Agenda of Papakura Local Board

1 Welcome

Board Member will lead the meeting in prayer.

2 Apologies

At the close of the agenda no apologies had been received.

3 Declaration of Interest

Members are reminded of the need to be vigilant to stand aside from decision making when a conflict arises between their role as a member and any private or other external interest they might have.

4 Confirmation of Minutes

That the Papakura Local Board:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Wednesday, 15 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 Papakura Local 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.

8.1 Deputation - Debbie Morris - Access Elizabeth Campbell Hall

Purpose

1. The purpose of the report is to allow Debbie Morris to address the Board.

Executive summary

2. Debbie Morris, Facility Manager for Papakura Recreation and Fitness is to make a presentation concerning the access/use of the Elizabeth Campbell Hall for the after school care programme which the facility provides for the Papakura community.

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board thank Debbie Morris for her presentation to the Board.

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 www 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.

Papakura Local Board

19 November 2014

Auckland Transport Update - November 2014

File No.: CP2014/26410

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 Papakura 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.

Monthly Overview

3. The Board hosted discussions with New Zealand Transport Agency experts regarding the Takanini Interchange on Wednesday 5 November. The Papakura Transport Portfolio meeting also took place on November 05. Transport matters in the Local Board areas were discussed as well as updates on spending of the Local Board Transport Capital Fund.

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board receive the report entitled “Auckland Transport Update – November 2014.”

Comments

Local Board Transport Capital Fund:

4. The Papakura Local Board is allocated $306,184 per annum from the Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF). These funds can be used annually or rolled together to use the full three years’ of funding.

5. Taking into account funding already allocated, The Papakura Local Board has $762,308 remaining to be utilised in this electoral term.

6. The Board has asked Auckland Transport to investigate using the LBCTF allocation to undertake the following projects:

Project	Description	Status	Projected Cost
Connection of Railway Station and Town Centre:	Looking at ways of cognitively linking the town Centre with the Railway station. Projects for further investigation include: - Making the intersection Railway Street West/ Wood Street more pedestrian friendly - Great South Road intersection with Opaheke Road - Investigating a covered walkway on Railway Street West down Avril Street and Wood Street - Providing a mirror to “make safe” the alley way at the end of the Railway Street West Ramp - Street furniture/way-finding lighting etc.. These will be investigated once firm costs are received for the “all weather bridge project”.	This project will be investigated once firm costs are received for the “all weather bridge project”.	T.B.C
All weather over bridge		The structural assessment showed that the walkway beams are too slender for any connections. Structurflex were engaged to design a concept that avoided any connections to the main span and they have completed this. An indicative price has been received by Structurflex for the canopy only to allow AT and the LB to decide if they wish to proceed with structural assessment of this proposed canopy.	Very rough costing to date for this project has increased due to the engineering constraints of constructing this bespoke canopy = $1,050,000 Earlier ROC was $750,000 although this is unlikely to cover the revised costs.
Cycle lanes:	Auckland Transport is working on a Rough Order of Cost for the following three areas: Connecting Great South Road to the Papakura Railway Station (down Chapel and up Railways Street West), connecting Grove Road with Bruce Pullman Park and the inland straight of Conifer Grove (along the motorway).	This project will be investigated once firm costs are received for the “all weather bridge project”.	T.B.C

7. The local board transport portfolio members will continue to work closely with Auckland Transport Elected Member Relationship Manager to develop project plans in the priority areas stated above.

Current Papakura Local Board Project Update:

Project	Description	Status	Projected Cost
Refresh of signage in Papakura	Refresh of navigation and directional signage, identification of parking buildings and areas of significance/interest (Maraes, galleries)	AT has provided the Transport leads a comprehensive report of proposed signage. This project is ongoing.	On July 16 the Board approved a maximum of $110,000 to refresh the signage in the Papakura Local Board area.

Board Consultations

8. Consultation documents for the following proposals have been provided to the Papakura 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.

New Bus Stops and Shelters – Route 372:

9. The Papakura Local Board was invited to comment on spacing, existing bus stop upgrades and removal along Willis, Sheehan, Dominion and Clevedon Road.

General Information Items:

Budget Workshops

10. 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.

11. Cluster workshops will be followed by individual Local Board workshops to discuss the prioritisation in detail. The workshop with Papakura is scheduled for 12 November, 2014. This workshop will look more closely at projects and initiatives over the next three years across: Maintenance and Renewals, Road Safety, Public Transport Operations, Route Optimisation, Travel Demand Management and Parking.

Redoubt-Mill Road Corridor Update

12. 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.

13. 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.

14. 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.

15. 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”

16. 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.

17. 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.

18. 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 public transport developments

19. 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.

20. 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

21. As schoolchildren 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’.

22. 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.

23. 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’.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors	Felicity Merrington – Elected Member Relationship Manager (South) Auckland Transport
Authorisers	Jonathan Anyon – Elected Member Relationship Team Manager

Papakura Local Board

19 November 2014

Auckland Transport Quarterly Update to Local Boards

File No.: CP2014/26403

Executive summary

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.

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).

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board receive the report entitled “Auckland Transport Quarterly Update to Local Boards.”

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 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.

Electric Multiple Unit 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 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 six weeks after the start of the trial 52% are continuing to use public transport and after eight 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
Khyber Pass Road	Crowhurst intersection bus priority upgrade	Resolution prepared, awaiting Local Board approval
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 three days for KPI 2, single trip, multi travel and continuous renewal permits and five 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.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Papakura Local Board Attachment - 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	23
b View	Papakura Local Board Attachment - Travelwise Schools activities broken down by Local Board - 19 November 2014	37
c View	Papakura Local Board Attachment - Traffic Control Committee Decisions - 19 November 2014	39
d View	Papakura Local Board Attachment - Local Board Advocacy Report - 19 November 2014	41
e View	Papakura Local Board Attachment - Local Board Transport Capital Fund Report - 19 November 2014	43

Signatories

Authors	Various Auckland Transport Authors
Authorisers	Johnathan Anyon – Elected Member Relationship Team Manager

Papakura Local Board

19 November 2014

Allocation of the 2014/2015 Infrastructure and Environmental Services Budget

File No.: CP2014/24962

Purpose

1. To approve the Papakura Local Board’s environmental budget of $29,547 for the 2014/2015 financial year to fund a targeted biodiversity and private landowner engagement programme on private land.

