Agenda of Rodney Local Board - 10 November 2014

Rodney Local Board

10 November 2014

Allocation of the remaining 2014/2015 Infrastructure and Environmental Services Budget

File No.: CP2014/24239

Purpose

1. To seek approval for the allocation of the remainder of the 2014/2015 Rodney Local Board budget for community-led environmental programmes (the budget) to projects in the local board area.

Executive summary

2. The Rodney Local Board committed $89,200 to community led environmental programmes in the Rodney Local Board area for the 2014/2015 financial year.

3. At the 8 September 2014 business meeting Rodney Local Board resolved to allocate $42,000 of the total community led environmental programmes budget to five projects recommended by officers.

4. To meet the timeframes to submit an agenda item to the 10 November 2014 business meeting it was not possible to workshop officer recommendations for the remainder of the budget.

5. On 6 October 2014 a memorandum was circulated to local board members with recommendations for the allocation of the remaining $47,205 of the budget. Officers sought input and feedback from the local board members by way of e-mail prior to this agenda report being submitted (Attachment A).

Recommendations

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) approve the allocation of the remainder of the 2014-2015 community-led environmental programmes budget to the projects outlined to the following projects:

Project	Amount allocated
i) Industrial Pollution Prevention Project	$15,000
ii) Improving Sediment & Erosion Control Programme	$10,000
iii) Forest Bridge Trust	$7,205
Total	$32,205

Comments

6. At the 8 September 2014 business meeting Rodney Local Board resolved to allocate $42,000 of the total community led environmental programmes budget to five projects recommended by officers.

7. Local board members, at the 8 September 2014 business meeting also indicated a desire for an industry pollution prevention programme to be implemented in urban areas in the Rodney Local Board area. Both Kumeu and Helensville townships have areas of industry with rivers running directly through the town centres. It is recommended an industry pollution prevention program is best suited for these towns.

8. Sediment is a key issue for the Mahurangi catchment. Warkworth is the main urban centre in this catchment, and is under increasing pressure from urban expansion. It is recommended that a program to address sediment and erosion control be carried out in this area.

9. Local board members also expressed a desire to undertake action for improvement of the built environment. The Rodney Local Board has a relationship with Ngati Whatua Nga Rima o Kaipara. Officers have explored opportunities to support the existing Kaipara housing improvement project being implemented by Ngāti Whātua Nga Rima o Kaipara in conjunction with Community Development Arts and Culture department. Funding for this was confirmed at the local board meeting.

10. The following is a table of projects focused on environmental outcomes and aligning to the above recommendations to expend the remaining $47,205 of the community led environmental programmes budget.

Project and Estimated Cost

Industrial Pollution Prevention Project - $15,000

A project targeting approximately 100 businesses between Kumeu / Huapai and Helensville for the Rodney Local Board area will be developed which will include:

· provision of an educational “Leave Behind” brochure that informs the business about their local waterway and how to protect it

· audit assessments of all sites handling substances with a pollution risk and provision of a brief report of recommendations to mitigate the risks

· follow up with those businesses with a further visit if needed

· maintenance of a database of businesses visited, and a database of the reports sent

· presentation of the results of the project to the Rodney Local Board

The timeframe for this project is approximately 3 months from beginning to end and the estimated cost is $15,000.

Project and Estimated Cost

Improving Sediment & Erosion Control Programme - $10,000 (estimated for 100 sites)

Warkworth has multiple sub-divisions ready for building, and is planned for urban expansion. Erosion and sediment discharge is often a significant issue in urban expansion. Warkworth is an ideal location to trial an expanded education and compliance programme as it is within the Mahurangi Catchment. This catchment has a well-developed catchment management programme (the Mahurangi Action Plan) and high level of community awareness.

The sustainable catchments team recognises the potential for a sediment and erosion control program and are interested in partnering with others to support its delivery.

This program is educational and aimed at contractors working on construction sites to compliment the resource consent and building consent regulatory role of Auckland Council. It has a particular emphasis on (but not limited to) earthworks on sites that do not require a resource consent i.e. only a building consent. The approach is proactive and non-regulatory.

Flyers providing information on how to protect the environment on a building site will be sent out with building consent approvals. Signs offering the same information will be erected at the entrance to sub-division sites.

An independent expert will visit sites to talk to contractors about potential issues and erosion and sediment control measures. Information sheets and booklets will also be provided to any sub-contractors onsite. Research shows that face to face communication is critical to improve uptake of good practice. Adopting this approach means an increased likelihood of behaviour change than flyers and signs alone.

This educational approach to supplement existing compliance work has been piloted successfully as part of the Long Bay development. An evaluation of the contractor response and observed uptake of improved sediment control practices will be provided.

Existing educational material will be used for the signs, flyers and information packs. These resources are generic and do not require re-branding for use in Warkworth or elsewhere. Building inspectors and compliance staff will be provided with the same information packs to use for their onsite inspections.

Officers will also seek an appropriate community group to lead this program.

This project is an opportunity to lead a pilot program of great relevance to Warkworth. It also has potential to be transferred across other Rodney locations and into other local board areas.

The cost has been estimated to be approximately $10 000 for 100 site visits, installation of signs at four sites and the printing of educational booklets. Various in-house resources, such as printing, will be used to keep the costs of this program to a minimum.

Project and Estimated Cost

Forest Bridge Trust - $7,205

The Forest Bridge Trust was established earlier this year and is a farmer-initiated environment trust that supports land stewardship across the narrowest part of the North Island, a bridge of green across the central Kaipara Omaha isthmus.

The Trust’s mission is to support farmers and other land owners to restore forests and wildlife to their land, and to protect their rivers, streams and wetlands, all within a productive, profitable and sustainable farming landscape.

There are currently unconnected pockets of restoration activity on both private and public land. There is a significant opportunity to improve the ecological values of the land in-between, to create and safeguard wildlife habitat, to control pests and weeds, and to prevent the sedimentation of local rivers, streams and estuaries.

The Forest Bridge Trust will trial this concept of bridging partners, supporting farmers and other landowners to make a practical impact for conservation and environmental outcomes. It will also provide an avenue for donors, government, councils, schools, environment groups and urban residents to support an outstanding natural and farmed landscape.

A priority-setting workshop is scheduled for late October with the primary objective of informing the Trust’s strategic plan. The workshop aims to develop understanding of the current state of issues such as soils, landforms, flora/fauna, and land use.

It is recommended that the Rodney Local Board consider allocating $7,250 for restoration implementation (fencing, plants and planting and pest control) on farms that have been identified as key priorities at the priority-setting workshop.

Project and Estimated Cost

Ngati Whatua Nga Rima o Kaipara Housing Project - $15,000

The Rodney Local Board resolved to allocate $15,000 from the “’Environmental Community-led Programmes’ budget” at their October 2014 business meeting (RD/2014/223).

11. Officers seek approval from Rodney Local Board to allocate the budget to these projects.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

12. This report is prepared to seek approval from the local board for the allocation of budgets for the 2014/2015 financial year to projects to be delivered by the Infrastructure and Environmental Services Department.

Maori impact statement

13. This report provides information for anticipated environmental programmes, it is recognised that environmental management, water quality and land management has integral links with the mauri of the environments and concepts of kaitiakitanga.

14. Many of the identified activities are of interest to Maori and provisions for mana whenua participation, contribution, and consultation will be incorporated.

Implementation

15. Implementation of the projects will be regularly reported to the Rodney Local Board in the quarterly update reports to the local board. A more detailed report will be presented to the local board at the end of the financial year.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Copy memo regarding budget reminders	11

Signatories

Authors

Theresa Pearce - Relationship Advisor

Authorisers

John Dragicevich - Manager Infrastructure and Environmental Services

Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager

Rodney Local Board

10 November 2014

Dog Access Rules Review Programme

File No.: CP2014/20136

Purpose

1. To decide on the scope of review of local dog access rules in the Rodney Local Board area.

Executive summary

2. The governing body delegated the review of dog access rules on local park, local beach and local foreshore areas to local boards in 2012.

3. The primary objective for local boards in making decisions on dog access is to ensure public safety and comfort and to ensure that the needs of dogs and their owners are met.

4. The governing body has established a standard process to assist local boards which identifies what aspects of the process will be funded by the governing body.

5. The Rodney Local Board resolved in 2013 that it sought to review certain local dog access rules contained in the Auckland Council Policy on Dogs 2012 and Auckland Council Dog Management Bylaw 2012 by the summer of 2015.

6. The process is intended to start in September 2014 and ends in October 2015. The Rodney Local Board has to adopt a proposal by April 2015, hold hearings and deliberations, and make decisions on submissions by August 2015.

7. The following matters were identified through the 2012 governing body review process and can be used as a basis for establishing the scope of the review.

