
38. Overall operating expenditure is running ahead of budget due to the effects of the major storm event which struck Great Barrier Island in June, higher electricity costs and an increased spend on unsealed road maintenance.
39. Renewal expenditure is behind forecast but good progress has been made in making preparations for the upcoming construction season. The actual spend is consistent with the reduced level of funding now available for renewals.
Key Renewals
40. Construction of the Beach Road Cycleway was delivered by the Road Corridor Group and completed on time for the opening by the Prime Minister in August.
41. The design of the new box culvert is underway on Great Barrier Road with the intention of commencing physical works later this year. The existing steel plate was washed away in the storm event on 10 June 2014 and there is a temporary stream crossing in place until the works can be completed.
42. Chipsealing commenced in Franklin in August using Emulsion instead of cut-back bitumen. Emulsion can be sprayed in cooler weather, provides improved chip wetting and adhesion and is safer and more environmentally friendly than hot bitumen.
43. Repairs to the Maraetai Beach seawall were also completed in August. The seawall had been undermined by several major storms over the June/July period.
44. Streetlight improvements have been carried out on East Tamaki Road and on the cycle routes in the Dominion Road Corridor. The street lights in these cycle routes, located immediately to the East and West of Dominion Road, have been upgraded with LED Luminaires to improve safety.
Road Corridor Access
Corridor Access Request (CAR) Applications
45. There were 4,039 CAR applications approved during the first quarter, representing a 4.4% increase over the number of 3868 for the same period last year.
46. Monthly incremental increases of around 8% have been experienced since July with the major share of the increases being for minor works i.e. works in the footpath and berm area only.
Ultra-Fast Broadband Rollout
47. Overall forecast build starts have fallen below forecasts and the likelihood of a back ended build programme for the year has increased. Up to 30 cabinet areas appear to be at risk.
48. Currently for Year 4, 88 cabinet areas are in build, 43 are completed and 22 have moved into warranty.
Watercare Hunua 4 Bulk Watermain
49. As at the end of September 2014, 12.6 km of pipe has been laid at an average weekly rate of 48 metres and Watercare advise it is on target.
Watercare Pakuranga Rising Water Main
50. Work commenced in January on the construction of a new 0.9 metre diameter sanitary sewer rising main in the carriageway of Pakuranga Road and Lagoon Drive in the vicinity of the Panmure Bridge.
51. Progress at either end of the project site (Lagoon Drive and Pakuranga Road east of the Panmure Bridge) has been good and the positive temporary traffic management measures employed have enabled traffic to continue with only minimal delays.
Overweight Permits
52. There were 198 overweight permit applications processed in September. Of the 198 permit applications, 155 (78.3%) were processed within the target times and all applications were processed by the nominated travel start date.
53. The target timeframes for processing overweight permit applications are 3 days for KPI 2, single trip, multi travel and continuous renewal permits and 5 working days for KPI 3 continuous and area permits.
Parking and Enforcement
Parking machine replacement
54. The existing 922 Pay and Display machines installed in the greater Auckland area have reached their end of life and are due for replacement. Parking Services have conducted an on-going investigation into the developing technology associated with on-street parking. A paper has recently been prepared requesting the funding necessary for a technology upgrade and is planned to be presented to the AT Board at its November meeting.
55. The proposed new system incorporates the ‘pay by space’ mode with in-road sensors for each parking spot. Parking availability will be published on the internet. Once a parking space is occupied payment will be made at a nearby payment machine that will accept HOP cards, credit cards, text-a-park and cash. Smartphone payments will also be available with text reminders being sent when the time limit is due to expire. Additional topping up for extending parking will be available by either smartphone or at any other parking payment machine.
56. Enforcement of expired parking spaces will be managed from Parking Officers PDAs that will be able to communicate to a central system holding data on the parking status of the city’s precincts. Improved management information and remote tariff adjustments will be managed from the centralised system.
Auckland parking discussion document
57. There was significant interest in the parking discussion document, with AT receiving over 6,000 submissions. The submissions are still being analysed and themes collated. The next step will be to draw up a region-wide parking policy which will consider information from those submissions.
58. A report on key themes and possible policy responses is expected to be reported back to the AT Board in October. The detail of individual schemes will follow.
No. |
Title |
Page |
aView |
Schedule of activities undertaken for the first quarter (2014/15) ending 30 September 2014 and forward works programme for the second quarter (2014/15) ending 31 December 2014 |
101 |
bView |
Travelwise Schools activities broken down by Local Board |
115 |
cView |
Traffic Control Committee Decisions |
117 |
dView |
Local Board Advocacy Report |
119 |
eView |
Local Board Transport Capital Fund Report |
121 |
Signatories
Authors |
Various Auckland Transport authors |
Authorisers |
Jonathan Anyon, Elected Member Relationship Team Manager Rex Hewitt - Relationship Manager |
13 November 2014 |
|
Council Controlled Organisation Review, Progress Report to Local Boards
File No.: CP2014/23246
Purpose
1. To inform local boards about key aspects of the current review of council controlled organisations (CCOs) and seek local board feedback, in particular on matters of interest to local boards.
Executive summary
2. This report informs local boards on a number of matters relating to the CCO review. These include:
· the key steps undertaken in the CCO review so far
· CCO configuration options that have been considered but are not being progressed
· CCO configuration options that are still under consideration
· other aspects of the CCO review of interest to local boards including the Accountability Framework workstream; and the Communication, Collaboration and Consultation workstream
· next steps in the CCO review.
3. This report seeks feedback from local boards, in particular about an option to increase activities in support of the council’s transformational shift of radically improving the quality of urban living. The council is considering a new vehicle that could act as a single outward facing voice in the development of the Auckland region, with greater economies of scale, enhanced commerciality and the ability to partner with others. The report seeks feedback on the concept, including comment on the considerations the council should take into account, from a local perspective, when developing the concept.
4. The report notes that local boards have already provided feedback on the following matters which are being considered as part of the CCO review.
· Whether local economic development activities are delivered by Auckland Council or ATEED.
· The roles and interface between local boards and Auckland Transport in relation to place-making functions.
5. In relation to local economic development, the report seeks local board views on ATEED being responsible for local economic development, if a mechanism can be established to hold ATEED accountable to local boards for delivery. The report also notes that the CCO review will not consider the level of funding for local economic development activities, as this is an LTP issue. Current proposals are for LTP funding for local economic development to be provided in the council’s spatial priority areas only.
6. In relation to local boards, Auckland Transport, and place-making responsibilities, any specific proposals would require further consultation with local boards.
7. In relation to the Accountability Framework workstream, the report notes that improved alignment between the statement of intent process and the LTP/Annual Planning process should provide the Budget Committee with greater visibility of the extent to which proposed CCO work programmes deliver on local board priorities.
8. The Accountability Framework workstream also proposes that council requirements of CCOs, in relation to local board engagement, reporting, and consideration of local board priorities will be included in a new Governance Manual that all CCOs are required to comply with.
9. The report also notes that the Communication, Collaboration and Consultation workstream is still being scoped and may require local board engagement at some stage.
That the Manurewa Local Board: a) consider the information provided in this report and provide feedback, in particular on matters of interest to local boards as indicated in the report. |
Comments
Phase One – Terms of Reference and Current State Assessment
10. The governing body adopted its terms of reference for the CCO review on 27 February 2014. The terms of reference sought to ensure that CCO governance structures were aligned with the council’s strategies and provided an efficient and effective model of service delivery. They also sought to:
· ensure sufficient political oversight and public accountability of CCOs
· provide clarity about roles and responsibilities
· eliminate duplication
· better integrate services and functions and provide a positive interface between the Auckland Council group organisations and Aucklanders.
11. Major structural change for Auckland Transport was identified as being out of scope because Auckland Transport is a statutory entity governed by specific legislative provisions.
12. The review is due to be completed by June 2015. Any proposals for structural change will be consulted on through the draft Long Term Plan (LTP).
13. The terms of reference and CCO review workstreams were informed by two current state assessment reports, one prepared from a council perspective and one from a CCO perspective. Local board input to the current state assessment acknowledged significant improvements in interactions between CCOs and local boards over the three year period, although most local boards were still looking for further improvement in certain areas.
Phase Two – Assessment of Services
14. The first step in phase two of the review was to test the rationale for delivering services through a CCO. Councillors discussed that there were both benefits and challenges from delivering services through arms’ length entities such as CCOs.
15. Benefits include commercial focus, efficiency, flexibility in decision-making, and ability to attract specialist skills. Challenges include that the council is ultimately accountable for ratepayer funding, and achieving integration of CCO activities with other council services or policies. It was also acknowledged that where there is high political, public, iwi, or stakeholder interest in CCO decision-making, this can be challenging for the council.
16. At its meeting of 26 June 2014, the governing body received analysis of the services currently being provided by CCOs, against a set of criteria that sought to test the suitability of those services for delivery through a CCO. Overall the analysis suggested that the services currently being delivered through CCOs were well suited to this mode of delivery. Where challenges were identified it was clear that councillors believe these can be properly managed through a CCO model.
Phase Two – CCO delivery and configuration
17. The second step in phase two of the review was to identify whether any changes to the grouping of activities was likely to deliver better outcomes than the current CCO configuration.