Executive summary

2. As part of its Local Board Agreement the Papakura Local board committed $29,547 to bush site management programmes in the board area for the 2014/2015 financial year.

3. It is recommended that this budget funds an initiative to engage with private landowners in the board area to raise awareness of biodiversity values on private land, and provide advice to interested landowners on how best to manage biodiversity on their properties.

4. These initiatives support the ‘Protecting our cultural and natural heritage’ and ‘Enhancing our living spaces and places’ priorities in the Papakura Local Board Plan.

Recommendations

That the Papakura Local Board:

a) agrees to fund a targeted biodiversity and private landowner engagement programme on private land at a cost of $29,457.

b) requests any significant changes to this work programme be brought back to the board.

Comments

5. As part of its Local Board Agreement the Papakura Local Board committed $29,547 to bush site management programmes in the board area for the 2014/2015 financial year. Details of this programme have been discussed in the Local Board workshop on 22 October 2014.

6. It is recommended that this budget funds an initiative to engage with private landowners in the board area to raise awareness of biodiversity values on private land, and provide advice to interested landowners on how best to manage biodiversity on their properties.

7. This programme would be delivered by biodiversity officers in the Infrastructure and Environmental Services Department and run in a similar fashion to council’s current Covenant Monitoring Programme, which occurs in the Franklin, Rodney and Waitakere Local Board areas.

8. The purpose of the Covenant Monitoring Programme is to engage with private landowners who have statutory covenants registered on their title, and assist them in:

a. Understanding the ecological values of the bush covenant on their property;

b. Understanding the threats to the covenant health on their property from invasive species (i.e. weeds, pest animals) or wandering stock;

c. Understanding their statutory obligations to look after the covenant on their property;

d. Knowing how to manage the covenant effectively to ensure the ongoing health of that ecosystem.

e. Each landowner receives a ‘Covenant Management Plan’ for their property which is tailored to their needs and provides important ecological information and advice to support the ongoing management of the covenant.

9. The Papakura biodiversity and landowner engagement project would be of a similar nature, but the scope of the project would be extended to all interested landowners within the board area with areas of biodiversity on their land (i.e. not purely those landowners with statutory covenants on their property).

10. A contractor would be engaged to complete the scope of works as per below:

a) identify potential private properties within the board area that may have existing biodiversity value (i.e. natural areas);

b) carry out a site visit with landowner permission;

c) carry out a rapid ecological assessment of the site;

d) produce a tailored management plan for the landowner with an aim of assisting them to manage the biodiversity (i.e. wetland, forest, stream bank) on their property.

11. The ecological prioritisation of parks within the Papakura Local Board area has been a key piece of work for the biodiversity and parks teams over the past year. This exercise has categorised the parks within the Papakura Local Board area in terms of ‘high’, ‘medium’ and ‘low’ priority for ecological management.

12. Four sites (Red Hill Scenic Reserve, Margan Bush, Kirk’s Bush and Dominion Reserve) were classified as ‘high’ priority for ecological management due to their high ecological value (and other qualities) in the Papakura Local Board area.

13. As part of this private landowner engagement initiative, it is proposed to visit property owners adjacent to these ‘high priority’ parks in the first instance, and then progressively to ‘medium’ and ‘low’ areas as resources permit.

14. Other sites will be considered based on their ecological values such as larger areas of forest on the eastern side of the Papakura Local Board area.

Consideration

15. This is a report prepared specifically for the Papakura Local Board.

Local Board Views and Implications

16. This is a report prepared specifically for the Papakura Local Board.

17. These recommendations were discussed and developed in a workshop with Papakura Local Board members on 22 October 2014.

Māori Impact Statement

18. No consultation with Maori was required for the purposes of this report. It is acknowledged that environmental management; water quality and land management has integral links with the mauri of the environments and concepts of kaitiakitanga.

Implementation

19. There are no implementation issues arising from this report. Regular reporting on project delivery was provided through the quarterly report from the Infrastructure and Environmental Services department, or as required.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Michael Ngatai – Biodiversity Advisor

Varsha Belwalkar - Relationship Advisor

Authorisers

John Dragicevich - Manager Infrastructure and Environmental Services

Rex Hewitt - Relationship Manager

Papakura Local Board

19 November 2014

Road Name Approval for Karaka Lakeview Limited for a New Road Located at 128 Hingaia Road, Papakura

File No.: CP2014/25179

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to seek approval from the Papakura Local Board, for one new road name at 128 Hingaia Road, Papakura.

Executive summary

2. Karaka Lakeview Limited (The Applicant) supplied a preferred and two alternative names for the new road.

Road name
Oasis Dream Crescent	Preferred Option
Costa Viva Crescent	Alternate One
Longchamp Crescent	Alternate Two

3. Application of the assessment criteria has resulted in the three names meeting the relevant criteria.

4. As the Applicants preferred name ‘Oasis Dream Crescent” meets the criteria, this name has been put forward for consideration and approval by the Papakura Local Board.

Recommendation/s

a) That the Papakura Local Board, pursuant to section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974, considers for approval the name: “Oasis Dream Crescent”, for the new road proposed at 128 Hingaia Road, Papakura, noting that both the preferred name and the alternatives (“Costa Viva Crescent” and “Longchamp Crescent”) meet the relevant road naming criteria.

Discussion

5. The legacy Papakura District Council road naming policy provided that where a new road, needs to be named as a result of a subdivision or development, the subdivider/ developer/ constructor would be given the opportunity to suggest their preferred new road name for Council’s approval.

6. The Plan, as shown below, highlights the location of the Road to be named.

7. The Applicant has submitted a preferred and two alternative road names for consideration to the Local Board. These names derive from the horse racing industry and therefore are consistent with the equestrian road naming theme in the adjacent subdivision.