· A review of the current time and season beach and foreshore dog access rules, including adjacent parks.

· A review of which dog exercise areas meet the new criteria or are more appropriately referred to as under control off-leash areas (shared spaces).

· A review of ‘gulf islands’, ‘bush walks’, ‘picnic’ and ‘protected wildlife’ areas.

8. The final scope of the review is a matter for the Rodney Local Board to decide.

9. Depending on the scope of the review, options for pre-consultation and research may include both internal and external engagement activities.

Recommendations

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) resolve to review local dog access rules in the Rodney Local Board area in 2014/2015 as follows:

i. local beach and foreshore dog access rules. The review is to focus on those beaches (approximately 12) that are subject to the current time and season rules.

ii. rules on parks adjacent to the above identified beaches.

iii. clarify rules by identifying:

· which dog exercise areas meet the new criteria or are more appropriately referred to as under control off-leash areas

· ‘Gulf island areas’, ‘bushwalks’, ‘picnic areas’ and ‘protected wildlife areas’.

b) note that it is appropriate that the governing body decides dog access rules on the land recently added to Mahurangi and Te Arai Regional Parks and the adjacent beach and foreshore areas.

c) resolve to fund any additional research, engagement, or public notification initiatives specified by the local board.

Discussion

Background

10. In 2012, the governing body replaced seven legacy policies and seven legacy bylaws on dogs with a single Auckland Council Policy on Dogs 2012 (‘the policy’) and Auckland Council Dog Management Bylaw 2012 (‘the bylaw’). As part of that process it delegated responsibilities for dog access rules on local park, local beach and local foreshore areas (areas not of regional significance or Department of Conservation) to local boards.

11. It is noted the areas of regional significance include regional parks and adjoining beach and foreshore areas. The governing body decision of 22 August 2013 (GB/2013/86) added areas of land to the Mahurangi and Te Arai Regional Parks and consequently these areas have been excluded from the scope of this report.

12. The delegations also contained a specific requirement that local boards review their dog access rules on any beach and foreshore area.

13. A three year programme (2013-2016) has been established to assist local boards in reviewing local dog beach and foreshore access rules. As part of the establishment of this programme, workshops were held with each local board to establish how much of a priority a review would be (low, medium, high) as well as ascertaining whether there were any key issues of concern. Another function of the programme is to achieve efficiencies by aligning the review programmes across multiple local boards to allow for centralised support and activities.

14. The Rodney Local Board decided at a meeting on 9 September 2013 (RD/2013/290) to undertake a review of dog access rules by the summer of 2015.

General considerations

15. The primary issues of dog access under the Dog Control Act 1996, Council’s Policy on Dogs 2012 and the Dog Management Bylaw 2012 are balancing the protection of the safety and comfort of the general public, the protection of wildlife and providing for the recreational and exercise needs of dogs and their owners on a region wide basis. This means having regard to:

(a) The need to minimise danger, distress, and nuisance to the community generally

(b) the need to avoid the inherent danger in allowing dogs to have uncontrolled access to public places that are frequented by children, whether or not the children are accompanied by adults

(c) the importance of enabling, to the extent that is practicable, the public (including families) to use streets and public amenities without fear of attack or intimidation by dogs.

(d) the exercise and recreational needs of dogs and their owners^{^[1]}.

A more detailed outlined of the requirements is provided in Attachment A.

Safety and comfort of the general public

16. While the following information is not specific to the Rodney Local Board area, it provides an indicative overview of the general issues.

17. Primary research undertaken by staff for the Auckland Council Dog Management Bylaw 2012 identified that in 2010 the top three dog related complaints^{^[2]} were roaming, barking and dog attacks or aggression.

18. Key points from this research of common dog related complaints received include:

· Dogs that roam unaccompanied by their owners account for just over half of all dog related problems.

· Dogs that persistently bark or howl account for one third of all dog related problems.

· Dogs that attack, rush or are aggressive to people or animals account for just over a tenth of all dog related problems. Dog attacks on people account for less than three per cent of complaints.

19. The research (as shown in Figure 1) identified that the most common location of reported dog attacks on people was outside the owner’s property (36 per cent). However, it should be noted that based on Accident Compensation Commission injury statistics, the reported incidents are estimated to only account for less than a third of actual dog attacks^{^[3]}. A possible reason for lack of reporting, particularly in public places, may be an inability to identify the details of a dog or their owner in order to make a complaint.

20. Comfort of the general public is more problematic to assess and quantify. The first matter for consideration is whether the general public can utilise a public area without ‘fear of attack or intimidation’. While it is noted that most dog owners consider their pets friendly and that they would not wilfully harm anyone, to another user the presence of an unknown unleashed dog may engender fear or intimidation. This is particularly within a confined area such as a boardwalk or narrow bush walk where there is no space to avoid coming into contact with the dog.

21. Secondly, there is the requirement to consider nuisance to the community. Do users of the space want to be approached by unknown dogs? As part of a survey conducted for the dog access reviews of the Kaipatiki and Orakei Local Board areas, 60 per cent and 65 per cent respectively of non-dog owner respondents did not want unknown dogs approaching them^{^[4]}.

22. This would indicate that for the comfort of people to be maintained, dogs need to be effectively controlled in the proximity of non-dog owners, particularly around vulnerable people. Additionally any interactions need to be managed so that they are positive for the owners, their dogs and non-dog owners. Dog access rules can help in managing interactions by identifying areas where dogs are allowed under control off-leash, on-leash or are prohibited.

Wildlife

23. A number of wetland and shorebirds are vulnerable to dogs as they nest, roost, breed or feed in wetland or inter-tidal areas. Feedback from Auckland Council biodiversity staff indicates that for some species, including the New Zealand Dotterel, the presence of dogs can cause ground-nesting birds to leave the nest resulting in loss of clutches and broods and disrupted feeding which is particularly important for migratory birds.

24. Dog restrictions in protected wildlife areas are not only about protecting wildlife, but also reducing the risk of associated penalties on owners if such areas are disrupted by dogs.

25. Under the Dog Control Act 1996, it is an offence to allow dogs to roam or attack protected wildlife. Penalties include seizure and destruction of the dog; owner imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years, or a fine not exceeding $20,000, or both. Under section 63 of the Wildlife Act 1953 it is an offence to kill or disturb wildlife. Penalties for individuals include imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years, or a fine not exceeding $100,000, or both.

Recreational and exercise needs of owners and their dogs

26. Walking a dog is an important form of regular exercise for many dog owners with a study in Manukau showing that for 50 per cent of dog owners it was their main form of exercise^{^[5]}. Supervised interaction between a dog, other dogs and people is also important for the socialisation of dogs.

27. It is generally accepted that areas to walk a dog (either on-leash or off-leash) that are easily accessible, desirable, and provide diversity of experience for both the dog and owner is important.

Objectives of review

28. The primary objective for local boards in making decisions on dog access is provided in paragraph 15 above.

29. Local boards have the power to determine the full scope of any review in accordance with their delegation. The directive provided by the governing body provides a framework for this first review of the Rodney Local Board dog access rules. The proposed scope outlined inthis report is based on that framework and is provided in the following section for discussion.

What local dog access rules to review

30. Category 1 - Review

This relates to the delegated duty to review all beach and foreshore dog access rules. A proposal must be adopted for public notification^{^[6]}. This review includes the following:

· The identification of possible under control off-leash at all times beaches.

· The identification of where it is appropriate to use the region wide standard summer times (10am and 5pm) and summer season (Labour Weekend to 1 March).

The identification of marine based significant ecological areas is closely linked to the above rules and is therefore recommended by staff to be considered appropriate for inclusion in the review.

31. Category 2 –Consider

This relates to public submissions on the dog access rules on specific parks and beaches during the 2012 process. It is at a local board’s discretion to include any such requests in a proposal for public notification. The requests that would require changes to the current rules are as follows, with the number of people making the request shown in brackets:

· Snells Beach area. Prohibit dogs (5) and provide alternative nearby off-leash dog access (1)

This issue is already provided for in terms of the category 1 review, but is included here for completeness.

32. Category 3 – Optional

This category relates to making dog access rules less complicated. During the 2012 process staff identified a number of issues which, if resolved, would clarify or revoke ambiguous legacy rules and ensure any changes are easier to understand ‘on the ground’ analysis identified the following issues for the Rodney Local Board area. The relevant reference to the dog access rule in Schedule 2 of the policy is shown in brackets:

· Review dog exercise areas against the new criteria in method 3E of the policy [RLB (2)].

· Identify bush walks on which dogs are required to be under control on-leash in the former Rodney District [RLB (7)(a)].