18. Councillors have discussed configuration options at a series of workshops in August and September. The options were informed by one or more of the following drivers for change:
· Opportunities to address issues raised in the current state assessment, particularly removing duplication in skills and clarifying responsibilities
· Opportunities to increase effectiveness and drive results
· Opportunities to improve strategic alignment to Auckland Plan goals
· Opportunities to increase efficiency/reduce costs
· Evidence from international best practice or other desktop research.
19. In relation to the last bullet point a number of pieces of desktop research were undertaken. These included reviews of national/international delivery models and a report by Synergine Group on the linkages between water, wastewater and stormwater.
20. The Governing Body has not made any decisions on configuration options; however, workshop discussions have indicated that there was insufficient rationale to progress some options.
Options not being progressed
21. Three waters – The Synergine Group report found that there would be some benefits from the integrated management of three waters, such as enhanced catchment management planning. It also found significant linkages between stormwater and other activities of the council group, including land use planning and transport.
22. For this reason, the options of delivering three waters in-house or within a three waters CCO were both considered.
23. In-house delivery of three waters could help better align water and wastewater network planning with council strategy; however, these benefits can be achieved in other ways including through greater collaboration. This option would have some significant disadvantages including very high cost of change and likely reduced commercial focus in relation to water and wastewater delivery.
24. Delivery of three waters within a three waters CCO could have benefits in terms of operational efficiencies and greater commercial focus. However, some of the benefits can be achieved in other ways and there are some major drawbacks. For example, this option could require complex agreements between Auckland Council and Watercare as many stormwater assets are ‘soft infrastructure’ such as overland flow paths. This would have implications for local boards as many of the overland flow paths are in local parks. Another reason that the option was not progressed was that stormwater planning also needs to be highly integrated with land use planning.
25. Regional facilities, tourism and major events. This option would involve transferring ATEED’s responsibility for tourism and major events to RFA. The main drivers for this option were perceived increase in efficiency and effectiveness as both RFA and ATEED have a focus on tourism and major events including conferences. However, RFA’s main objectives are to maximise utilisation of their assets, while ATEED’s focus is on delivering benefit for the Auckland Region. This option has not been progressed as there was a concern that the resulting CCO would have conflicting objectives.
26. Larger Commercial CCO. Consideration was given to other council investments or business interests that could be transferred to ACIL; however, no significant opportunities were identified.
27. Of the options not being progressed, the option involving transferring stormwater to a three waters CCO is likely to be of most interest to local boards for reasons outlined in paragraph 24.
Options still under consideration
28. Enhanced status quo. This option will apply to all CCOs which do not undergo significant structural change. Enhanced status quo will involve reviewing the purpose and high-level objectives of each CCO as set out in the orders of council under which they were established. This does not apply to Watercare or Auckland Transport, which have specific legislative provisions defining their powers and responsibilities. The timeframe for this review will be between February and June 2015.
29. Enhanced status quo will also involve considering a number of one off issues in relation to each CCO. The following are likely to be of most interest to local boards.
· Whether local economic development activities are delivered by Auckland Council or ATEED.
· The roles and interface between local boards and Auckland Transport in relation to place-making functions.
30. A lot of feedback has already been provided by local boards on these matters and will be taken into account as options are developed.
31. A key difficulty with ATEED delivering local economic development activities on behalf of local boards is that local boards have decision-making responsibility for this, yet they do not have a direct governance relationship with ATEED. This report seeks local board views on ATEED being responsible for local economic development, if a mechanism can be established to hold ATEED accountable to local boards for delivery.
32. Note that the CCO review will not address the level of funding for local economic development activities, as this is an LTP decision. Current budget proposals are for the funding for local economic development activities to be provided in the council’s spatial priority areas only.
33. In relation to local boards, Auckland Transport and place-making, the current state assessment from local boards contained a lot of feedback which will be considered. Any specific proposals would need to come back to local boards for further feedback.
34. Under enhanced status quo there are a number of matters to clarify in relation to Waterfront Auckland. These include the role of Waterfront Auckland in its “area of influence”, and whether the Cloud, Shed 10, and the Viaduct Events Centre, are managed by Waterfront Auckland or RFA. These matters may be of interest to some local boards. The timing for addressing these matters has not yet been determined, but further consultation with interested local boards may be required at a later date.
35. Urban Regeneration CCO: Serious consideration is being given to how the council can increase its level of activity to support its transformational shift of radically improving the quality of urban living. This means moving to quality compact urban form that is well connected, appropriately serviced, provides employment opportunities, and provides housing affordability and choice. These are key elements but there are many other considerations including safety, sustainability, and quality urban design.
36. While the proposed Auckland Unitary Plan (PAUP) is an enabler, it will not be sufficient on its own to provide the scale or quality of development required.
37. The council already has a range of vehicles for helping deliver on these objectives. These include:
· Waterfront Auckland, which is responsible for regeneration of Wynyard Quarter
· City Transformations which undertakes master planning and town centre upgrades
· ACPL which has a role in facilitating housing and commercial development in specific locations including Ormiston Town Centre, Yard 37 at Hobsonville, Papatoetoe town centre, Avondale town centre, and Wilsher Village in Henderson
· Tamaki Redevelopment Company, which is jointly owned with central government and council
· Housing Project Office which is charged with implementation of the Housing Action Plan and integrated consenting in Special Housing Areas (SHAs).
38. The council is considering a new vehicle that could act as a single outward facing voice in the development of the Auckland region, with greater economies of scale, enhanced commerciality and the ability to partner with others. This is likely to be a staged process with the first steps undertaken as part of the CCO review. Options are still being refined but could include expanding the role of ACPL, bringing together the skills and expertise from Waterfront Auckland and ACPL, or another option which could emerge out of work still being undertaken.
39. The concept of a new vehicle to assist in the delivery of quality urban living goals is likely to be of interest to local boards. Local boards’ role in community engagement and local place-making is central to shaping on-going change.
40. In the initial stages it is likely that any increase in redevelopment/regeneration activity would simply reflect repriotisation of LTP budgets in areas which have been identified as spatial priorities. However, it is anticipated that the vehicle would generate and/or leverage new sources of funding over time.
41. This report seeks comments from local boards on the concept of an enhanced delivery vehicle for urban regeneration including comment on the considerations that the Governing Body should take into account from a local perspective, when developing the concept further.
42. Holding Company. ACIL currently owns council shares in Ports of Auckland Limited, Auckland Film Studios, and Auckland International Airport. It also manages the diversified financial assets portfolio (DFAP) on behalf of the council. An option still being considered is to transfer responsibility for the DFAP to the council. ACIL would then become a holding company for council’s ownership in commercial investments. This option does not have identifiable implications for local boards.
CCO model –working better together
43. The focus of the review to date has been on the rationale for arms-length delivery and options for structural change. The terms of reference for the review are much wider than this and include consideration of how to make the CCO model work best for the Auckland Council group. The Auckland Council CCO model is fundamentally different to other local authorities in New Zealand as CCOs deliver core services on behalf of council. The preferred approach is a collaborative model where CCOs are delivery partners, rather than autonomous entities that the council procures services from.
44. Two workstreams likely to be of particular interest to local boards are the Accountability Framework workstream; and the Communication, Collaboration and Consultation workstream.
Accountability Framework
45. To date, the Accountability Framework workstream has focussed primarily on processes, with a goal of improving alignment between budgeting, the LTP process and the annual statement of intent (SOI) process.
46. Proposed new processes have been considered at CCO Review workshops and are due to be considered formally by the CCO Governance and Monitoring Committee on 7 October 2014.
47. The proposed new process recognises that the council’s expectations of CCOs expressed through the SOI process, need to be aligned to the LTP/Annual Plan. When the council considers CCO priorities it should do so within the context of the funding it is providing, or the funding assumptions it is making in the LTP/annual plan.
48. Under the proposed new process the Budget Committee will consider CCO key performance indicators and targets at its October/November workshops with CCOs, and will agree an annual letter of expectation (LOE) to CCO chairs, that reflects budget decisions made. The CCO Governance and Monitoring Committee will receive the draft SOIs in April each year as usual and will limit its shareholder comments to checking that deliverables reflect what has already been agreed through the budgeting process.
49. For local boards, the main implication is that the Budget Committee will also have an overview of local board priorities when it sets its funding for CCOs. For the proposed LTP, the Budget Committee workshops with local boards occur shortly before workshops with CCOs. This will enable Budget Committee members to engage with CCOs regarding local board priorities if they have concerns about any priorities that are not reflected in programmes proposed by CCOs.
50. This does not supersede the requirement for CCOs to take local board priorities into account when they develop their proposed programmes, and for CCOs to actively engage with local boards as they do this.
51. The other proposed change is to streamline the SOIs so that they are focused on what the CCO will deliver. Council expectations in relation to how the CCO is expected to act will be included in a new Governance Manual that will replace the current Shareholder Expectation Guide.
52. Under recent changes to the Local Government Act 2002, the council is required to have a binding agreement with its CCOs. It is proposed that the binding agreement will cross-reference the Governance Manual which will formalise the requirement to comply with council expectations.
53. This Governance Manual will include council expectations of CCOs in relation to local board engagement and reporting, and consideration of local board priorities. These have already been articulated in resolutions of the Accountability and Performance committee in December 2012, and the Strategy and Finance Committee in September 2013. The recent elected member survey included questions for local board members to help assess the current level of satisfaction of local board members in relation to these matters. It is intended that this will continue to be monitored annually.