Table One: List of Supplied Road names

	Proposed Name	Meaning

Preferred Name	Oasis Dream Crescent	A stallion who is leading sire in Europe by winners and Percentage winners to runners in 2013, the sire of 25 stakes performers in 2014, the leading sire of 2YOs in Europe by prize money in 2013 and the leading British sire based on yearling sales for 2012 and 2013.
Alternate Name 1	Costa Viva Crescent	2014 New Zealand Bloodstock Filly of the Year.
Alternate Name 2	Longchamp Crescent	Famous race course in Paris, France. Location of the Prix de l’Arc de Triomphe race, considered by many to be the European equivalent of the Kentucky Derby, Melbourne Cup and the Epsom Derby

Decision Making

8. The Auckland Council, by way of the Auckland Council Long Term Plan (2012 – 2022), allocated the responsibility for the naming of roads to Local Boards.

9. The Applicant’s proposed road names have been assessed against the criteria set out in the legacy Papakura District Council road naming policy and standard AS/NZS 4819 for rural and urban addressing, as summarised in tables 2 and 3 below.

10. Road Name – Assessment

Table Two: Papakura Road Naming Policy Assessment Criteria

Policy reference	Summary of Road Naming Policy
Thematic Area 1(a)	New names will be allocated in thematic areas that are in keeping with the existing theme
Thematic Area 1(a)	Council will identify and incorporate a minimum of one thematic area within Greenfields developments and new subdivisions
Appropriateness 1	Is there a connection to the local and/or Papakura area
Appropriateness 1	Maori to be consulted on appropriateness of name including spelling and translation
Appropriateness 1	Name of living persons not to be considered except in exceptional circumstances
Appropriateness 1	Permission from next of kin for names of deceased persons
2 Utility	Are a single word or name that is not hyphenated;
2 Utility	Do not contain any inflection marks (e.g. macrons, accents);
2 Utility	Are not longer than 12 letters;
2 Utility	Are not already used to name or identify another road or landmark feature within the District and surrounds;
2 Utility	Are not considered offensive (including when translated into another language).

Table Three: AS/NZS 4819:2011 for Rural and Urban addressing Assessment Criteria

Standard reference	Summary of Road Naming requirements
4.4.2	One name for one road
4.4.3	The name is to be officially recognised
4.4.4	The name shall not be offensive, racist, derogatory or demeaning
4.4.5	The name should be easily spelt and pronounced
4.4.6	A road shall keep its name when crossing administrative boundaries
4.4.7	The name shall not be duplicated in spelling, pronunciation to another existing road name in the same locality or in the same local government area.
4.4.8	An indigenous name should be local to the area.
4.4.9	A name should not be conjoined names of places found or at the end of the road
4.4.10	The length of a road name should be shorter rather than longer , especially where the road itself is short
4.4.11	A road type shall not be included in a road name i.e. Boulevard street

Table Four: Application of assessment criteria

Preferred Name	Oasis Dream Crescent
Meets criteria	Yes

Alternate Name 1	Costa Viva Crescent
Meets criteria	Yes

Alternate Name 2	Longchamp Crescent
Meets criteria	Yes

11. As the Applicant’s preferred name ‘Oasis Dream Crescent” meets the road naming criteria, this name has been put forward for consideration and approval by the Papakura Local Board.

Consideration

Significance of Decision

12. The decision sought from the Papakura Local Board for this report does not trigger any significance policy and is not considered to have any immediate impact.

Maori Impact Statement

13. The decision sought from the Papakura Local Board does not adversely affect Maori communities, as the naming of roads is not linked to one of Council’s strategic priorities for Maori.

Consultation

14. Under the Papakura District legacy road naming policy, consultation with iwi is only required if the proposed name is Maori. Accordingly, the Applicant did not consult specifically with tangata whenua in regard to the proposed names. The Applicant commented that extensive consultation with iwi was undertaken in regard to Maori names at the time of Stage 1 of the Lakeview development and that the majority of the names identified have been used within the development.

15. New Zealand Post has confirmed that the names are acceptable and should not provide postal addressing problems.

Financial and Resourcing Implications

16. The cost of processing the approval of the proposed new road name and any installation of road name signage is recoverable in accordance with Council’s Administrative Charges.

Legal and Legislative Implications

17. The decision sought from the Papakura Local Board for this report is not considered to have any legal or legislative impactions.

Implementation Issues

18. The Southern Monitoring Team will ensure that appropriate road name signage is installed once an approval is obtained for the new road name.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Gayatri Devi - Resource Consent Administrator

Authorisers

Heather Harris - Manager Resource Consents

Rex Hewitt - Relationship Manager

Papakura Local Board

19 November 2014

Draft Community Facilities Network Plan

File No.: CP2014/25953

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.

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a) Provide feedback on 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. 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

18. 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

19. 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.

20. 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

21. 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.

22. 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.

23. 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.

24. 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.

25. 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.

26. 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.

27. 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

28. 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.

29. 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.

30. 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

31. 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.

32. 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.

33. 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.

34. 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.

35. 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

36. 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.

37. 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.

38. 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

39. 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.

40. 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.

41. 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

42. 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.

43. 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.

44. Once the network plan is adopted, implementation will focus on progressing the high priority actions using the implementation approach and community facilities development guidelines.

45. 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.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Draft Community Facilities Network Plan (Under Separate Cover)
b View	Draft Community Facilities Network Plan stakeholder feedback (Under Separate Cover)

Signatories

Authors

Anita Coy-Macken - Principal Policy Analyst – Central

David Shamy - Principal Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Penny Pirrit - Regional & Local Planning Manager

Rex Hewitt - Relationship Manager

Papakura Local Board

19 November 2014

Request for Feedback on the Draft Local Approved Product Policy

File No.: CP2014/26695

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.

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board provides 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 28^th 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. Seventeen (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 maximise 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

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Changes from proposed to draft summary	65
b View	Statement of Proposal - draft LAPP	67

Signatories

Authors

Callum Thorpe - Principal Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Penny Pirrit - Regional & Local Planning Manager

Rex Hewitt - Relationship Manager

Papakura Local Board

19 November 2014

Why were these rules chosen?

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.