· Identify other Gulf Islands where there may be a threat to any native fauna and not specifically identified as a prohibited area in the former Rodney District on which dogs are required to be under control on-leash [RLB (7)(b)].

· Clarify references to ‘designated public picnic areas’ in which dogs are prohibited in the former Rodney District. [RLB (13)(a)].

· Identify habitats home to protected wildlife recognised by the council or Department of Conservation in which dogs are prohibited in the former Rodney District [RLB (13)(b)].

33. The current Rodney Local Board dog access rules are provided in Attachment C for completeness.

34. The following tables provide options on each matter outlined above to assist the board in deciding what local dog access rules to review.

Table 1:Beach and foreshore dog access rules

Option

Advantages and Disadvantages

Option 1: Review dog access rules on current bylaw time and season beaches, including parks adjacent to the beaches, and any other beaches specified by the local board.

Why?

Targeted review will focus on previously identified key beaches. Will clarify if and where exceptions to the region-wide standard summer beach time and season are appropriate.

Will allow for consideration of more 24/7 under control off-leash dog access on beaches.

Review of parks adjacent to time and season beaches will allow alignment of rules to reduce user confusion.

Review would include Snells Beach and the adjacent parks and the issues raised in the 2012 submission process.

Advantages

Targeted review on previously identified high use beaches.

Implementation of the policy.

Allows for more consistent rules for adjoining park and beach areas, making rules easier to understand and comply with ‘on the ground’.

Disadvantages

All other beaches not subject to individual review will retain current default under control off a leash rule.

Possible outcomes and costs of review (illustration only)

For the approximately 12 beaches confirmation of if and where the standard summer beach time and season is appropriate, if not what the alternatives are, and type of dog access is between time slots.

Local board signage costs. Local board signage costs. Unable to estimate until investigation completed.

Option 2: Review dog access rules on all Rodney Local Board beach and foreshore areas.

Why?

Provides a comprehensive review of all coastal dog access rules. Legacy bylaw was last amended in 2005, no comprehensive review of all beaches undertaken since.

Advantages

Comprehensive review of all beach and foreshore dog access rules.

Disadvantages

Significant piece of research and analysis work, additional resource (time) required to investigate.

May not significantly alter overall outcome.

Possible outcomes and cost of review (illustration only)

All beaches identified to improve certainty and confirmation of if and where the standard summer beach time and season is appropriate, if not what the alternatives are, and type of dog access is between time slots.

Local board signage costs. Unable to estimate until investigation completed.

Table 2: Dog exercise areas

Option	Advantages and Disadvantages
Option 1: Review which dog exercise areas meet the new designated dog exercise area criteria of the policy or are more appropriately referred to as under control off-leash areas. Why? The current rule, based on the Legacy Rodney District Council rule uses the term ‘dog exercise area’ to describe 13 under control off-leash parks and beach areas (in general parks are under control off-leash areas)^{^[7]}. ‘Dog exercise area’ is a legal term to describe places that dogs classified as ‘dangerous’ can be off-leash (but muzzled). Rodney local Board area has 8 dogs classified as ‘dangerous’. Policy defines a ‘designated dog exercise area’ as a place where dog owners are the priority user, with characteristics similar to a ‘dog park’. ‘Under control off-leash areas’ are defined as places shared with other users and in practice this may be the more general usage style of the current dog exercise areas.	Advantages Removes inconsistency between legacy rules and the approach defined in the policy. Implementation of the policy. Continues to provide for under control off-leash dog access. Does not prevent the future development of a ‘dog park’. Clarifies the rules ‘on the ground’. Disadvantages Resource (time) required to investigate. Possible outcomes and cost of review (illustration only) Dog exercise areas that are more appropriately listed as under control off-leash areas. Local board signage costs. Unable to estimate until review completed. May be minimal as only 13 areas, and would not require removal of off-leash dog symbol.
Option 2: Do not review (retain current list of dog exercise areas)	Advantages No resource (time) required to investigate, and no cost for signs (if required). Disadvantages Retains inconsistency between legacy Rodney area and the policy, which is difficult to communicate and confusing for users. Possible outcomes and cost of review (illustration only) Continued lack of clarity for dog and non-dog owners. No cost.

Option

Advantages and Disadvantages

Option 1: Review which dog exercise areas meet the new designated dog exercise area criteria of the policy or are more appropriately referred to as under control off-leash areas.

Why?

The current rule, based on the Legacy Rodney District Council rule uses the term ‘dog exercise area’ to describe 13 under control off-leash parks and beach areas (in general parks are under control off-leash areas)^{^[7]}. ‘Dog exercise area’ is a legal term to describe places that dogs classified as ‘dangerous’ can be off-leash (but muzzled). Rodney local
Board area has 8 dogs classified as ‘dangerous’.

Policy defines a ‘designated dog exercise area’ as a place where dog owners are the priority user, with characteristics similar to a ‘dog park’. ‘Under control off-leash areas’ are defined as places shared with other users and in practice this may be the more general usage style of the current dog exercise areas.

Advantages

Removes inconsistency between legacy rules and the approach defined in the policy.

Implementation of the policy.

Continues to provide for under control off-leash dog access.

Does not prevent the future development of a ‘dog park’.

Clarifies the rules ‘on the ground’.

Disadvantages

Resource (time) required to investigate.

Possible outcomes and cost of review (illustration only)

Dog exercise areas that are more appropriately listed as under control off-leash areas.

Local board signage costs. Unable to estimate until review completed. May be minimal as only 13 areas, and would not require removal of off-leash dog symbol.

Option 2: Do not review (retain current list of dog exercise areas)

Advantages

No resource (time) required to investigate, and no cost for signs (if required).

Disadvantages

Retains inconsistency between legacy Rodney area and the policy, which is difficult to communicate and confusing for users.

Possible outcomes and cost of review (illustration only)

Continued lack of clarity for dog and non-dog owners. No cost.

Table 3: Gulf Island areas

Option	Advantages and Disadvantages
Option 1: Review existing gulf island rules Why? Gulf islands not listed. Different rules apply to different islands, e.g. Rat Island is under control on a leash and Kawau is under control on a leash where there may be a threat to native fauna. Most islands in Rodney Local Board are under Department of Conservation control, dogs prohibited.	Advantages Clearly identifies gulf islands in Rodney Local Board area and allocates appropriate restrictions in relation to threats to native fauna. Clarifies the rules ‘on the ground’. Disadvantages Resource (time) required to investigate. Possible outcomes and cost of review (illustration only) Rules amended to include list of islands in relevant area (e.g. under control, on a leash or prohibited). Local board signage costs. Unable to estimate until review completed. May be minimal as likely to be existing signage or inaccessible.
Option 2: Do not review (retain current rules)	Advantages No resource (time) required to investigate, and no cost for signs (if required). Disadvantages Potential impact on native fauna and lack of clearly identified islands and therefore rules for users. Possible outcomes and cost of review (illustration only) Continued lack of easy to understand ‘on the ground’ rules. No cost.

Option

Advantages and Disadvantages

Option 1: Review existing gulf island rules

Why?

Gulf islands not listed. Different rules apply to different islands, e.g. Rat Island is under control on a leash and Kawau is under control on a leash where there may be a threat to native fauna.

Most islands in Rodney Local Board are under Department of Conservation control, dogs prohibited.

Advantages

Clearly identifies gulf islands in Rodney Local Board area and allocates appropriate restrictions in relation to threats to native fauna.

Clarifies the rules ‘on the ground’.

Disadvantages

Resource (time) required to investigate.

Possible outcomes and cost of review (illustration only)

Rules amended to include list of islands in relevant area (e.g. under control, on a leash or prohibited).

Local board signage costs. Unable to estimate until review completed. May be minimal as likely to be existing signage or inaccessible.

Option 2: Do not review (retain current rules)

Advantages

No resource (time) required to investigate, and no cost for signs (if required).

Disadvantages

Potential impact on native fauna and lack of clearly identified islands and therefore rules for users.

Possible outcomes and cost of review (illustration only)

Continued lack of easy to understand ‘on the ground’ rules. No cost.

Table 4: Bush walks

Option	Advantages and Disadvantages
Option 1: Review ‘bush walk’ rules. Why? The current rule, based on the Legacy Rodney District Council rule, requires dogs to be under control on a leash on ‘bush walks’. ‘Bush walks’ undefined thus difficult to enforce the rules.	Advantages Will clarify rules related to ‘bush walks’. Removes lack of definition enforcement issues (e.g. between an off-leash park and an on-leash bush walk). Disadvantages Resource (time) required to investigate. Possible outcomes and cost of review (illustration only) Rule revoked for ‘bush walk’. Investigation finds rule unnecessary and that underlying rule for the park (typically under control off-leash) is appropriate. Rule replaced for ‘bush walk’. Investigation finds a small number of particular areas easily identifiable on the ground as bush walks. Local board signage costs. Unable to estimate until review completed. May be minimal if only a few areas identified and existing appropriate signage present.
Option 2: Do not review (retain current rules)	Advantages No resource (time) required to investigate, and no cost for signs (if required). Disadvantages Lack of clarity for user and appropriate rules in ‘bush walk’ areas. Possible outcomes and cost of review (illustration only) Continued lack of easy to understand ‘on the ground’ rules. No cost.