Communication, collaboration and consultation workstream
54. The purpose of this workstream is to:
· Ensure that CCOs, elected members and council staff engage effectively over strategic issues and keep each other well informed of sensitive issues. This includes CCO interaction with the IMSB and local boards.
· Ensure appropriate public engagement on matters of public interest.
55. This work is still being scoped. The working group will include a staff member from Local Board Services.
56. This work could result in new content for inclusion in the new Governance Manual referred to in paragraphs 51-53. This would need to be identified in draft form by March 2015. If there are any proposals that relate to local boards, CCO Review staff will seek guidance from Local Board Services about further engagement with local boards on these matters.
Next steps in CCO review
57. According to the current timetable, the Governing Body will receive a report on 27 November 2014 with recommendations on CCO configuration options. If the council agrees to support any option that would require significant structural change to any CCO or the establishment of a new CCO, this will be consulted on through the LTP. The proposal to establish a new vehicle to deliver on quality urban living objectives would require LTP consultation.
58. Work on the “working better together” workstreams will continue from now until June 2015.
Consideration
Local board views and implications
59. This report asks for local board views on a number of issues that are being considered as part of the CCO review. This report has provided an overview of review and noted the matters which are likely to be of most interest to local boards.
Māori impact statement
60. The CCO review also includes a range of issues that are likely to be of interest to Māori and to the IMSB. Staff will also seek feedback from the IMSB in relation to these matters.
Implementation
61. There are no implementation issues associated with this report.
There are no attachments for this report.
Signatories
Authors |
Catherine Syme - Principal Advisor, CCO Governance and External Partnerships |
Authorisers |
John Bishop - Treasurer and Manager CCO Governance & External Pertnerships Karen Lyons - Manager Local Board Services Rex Hewitt - Relationship Manager |
Manurewa Local Board 13 November 2014 |
|
Draft Community Facilities Network Plan
File No.: CP2014/24133
Purpose
1. To seek the Board’s feedback on the draft Community Facilities Network Plan (Attachment A) following workshops held with all local boards in August and September 2014.
Executive summary
2. In August 2014 the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee endorsed the Draft Community Facilities Network Plan (REG/2014/98) for engagement with local boards, advisory panels and key external stakeholders.
3. The purpose of the Community Facilities Network Plan (draft plan) is to guide council’s provision of community facilities for the next 10 years and beyond. The key drivers are to:
· Optimise the use and efficiency of existing facilities
· Address gaps and needs for community facilities now and into the future
· Meet demand arising from population growth and changing user expectations.
4. The scope of the draft plan includes community centres, venues for hire (community or rural halls), arts and culture facilities, aquatic and leisure facilities. The network includes facilities owned by council and facilities owned by third-parties which are supported by council and available for community use. While facilities like libraries, sport clubs, community leases, schools, churches and marae are not included in the recommendations of the network plan, these facilities will be considered in the implementation phase.
5. There are three key components of the draft plan:
· Strategic framework – specifies the outcomes council is seeking from its investment in community facilities aligned with the Auckland Plan, Local Board Plans and other strategic priorities; and articulates the council’s key objectives for future provision.
· Provision framework – guides council’s approach for future community facility provision.
· Action Plan – over 50 recommended actions to investigate areas with potential gaps in provision and to investigate existing facilities with issues affecting their performance.
6. Each action will require detailed community or sector based investigation to understand needs and determine the appropriate response. Process guidelines have been developed to ensure a consistent approach to these investigations. Local boards and the local community will be fully involved in investigation processes.
7. As council may not have the capacity to invest in all community facility projects, the draft plan also provides prioritisation criteria to help determine the priorities for investment once the investigation process determines the appropriate facility response. The ability and timeframe to implement the actions is dependent on the budget available for community facility investment in the Long-term Plan 2015-2025 (LTP).
8. Feedback on the draft plan was sought from key stakeholders including regional sports organisations, facility partners, facility managers and advisory panels. Submissions were also invited through shapeauckland.co.nz which closed on 15 September 2014. A summary of feedback is attached in Attachment B.
9. It is proposed that libraries should be included in the Community Facilities Network Plan as another key community facility that council provides, and to ensure alignment of planning and future facility provision. Libraries have undertaken similar research to understand the gaps and needs for libraries and are well placed to be included. There will need to be further communication with local boards on the libraries content. Revised timeframes to integrate libraries into the plan and to align with the LTP process are outlined in this report.
That the Manurewa Local Board: a) Provide feedback of the Draft Community Facilities Network Plan which will guide council’s provision of community facilities, including any specific feedback on the strategic framework, provision framework, action plan, implementation approach and prioritisation criteria. b) Notes proposed revised timeframes to include libraries in the Community Facilities Network Plan and that further engagement with local boards will be undertaken to discuss the libraries content and the final revised network plan. |
Comments
Draft Community Facilities Network Plan
10. Community facilities contribute to building strong, healthy and vibrant communities by providing space for people to connect with each other, socialise, learn skills and participate in a range of social, cultural, art and recreational activities. Community facilities contribute to improved lifestyles and a sense of belonging, identity and pride among residents.
11. The draft plan outlines how council will provide and invest in community facilities to respond to community needs and population growth and changes.
12. The draft plan sets out a strategic framework for community facilities to articulate why council invests in the provision of community facilities, the desired outcomes from this investment and the key objectives for future provision. This is aligned with the strategic direction and transformational shifts in the Auckland Plan, local board plans and relevant strategic action plans.
13. The proposed common purpose for community facilities is “Vibrant and welcoming places at the heart of where and how communities connect and participate”.
14. The draft plan sets out four proposed key objectives to guide and underpin the future provision of community facilities:
· Undertake robust and consistent planning to ensure future decisions on the provision of community facilities are based on clear evidence of needs and assessment of all options.
· Maintain, improve and make the best use of existing community facilities where they continue to meet community needs and investigate the future of facilities that no longer meet community needs.
· Provide flexible and multi-purpose facilities that are co-located and/or integrated with other community infrastructure.
· Look for opportunities to leverage and support partnerships.
Future Provision Framework
15. The draft plan proposes provision frameworks for each type of community facility to guide council’s approach to the provision of new facilities in the future.
Community Centres
16. The proposed provision approach for community centres is to continue to maintain and deliver community centres at the local level across the region, recognising the important role they play in meeting local community needs for spaces to deliver a wide range of community, recreation, learning, events, arts and culture activities.
Venues for hire
17. Given the wide range of providers of venues to hire, the draft plan proposes the council does not invest in any more new stand-alone venues for hire. It is proposed that bookable space is included in multi-purpose community centres (new or existing/redeveloped), guided by community needs assessments.
18. Other options should be explored including partnerships or encouraging other organisations (such as schools, sports clubs and churches) to make bookable spaces available for community use. In some cases where venues for hire are no longer serving community needs, there may be potential to consider repurposing venues for other activities or possible divestment.
Aquatic and Leisure Facilities
19. The proposed provision framework for aquatic and leisure facilities is through a hierarchy of local, destination and regional facilities to support participation in a range of sport and recreation activities from casual play through to competitive sport. The draft plan outlines different functions and level of provision for local, destination and regional facilities.
Arts and Culture Facilities
20. At the local level, the proposed future provision will focus on enabling participation in arts and culture activity through programming in existing facilities and new multi-purpose facilities, rather than building new standalone local arts facilities. The focus will be placed on integrating arts space and programming within the existing network or in new multi-purpose facilities, repurposing existing spaces or partnering with others to provide suitable space.
21. It is recognised there is a need for some specialised arts and culture facilities that serve larger catchments. The draft plan proposes supporting a network of destination and regional arts and cultural facilities to meet sector and audience demand, which would be determined by robust investigation on a case-by-case basis. It is proposed the council would only intervene when the private sector does not and opportunities for partnerships with the wider sector including central government should be explored.
Action Plan and Implementation
22. The draft plan includes over 50 recommended actions to undertake investigations into the future provision of community facilities, focused on both existing facilities and potential areas for new facilities.
23. All recommended actions will require detailed community or sector based investigation to determine the appropriate response. It is intended that any future investment in community facilities will be determined following detailed investigation which provides clear evidence of need, options analysis and development of a robust business case. Detailed process guidelines to ensure a consistent approach to these investigations have been developed (Appendix 2 of draft plan: Community Facilities Development Guidelines). Local boards and the community would be fully involved in investigation processes.
24. As council may not have the capacity to invest in all community facility projects, the draft network plan provides prioritisation criteria to assist the governing body to determine its priorities for investment in community facilities.
25. The draft plan identifies existing community facilities which have issues impacting on their performance and ability to meet community needs. In these cases, investigation is required to understand in more detail how the facility is operating and meeting community needs, explore various options for the facility and to determine the appropriate response. There could be a variety of options including changes to facility governance, management or programming, facility redevelopment, repurposing for another activity or possible divestment.
26. For potential areas for new facilities, a similar investigation process is required to understand community needs, explore and test the feasibility of different options and assess the business case for a new facility. The outcome of this investigation may identify a non-asset solution is required such as programming, partnerships or supporting a non-council facility.
27. The actions in the draft network plan have been ranked according to the urgency of completing the investigation recognising different factors including condition issues, responding to catalysts, opportunities for rationalisation or partnerships, timing and scale of population growth and location in a spatial priority area.
28. During workshops with local boards, some inaccuracies were identified in the draft plan. Corrections have been included in the draft plan attached in Attachment A.