Papakura Local Board

19 November 2014

AC new logo_horz_cmyk

PAPAKURA LOCAL BOARD

ACHIEVEMENTS REGISTER 2013-2016 ELECTORAL TERM

Date	ACHIEVEMENT
7 November 2013	Inaugural Meeting - Election of Chair, Bill McEntee and - Deputy Chair, Michael Turner
8 November 2013	Fireworks Spectacular
9 November 2013	Spring Clean
19 November 2013	Citizenship Ceremony
28 November 2013	Appointment of Board Members to Outside Organisations
28 November 2013	Appointment of Portfolio Allocations, Urban Design Champion, Business Improvement District (BID) Executive Committee and Resource Consent Public Notifications.
30 November 2013	Supported the Papakura Santa Parade
11 December 2013	Board agrees to release of Draft Annual Plan 2014/2015 including the draft Papakura Local Board Agreement 2014/2015 for public consultation
13 December 2013	Supported the Papakura Carols in the Park
29 January 2014	Appointment of Board Youth Portfolio Lead to the Papakura Youth Connections Steering Group
29 January 2014	Formal establishment of the Pukekiwiriki Paa Joint Management Committee
29 January 2014	Position Paper on Draft Psychoactive Substances approved
29 January 2014	Approved position statement to the Auckland Council submission on the proposed Auckland Unitary Plan
11 February 2014	Papakura Local Board Public Engagement – Local Board Plan – Papakura Library
15 February 2014	Papakura Local Board Public Engagement – Local Board Plan – Smiths Avenue and Papakura Library
18 February 2014	Papakura Local Board Public Engagement – Local Board Plan – Takanini Stores
27 February 2014	Papakura Local Board Public Engagement – Workshop – Local Board Chambers
1 March 2014	Movies in the Park
2 March 2014	PIPs Canoe Day
8 March 2014	Southern Regional Hui – Local Board Plans
8 March 2014	Rosehill Family Fun Day
18 March 2014	Citizenship Ceremony
19 March 2014	Papakura Local Board Psychoactive Substances Regulations Submission feedback to form part of the Governing Body Submission to the Ministry of Health
19 March 2014	Papakura Local Board Objection to Liquor Licence Application – Harpreet Kaur Limited
29 March 2014	Papakura East Neighbourhood Policing Team Day
30 March 2014	Takaanini Reserve Neighbourhood Event
5 April 2014	Joint Papakura and Manurewa Elderly and Disability Engagement Session in collaboration with Counties Manukau DHB
16 April 2014	Approved the Papakura Local Economic Development Plan and Commerce and Industry Programme
25 April 2014	Attended ANZAC Day Services at Papakura and Drury
29 April 2014	Advocacy presentation to the Governing Body
	Council Controlled Organisations feedback submitted
	Funding Policy Review feedback submitted
30 April 2014	Inaugural Meeting Pukekiwiriki Paa Joint Management Committee
21 May 2014	Community Group Funding of $80,364.00 awarded in funding Round 2 of the 2013/14 financial year
23 May 2014	Members attended Liquor Licencing Hearing - BottleO
29 May 2014	Dawn blessing of Takaanini Reserve and Ihaka Takaanini Plinths
	Advocacy from the Board on the Takanini Interchange and motorway upgrade
	Advocacy from the Board on Psychoactive substances leading to the temporary withdrawal from the market.
18 June 2014	Approved the Papakura Local Board Community Development, Arts and Culture Work Programme 2014/2015
18 June 2014	Adopted the local content for the Annual Plan 2014/2015 including the Papakura Local Board Agreement 2014/2015
18 June 2014	Approved the Draft Local Board Plan 2014 for consultation
18 June 2014	Support for a joint scoping study with Southern Local Boards for the establishment of community recycling centres in the south.
18 June 2014	Approval of $15,000 funding to establish an annual Papakura Sports Awards
26 June 2014	Papakura Careers Expo
1 July 2014	Local Alcohol Policy Information Event - Stall
	Active promotion of Auckland Transport Parking Strategy consultation
	Active promotion of Long Term Plan youth engagement ‘My Vote Rule’
5 July 2014	Papakura Draft Local Board Plan Engagement Drop-in Session – Papakura Library
8 July 2014	Papakura Draft Local Board Plan Engagement Drop-in Session – Papakura Library
8 July 2014	Rosehill Residents Group – Consultation on Local Board Plan
8 July 2014	Conifer Grove Residents Association - Consultation on Local Board Plan
9 July 2014	Papakura Draft Local Board Plan Engagement Drop-in Session – Papakura Library
July 2014	Stakeholder engagement event of the Arts and Culture Strategic Action Plan
16 July 2014	A total of $6,000 awarded under the Local Event Support Fund
16 July 2014	Feedback provided on the draft Local Alcohol Policy, Local Board role in alcohol licensing applications and Allocation of decision making review
16 July 2014	A grant of $7,800 awarded from the 2014/2015 discretionary operational budget towards the provision of a WW1 centennial commemorative panel at Papakura Museum and external signage for the museum and library.
July/August 2014	SCP on draft local board plan - board members held three drop in sessions at Papakura library and have been attending meetings of residents groups and other organisations in order to encourage submissions.
20 August 2014	Approved funding of $8,500 for Manukau Harbour Forum Action Plan and Work Programme in 2014/2015
20 August 2014	Annual Report 2014/2014 – Chairs Foreword and Achievements approved
20 August 2014	Additional $5,000 grant approved towards Papakura Fireworks Spectacular 2014
20 August 2014	Feedback made on Draft Local Approved Products Policy
21 August 2014	Papakura Volunteer Awards
27 August 2014	Papakura Local Board Plan Hearing
17 September 2014	Establishment of a local alcohol ban review panel to make review of alcohol bans in the local board area
17 September 2014	Approval of additional funding of $20,472 to Papakura and Districts Historical Society Incorporated to extend the Papakura Museum’s opening hours, effective 1 September 2014
17 September 2014	Deliberations on the submissions received to the Papakura Draft Local Board Plan
25 September 2014	Hosted the Local Board Urban Design Champions Quarterly Meeting, focused on design opportunities in Papakura Metropolitan centre
15 October 2014	Adoption of the Papakura Local Board Plan 2014
15 October 2014	Options approved for the future governance and management of community facilities on Smiths Reserve
15 October 2014	Community Group Funding applications approved totalling $15,102
15 October 2014	Funding of $7,000 agreed towards a 2015 Papakura Careers Expo
15 October 2014	Adoption of principles to guide decisions on requests for lease of public open space for early childhood education provision
15 October 2014	Feedback agreed on the Significance and Engagement Policy
15 October 2014	Feedback agreed on the Draft Arts and Culture Strategic Action Plan
15 October 2014	Presentation to the Governing Body on key messages for Papakura in Long Term Plan prioritisation and policies