Option

Advantages and Disadvantages

Option 1: Review ‘bush walk’ rules.

Why?

The current rule, based on the Legacy Rodney District Council rule, requires dogs to be under control on a leash on ‘bush walks’.

‘Bush walks’ undefined thus difficult to enforce the rules.

Advantages

Will clarify rules related to ‘bush walks’.

Removes lack of definition enforcement issues (e.g. between an off-leash park and an on-leash bush walk).

Disadvantages

Resource (time) required to investigate.

Possible outcomes and cost of review (illustration only)

Rule revoked for ‘bush walk’. Investigation finds rule unnecessary and that underlying rule for the park (typically under control off-leash) is appropriate.

Rule replaced for ‘bush walk’. Investigation finds a small number of particular areas easily identifiable on the ground as bush walks.

Local board signage costs. Unable to estimate until review completed. May be minimal if only a few areas identified and existing appropriate signage present.

Option 2: Do not review (retain current rules)

Advantages

No resource (time) required to investigate, and no cost for signs (if required).

Disadvantages

Lack of clarity for user and appropriate rules in ‘bush walk’ areas.

Possible outcomes and cost of review (illustration only)

Continued lack of easy to understand ‘on the ground’ rules. No cost.

Table 5: Picnic areas

Option	Advantages and Disadvantages
Option 1: Review ‘picnic area’ rules. Why? The current rule, based on the Legacy Rodney District Council rule, prohibits dogs in ‘any designated public picnic area’. Term not defined and therefore considered unenforceable. Residents (including dog owners) do not know where the rule applies, therefore the question becomes is the rule necessary?	Advantages Will clarify rules related to picnic areas. Disadvantages Resource (time) required to investigate. Possible outcomes and cost of review (illustration only) Investigation finds rule unnecessary and that underlying rule for the park (typically under control off-leash) is appropriate. Rule revoked. No or minimal local board signage costs. Investigation finds a small number of particular areas easily identifiable on the ground picnic areas. Rule replaced for ‘picnic areas’. Local board signage costs. Unable to estimate until review completed. May be minimal if only a few areas identified. Note: This would not include isolated tables or BBQ facilities but particular areas.
Option 2: Do not review (retain current rules)	Advantages No resource (time) required to investigate, and no cost for signs (if required). Disadvantages Retains unnecessary or confusing rules, some of which are not enforced, and difficult to communicate. Possible outcomes and cost of review (illustration only) Continued lack of easy to understand ‘on the ground’ rules. No cost.

Option

Advantages and Disadvantages

Option 1: Review ‘picnic area’ rules.

Why?

The current rule, based on the Legacy Rodney District Council rule, prohibits dogs in ‘any designated public picnic area’. Term not defined and therefore considered unenforceable.

Residents (including dog owners) do not know where the rule applies, therefore the question becomes is the rule necessary?

Advantages

Will clarify rules related to picnic areas.

Disadvantages

Resource (time) required to investigate.

Possible outcomes and cost of review (illustration only)

Investigation finds rule unnecessary and that underlying rule for the park (typically under control off-leash) is appropriate. Rule revoked.

No or minimal local board signage costs.

Investigation finds a small number of particular areas easily identifiable on the ground picnic areas. Rule replaced for ‘picnic areas’.

Local board signage costs. Unable to estimate until review completed. May be minimal if only a few areas identified.

Note: This would not include isolated tables or BBQ facilities but particular areas.

Option 2: Do not review (retain current rules)

Advantages

No resource (time) required to investigate, and no cost for signs (if required).

Disadvantages

Retains unnecessary or confusing rules, some of which are not enforced, and difficult to communicate.

Possible outcomes and cost of review (illustration only)

Continued lack of easy to understand ‘on the ground’ rules. No cost.

Table 6: Protected wildlife

Option

Advantages and Disadvantages

Option 1- Review ‘wildlife’ rule

Why?

The current rule, based on the Legacy Rodney District Council rule, prohibits dogs in protected wildlife habitat areas. Areas undefined.

‘Wildlife’ undefined term. Move across the region to use the significant ecological areas of the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan as a basis for habitat and fauna protection rules.

The review would include a review of both land and marine based significant ecological areas.

Advantages

Will clarify rules related to wildlife areas and remove inconsistency between previous two legacy areas.

Will identify specific locations to allow for rules to be applied to protect identified wildlife as well as habitat and fauna.

Disadvantages

Resource (time) required to investigate.

Possible outcomes of review and costs (illustration)

Rule clarified for ‘wildlife areas’, including replacing ‘wildlife’ with more current and appropriate technical terms. Investigation identifies relevant areas and associated dog access restrictions and lists them in the bylaw.

Local board signage costs. Unable to estimate until review completed. May be minimal as likely to be existing signage or inaccessible.

Option 2: Do not review (retain current rules)

Advantages

No resource (time) required to investigate, and no cost for signs (if required).

Disadvantages

Retains unnecessary or confusing rules, some of which are not enforced, and difficult to communicate.

Unclear definition and location of significant ecological areas means important habitat and wildlife areas are at risk from dogs.

Possible outcomes and cost of review (illustration only)

Continued lack of easy to understand ‘on the ground’ rules. No cost.

Process and costs

35. The governing body has established a standard process to assist local boards. The governing body will fund aspects of the standard process, including basic research and engagement and public notification. Local boards will be required to fund any additional research and engagement, alternative forms of public notification, and signage. Attachment B provides an outline of the process and respective responsibilities.

36. The standard process established by the governing body supports changes to dog access rules on an annual basis being integrated with the dog registration process. This process allows for a more timely and robust discussion as well as achieving efficiencies by aligning the review programmes across multiple local boards to allow for centralised support and activities.

37. The process timeline starts in September of one year and ends in October of the following year. The local board will need to adopt a proposal by April 2015, hold hearings and deliberations and make decisions on submissions by August 2015.

Pre-consultation and research

38. For completeness, the table below summarise the proposed activities covered through the standard process to be undertaken prior to the formal consultation for a statement of proposal using the special consultative procedure of the Local Government Act 2002. The confirmation of the standard initiatives is subject to the finalisation of the scope of the review.

Pre-consultation activities: September 2014 – March 2015

Auckland Council internal stakeholders

Workshops/meetings with representatives from:

· Parks

· Animal Management

· Biodiversity

· Biosecurity

· Community Policy and Planning

External interested parties and identified stakeholders

Workshops/meetings (via direct invitation) with representatives from:

· Ecological groups

· Specific interest groups (including e.g. residents and ratepayer associations)

Survey (on-line survey on beach use only), invitees to include:

· general public

· local board identified stakeholders

· people’s panel members in affected Rodney Local Board area

Photo library (beaches within review only)

Consideration

Local board views and implications

39. The views of other local boards have not been sought.

Māori impact statement

40. The views of 23 iwi in relation to dog access were sought as part of two hui held on 22 and 23 October 2013. The hui covered five bylaw topics - signs, trading in public places, navigation safety and lifejackets, animal management and dog access, outdoor fires.

41. Feedback related to the ability of iwi to determine dog access on marae, a focus on control, responsible dog ownership, and ensuring the protection of sensitive ecological areas.

Implementation

42. Issues related to implementation relate to the local board costs for additional research, engagement, and public notification initiatives; and the cost of any signage.

43. The costs of implementation are expected to be obtained from existing budgets. The cost of signage will become clearer as the review progresses.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Decision-making requirements	29
b View	Standard Process	35
c View	Schedule 1 and 2 Dog Control Bylaw 2012	37

Signatories

Authors

Shireen Munday - Policy Analyst

Toni Ferdinands - Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Helgard Wagener - Team leader, Policies and Bylaws

Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager

Rodney Local Board

10 November 2014

Muriwai Beach Visitor Hosting Service Funding Request 2014/2015

File No.: CP2014/24567

Purpose

1. To seek the allocation of funding to Nga Maunga Whakahii o Kaipara Development Trust to run a pilot visitor hosting service at Muriwai Beach.

Executive summary

2. Nga Maunga Whakahii o Kaipara Development Trust (the Trust) made a deputation to the Rodney Local Board at their business meeting in August 2014 outlining their proposal to run a pilot visitor hosting service at Muriwai Beach over the 2014/2015 summer.