Stakeholder Engagement
29. The draft plan has been informed by previous feedback from communities, principally via annual customer satisfaction surveys, user surveys, catchments studies and consultation on the Auckland Plan and relevant strategic action plans.
30. Given this context, engagement on the draft plan has primarily been limited to targeted stakeholders, including council’s advisory panels, facility partners and managers and external stakeholder groups such as regional sports organisations. Additionally, the draft plan has been available for wider public comment on shapeauckland.co.nz. A summary of feedback is attached in Attachment B.
31. Most of the actions identified in the draft plan will require further investigation to determine the appropriate response. This will include detailed and localised community and/or sector based investigation/engagement and feedback from communities on different options. The public will also have the opportunity to provide feedback on the proposed level of future investment in community facilities via the LTP consultation process.
Incorporating Libraries into the Network Plan
32. Through the LTP process, the Parks, Community and Lifestyle theme has been working to address priorities and funding for activities including community facilities, recreation facilities and libraries. It has become clear there is a need for a more coordinated and aligned approach for the future planning and development of community facilities with an emphasis on multi-purpose facilities.
33. It is proposed that libraries be included in the network plan as a key community facility that council provides and to ensure alignment of planning and future facility provision. Libraries have undertaken similar research to understand the gaps and needs for future libraries and are well placed to be included. There will need to be further communication with local boards on the libraries content which means the timeframes to complete the network plan will need to be extended into 2015.
34. One advantage of extending the timeframes is alignment with the LTP process. The level of future capital investment in community facilities won’t be known until after the public consultation process on the LTP is completed in May 2015. Finalising the network plan once the LTP process is completed (or near completion) will ensure the plan can incorporate the LTP outcomes and governing body priorities for future investment in community facilities.
35. The key benefit of modifying the scope to include libraries is the alignment of planning and provision to achieve better community outcomes and greater efficiency.
36. The revised timeframe for integrating libraries into the draft plan is outlined below:
Dec |
Briefing with local boards on the library research |
Dec-Jan |
Development of revised Community Facilities Network Plan |
Feb 2015 |
Workshops with local boards to review the revised plan |
Mar |
Report to the governing body on the revised draft plan |
Apr-May |
Report to local boards seeking feedback on revised draft plan |
July |
Report to governing body seeking approval of final Community Facilities Network Plan |
Consideration
Local board views and implications
37. During August and September, workshops with local boards were undertaken to present on the draft Community Facilities Network Plan, to respond to any questions and assist local boards in formulating their feedback.
38. Feedback from local boards is sought on the draft plan, particularly on the following:
· Strategic framework (section 3) including the common purpose, outcomes and objectives
· Provision frameworks (Section 4)
· Action plan (section 5)
· Implementation approach (section 6) including process guidelines and prioritisation criteria.
39. The feedback from local boards will be incorporated into a revised network plan (which includes libraries) and will be presented/reported to local boards in 2015.
Māori impact statement
40. The provision of community facilities contributes to improving wellbeing among Maori communities by providing spaces to connect, socialise, learn skills and participate. For all community facility types Maori are represented as users. At aquatic facilities Maori make up 14% of users (compared to 9% of the population), 11% of leisure facility users and 9% of community centre users. Maori are under-represented as users compared to the Auckland population at arts and culture facilities.
41. Given the context of the network plan and the information already received through the user surveys and iwi consultation on the strategic action plans, it was not proposed to undertake any specific engagement with Maori or other facility users.
42. The broader picture of community facility provision recognises that marae and kohanga reo are important social infrastructure for Maori and the community. Officers from Te Waka Angamua are currently scoping a project to address the future provision and development of marae facilities. Opportunities for aligned provision and/or partnerships with marae facilities should be considered as potential options to meet community needs.
Implementation
43. The draft plan is an aspirational plan for the next 10 to 20 years which outlines what needs to be investigated and undertaken to deliver a network of community facilities to meet community needs. The ability and timeframe to implement the actions is dependent on the level of budget available through the council’s LTP 2015-2025.
44. Through the LTP process, the governing body will consider the amount of funding available for investment in community facilities. To deliver the network plan this will need to include both operational funding to undertake the required investigations and depending on the outcome of each investigation, capital and operational funding to implement the recommended response.
45. Once the network plan is adopted, implementation will focus on progressing the high priority actions using the implementation approach and community facilities development guidelines.
46. The draft plan lists a number of community facility projects that are already underway or were anticipated to commence construction in 2014/15. The current review of the 2014/15 capital works programme may result in the deferral of some of these projects. Once decisions have been made on deferrals, then the draft network plan will be amended to reflect this.
No. |
Title |
Page |
Draft Community Facilities Network Plan (Under Separate Cover) |
|
|
bView |
Draft Community Facilities Network Plan stakeholder feedback |
137 |
Signatories
Authors |
Anita Coy-Macken - Principal Policy Analyst – Central David Shamy - Policy Analyst |
Authorisers |
Penny Pirrit - Regional & Local Planning Manager Carol McKenzie-Rex – Acting Manager Local Board Services Rex Hewitt - Relationship Manager |
13 November 2014 |
|
File No.: CP2014/25423
Purpose
1. This report seeks the Manurewa Local Board’s (MLB) endorsement for Auckland Council Property Limited (ACPL) to recommend for disposal the council-owned sites at 18D and 22D Walpole Avenue, Hill Park and 49D Scenic Drive, Hill Park.
Executive summary
2. The council-owned property at 18D and 22D Walpole Avenue, Hill Park, Manurewa and 49D Scenic Drive, Hill Park, Manurewa have been identified as potentially surplus to council requirements through a review process.
3. 18D and 22D Walpole Avenue, Hill Park, Manurewa are both flat, narrow, vacant strips of land. These sites were acquired by the Borough of Manurewa in 1965. Subsequent residential development of the surrounding area has rendered the proposed access ways obsolete.
4. 49D Scenic Drive, Hill Park is a flat, narrow, vacant strip of land. This site was acquired by the Borough of Manurewa in the 1965 as part of a larger parcel of land that was subsequently divided into residential lots and sold to residential landowners. This site appears to have been retained to provide access to the rear land.
5. ACPL commenced the rationalisation process for these properties in June 2014. Consultation within council and its CCOs, Iwi Authorities and the MLB has now taken place. The MLB has provided informal feedback that it is supportive of the proposed disposal of these sites.
6. A resolution for the sale of the site is required from the Finance and Performance Committee before any disposal can be progressed.
That the Manurewa Local Board: a) endorses Auckland Council Property Limited’s recommendation to the Finance and Performance Committee to dispose of 18D Walpole Avenue, Hill Park, Manurewa comprised of an estate in fee simple, containing approximately 119m² more or less being lot 85 deposited plan 53109 contained in certificate of title NA50C/172; b) endorses Auckland Council Property Limited’s recommendation to the Finance and Performance Committee to dispose of 22D Walpole Avenue, Hill Park, Manurewa comprised of an estate in fee simple, containing approximately 114m² more or less being lot 84 deposited plan 53109 contained in certificate of title NA50C/171; c) endorses Auckland Council Property Limited’s recommendation to the Finance and Performance Committee to dispose of 49D Scenic Drive, Hill Park, Manurewa comprised of an estate in fee simple, containing approximately 205m² more or less being part of lot 93 deposited plan 53695 contained in certificate of title NA49C/1383. |
Comments
7. ACPL and ACPD work jointly on a comprehensive review of council’s property portfolio. One of the outcomes of the review process is to identify properties in the council portfolio that are potentially surplus to requirements and that may be suitable to sell. The subject sites were identified as potentially saleable through the review process.
8. Once identified as potentially surplus ACPL then engages with council and its CCO’s through an Expression of Interest (EOI) process, to establish whether the property is needed for a future funded project, or whether it must be retained for a strategic purpose.
18D and 22D Walpole Avenue, Hill Park, Manurewa
9. 18D Walpole Avenue, Hill Park is a 119m2, flat, narrow strip of land. 22D Walpole Avenue, Hill Park is a 114m2, flat, narrow strip of land. Both sites are vacant and are surrounded by residential properties. Both sites are currently in unauthorised private use by the occupiers of a neighbouring property. Each site has a rating valuation of $10,000. Both sites are currently zoned Residential Heritage 8 and the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan zoning is General - Road.
10. The land surrounding these sites was subdivided by the original landowner in the 1960’s. The land at 18D and 22D Walpole Avenue, Hillpark, Manurewa appears to have been acquired by the Mayor Councillors and Citizens of the Borough of Manurewa to provide access to the rear undeveloped property that included native bush in the centre of the original block of land. Subsequent residential development of the large area of land which the access strips at 18D and 22D Walpole Street appear to have been designed has rendered any proposed accessway obsolete.
11. The rationalisation process for these properties was commenced in June 2014. EOI’s were sought from council and its CCO’s in respect of these sites. No EOIs were received. The EOI process provided the Maori and Strategy Relations team the opportunity to flag any issue that is of particular relevance to Maori. The Heritage Unit and the Closed Landfills and Contaminated Land team were also invite through the EOI process to flag any particular issues. None of these parties have raised any relevant issues.
12. The results of the rationalisation process to date indicate that these properties are not required for current or future service requirements. As such ACPL recommend that these sites be recommended to the Finance and Performance Committee for consideration of disposal.