Papakura Local Board

19 November 2014

Row No.	Date of Resolution	Group reporting	Issue	Resolution/Description	Officer Item Referred to	COMMENTS
1	20 June 2012	Local and Sports Parks	Prince Edward Park	Resolution number PPK/2014/34 That whilst the Papakura Local Board appreciates there has been delays in progress for the design work at Prince Edward Park it is critical that the lighting works be completed by 24 March 2014. Resolution number PPK/2012/1 That the Papakura Sea Eagles Rugby League Club be thanked for their presentation and that the proposal be referred to parks staff for consideration and report back to the Papakura Local Board.	Andrew Moor	3 November 2014 *Andrew Moor emailed at 3.54 pm advising:* Irrigation: Physical works are now complete. Fences will remain up around fields to aid turf grow in of lines. Lights: Contract has been awarded. Pre-start meeting was held with contractor, designer and Council. Contractor is now aiming to start work on the foundations and cabling prior to Christmas, returning in the New Year to install the poles and light fittings. 9 September 2014 Andrew Moor emailed at 2.09pm advising: Lights: Building consent has been issued Tenders for the physical work close 12/09/14 – 2pm Will award contract and set date, aiming for early in the new year Vector fees have been paid, project budget has been finalised Irrigation: Contract awarded, commencing 29/09/14 Liaising with the Softball Club to accommodate this. 30 July 2014 Andrew Moor emailed at 2.09pm advising: Lights · Resource consent obtained. · Building consent lodged – officers have identified that we need Watercare approval for excavations within 10m if a regional sewer, this is being progressed. · Awaiting Vector fees and costs, expecting any day now at which point the project budget can be finalised. · Procurement plan has been prepared and is awaiting approvals. This will go to tender and we need to allow 2 working weeks for contractors to price. · The poles and lights will be included in the tender and not split out. · Contract period will be 22 weeks, with 16 – 18 weeks for the supply of the materials, lighting columns and floodlights, 1 week for starting and 3 weeks for completing the job. Irrigation · Infrastructure growth charges have been paid. · Tender price received and preferred contractor in place. · Currently confirming start date. The project is still experiencing delays with consenting and delivery of components. With the change in weather and ground conditions on the fields the parks Advisor is compiling a number of options for the timing and execution of the project. This will be discussed with Board members and the League Club in an attempt to achieve the best outcome for the development of the park. The detailed design has now been completed, ready to be submitted for consenting. The lighting components have been selected. The suppliers have been asked to provide a timeframe of when these will be ready for installation. Once this is received an update and more accurate proposed completion date will be provided to the Board and Rugby League Club. The Project Team are currently working with the Lighting Designer to fast track the project. This will include the pre ordering of poles and light fixtures and shortening of the physical works tendering process. Staff will provide the Board and Rugby League Club with an updated time table as soon as it has been confirmed. Ongoing There have been delays with progress on the detailed design waiting for survey work to be undertaken. However, the project is now running again but the designer has flagged that the timeframe has now moved back. The Development Team are working with the designer to progress consents and get physical works underway as soon as possible. Have initial design and capacity work done for lighting based on feedback from clubs. Detailed design and pricing underway. Meeting with clubs again to feedback progress and decide on how the work will be staged over two years. Have agreed that irrigation and lighting are the next priorities for the park. LSP team have provided some options for possible lighting layouts. League Club to meet 14/08/13 and will feedback preference. Staff have met with the users and have developed a concept plan. Agreed that first stage of this would be irrigating the sportsfields and lighting one field. Work programmed for 2013/14 financial year. Meeting with user groups arranged for early April. Design work to proceed after this meeting. LSPS staff and Board Parks Portfolio members held a meeting with softball and rugby league clubs. Both clubs are open to working together to develop the reserve. They have provided staff with a breakdown of works they would like to see undertaken on Prince Edward. Staff to ascertain how these works can be fitted into current and future years budgets and then work with clubs and Board to prioritise and programme these. LSPS staff to make contact with Softball Club advising them of intention to develop master plan. Call meeting of softball and league and establish a user group committee for the reserve. Develop draft concept plan with users. Workshop with the Board – October 2012.
2	19 June 2013	Property CDAC	Papakura Museum - void	Resolution number PPK/2013/3 That the Papakura Local Board: a) Approves the allocation of $40,560 of operational funding from the current financial year 2012/2013 to the Papakura and Districts Historical Society, to increase the curator hours for the Papakura Museum over the two year period from 1 July 2013 to 30 June 2015. b) Requests that the Papakura and Districts Historical Society report monthly on the number of visitors, activities and programmes at the Papakura Museum, as a condition of funding. c) Requests a workshop on the issue of the development of the void space in the Papakura Museum including the costs and requirements with the appropriate council staff attending. d) Requests officers provide the board with a report outlining the specifications and design work required for the void space in the Papakura Museum.	Alison Farrell Leilani Unasa	Updated 13/11/14 Project sitting with the project manager – on track Updated 9/09/14 – Raewyn Curran $250,000 allocated in Local Board Agreement to project to extend Papakura Museum. The project is currently sitting with the project manager, with a delivery date of 28 February 2015, which gives the Historic Places Society a month to set up the exhibition. The Board sent a letter of support to the Historic Places Society Consultation being undertaken as part of the Papakura Local Board Agreement Report to September 2013 meeting Being workshopped on 11 July 2013 followed by report to August business meeting.
3	16 July 2014	Local and Sports Parks	Karaka Harbourside	Resolution number PPK/2014/5 That the Papakura Local Board thank Mr Glenn Archibald for his presentation regarding the following issues: · Karaka Harbourside · Street Lighting issues at Prictor Street and Clevedon Road · Traffic speed and traffic volume on Prictor Street and Clevedon Road · Development Contributions · Issues with speed limit signage at Karaka · Auckland Transport roping off areas of berm which have been resown with grass seed	Andrew Moor	3 November 2014 *Andrew Moor emailed at 3.57 pm advising:* Coastal consultant has advised that consent application is nearly ready to submit. Parks staff to continue with further consultation with iwi. 9 September 2014 Email from Andrew Moor: The coastal consultants engaged to address the erosion issues at Karaka Harbourside (Tonkin and Taylor) have undertaken an investigation of the site and provided Council with a number of options. The Parks and Coastal Teams have reviewed these and gone back to them with a preferred solution to address the issues that fits within the current budget. Tonkin and Taylor have now been engaged to prepare the necessary consent applications with the plan being to have this completed in time to undertake the physical works this summer as conditions allow. 30 July 2014 Trish Wayper emailed Andrew Moor at 1.47pm: Glenn Archibald attended the public forum of the July business meeting. One the subjects he discussed was Karaka Harbourside and the continuing issues being experienced there. Issues included: 1. Erosion 2. Clearance of gorse Glenn has suggested another site visit between yourself and the board members. Perhaps you could discuss this at your next portfolio update. Andrew Moor responded at 2.09pm: Will do.
	15 October 2014	Financial Planning, Policy and Budgeting	Legacy Council Development Contributions	Public Forum – Mr Glenn Archibald Requested clarification on legacy council development contributions	Felipe Penteli	29 October 2014 *Felipe Panteli emailed at 11.09 am advising:* 1 - The Rail Bridge of Broadway into Clevedon Road was 54% funded by NZTA. No development contributions were associated to this, remaining funding was from rates. The several kilometres of Clevedon Road from the roundabout heading to Keri Hill had no NZTA funding. Auckland Transport’s Road Corridor Maintenance Department have previously informed that pavement repairs and resurfacing are the most cost effective maintenance treatment for this section of road around Mill Road. These works will be undertaken as soon as minor safety works currently under way are completed. 2 – Violia Water (previously United Water) had a 15 year agreement (with an option for another 10 years) with Papakura District Council for Water Services. When the Council’s merged in 2010, this agreement continued to be honoured. 3- Development and financial contributions collected under the previous Papakura District Council were spent as per their Long-term Plans until amalgamation. The contributions collected and Private Developer Agreements (within Papakura including Karaka - both Karaka Lakes and Karaka Harbourside), all transferred to Auckland Council as per the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 and Local Government (Auckland Transitional Provisions) Act 2010. Projects that were planned under Papakura District Council now come under the assets groups of the Auckland Council and as such have the right to be reprioritised and used as needed. The conditions of the Act does state contributions for an activity (transport, storm water, etc.) must still be used for that activity and this has been done.