3. The Trust plans to use the existing kiosk near the beach as a base for greeting visitors, sharing information and promoting the wider area.

4. The Trust has requested funding of $50,000 to run this service over the 2014/2015 summer on a trial basis.

5. This funding would cover the costs of staff, uniforms, furniture, equipment and evaluating the service.

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) allocate funding of $28,134 to Nga Maunga Whakahii o Kaipara Development Trust to develop and run the Muriwai Beach Visitor Hosting Service in 2014/2015 from the Relationships with Community and Iwi budget.

Discussion

6. Muriwai Beach has over 1 million visits annually. It is a significant gateway for visitors to Rodney and is often their only destination in the western Rodney area. There is currently no dedicated presence to greet, inform and guide visitors, and the rich cultural and historic heritage of the area is largely unknown and underappreciated.

7. The Trust believes that the visitor hosting service will significantly enhance visitor experiences at Muriwai. Similar initiatives at Okahu Bay and Maungawhau have been very popular with both domestic and overseas visitors relishing the opportunity to learn more about the environment from a Maori perspective.

8. In addition to greeting people and sharing information about the area, the service will also encourage responsible visitor behaviour, complementing the roles of agencies with formal responsibilities at Muriwai such as the Police, Ministry of Fisheries and council. Guidance will be provided on activities at the beach that minimise impact on the environment and enhance safety.

9. The visitor hosting service has the potential to provide a portal to the rest of west Rodney by encouraging some of the 1 million people who come to Muriwai to explore the surrounding areas more widely. The ability to promote other activities and experiences in the district through direct conversations with people, rather than through posters and pamphlets, is a valuable additional service.

10. This project aligns with a number of priorities in the current Rodney Local Board Plan:

· Increasing visitor numbers and enhancing visitor experiences

· Alignment with environmental priorities for restoring and protecting sites of significance and cultural value

· Promoting enduring and positive relationships with mana whenua that enhance Maori identity and wellbeing

· Supporting opportunities for co-managing aspects of regional parks

· Promoting and supporting local businesses.

11. It is anticipated that the visitor hosting service would operate from the wooden kiosk near the beach between 10am and 4pm on weekends, public holidays and during peak periods between Labour Weekend and Queens Birthday. During these times there will be a host/kaitiaki presence to greet people and provide them with a range of information about the environment, history, cultural context and local activities.

12. Funding is sought to cover wages, uniforms, communication equipment, fit out of the kiosk, information and signage. The project will also be supported by six existing paid staff members of the Trust.

13. It is intended that feedback from visitors, locals and other key stakeholders will be collected, in order to evaluate the success of the project. If successful, it could provide a useful model in the future for other areas such as Long Bay or Tawharanui.

14. The project manager of the Muriwai Beach Visitor Hosting Service was also responsible for developing and delivering the Okahu Bay and Maungawhau hosting services. He has an environmental management background and is an experienced heritage advisor with specialist knowledge of cultural tourism. His credibility and good track record mean this project is very likely to succeed.

15. If funding is granted, Council staff will negotiate a funding agreement with the Trust with clear milestones and deliverables and a timeframe for reporting back to the Rodney Local Board.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

16. This report is for the Rodney Local Board and seeks a decision on whether to fund the Muriwai Beach Visitor Hosting Service.

Māori impact statement

17. This project supports and enhances relationships with mana whenua and will contribute to Maori wellbeing and identity. It directly aligns with The Maori Plan for Tamaki Makaurau, particularly with regards to Wairuatanga and Kaitiakitanga.

Implementation

18. There are no implementation issues associated with this report.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Muriwai Visitor Hosting Presentation	59

Signatories

Authors

Paul Prestidge - Community Development Programme Manager

Authorisers

Graham Bodman - Manager - Community Development, Arts and Culture

Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager

Rodney Local Board

10 November 2014

Process for making public safety and nuisance controls for set netting at Omaha Beach

File No.: CP2014/24914

Purpose

1. The purpose of the report is to inform the Rodney Local Board of the process for making controls for recreational activities on beaches under the new Auckland Council Public Safety and Nuisance Bylaw 2013.

Executive summary

2. The Public Safety and Nuisance Bylaw 2013 enables Auckland Council to make controls for recreational activities on beaches to ensure public safety and prevent nuisance. The council is already proposing to make an annual summer set net control at two Shakespear Regional Park beaches as there have been public safety and nuisance complaints from park visitors over the past three summers.

3. Although the council has received additional requests to make set netting controls at Omaha Beach, further controls are not recommended for the 2014/2015 summer period because of an absence of recorded, verifiable evidence of risks to public safety or nuisance caused by the setting of nets, enforcement resources are not currently available and there is limited time to arrange implementation such as public notices and signage.

4. Instead council staff recommend that set netting activities be monitored at Omaha Beach over the 2014/2015 summer period and evidence of risk to public safety and nuisance issues be reviewed in 2015 at the time of the Rodney District Council – Prohibition of Set Netting Arkles Bay Bylaw review.

Recommendation

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) recommend that set netting activities be monitored at Omaha Beach over the 2014/2015 summer period and evidence of risk to public safety and nuisance be reviewed to determine if a control should be implemented.

Comments

5. Access to and management of the fishing resource is managed by the Ministry of Primary Industries. The setting of nets is a lawful activity if it complies with the Set Net Code of Practice issued by the Ministry of Primary Industries that came into effective from June 2014. Under the Public Safety and Nuisance Bylaw 2014 the council may only make controls to restrict the setting of nets where it has evidence that the nets cause a nuisance or a risk to public safety.

6. The Public Safety and Nuisance Bylaw 2013 enables the council to make controls to prohibit or restrict recreational activities on beaches for specified times or seasons to ensure public safety and prevent nuisance. As a matter of good decision-making, controls should be enforceable, evidence-based, complementary to other tools and flexible to be amended if proven ineffective.

7. Requests for controls at Omaha Beach have been received recently by the council, including a request from the Omaha Residents and Ratepayers Association to ban set netting and crab netting at Omaha (see Attachment A). There were also a number of submissions in 2013 to the Public Safety and Nuisance Bylaw on the issue of set netting at Omaha Beach (Attachment B).

8. A control at Omaha is however not recommended for the 2014/2015 summer period because period because of an absence of recorded, verifiable evidence of risks to public safety or nuisance caused by the setting of nets, enforcement resources are not currently available and there is limited time to arrange implementation such as public notices and signage.

9. Instead council staff recommend that set netting activities at Omaha Beach be monitored over the 2014/2015 summer period and evidence of risk to public safety and nuisance issues be reviewed in 2015 at the time of the Rodney District Council – Prohibition of Set Netting Arkles Bay Bylaw review.

10. Council staff also recommends that council’s enforcement staff work with the Ministry for Primary Industries to educate set netters and swimmers on safety considerations and the national set netting regulations. The Ministry for Primary Industries is responsible for protecting fisheries resources and for making and enforcing set netting regulations. Set netters in breach of the regulations should be reported to the Ministry for Primary Industries.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

11. At the Rodney Local Board workshop on 21 October 2014 the board expressed support for a set net control to be implemented at Omaha Beach for the upcoming summer period and will recommend to the Regulatory and Bylaws Committee to approve this.

Māori impact statement

12. Local iwi were invited to provide their feedback on the proposal and council staff met with a representative from Ngati Whatua and mataawaka. Feedback from both representatives was that there should be no restrictions on people’s ability to gather food for their own personal use and that there needs to be a better understanding of what the real issues are. They recommended that a more balanced approach should be undertaken including education of all beach users, including swimmers. Other feedback recently received is that consideration needs to be given to the potential impacts on other beaches, where no controls exist, as a result of displacement of set netters from Omaha.

Implementation

13. There are no implementation issues associated with the recommendations of this report. However if the Rodney Local Board recommend to the Regulatory and Bylaws Committee to make a seasonal set net control at Omaha Beach, there would be implications for enforcement resources and adequate time to implement such a control for the immediate summer.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Letter and email to ban set netting and crab netting at Omaha	67
b View	Submissions to the Public Safety and Nuisance Bylaw 2013 on Omaha Beach	81

Signatories

Authors

Emma Pilkington - Policy Analyst

Rebekah Stuart-Wilson - Principal Policy Analyst - Planning, Policies & Bylaws.

Authorisers

Helgard Wagener - Team leader, Policies and Bylaws

Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager

Rodney Local Board

10 November 2014

Community Lease to Kowhai Art and Craft Incorporated on Warkworth Showgrounds Reserve

File No.: CP2014/25100

Purpose

1. To seek Rodney Local Board approval for a community lease to Kowhai Art and Craft Incorporated on Warkworth Showgrounds Reserve.