49D Scenic Drive, Hill Park, Manurewa
13. 49D Scenic Drive, Hill Park is a 205m2, flat, narrow strip of land. This site is vacant and surrounded by residential properties. This site provides a driveway/access way from the legal road to the rear neighbouring properties. This site has a rating valuation of $3,000. The site is currently zoned Residential Heritage 8 and the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan zoning is Residential – Single House.
14. The land was acquired by the Mayor Councillors and Citizens of the Borough of Manurewa in the 1965 as part of a larger parcel of land that was subsequently divided into residential lots. The surrounding residential lots were subsequently disposed of to private landowners. This site appears to have been retained to provide access to the rear land.
15. The following registered interests pertain to this site:
a) subject to Fencing Agreement in Transfer 406196;
b) subject to Building Line Restriction A27404;
c) Easement Certificate A103570 (creating a right of way). This easement was created on subdivision and provides a reciprocal right of way over this lot and Lots 92 and 94 to provide access to those lots;
d) Transfer A.108465 (creating water supply easement in gross);
e) Transfer 430717.7 creating easements of right of way, right to convey gas, electricity, water supply and telecommunications in favour of Lot 1, DP 191323 (49C Scenic Drive). This provides right of way and utilities easement over the whole of Lot 93 to provide access to Lot 1 DP 191323 at the rear. This was created on subdivision of the rear land in 1998; and
f) an unregistered water easement in gross shown on DP 53695. This easement is in favour of the Manurewa Borough Council (now Watercare). This was created on the initial subdivision in separate instruments and registered over neighbouring lots. It is not recorded on the title for Lot 93, possibly due to the council being the owner. This would need to be rectified before any potential sale occurs.
16. The rationalisation process for this property commenced in June 2014. EOI’s were sought from council and its CCO’s in respect of these sites. No EOIs were received. The EOI process provided the Maori and Strategy Relations team the opportunity to flag any issue that is of particular relevance to Maori. The Heritage Unit and the Closed Landfills and Contaminated Land team were also invite through the EOI process to flag any particular issues. None of these parties have raised any relevant issues.
17. The results of the rationalisation process to date indicate that this property is not required for current or future service requirements. As such ACPL recommend that this site be recommended to the Finance and Performance Committee for consideration of disposal.
Consideration
Local board views and implications
18. ACPL circulated information about these properties to the MLB in lieu of a workshop. The MLB subsequently provided ACPL with a letter dated 10 October 2014 stating that it had no issues with the proposed disposal of these properties.
19. The MLB’s resolution will be included in a report to the Finance & Performance Committee about these properties in December.
Maori impact statement
20. 18 iwi authorities were contacted regarding the potential sale of 18D and 22D Walpole Avenue and 49D Scenic Drive, Hill Park, Manurewa. The feedback close date is ?? 2014. Any site specific considerations raised by iwi will be brought to the board’s attention following that date if necessary.
Implementation
21. 18D and 22D Walpole Avenue, Hill Park, Manurewa
a) Pursuant to section 40(1) of the Public Works Act (PWA), where any land held for a public work is not required it may be sold to the person from whom it was acquired, unless any exceptions apply. Section 40(4) provides that land may be sold to an adjacent owner if its size, shape, or situation means it could not be expected to be sold to any other person. Section 40(4) prevails over the obligation in section 40(2) to offer the land for sale to the person from whom it was acquired. In the absence of the Agreement for Sale and Purchase, it is possible that the land was not acquired for a public work purpose and the offer back obligation under section 40 PWA would not apply. In any event, if the land can be found to have been acquired for a “public work”, based on the information to hand, section 4(4) PWA applies to both properties, 18D Walpole Avenue and 22D Walpole Avenue and the recommendation to sell the land to the adjacent landowners is based on this statutory interpretation.
b) This property is not one of Council’s Strategic Assets to which the Significance Policy would apply.
22. 49D Scenic Drive, Hill Park, Manurewa
a) Pursuant to section 40(1) of the PWA, if the land is not required it may be sold. Section 40(4) provides that land may be sold to an adjacent owner if its size, shape, or situation means it could not be expected to be sold to any other person. Based on the information to hand, section 40(4) applies to the property at 49D Scenic Drive and the land may be offered to the adjacent land owners.
b) This property is not one of Council’s Strategic Assets to which the Significance Policy would apply.
23. Should a resolution to divest these properties be obtained from the Finance and Performance Committee, ACPL will explore selling this site to an adjoining land owner.
No. |
Title |
Page |
aView |
Images of 18D Walpole Avenue, Hill Park, Manurewa |
147 |
bView |
Images of 22D Walpole Avenue, Hill Park, Manurewa |
149 |
cView |
Images of 49D Scenic Drive, Hill Park, Manurewa |
151 |
Signatories
Authors |
Letitia McColl, Senior Engagement Advisor, Portfolio Review, ACPL |
Authorisers |
Marian Webb, Team Leader, Portfolio Review, Auckland Council Property Limited Rex Hewitt - Relationship Manager |
13 November 2014 |
|
Request for feedback on the draft Local Approved Product Policy
File No.: CP2014/25838
Purpose
1. The purpose of the report is to seek local board feedback on the draft Local Approved Product Policy (LAPP).
Executive summary
2. On 9 October 2014 the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee approved the draft LAPP for public consultation (REG/2014/123). The LAPP sets rules regarding where retail outlets of psychoactive substances may operate. The Psychoactive Substances Act 2013 provides that a policy may regulate the location of retail outlets by reference to broad areas within a district, proximity to other premises selling approved products and/or distance from certain types of premises such as schools, places of worship and other community facilities.
3. Local boards are being asked to provide formal feedback on the draft LAPP by the end of December. There will be an opportunity for local boards to present their views to the hearings panel in February 2015.
That the Manurewa Local Board: a) provide feedback on the draft Local Approved Product Policy in the attached report. |
Comments
4. On 9 October 2014 the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee approved a draft LAPP for public consultation (REG/2014/123).
5. The LAPP sets rules regarding where retail outlets of psychoactive substances may operate. The Psychoactive Substances Act 2013 provides that a policy may regulate the location of retail outlets by reference to broad areas within a district, proximity to other premises selling approved products and/or distance from certain types of premises such as schools, places of worship and other community facilities.
6. The draft LAPP will prevent licences being granted in areas of high deprivation, near high schools and near addiction and mental health treatment centres. It would also limit how close to an existing shop a new shop could open. The policy also has a separate set of rules for the city centre where licences won’t be granted in areas of high residential deprivation and new shops would have to be a certain distance from existing shops. This draft would reduce the availability of these substances in areas where their presence is likely to have the greatest potential for harm.
7. Public consultation on the draft LAPP will be conducted via a special consultative procedure. The consultation will begin on 28th October and run for four weeks. The consultation is being publicised via social media, Our Auckland, the peoples panel, various public events and advisory panel networks.
Consideration
Local board views and implications
8. Local board views are being sought via this report. Local boards have previously provided feedback on possible options and on a proposed draft. Workshops on the proposed draft were held with a number of boards. 17 boards provided feedback on the specific options, three requested a complete ban. Great barrier declined to comment as they did not consider it an issue for their area.
9. As a result of local board feedback to the proposed draft the following changes were made:
· Buffer zones around schools were increased
· Buffer zones around mental health and addiction treatment centres were increased
· New rules for the city centre were added.
10. Local board feedback is being sought in in a parallel process to the special consultative process. The local board process will last until the end of December with local boards having the opportunity to present their views to the hearings panel in February 2015.
Maori impact statement
11. Māori are over represented amongst the groups of vulnerable people likely to be affected by using approved psychoactive substances. This over representation has two effects. Firstly getting the right option for the LAPP to maximize harm reduction will be more effective for Māori. Secondly, any solutions need to be designed in close collaboration with Māori to ensure they are workable and support wider initiatives aimed at improving Māori outcomes. Both of these goals are consistent with outcomes set out by Auckland Council to improve social outcomes for Māori in Auckland.
12. The consultation process with Māori has been developed in partnership with Māori agencies. A workshop has been undertaken with representatives from Hapai Te Hauora Tapui, an agency representing Māori health providers in the Auckland region, to provide initial feedback. Council staff are working with the Independent Māori Statutory Board, Te Waka Angamua and Hapai Te Hauora Tapui to ensure effective engagement with Māori. The initial work has centred on ensuring information is available to iwi and maata waka.
Implementation
Step |
Estimated timeframe |
1. Special consultative procedure |
28 October – 28 November |
2 Local board consultation |
20 October – 19 December |
3 Hearings |
February 2015 |
4. Adopt final policy |
April 2015 |
5. Implementation and review |
Ongoing |
No. |
Title |
Page |
aView |
Changes from proposed to draft summary |
155 |
bView |
Statement of Proposal - draft LAPP |
157 |
Signatories
Authors |
Callum Thorpe - Principal Policy Analyst |
Authorisers |
Penny Pirrit - Regional & Local Planning Manager Rex Hewitt - Relationship Manager |
13 November 2014 |
|
Contents
Why do we need a Local Approved Product Policy?
The Draft Local Approved Product Policy
Why were these rules chosen?
Why have separate rules for the city centre?
How will the LAPP decide between two licence applications close to each other?
Why do we need a Local Approved Product Policy?
Why are there approved psychoactive substances?