Papakura Local Board

19 November 2014

Workshop Wednesday 08 October 2014

Item 1 – Finalisation of the Papakura Local Boards View of the Long Term Plan Budgets and Mayors Proposal

General Comments

· Papakura has annual budget of $1.453 million discretionary for next 3-10 years. These funds are guaranteed as per agreed as part of Local Board Funding Policy This is due to a budget adjustment of $750,000.00 from the formula used via the LBFP ( 90% population, 5% deprivation and 5% geography

· Assets budget are set and cannot be touched by Local Boards.

· The asset plans let boards know what the departments are going to do with the asset funds; this is an opportunity for the boards to use their discretionary funds to fill gaps.

· Remember – if discretionary funds use for capex spend then you must take into account the annual opex cost for the life of the asset (estimated at 10%).

Other comments re: individual budget lines are noted on Papakura Local Board Locally Driven Initiatives (LDI) Options Spreadsheet which is attached.

Item 2 – Environmental Protection Bylaw Review

Officer attending: Richard Stuckey

General Comments

· Six issues to be considered in total:

o Issue 1 – electric, barbed and razor wire fences on private land, below a certain height, may pose a danger to the public when they are situated adjacent to a public place or road.

o Issue 2 - registration and chemical dosing of all industrial cooling towers within the Auckland to ensure that they are regularly tested for Legionella.

o Issue 3 – allowing a section to become so overgrown that it poses a nuisance or that it may harbour pests or vermin.

o Issue 4 – storing abandoned or derelict vehicles on private property that may harbour pests or vermin.

o Issue 5 – the storage of any material or thing that may omit a smell or odour that causes a nuisance.

o Issue 6 – the feeding of any wild or feral animal, bird or fowl that may cause a nuisance.

o Issue 7 – control and maintenance of burglar alarms.

· Involves the review of 2 legacy bylaws which is to be completed by October 2015.

· Issue 1 and 2 fell out of construction bylaw.

· Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) allows for $20,000.00 fine but does not have a clear definition of what is considered a “nuisance”.

· Maximum penalty under Health Act is $500.00.

· Draft bylaw attached for review by board and feedback on bylaw content and possible name for the bylaw.

· Properties with caveats/covenants are a different issue under a different act.

· In terms of the bylaw – property owner is responsible.

· Under Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan (PAUP) any fence over 2.5 meters is classified as a building.

· Suggested name for bylaw is Land and Property Owner Responsibilities To Their Neighbours.

· Part 2, under section 8 - Barbed and razor wire and electric fences (1) (a) and (2) (a) states that they must have written approval of the council. Richard is seeking whether the board supports this approach.

Questions Raised

Q - why do we need to identify actual pests, could it be covered under general pests?

A – the list states but not limited to and we also have the Regional Pest Strategy to refer to.

Q – who defines if 3 or 12 abandoned vehicles on a section are a nuisance.

A – material or thing on any private land or in any property that may attract, harbour or promote the breeding of pests or vermin or create offensive smell or odour or create a nuisance to any neighbouring person, property or business. Part 2, clause 6, (1) (a).

Q – would the board be asked to give exemptions and what is this based on.