Executive summary

2. The Warkworth Showgrounds Reserve is located on the eastern side of State Highway 1, just north of the Warkworth township.

3. Kowhai Art and Craft Incorporated (Kowhai Arts) its own building and has occupied the site at Warkworth Showgrounds since 1978 (Attachment A).

4. To date Kowhai Arts has not held a formal occupancy arrangement with council.

5. Kowhai Arts wishes to enter into community lease on part of the Warkworth Showgrounds Reserve being Part Section 96D Parish of Mahurangi (Attachment B).

6. Historically Section 96D has always been held in ownership by the Crown as a reserve. The land was vested in the Warkworth Agricultural and Pastoral Society (the Society) in trust, for use as a showground. In 1979 the land was classified by the Crown as a recreation reserve. The Society retained its vested powers and from 1979 continued to administer the land on behalf of the Crown in trust for recreational purposes. In 2011, after agreement was reached with council and the Society, the Department of Conservation (DOC) cancelled the vested powers of the Society over the land and vested the land in council in trust for recreational purposes. The Crown reserves the right to cancel the vesting should the reserve be required for redress of a claim made against the Crown pursuant to the Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975.

7. The Society has a right under an encumbrance in respect of the reserve land on which the lease will be granted. This right entitles the Society to hold its annual show in January or February each year and have exclusive use of the reserve for no more than seven days during this period. The rights pursuant to the encumbrance will be documented in any community lease granted.

8. A clause will need to be included in a new community lease to identify Part Section 96D being owned by the Crown, only vested in trust in the council and as such, may be identified in future years for treaty settlement.

9. This report recommends that the Rodney Local Board approves a new community lease to Kowhai Art and Craft Incorporated for 10 years with one 10 year right of renewal in accordance with; Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012, the rights to Warkworth Agricultural and Pastoral Society under the Encumbrance and acknowledging the Treaty of Waitangi obligations under Section 4 of the Conservation Act 1987.

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board approve:

a) a community ground lease of Part Section 96D Parish of Mahurangi as outlined in red on the attached map (Attachment B) to Kowhai Art and Craft Incorporated on the following terms and conditions:

i) Term 10 years, with one right of renewal for 10 years

ii) Rent - $1.00 per annum if requested

iii) The Kowhai Art and Craft Incorporated Community Outcomes Plan attached to the lease document (Attachment C)

iv) The Warkworth Agricultural and Pastoral Society’s rights under the encumbrance is documented in the lease

v) A clause will be included in a new community lease to document that Part Section 96D Parish of Mahurangi is owned by the Crown and may be identified in future years for treaty settlement.

b) all other terms and conditions in accordance with the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012.

Comments

10. Kowhai Arts began in 1975 as a group of five women who wished to continue pottery after their night school classes ended. They met in an old cow shed on a nearby farm and used a potter’s kiln. The group continued to grow and became an Incorporated Society under the Incorporated Societies Act 1908 on 17 August 1976. Kowhai Arts changed its name to Kowhai Art and Craft Incorporated on 17 August 2000.

11. In 1978 Kowhai Arts bought an old Keith Hay office and had it shifted to its present site. Kowhai Arts facility was officially opened on 1 November 1978.

12. Kowhai Arts is a cooperative which enables members to learn and practice their art or craft. All members are expected to take their turn in the ‘house chores’ and in the organisation at some level. Kowhai Arts works with many mediums, from pottery to printing, calligraphy and book art, through to photography and flax weaving.

13. Kowhai Art’s constitution includes the following as its objects:

· To promote and in every way to encourage arts and crafts

· To carry out instruction in arts and crafts

· To establish and manage a craft centre or any other facility for the use or benefit of the community and its members

· To promote or arrange displays, exhibitions, lectures and discussions

· To establish or arrange for the printing and publication of newsletters and reports

· To join or affiliate as a member of any club, association or society, whether under the Incorporated Societies Act 1908 or not, having one of its objects the advancement of arts and crafts.

14. Kowhai Arts currently has 108 members, its most mature member being 94 years of age. Kowhai Arts make its building available to other local groups for hire of an evening for a nominal fee. The members from the adjacent pony club are the predominant hirers.

15. The Kowhai Arts building occupies a portion of Part Section 96D Parish of Mahurangi which is held by the Crown through the Department of Conservation, classified as a recreation reserve and vested in Auckland Council, in trust for recreation purposes.

16. In 2004 the Rodney District Council adopted a Reserve Management Plan for the Warkworth Showgrounds Reserve. Within the plan, Kowhai Arts is identified as having a long association with the reserve and the plan states that Kowhai Arts occupancy should be reconfirmed by way of a lease. Further, the plan details proposed changes to classification (reclassifying from recreation reserve to local purpose reserve) the portion of land occupied by Kowhai Arts (and the adjacent Warkworth Agricultural and Pastoral Society) on Part Section 96D Parish of Mahurangi. To date, this reclassification work has not yet been completed. A separate report will be presented to the Rodney Local Board requesting approval to undertake this process which will require Iwi consultation and public notification of the portion of land to be reclassified. Council’s Reserves Act Specialist will then deal with completing the final stage of the reclassification process which will involve:

(i) completing a submission to the Minister’s delegate seeking the reclassification gazette notice to be signed

(ii) arranging for the signed notice to be published in the New Zealand Gazette

(iii) registration of the notice against the relevant title so as to provide a permanent public record for everyone.

17. A new community lease may be granted by the Rodney Local Board in terms of section 61(2A) of the Reserves Act as the lease has been contemplated in the approved reserve management plan. This is despite the fact that the portion of reserve occupied by the building and the activity therein is classified as a recreation reserve.

18. A clause will need to be included in a new community lease in light of Part Section 96D, Parish of Mauhurangi being Crown owned, only vested in trust in the council and as such, may be identified in future years for treaty settlement.

19. Objective three of the Warkworth Showgrounds Reserve Management Plan states that the open space character of the reserve is to be preserved as far as practicable and policy (iii) states Investigate the possibility of relocating the Kowhai Crafts Club and their building away from the entrance to enable a more attractive entrance to the reserve.

20. Item 12 at the Rodney Local Board business meeting of 8 July 2013 being Warkworth Showgrounds Master Plan Consultation and with respect to d) the board resolved to support Kowhai Art and Craft remaining in their current building at the existing location within the Warkworth Showgrounds Resolution Number RD/2013/182 (Attachment D).

21. In August 2013, the Trust submitted a formal application to council for a community lease on land at Warkworth Showgrounds, being Part Section 96D Parish of Mahurangi (Attachment B).

22. Council staff undertook a site visit in October 2013 at which time a building inspection was undertaken. The overall assessment of the building as stated as fit for purpose with the condition stated as satisfactory for age with some deferred maintenance. Kowhai Arts is keen to secure a community lease and progress with maintenance of its facility.

23. Council staff has negotiated and agreed a community outcomes plan with Kowhai Arts (Attachment C) which, if approved by the Rodney Local Board will be appended as a schedule to the community lease.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

24. The Rodney Community Services & Facilities Portfolio Holders were apprised of the proposal on 22 August 2014.

25. The Rodney Local Board is the delegated authority to approve the community lease.

Māori impact statement

26. There are no identified significant changes or impacts for Maori associated with the recommendations in this report.

Implementation

27. The recommendations contained in this report do not trigger the Auckland Council Significance Policy.

28. There are no cost implications for Auckland Council.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Attachment A: Aerial view of Kowhai Art and Craft Incorporated	105
b View	Attachment B: Kowhai Art and Craft Incorporated leased area at Warkworth Showgrounds	107
c View	Attachment C: Kowhai Art and Craft Incorporated Community Outcomes Plan	109
d View	Attachment D: Item 12 Rodney Local Board 08 July 2013 Resolution Number RD 2013 182	111

Signatories

Authors

Karen Walby - Advisor Community Lease

Authorisers

Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager

Graham Bodman - Manager - Community Development, Arts and Culture

Rodney Local Board

10 November 2014

Approval to reclassify a portion of Part Section 96D Parish of Mahurangi on Warkworth Showgrounds Reserve

File No.: CP2014/25107

Purpose

1. To seek Rodney Local Board approval for the proposed reclassification of a portion of Part Section 96D Parish of Mahurangi on Warkworth Show Grounds Reserve.

Executive summary

2. The Warkworth Showgrounds Reserve is located on the eastern side of State Highway 1, just north of the Warkworth township (Attachment A).

3. Part Section 96D Parish of Mahurangi forms part of the Warkworth Showgrounds Reserve. (Attachment B). The balance of the reserve is held in fee simple by council.