The Psychoactive Substances Act 2013
The Psychoactive Substances Act 2013 (the Act) sets a regulatory framework for the manufacture and sale of psychoactive substances. By allowing low risk products to be sold the government wanted to reduce harm from to users of the products and prevent a black market in selling unapproved products. The government felt that with a black market there would be no control on what was being sold, how it was made or who was buying it. Without these controls there would be increased harm to people’s health and well-being.
The Act’s stated purpose is to protect the health of, and minimise the harm to, individuals who use psychoactive substances and regulate the availability of psychoactive products. It banned psychoactive substances from being sold in dairies, service stations, supermarkets, convenience stores and places where alcohol is sold. It also restricted the advertising of products and the sale to those under 18.
The Psychoactive Substances Amendment Act 2014
The Psychoactive Substances Amendment Act 2014 ended all of the interim approvals and licences previously granted under the Psychoactive Substances Act 2013. This reversal meant that until regulations are developed there would be no psychoactive substances that were legal to sell and no businesses that could legally sell them. The amendment did not change the intent of the Psychoactive Substances Act 2013 to allow the sale of low risk psychoactive substances.
What gives the council the authority to have a Local Approved Product Policy?
Sections 66 to 69 of the Act let Auckland Council develop a Local Approved Product Policy (LAPP). The LAPP can only make rules about:
· The location of premises from which approved products may be sold by reference to broad areas.
· The location from which approved products may be sold by reference to proximity to other premises from which approved products are sold.
· The location of premises from which approved products may be sold by reference to proximity to premises or facilities of a particular kind or kinds.
How does the Local Approved Product Policy fit into Auckland Council’s vision for the future?
Auckland Council has a number of priorities to grow Auckland into the world’s most liveable city. One of key outcomes is a fair safe and healthy Auckland. The LAPP will contribute to this priority by reducing the risk of harm that vulnerable people will experience from legal psychoactive substances. This harm reduction will be achieved by reducing the availability of these substances to vulnerable populations such as high deprivation areas, youth and people with mental health concerns.
As part of Auckland Council’s vision for Auckland, six transformational shifts were identified to help create the world’s most liveable city. The LAPP contributes to two of these – dramatically accelerate the prospects of Auckland’s young people and significantly lift Māori social and economic well-being. The LAPP contributes improved prospects for young people through reducing the exposure to these substances to those still at school and in the most socially deprived communities.
In terms of Māori well-being in Auckland there is a higher proportion of Māori in high deprivation communities compared with low deprivation communities. The goal of the LAPP to stop licences in these high deprivation areas will mean that these communities should experience less harm and consequently Māori should experience less harm.
In line with the Mayors vision for Auckland Council to deliver value for money the LAPP needs to be practical to implement and cost effective.
Manurewa Local Board 13 November 2014 |
|
The Draft Local Approved Product Policy
Definitions
Term |
Definition |
Distance restriction |
Distance restrictions will be measured from the two nearest points on the properties boundaries – that is, the boundary of the property not just the building. |
City centre |
As defined in the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan. |
Neighbourhood centre |
As defined by the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan. |
Mental health treatment centre |
A residential facility where people are treated for mental health issues and has been identified by Auckland Regional Public Health Services as at risk of their clients experiencing harm if they were to have easy access to psychoactive substances. |
Addiction treatment centre |
A residential facility where people are treated for addiction issues and has been identified by Auckland Regional Public Health Services as at risk of their clients experiencing harm if they were to have easy access to psychoactive substances. |
High Deprivation |
Census Area Units that have a score on the New Zealand Deprivation Index of 8, 9 or 10. This indicates the area is in the most deprived 30% of New Zealand. |
Residential deprivation |
An area which has a high proportion of people living in social housing. |
For Auckland except for the city centre (See attached maps)
1. For all areas of Auckland apart from the city centre it is proposed that licences to retail legal psychoactive substances will not be granted in:
a) areas of high deprivation
b) neighbourhood centers
c) within 500m of a school teaching students year seven and above
d) within 200m of a school teaching students between years one and six inclusive
e) within 500m of the mental health or addiction treatment center
f) within 500m of an existing psychoactive substances retail licence
g) areas identified as restricted areas on map 1a and 1b.
For the city centre – see map 2
2. For the city centre it is proposed that licences to retail legal psychoactive substances will not be granted in:
a) areas of residential deprivation
b) within 100m of an existing psychoactive substances retail licence.
When will the policy be reviewed?
3. The LAPP will be reviewed in two years from the date it is adopted. This relatively short review period will allow Auckland Council to assess how effective the policy has been in its intent to reduce harm and to recommend any changes in a timely manner. At the first review a decision will be made on future review periods.
Maps
Map 1a Identified restricted area – Otara Papatoetoe
Map 1b Identified restricted area – Manurewa
Map 2 – City centre and restricted area
Manurewa Local Board 13 November 2014 |
|
Why restrict where they can be sold?
Because psychoactive substances are new and continue to change composition there is almost no information on their impact on communities or groups of people. In lieu of this information the proposed approach is to use the available data concerning the effects of similar substances. The best comparisons concern the effect of alcohol, smoking and other substance use. One of the ideas to reduce harm from substances that a lot of people support is that decreasing the availability of a substance will tend to reduce its use.
Why high deprivation?
One impact that stands out from the research is that areas with high levels of deprivation experience more harm from substance use than areas with low levels of deprivation. When this finding is combined with the idea that decreasing the availability of a substance will tend to reduce its use, there is a strong case that preventing the sale of psychoactive substances in high deprivation areas will prevent harm to those who are more vulnerable to harm.
Why schools?
The youth council representatives and a number of treatment providers advised that the use of these substances in high school aged youth was a considerable problem. Similar to the high deprivation restriction a reduction in availability is proposed to reduce harm.
To reduce the availability of these substances to youth, a control on the location of where they can be sold is needed. To achieve this control over access it is proposed that a 500m zone around schools with year 7 and older students and a 200m buffer zone around schools with year six and younger students.
The 200m buffer zone around schools with year six and younger students is considered to be appropriate as these children are less likely to be able to purchase substances due to their age. This has been demonstrated by the low numbers of youth in this age bracket being treated for substance use or coming to the attention of the Police.
Why treatment centres?
As with schools and high deprivation areas; limiting the availability of these substances to vulnerable people is likely to be the most practical approach to minimising harm. Both mental health treatment centres and addiction treatment centres serve people who would be considered particularly vulnerable to the effects of these substances. Many of the treatment providers expressed a strong preference that they should not be for sale close to any mental health treatment centre. To reduce the availability of these substances to this group of people a 500m buffer around treatment centres is proposed.
Why Neighbourhood centres?
It is proposed to not allow psychoactive substances to be sold in neighbourhood centres. These centres are the small groups of shops within residential areas. People who don’t tend to travel large distances like youth and people struggling with addictions or mental health issues find these locations convenient. By removing the sale of these products out of neighbourhood centres there is an increased probability of reducing harm to those most at risk of harm from using psychoactive substances.
Why restrictions on how close a shop can be to another shop?
Research in New Zealand and overseas has established a link between the density of alcohol outlets and the alcohol related harm experienced by the local communities. It is considered reasonable to assume that there is a high likelihood of a similar link for psychoactive substances. It follows then that a density control mechanism will help the other measures to minimise the harm experienced by users of psychoactive substances. To achieve this control it is proposed to not allow a new licence to sell psychoactive substances within 500m of an existing licence.
Why have other identified areas?
Two small areas have been identified that are commercial areas in mainly high deprivation areas and are only partially covered by the high deprivation census areas. These areas are Hunters Corner in Papatoetoe, and the Manurewa commercial area. In both cases a significant portion of the commercial area is in a very high deprivation area. These are also areas where the local boards have advised that the areas experienced high levels of harm related to the sale of psychoactive substances in the past. It is considered that leaving small areas within these commercial zones where a licence could be granted would be contrary to the stated purpose of the LAPP. These areas are indicated on map1a and 1b.
Why not have other types of sensitive sites?
For each area considered for inclusion as a sensitive site there is a trade-off between the restriction that is imposed and the benefit of reduced harm gained from the decision. There were a number of areas considered as possible sensitive sites where it was difficult to match the potential with the restriction required to achieve it. Potential sites that did not meet the criteria for inclusion were early childhood education centres, churches, playgrounds, public spaces, libraries and community centres.
For example it is difficult to determine what harm would be minimised from adding a buffer to early childhood education centres. The restriction would not protect the students as they are far too young to buy the substances and they would not be exposed to the trade occurring in local shops as the centres tend to be enclosed. .
A buffer zone around places of worship was also strongly considered. A number of stakeholders argued that these places provide services to vulnerable populations and thus should be protected. However the services they provide tend to be of a short duration such as a support meeting and are not conducted equally at every place of worship. Also these places may only offer such services for a portion of the year. This lack of consistency makes it impossible for a general restriction to apply to all places of worship. The alternative option of having a different restriction for each place of worship based on the work they do is not practical to develop or maintain.
Why have separate rules for the city centre?
The city centre of Auckland has been clearly set out as a separate and very different urban landscape from the rest of Auckland. Planning and policy documents such as the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan and the Local Alcohol Policy make this distinction very clear. This uniqueness means the rules that work well for the rest of Auckland will not work so well for its centre.
Why not use the deprivation index?