A – some would be based on local knowledge of the area.

Q – Would need officers involved anyway like the swimming pool exemptions.

A – Officers would give the board relevant information so the board can make decision to exempt or not.

Item 3 – Papakura Youth Council Strategic Plan and Budget for 2014-2015

Officer attending: Sjimmy Fransen

Youth Council Attending: Jason Mareroa (Chair), Candis Ormsby (Deputy Chair), Galeva Mai-Kwarara and ? Youth Council Members.

General Comments

· Youth Council gave overview of their Papakura Youth Council Strategic Plan for 2014/2015 and budget expenditure expected for 2014/2015.

· Youth council was established in late 2011. The aim of this new youth council, the opportunities and challenges the youth of Papakura were /are facing is outlined on their current strategic plan.

· Opportunities Youth Council see in their relationship with the Local Board.

· Vision – sustainability – focus on moving forward.

· Cohesive meaningful and youth centric manner to achieve a collective vision.

· The Papakura Youth Council have 5 strategies:

o Strategy 1 – inspire youth so they can connect with, facilitate and drive the youth council.

o Strategy 2 – celebrate and value the diversity and talent of our young people by ensuring their voice is heard, involving them in every aspect of the movement and providing meaningful opportunities for them to lead.

o Strategy 3 – foster the creation of a range of opportunities around youth and their whanau that provide the support, information and connections they need to create and realise their leadership potential.

o Strategy 4 – empower every influence in the lives of our young people with the tools and resources they need to support their young person to make choices about their future.

o Strategy 5 – facilitate a holistic ecosystem that actively engages in new ways of working and enables further pathways for Papakura young people.

· By May 2015 hope to have the allocated positions in place as per the criteria for membership.

· The board congratulated the youth council on the creation of the excellent terms of reference. The terms of reference covers everything including the purpose, vision, roles and what the youth council want to achieve and how they aim to do this.

· Standard term of role for a general position will be 2 years, while appointed role e.g. chair will be an annual term.

· Frequency of meetings states “monthly statutory meetings”. The Papakura Local Board suggested that the youth council change this to “hold at least 10 meetings per year” as this will give the youth council to agree not to have a meeting over the Christmas / New Year period.

· The youth council have already ratified the strategic plan, terms of reference and 2014-2015 budgets.

· The next step is the Papakura Local Board to ratify the Papakura Youth Council strategic plan, terms of reference and 2014-2015 budget – noting that the board have already approved the 2014/2015 budget.

· Graham Purdy mentioned that that the board budgets are being cut, so moving forward for 2015/2016 onwards youth council budget will need to be based on what is being given the local board .

· Youth council is not a legal entity and functions as an initiative of the local board therefore the youth council cannot apply for sponsorship or funding from other sources.

Item 4 – Economic Development

Officers Attending: John Norman, Stephen Cavanagh.

Representatives: Alan McMahon and Chris Dibble from Colliers International and Graham Jackson and Nicole Legge from Ipsos

Economic Development

General Comments

· Gave overview of completed projects and introduced representatives from Colliers International and Ipsos.

Questions raised for Colliers

Q - can vacant retail space be used for more offices?

Questions raised for Ipsos

Q - can we assess what types of business have skills shortage and whether skills / training initiatives are addressing these.

A – Ipsos to check whether data can be analysed to enable assessment.

General Comments

· Members expressed their appreciation for the work undertaken on these two surveys and were happy with the report.

· The board agreed:

o reports could be finalised and published

o have regular bi-monthly economic development meetings

o report to November business meeting to agree on 2014/2015 projects ($74k budget).

Item 5 – Maori Contribution to Local Board Decision Making and Hui Update

Officer Attending: Wayne Knox

General Comments

· Overview of Hui taking place on Saturday 21 October 2014 to which all members of the Papakura board are invited.

· Focus group to then work at refining some recommendations.

Papakura Local Board

19 November 2014

WORKSHOP NOTES

What: Papakura Local Board Workshop

Where: Council Chambers, Papakura Service Centre, 35 Coles Crescent, Papakura

When: 3.30 pm Wednesday, 22 October 2014

Present: Bill McEntee, Stuart Britnell, Brent Catchpole, Graham Purdy, Katrina Winn and Michael Turner.

Apologies:

Staff: Rex Hewitt, Karen Gadomski, Raewyn Curran, Mary Hay, and Trish Wayper.

Item
1. Long Term Plan Budget Discussion Continuation Staff: Mark Purdie and Debbie Pinfold The following clarifications were given to the Board: Karaka community gardens – included in LDI figures for community gardens. Mangrove and pacific oysters – a sum is included in projected asset based services budget. A large element of the community grants funding is still allocated as regional but it is expected that some of this will come into the locally driven initiatives as the budgets are worked through. Parks Board felt that the budget being used for specimen trees and new conveniences could be reallocated to other areas. The board queried whether there was any contingency built into the budget for emergency or unexpected work. It was confirmed that the budget contained approximately $400,000 for this purpose. Parks staff reported that very little savings could be made out of the contract budgets in the south and these had been reviewed and renegotiated. Some other parts of Auckland will be brought into line and significant savings could be made from some regions. Board Priorities Revitalisation of town centre – number one priority Upgrading of sports fields Development of events Arts and Culture Also Safety Patrol – increase budget line to $150,000 Facility Hire Fees and charges – work to be done on list of current exemptions and the effect on the board’s budget. Further consideration needed to be given to the approximately $600,000 not yet allocated in the budget. Action: Debbie and Mark to work through the remaining budget queries and bring updated spreadsheets to the workshop on 29 October.
2. Infrastructure and Environmental Services Budget Allocation 2014/2015 Staff: Michael Ngatai and Varsha Belwalkar A powerpoint presentation (Attachment 2B) was made outlining the proposed project to the board. There are 62 sites with natural heritage value in the board’s area. Areas surrounding the following four sites were being identified as high priority for work with adjoining landowners: · Kirks Bush · Margans Bush · Redhill · Dominion Reserve The Board thought that other sites should be considered as land around the four proposed priority sites is generally already well looked after and maintained, particularly Kirk’s Bush A copy of the Ecological Restoration Priorities on Local Parks within the Papakura Local Board Area was tabled. (Attachment 2C) Action: Michael Ngatai to put together a wider list of sites for consideration as part of the proposed programme. Varsha Belwalkar to re-submit the report to the November business meeting in order that the project spend can be formally considered.
The workshop closed at 3.00 pm

Papakura Local Board

19 November 2014

WORKSHOP NOTES

What: Papakura Local Board Workshop

Where: Council Chambers, Papakura Service Centre, 35 Coles Crescent, Papakura

When: 1.00 pm Wednesday, 5 November 2014

Present: Bill McEntee (Chair), Stuart Britnell, Brent Catchpole, Graham Purdy, Katrina Winn (until 3.30pm) and Michael Turner.