4. Historically, Part Section 96D has always been held in ownership by the Crown as a reserve. The land was vested in the Warkworth Agricultural and Pastoral Society (the Society) in trust, for use as a showground. In 1979 the land was classified by the Crown as a recreation reserve. The Society retained its vested powers and from 1979 continued to administer the land on behalf of the Crown in trust for recreational purposes. In 2011 after agreement was reached with council and the Society, Department of Conservation cancelled the vested powers of the Society over the land and vested the land in council, in trust for recreational purposes. The Crown reserves the right to cancel the vesting should the reserve be required for redress of a claim made against the Crown pursuant to the Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975.

5. In 2004 the former Rodney District Council approved a survey (identified as SO 348663) which divided Part Allotment 96D into Sections 1 and 2 (Attachment C). The southern portion was defined as Section 1 and was intended to be reclassified from recreation reserve to local purpose (showgrounds) reserve. There is no evidence to show that this reclassification of Part Section 96D was ever completed.

6. The portion to be reclassified would include the area of land occupied by Kowhai Art and Craft (Kowhai Arts), the adjacent Warkworth Agricultural and Pastoral Society (the Society) and the equestrian users. The activities undertaken by these groups best fit with the land classification of local purpose (community buildings and showgrounds) reserve.

7. A component of the process to reclassify Section 1 as outlined on SO 348663 from recreation reserve to local purpose (community buildings and showgrounds) reserve will involve Iwi consultation and public notification of the proposal.

8. This report recommends that the Rodney Local Board approves the process to reclassify Section 1 consisting of 3.6965 ha as outlined on SO 348663 being a portion of Part Section 96D Parish of Mahurangi to local purpose (community buildings and showgrounds) reserve.

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) approve the process to reclassify Section 1 consisting of 3.6965 ha as outlined on SO 348663 being a portion of Part Section 96D Parish of Mahurangi on Warkworth Show Grounds Reserve from recreation reserve to local purpose (community buildings and showgrounds) reserve in accordance with the terms of the Reserves Act 1977 (Attachment C).

b) will meet the costs associated with Iwi consultation and public notification of the intention to reclassify Section 1, in the approximate amount of $500.00.

Comments

9. In 2004 the former Rodney District Council approved a survey (identified as SO 348663) which divided Part Allotment 96D into Sections 1 and 2 (Attachment C). The southern portion was defined as Section 1 and was intended to be reclassified from recreation reserve to local purpose (showgrounds) reserve. There is no evidence to show that this reclassification of Part Section 96D was ever completed.

10. The portion to be reclassified would include the area of land occupied by Kowhai Art and Craft (Kowhai Arts), the adjacent Warkworth Agricultural and Pastoral Society (the Society) and the equestrian area. The reclassification is necessary to support the activities undertaken by these particular groups.

11. A component of the process to reclassify Section 1 as outlined on SO 348663 from recreation reserve to local purpose (community buildings and showgrounds) reserve will involve Iwi consultation and public notification of the proposal.

12. Council staff will complete the final stage of the reclassification process which will involve:

(i) completing a submission to the Minister’s delegate seeking the reclassification gazette notice to be signed

(ii) arranging for the signed notice to be published in the New Zealand Gazette

(iii) registration of the notice against the relevant title so as to provide a permanent public record for everyone.

13. Council staff from the appropriate departments have been canvassed and are comfortable with the proposal to reclassify the land defined as Section 1 as outlined on SO 348663.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

14. The Rodney Local Board is the delegated authority to approve the process to reclassify.

Māori impact statement

15. There are no identified significant changes or impacts for Maori associated with the recommendations in this report.

Implementation

16. The recommendations contained in this report do not trigger the Auckland Council Significance Policy.

17. There is a cost implication for the Rodney Local Board associated with Iwi consultation and public notification of the intention to reclassify Section 1, in the approximate amount of $500.00.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Attachment A: Aerial view of Warkworth Show Grounds Reserve	117
b View	Attachment B: Part Section 96D Parish of Mahurangi	119
c View	Attachment C: SO 348663 outling area to be reclassified as Local Purpose being Section 1	121

Signatories

Authors

Karen Walby - Advisor Community Lease

Authorisers

Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager

Graham Bodman - Manager - Community Development, Arts and Culture

Rodney Local Board

10 November 2014

Auckland Transport Update to Rodney Local Board, October 2014

File No.: CP2014/25165

Purpose

1. To respond to local board requests on transport-related matters and to provide information to elected members about Auckland Transport (AT) activities.

Executive summary

2. The report provides an update on transport matters for the information of the Rodney Local Board and a register of transport issues in the local board’s area, as collated by Auckland Transport’s (AT’s) Elected Member Relationship Manager North.

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) receive the Auckland Transport Update to the Rodney Local Board for September 2014.

Comments

Cluster Workshops

3. Over the months of October and November AT 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.

4. These cluster workshops will be followed by individual local board workshops to discuss this prioritisation in detail. The individual workshops will also look more closely at projects and initiatives over the next three years across the relevant local board area, including maintenance and renewals, road safety, public transport operations, route optimisation, travel demand management and parking.

Annual Report

5. AT has published its annual report for 2014 which shows that the organisation delivered $813 million worth of projects over the period, including $408 million on roads and $122 million on public transport. Many of the projects have been in the programme for many years.

6. One of the major initiatives in the current year is the new public transport fare structure and New Network, which will see buses on key routes at a minimum average of every 15 minutes, 7am to 7pm, seven days a week. AT will also be embracing new technologies to improve the customer experience, particularly in the area of public transport.

7. Further information in AT’s 2014 Annual Report and those for previous years is available at: https://at.govt.nz/about-us/reports-publications/annual-reports/.

Redesign of West Auckland buses now open for consultation

8. Consultation on proposed changes to bus services for Western areas, including Helensville, Huapai and Kumeu, began on Tuesday, 21 October 2014. A simpler, easier to understand bus network that connects better with train services are amongst the proposals and the result will be that more of west Auckland, including some of the west’s major roads such as Lincoln and Great North Rd, will have more frequent bus services.

9. Bus services are being redesigned to take advantage of the huge investment in the rail system. In a couple of years, not only will all trains (apart from the Pukekohe shuttle) be electric, they will also be operating at least every 15 minutes all-day, seven days a week. Buses will be used to connect with those frequent trains at key interchanges like Henderson and New Lynn.

10. Two new features of the proposals are a more direct and frequent bus to the North Shore, and an all-day bus service from Westgate to the city along the Northwestern motorway. The motorway is a major bus route and AT is investigating the possibility of a future busway similar to the busway on the North Shore.

11. The consultation will close on 1 December 2014. AT hopes to implement the Western New Network late in 2016, due to the need to follow a competitive tendering process and make any infrastructure changes required such as bus stops and interchanges.

12. For more events and to give feedback on the proposals visit: www.at.govt.nz/NewNetwork or phone 09 366 6400.

Draft Parking Plan Consultation

13. AT received over 6,000 responses to its Draft Parking Plan consultation, its largest consultation response to date, and undertook a significant number of face to face briefings during the consultation. The document discussed the supply, management and pricing of parking and its impacts on the achievement of transport and land use outcomes. The projected growth in population, employment and economic activity in Auckland will increase competing demands on the road network, including parking. Parking is therefore a topic which affects everyone in Auckland in one way or another.

14. Feedback has been assessed and compiled into key themes on which AT staff will make draft recommendations for consideration by the AT Board. The accepted recommendations will form a Parking Strategy for Auckland, with a set of key parking principles which will ensure that a consistent and integrated approach to parking is put in place across Auckland.

15. It is expected the strategy document will be completed early next year. Implementation of key policies is expected to be phased according to a timeframe for each principle, with any changes including localised consultation from 2015 onwards.

Operational Policy – Unformed Legal Roads

16. An operational policy on how Auckland Transport will manage unformed legal roads is being developed which will set out guidelines for dealing with common questions that arise.

17. Input has been sought from a range of stakeholder groups including the local boards, Federated Farmers, the Walking Access Commission, Fish and Game NZ, and various community and recreational user groups for horses, mountain bikes, and 4 wheel drive vehicles.

18. A final draft will go to the AT Board for approval later this year.

Update on the Rodney Local Board’s LBTCF Projects

19. All local boards are being urged to urgently identify new project proposals for the LBTCF programme so that subsequent initial assessment, detailed design, consultation and statutory approvals (where required), and construction can be completed by 30 June 2016. The balance of funding not committed to projects at that time will be forfeited. The balance of the Rodney Local Board’s TCF to be allocated prior to 30 June 2016 is approximately $688,000.