The New Zealand Deprivation Index is calculated by scoring nine items. These items are effective and providing a measure that closely matching social deprivation in New Zealand. However, when the city centre population is considered it is not so effective. The high number of students who share factors with high deprivation households such as low personal income, no access to a car and no home ownership lead to a high deprivation index that is not a good measure of overall social deprivation in the residential population.
Why are there restrictions on areas of high density social housing?
These broad areas replace the deprivation zones used in the other areas of Auckland. These zones more effectively capture the intent of the deprivation restriction. They represent areas of the city centre where the residents with the highest social deprivation live. By targeting these areas it is considered this restriction will have the same effect as the deprivation restrictions outside the city centre.
Why not have buffer zones around schools?
After discussion with the schools and other city centre stakeholders it was decided that the buffer zone around city centre schools did not provide the same level of protection as it does in a suburban environment. This lack of protection is due to the nature and the density of businesses in the city centre. It was also felt that due to the commercial density in the city the buffer zones would be more restrictive than those in other zones. This mix of reduced effectiveness and increased restriction led to the removal of the buffer zones.
Why is there a smaller exclusion zone around retailers
The smaller buffer zone is due to the significantly greater commercial density in the city centre. This reduction has been supported by the Waitemata Local Board, Heart of the City and Auckland City Mission.
Why is there no mention of neighbourhood centres?
There are no neighbourhood centres in the city centre.
How will the LAPP decide between two licence applications close to each other?
The LAPP is not able to make any provision to distinguish between two licences apart from where they are located. Due to the proposed density rules there may be a situation where two people apply for a licence close to each other. In this case both licences cannot be granted because they would be too close to each other. Deciding which licence should be granted is the job of the Psychoactive Substance Regulatory Authority who makes all of the licensing decisions.
13 November 2014 |
|
Budget allocation changes - financial year 2014/2015
File No.: CP2014/25750
Purpose
1. This report seeks board approval for the allocation of budget for:
i) up to $10,000 for the Community Christmas Carols event at the Manurewa Methodist Church
ii) up to $20,000 towards the $109,000 cost for the Mentoring Youth New Direction (MYND) Sibling Programme.
Executive summary
Manurewa Methodist Church Community Christmas Carols Event
2. The Manurewa Methodist Parish holds a Community Christmas Carols event each year.
3. The local board has been approached with a request to support this year’s event.
4. Two quotes have been provided totaling $5,570 for the board’s consideration (refer to Attachment A).
Mentoring Youth New Direction (MYND) Sibling Programme
5. The Foundation for Youth Development Mentoring Youth New Direction (MYND) is proposing a 26 week Sibling Programme. This is over and above their budgeted programme of work to deliver early interventions for children aged between 8-13 who are at risk of offending.
6. The outcome of the Sibling Programme is to change the life pathways of the 8-13 year olds to reduce the potential of them following those of their older siblings, where this has led to contact with the criminal justice system.
7. This programme is run in partnership with the Manurewa Police, and there is the potential of other funders becoming involved. The total cost of the programme is $109,000 and details are outlined in Attachment B.
That the Manurewa Local Board: a) approve budget allocations as follows: i) up to $10,000 for the Community Christmas Carols event at the Manurewa Methodist Church from the ________________ budget ii) up to $20,000 towards the $109,000 cost for the Mentoring Youth New Direction (MYND) Sibling Programme from the __________________ budget. |
No. |
Title |
Page |
aView |
Quotes for the Manurewa Methodist Church Community Christmas Carol Singing Event |
171 |
bView |
Mentoring Youth New Direction Sibling Programme |
173 |
Signatories
Authors |
Lee Manaia - Local Board Democracy Advisor |
Authorisers |
Rex Hewitt - Relationship Manager |
13 November 2014 |
|
Significance and Engagement Policy - Manurewa Local Board feedback
File No.: CP2014/25662
Purpose
1. This report seeks endorsement of the board’s feedback on the draft Auckland Council Significance and Engagement Policy.
Executive summary
2. On 9 October, 2014 Manurewa Local Board considered the draft Auckland Council Significance and Engagement Policy. Resolution number MR/2014/208:
The Board resolved that the Manurewa Local Board:
a) delegate authority to the Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson to formalise feedback on the draft Auckland Council Significance and Engagement Policy, noting the deadline date of 14 November 2014.
3. Board members participated in a workshop on this subject presented by Kenneth Aiolupotea, Head of Auckland Council’s Market Research & Engagement.
4. Following this workshop, the Manurewa Local Board provides the following feedback on the draft significance and engagement policy:
· endorses the principle-led approach taken to the drafting the policy.
· agrees that the development of consultation and engagement guidelines for Auckland Council will support the policy and the sharing of best practice.
· Requests that staff make use of local boards’ extensive community engagement experience to inform the development of the guidelines
· Offers to participate in a test as part of implementing new engagement and consultation guidelines.
That the Manurewa Local Board: a) endorse the following feedback on the draft Auckland Council Significance and Engagement Policy: i) endorses the principle-led approach taken to the drafting the policy. ii) agrees that the development of consultation and engagement guidelines for Auckland Council will support the policy and the sharing of best practice. iii) requests that staff make use of local boards’ extensive community engagement experience to inform the development of the guidelines iv) offers to participate in a test as part of implementing new engagement and consultation guidelines. |
There are no attachments for this report.
Signatories
Authors |
David Hopkins - Local Board Advisor |
Authorisers |
Rex Hewitt - Relationship Manager |
Manurewa Local Board 13 November 2014 |
|
Manurewa Local Board Submission on the Signage Bylaw
File No.: CP2014/23479
Purpose
1. This report seeks the board’s endorsement of the Manurewa Local Board’s submission to the Signage Bylaw.
Executive summary
2. In August 2013 the board provided feedback that informed the draft signage bylaw.
3. The formal public consultation period closed on 30 September 2014.
4. The board supports the new bylaw.
That the Manurewa Local Board: a) endorse the submission to the Signage Bylaw. |
No. |
Title |
Page |
aView |
Manurewa Local Board Submission on the Signage Bylaw |
179 |
Signatories
Authors |
Madelon De Jongh - Local Board Advisor Manurewa |
Authorisers |
Rex Hewitt - Relationship Manager |
13 November 2014 |
|
Manurewa Local Board feedback to Auckland Transport on the Manurewa town centre bus stops, bus route 365, and bus route 366
File No.: CP2014/25964
Purpose
1. This report seeks the board’s endorsement for the feedback provided to Auckland Transport on the Manurewa town centre bus stops, bus routes 365 and 366.
Executive summary
2. N/A
That the Manurewa Local Board: a) endorses the feedback provided to Auckland Transport on the Manurewa town centre bus stops, bus routes 365 and 366.
|
No. |
Title |
Page |
aView |
Feedback dated 24 September 2014 regarding the Manurewa town centre bus stops and bus routes 365 and 366 |
181 |
bView |
Further feedback dated 28 October 2014 on the Manurewa town centre bus stops |
183 |
Signatories
Authors |
Madelon De Jongh - Local Board Advisor Manurewa |
Authorisers |
Rex Hewitt - Relationship Manager |
13 November 2014 |
|
Reports Requested - Pending - Issues
File No.: CP2014/24506
Purpose
1. Providing an update on reports requested and issues raised at previous meetings.
Executive Summary
2. Nil.
That the Manurewa Local Board: a) receive the report entitled “reports requested – pending – issues” by the Democracy Advisor. |