Apologies:

Staff: Rex Hewitt, Karen Gadomski and Trish Wayper.

Item

1. Communications Work Programme

Staff: Tash Osborne

The Comms Officer had a discussion with the Board concerning the communications work programme into the future. The following ideas were discussed:

· Regular monthly comms update with the board.

· That contact be made to the Papakura Courier through the Comms Department.

· Our Auckland – two Papakura events had been missed. Events team need to be providing Comms with upcoming events for publication.

· Landing page – to be established to be update regularly so that various other pages can be automatically updated from one page.

· E-Bulletins – Comms to work with Jacqui Hindmarsh to develop the e-bulletin. To include more graphics, fun and events.

Action:

Comms Officer to supply Board Members with a copy of the Social Media Guidelines.

2. Planning for Long Term Plan Consultation

Staff: Karen Gadomski and Mary Hay

Karen outlined to the members the template pages that needed to be populated by the Board for the Long Term Plan 2015-2025 Consultation. These needed to be completed within the next couple of weeks.

Mary outlined the proposed consultation process for the LTP which included:

· Local Board Plan submitters being revisited and requested to attend a clinic to discuss topics of interest.

· A flexible and less formal hearing process

· At least one meeting including Councillors Calum Penrose and Sir John Walker in attendance.

Action:

Workshop – 12 November 2014 to include one hour for the Engagement Advisor to have a discussion with the Board Members concerning their consultation requirements for the Long Term Plan.

2. LTP/Budget Discussion Continuation

Staff: Debbie Pinfold and Mark Purdie

Officers reported that the Budget Committee had just approved at 3.5% rates increase for consultation with a 16% increase in Development Contributions.

Council Officers required for next Wednesday’s discussion were:

· CDAC – Leora Hirsh and Chantelle Whaiapu

· Events – Sharon McGinity

· Parks – Andrew Moor, Malcolm Page

· Economic Development – John Norman

3. CCO Configuration and Delivery

Staff: Rex Hewitt

Powerpoint presentation was made (Attachment 3E)

The following proposals were discussed:

Port and Airport Holding Company and Enhanced Commercial Investments CCO – no change recommended.

Urban Design Entity (Development Auckland) – could this include “The Southern Initiative?”. Board does not support the introduction of this CCO. Considered it another layer of bureaucracy. All departments and CCO’s should be working towards achieving the Auckland Plan goals and targets so shouldn’t need a separate entity to undertake this function. Board would be interested to know if any other boards were in support of this.

Three Waters in-house or Three Waters CCO – The board saw the logic in combining the water services either in-house or as a CCO. However a debate was needed on how it structurally all fitted together.

Regional Facilities, Major Events and Tourism CCO – The Board agreed that ATEED should be kept separate to Regional Facilities, however considered a debate was needed as to whether ATEED stood alone or was brought in-house. It was felt that ATEED delivered too many city orientated events but not enough was being invested in the smaller and outlying areas. The board did not support economic development sitting under the auspice of ATEED.

Auckland Transport – One idea raised was that Auckland Transport be split into two CCO’s. One to cover public transport, the other to be in charge of roading. It was felt that the CCO that existed was too big and that its scope of work was too wide. The Board would like to see AT adopt a more communicative, consultative and collaborative approach particularly with both Local Boards and the Governing Body. The Board also felt that Auckland Transport needed to be more accountable under the accountability framework.

4. NZTA Update

Staff: Jim Sephton (NZTA), Leone Hansen and Felicity Merrington (AT)

Attachment 4A was tabled – Southern Corridor Improvements – Neighbourhood Update.

The following update information was relayed to the Board:

Approximately 600 people had attended the consultation events with the overwhelming feedback being to undertake the project and commence as quickly as possible.

Tendering process will be undertaken in January 2015 with a commencement date in November/December 2015. All works to be completed by 2018.

Concerns raised by the Takanini residents had been considered at a meeting between NZTA and AT with congestion on Great South Road and also the access issue for Spartan Road discussed. Suggested that AT be invited to a workshop to convey their thinking on these issues.

Member Winn requested that the board be supplied with the funding difference in doing both suggested flyovers at the same time, compared to undertaking these separately.

The only land purchases were by the Botanic Gardens on Hill Road and also Stevensons site.

Iwi Consultation – have been meeting with iwi every two weeks discussing stormwater, native planting and the cultural design aspects of the project.

The Board enquired how much support had been displayed for the cycleways projects considering the budget required. Two thirds of those questioned supported the project.

Action:

Board to be supplied with the funding difference in doing both suggested flyovers at the same time, compared to undertaking these separately.

5. Parks Acquisitions – (Confidential)

Staff: Andrew Beer, Sophie Bell and Andrew Moor

Powerpoint presentation made (Attachment 5A).

The Parks Officers outlined a proposal for five possible parks acquisitions in the Papakura area.

The meeting concluded at 4.10 pm

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.

No.	Report Title	Meeting Date	Governing Body Committee or Forum
1.	Arts and Culture Strategic Action Plan – Part 1	28 October 2014	Arts, Culture and Events Committee
2.
3.

Chairperson	Bill McEntee
Deputy Chairperson	Michael Turner
Members	Stuart Britnell
	Brent Catchpole
	Graham Purdy
	Katrina Winn

Authors	Trish Wayper - Local Board Democracy Advisor
Authorisers	Rex Hewitt - Relationship Manager