No. |
Title |
Page |
aView |
November 2014 reports requested pending listing |
189 |
Signatories
Authors |
Lee Manaia - Local Board Democracy Advisor |
Authorisers |
Rex Hewitt - Relationship Manager |
13 November 2014 |
|
Manurewa Local Board Achievements Register 2013-2016 Electoral Term
File No.: CP2014/24509
Purpose
1. Providing a register of achievements of the Manurewa Local Board for the 2013 – 2016 Electoral Term.
Executive Summary
2. Nil.
That the Manurewa Local Board: a) receive the report entitled “Manurewa Local Board Achievements Register 2013 – 2016 Electoral Term”, noting the following additions to the register: i)
|
No. |
Title |
Page |
aView |
2013-2016 Achievements Register |
193 |
Signatories
Authors |
Lee Manaia - Local Board Democracy Advisor |
Authorisers |
Rex Hewitt - Relationship Manager |
Manurewa Local Board 13 November 2014 |
|
MANUREWA LOCAL BOARD
ACHIEVEMENTS REGISTER 2013-2016 ELECTORAL TERM
Row |
Board Meeting Date |
ACHIEVEMENT |
1. |
30 January 2014 |
Supported the Manurewa Santa Parade |
2. |
30 January 2014 |
Supported the Manurewa Christmas in the Park |
3. |
30 January 2014 |
Feedback on the Smoke Free policy |
4. |
30 January 2014 |
Feedback on the Boarding Houses and Hostels bylaw |
5. |
30 January 2014 |
Feedback on the Animal Management bylaw review |
6. |
30 January 2014 |
Position paper on Psychoactive Substances |
7. |
30 January 2014 |
Submission to the Hamilton City Council on their Psychoactive Substances Policy |
8. |
13 February 2014 |
Supported and attended the Manurewa Waitangi Day event and undertook community consultation for the Local Board Plan |
9. |
13 February 2014 |
Supported and attended the Homai Fun Day at Russell Reserve and undertook community consultation for the Local Board Plan |
10. |
13 February 2014 |
Submission to the Local Government Act Amendment Bill No. 3 |
11. |
13 February 2014 |
Local Board Plan community consultation at Southmall |
12. |
13 March 2014 |
Supported Elvis in the Gardens event – 20,000 people attended |
13. |
13 March 2014 |
Spoke to the Hamilton City Council regarding their Psychoactive Substances Policy |
14. |
13 March 2014 |
Held first meeting for the World War I commemorations event |
15. |
13 March 2014 |
Attended Long Term Plan scheme setting meeting |
16. |
13 March 2014 |
Provided input on the draft Cemeteries and Crematoria Bylaw |
17. |
13 March 2014 |
Provided input into the draft Boarding Houses and Hostels Bylaw |
18. |
13 March 2014 |
Provided input into the New National Drug Policy Discussion Document for New Zealand |
19. |
13 March 2014 |
Speaking to Select Committee regarding submission to the Local Government Act Amendment Bill No. 3 |
20. |
13 March 2014 |
Spoke to the Regional Strategy & Policy Committee regarding the psychoactive substances regulations |
21. |
13 March 2014 |
Consultation for the informal feedback on the Local Board Plan at Clendon and Southmall |
22. |
10 April 2014 |
Consultation with mana whenua regarding the Local Board Plan |
23. |
10 April 2014 |
Consultation with Weymouth community regarding the Local Board Plan |
24. |
10 April 2014 |
Consultation with elderly and the disability sector on the Local Board Plan |
25. |
10 April 2014 |
Opening of the Randwick Park Skate Park – an awesome facility |
26. |
10 April 2014 |
Supported Neighbours Day initiatives |
27. |
10 April 2014 |
Supported the Sunrise Walk for Hospice. |
28. |
8 May 2014 |
Supported and attended the Manurewa Sports Awards |
29. |
8 May 2014 |
Attended the sod turning for the stage 2 Netball Manurewa development |
30. |
8 May 2014 |
Daryl Wrightson partnered with the “YMCA be the change” group to organise a Manurewa and Clendon town centre clean up |
31. |
8 May 2014 |
Attended the legal highs co-governance session with the governing body |
32. |
8 May 2014 |
Continued advocacy for a Local Approved Product Policy |
33. |
8 May 2014 |
Worked with the RSA and achieved record attendance numbers at the Manurewa ANZAC day services |
34. |
8 May 2014 |
Supported the “Eye on Nature” event |
35. |
8 May 2014 |
Provided feedback on Alcohol Advertising and Sponsorship |
36. |
8 May 2014 |
Provided feedback on Local Boards Funding Policy Review |
37. |
8 May 2014 |
Provided feedback on the Council Controlled Organisations Review |
38. |
8 May 2014 |
Provided input to draft the regulations for discharge and dumping in the ocean |
39. |
8 May 2014 |
Allocated community group funding for round two 2013/2014 applications as follows:
- Local Board Discretionary Community: - Age Concern Counties Manukau Inc. - $3,263 - Alfriston College - $3,390 - Auckland Kids Achievement Trust (FYD Auckland) - $6,633 - Auckland NZ View - $400 - Auckland Regional Migrant Services Charitable Trust - $3,840 - Getin2life Youth Development Trust - $3,288 - LifeChurch Manurewa - $14,392 - Life Education Trust SE Auckland - $7,500 - Manurewa Squash Rackets Club Inc. - $3,398 - Manurewa University of the Third Age - $1,472 - New Foundations Trust - $9,620 - Rape Prevention Education - $5,434 - South Asian Trust Inc. - $1,998 - Te Ara Poutama AEC Charitable Trust - $2,000 - Youthline Auckland Charitable Trust - $5,000
- Community Crime Prevention: - Kidpower Teenpower Fullpower Trust - $2,347 - South Asian Trust Inc. - $4,639 - Te Whakaora Tangata - $9,934
- Marae Facilities: - Manurewa Marae - $8,344
- Rates Assistance: - Baptist Union of NZ (on behalf of The Dream Centre) - $5,000 - Lifechurch NZ Community Trust - $6,818 - Melkite Catholic Charitable Trust of New Zealand - $724
- Social Investment: - Age Concern Counties Manukau Inc. - $12,500 - The Parenting Place (Attitude Youth Division) - $4,234 |
40. |
12 June 2014 |
Lobbied central government for a law change on psychoactive substances |
41. |
12 June 2014 |
Supported the community day removing mangroves at Manurewa marae |
42. |
12 June 2014 |
Supported the community in opposing a proposed new liquor off-licence in Clendon |
43. |
12 June 2014 |
Endorsed the draft 2014-2017 Manurewa Local Board Plan for public consultation |
44. |
12 June 2014 |
Adopted the 2014/2015 Manurewa Local Board Agreement |
45. |
10 July 2014 |
Input to the draft Auckland Council Local Alcohol Policy |
46. |
10 July 2014 |
Input to the draft Allocation of Decision Making Review for local boards |
47. |
10 July 2014 |
Submission to the central government’s Product Stewardship Policy |
48. |
10 July 2014 |
Established a town centre steering group |
49. |
10 July 2014 |
Local Alcohol Policy consultation at the Manurewa market held on Sunday, 22 June 2014 |
50. |
10 July 2014 |
Supported and conducted consultation at the Wiri Business market |
51. |
10 July 2014 |
The chairperson attended a thank you event on behalf of the board held at South Auckland Hospice |
52. |
14 August 2014 |
Hosted a successful Volunteer Awards Event on Friday, 1 August 2014 |
53. |
14 August 2014 |
Hosted the Mayor on 12 August for 3 and half hours |
54. |
14 August 2014 |
Consulted on the Arts and Culture Strategic Action Plan |
55. |
14 August 2014 |
Ran a series of drop-in sessions for the special consultation procedure for draft Manurewa Local Board Plan |
56. |
14 August 2014 |
Attended the community planting day held at Wattle Downs |
57. |
14 August 2014 |
Attended the computer in homes graduations held at Finalyson Park school and South Auckland middle school |
58. |
14 August 2014 |
Attended a public consultation held for the Taonga Early Childhood Centre held at Randwick Park Community House |
59. |
11 September 2014 |
Completed the Local Board Plan hearings. |
60. |
11 September 2014 |
Presented at the hearing panel for the Local Alcohol Policy |
61. |
11 September 2014 |
Spoke at the Strategy and Finance Committee meeting regarding capital expenditure deferrals |
62. |
11 September 2014 |
Provided feedback on the Trading and Events in public Places Bylaws |
63. |
11 September 2014 |
Provided advocacy to attain funding for the resource recovery network development |
64. |
11 September 2014 |
Provided advocacy to the Southern Initiative to fund the economic development plan |
65. |
9 October 2014 |
Adopted the Manurewa Local Board Plan 2014 |
66. |
9 October 2014 |
Aupported the Manurewa Community Network Expo |
67. |
9 October 2014 |
Attended Manurewa Business Association annual general meeting |
68. |
9 October 2014 |
Supported the International Day for the Older Person |
13 November 2014 |
|
For Information: Reports referred to the Manurewa Local Board
File No.: CP2014/24510
Purpose
Providing an opportunity for the Board to receive reports that have been referred from Governing Body Committee meetings or forums for the information of the Local Board.
No reports were referred for information from the Governing Body committee meetings or forums:
No. |
Report Title |
Item no. |
Meeting Date |
Governing Body Committee or Forum |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That the Manurewa Local Board note the following reports referred for information from the Governing Body committee meetings or forums:
|
There are no attachments for this report.
Signatories
Authors |
Lee Manaia - Local Board Democracy Advisor |
Authorisers |
Rex Hewitt - Relationship Manager |
Manurewa Local Board 13 November 2014 |
|
Manurewa Local Board Workshop Notes
File No.: CP2014/24514
Purpose
1. Notes taken at the Manurewa Local Board workshops held on 30 September, 2, 7, 14, 16, and 23 October 2014 are attached.
Executive Summary
2. Nil.
That the Manurewa Local Board: a) receive the notes from the Manurewa Local Board workshops held on 30 September, 2, 7, 14, 16, and 23 October 2014. |
No. |
Title |
Page |
aView |
30 September Workshop notes |
203 |
bView |
2 October Workshop notes |
209 |
cView |
7 October Workshop notes |
213 |
dView |
14 October Workshop notes |
217 |
eView |
16 October Workshop notes |
221 |
fView |
23 October Workshop notes |
225 |
Signatories
Authors |
Lee Manaia - Local Board Democracy Advisor |
Authorisers |
Rex Hewitt - Relationship Manager |
Manurewa Local Board 13 November 2014 |
|
Exclusion of the Public: Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987
That the Manurewa Local Board:
a) exclude the public from the following part(s) of the proceedings of this meeting.
The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter, and the specific grounds under section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution follows.
This resolution is made in reliance on section 48(1)(a) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 and the particular interest or interests protected by section 6 or section 7 of that Act which would be prejudiced by the holding of the whole or relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting in public, as follows:
C1 Special Housing Areas: Request
Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter |
Particular interest(s) protected (where applicable) |
Ground(s) under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution |
The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7. |
s7(2)(c)(ii) - The withholding of the information is necessary to protect information which is subject to an obligation of confidence or which any person has been or could be compelled to provide under the authority of any enactment, where the making available of the information would be likely to damage the public interest. In particular, the report/presentation contains information which, if released, would potentially prejudice or disadvantage commercial activities.. |
s48(1)(a) The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7. |