20. Construction of the following LBTCF projects identified by the Rodney Local Board has been completed:

· Mountable kerb outside 336 Mahurangi East Road, Snells Beach (Project 118);

· Footpath extension on Fordyce Road, Parakai (Project 174);

· Extending the loose metal bridle trail on the northern side of Coatesville-Riverhead Highway from east of Glenmore Road to 264 Coatesville-Riverhead Highway (Project 179);

· New footpath on Mahoenui Valley Road opposite the school to its intersection with Coatesville-Riverhead Highway (Project 180);

· New footpath on Rodney Street, Wellsford (Project 190);

· Construction of local access road improvements, 338 – 382 Main Road, Huapai (Project 175);

· New footpath on the eastern side of Coatesville-Riverhead Highway Elliot Street to the bridge (Project 177).

21. The design, consents and contract schedule for Project 113, Puhoi Pedestrian Bridge, are currently being finalised and AT staff will discuss the engineer’s estimate and request the local board’s approval to proceed to construction on completion of the detailed design.

22. Construction of a footpath on the eastern side of Puhoi Road from Puhoi Library to Krippner Road Bridge (Project 162) will be carried out in conjunction with construction of the Puhoi Pedestrian Bridge (Project 113), commencing during the 2014/2015 summer construction period. During a discussion of the design options with the local board’s TPLs at a meeting on 13 October 2014, approval was given for a footpath with edge beam and parking bays to be incorporated into the design of the pedestrian bridge.

23. Project 163, a 1.8 m wide footpath on the western side of Oaia Road from Waitea Road to the distance that $95,000 will allow (estimated at 225m). Discussions are now taking place with AC stormwater staff regarding possible stormwater improvements to be addressed as part of the project. The physical works will be tendered when these matters have been resolved.

24. At the time this report was written confirmation of informal consultation with residents affected by the construction of a 1.8m wide from 30 Point Wells Road to the Point Wells General Store at 14 Point Wells Road, Point Wells, (Project 205) was still to be provided by Member Garner.

25. AT staff met with the local board’s TPLs on 28 July 2014 to discuss Project 116, construction of a footpath on Mahurangi East Road, Snells Beach, from Arabella Lane to the existing footpath. The project is currently on hold pending further information becoming available on the timing of slip repair works in this vicinity and discussion on how safety improvements, funded by the local board, may be combined with these repairs.

26. Information has come to hand that construction of the proposed slip repair is not planned for the current financial year; however, AT staff will attend a workshop of the recently established Transport, Planning and Infrastructure Committee at the earliest opportunity to discuss the proposed timing of the slip repairs and the possibility of the local board taking advantage of these works.

27. Detailed design and preparation of a firm cost estimate for a new 200m long footpath on Waitoki Road, Waitoki, from the corner of Kahikatea Flat Road (Project 161) is progressing and discussions are being held with AC stormwater staff regarding possible stormwater improvements, without which it may be impractical to build the footpath.

28. An update on this project will be provided to the local board when this comes to hand.

29. Member Garner recently advised that the seat made available by AT from surplus stock should be installed in front of the property at 6 Alexander Road, Algies Bay (Project 294).

30. This work has been programmed by the contractor and the seat will be installed prior to Christmas 2014.

Issues Update

31. The following Issues Update comprises issues raised by Elected Members and Local Board Services staff to 24 October 2014:

	Location		Issue	Status
1	Riverhead General		Requests from the Riverhead Residents' and Ratepayers' Association.		Responses to other queries raised by the Riverhead Residents’ and Ratepayers’ Association have been advised in previous updates. With regard to the requested speed limit change, NZTA, the AA and NZ Police have approved the reduction of the speed limits within both the Riverhead and Coatesville town centres, with the Riverhead town centre speed limit being reduced to 50km/h and Coatesville town centre to 60km/h. Consultation on these speed reductions with residents/property owners and the local board will begin in November.
2		Valley Road, Kaukapakapa	Request for enhancement of barrier preventing vehicles access the paper road portion of Valley Road, Kaukapakapa.		Member McLean asked on 6 June 2014 for the implementation of additional measures, such as heavy duty lockable gates, concrete barriers and/or signage, to prevent vehicle access to the paper road portion of Valley Road, Kaukapakapa. An interim response was forwarded on 1 July 2014; however, AT has now developed a draft operational policy on how it will manage unformed legal roads. This will set out guidelines for dealing with such queries, therefore no decision can be made with respect to this request until the policy document has been approved by the AT Board.
3		Waitea Road, Muriwai	Request for safety improvements on Waitea Road, Muriwai.		On 26 June 2014 Member Pirrie requested an investigation into the installation of NSAAT restrictions and cautionary signage on Waitea Road, Muriwai. Further to interim responses on 11 July 2014 and 11 September 2014, on 15 October 2014 the local board's TPLs were advised that, having considered that the proposal for NSAAT restrictions on Waitea Road has merit, the engineers had began studying possible options and hope to provide an update before the end of October as to what decision has been made. Under consideration by Road Corridor Operations.
4		Hauraki Road, Leigh	Maintenance required on retaining wall on Hauraki Road, Leigh.		Member Houlbrooke advised on 10 July 2014 that the retaining wall on the road frontage from the Leigh Fire Station (28 Seatoun Road) to the entrance to Leigh School (26 Seatoun Road) is rotting away and allowing the bank to fall onto the footpath, plus the trees to hang over the footpath. The overgrowth blocks visibility of the school entrance and pupils waiting to cross the road. The matter was referred to AC Parks as the retaining wall is part of a planted garden; however, on 13 October the local board's TPLs were advised that AT’s contractor will programme reinstatement of the retaining wall, with this work expected to be completed in November. In the meantime, discussions will continue with regard to ownership of the asset.
5		Matakana and Leigh Roads, Sandspit and Mahurangi East Roads, and Rodney roads in general	Request for information on upgrades programmed for Matakana and Leigh Roads, Sandspit and Mahurangi East Roads, and Rodney roads in general.		Having considered information on programmed rehabilitations/upgrades for the Leigh road (i.e. Matakana and Leigh Roads) and the Warkworth – Snells Beach road (Sandspit and Mahurangi East Roads) at their meeting on 9 July 2014, the Rodney Local Board’s TPLs asked when these roads and other roads throughout the Rodney Local Board area are programmed for major upgrades to bring them up to the standard now required due to increased traffic volumes. The local board's TPLs were advised on 1 October that AT’s Integrated Transport Programmes (ITP) identifies the following projects over the period 2015-25: Warkworth SH1 Intersection Improvements – provides AT contribution towards SH1 intersection projects as per existing Rodney District Council / Transit NZ MOU; Matakana Village Centre and Rodney Leathers Bridge (Variation 64) – improvements associated with existing plan variation; Stockyard Falls Light Industrial and Retail Parks (Variation 158) – also known as stage one of the Warkworth Western Collector. With regard to improvements associated with the existing plan variation, the Warkworth SH1 Intersection Improvements are currently identified as a project with commitments (the MoU) and, arrangements with NZTA are progressing for completion of the interim works at Hill Street this summer. Inclusion of the Matakana Village Centre and Rodney Leathers Bridge (Variation 64) and Stockyard Falls Light Industrial and Retail Parks (Variation 158) however depend on prioritisation results and the level of AT transport funding available over the next 10 years. The ITP also looks into the subsequent two decades (2025-2045) so includes costs associated with expansions to the Rural Urban Boundary in the Warkworth area. A map was provided indicating the conceptual roading network associated with the Warkworth area under medium growth land use assumptions. The costs associated with this network (approximately $320m) include funding for both the proposed new roading connections and the cost of upgrading parts of the existing arterial networks in the area to cope with the anticipated growth. It was noted that the map identifies a conceptual transport network only and further planning of land use and assessment of matters such as growth rates, staging of development, sequencing of projects, constructability issues and funding sources will be required to determine the final network. It is understood that Auckland Council is likely to update the map in its next round of RUB/greenfield planning to take into account changes such as those to the state highway network. The ITP also has a number of specified programmes available to deliver the highest priority safety and minor improvements, walking and cycling, minor intersection upgrades (under $5m) and initiatives that come out of Network Operating Plans, the levels of funding for which depends on prioritisation results and available funding. In addition, the Matakana Valley Road seal extension project is being progressed this financial year, followed by Takatu Road (2015/2016 and 2016/2017) and Monowai, Silverhill and Wellsford Valley Roads in subsequent years out to 2023. Three further Rodney projects feature next on the seal extension list, meaning effectively that all seal extension activity on the current Land Transport Programme takes place in Rodney. The ITP is proposing that a dedicated budget for prioritised seal extensions continue to be provided for the foreseeable future.
6		Austin/Kahikatea Flat Roads, Dairy Flat	Request for road marking and signage at the intersection of Austin/Kahikatea Flat Roads, Dairy Flat.		Member McLean asked on 13 August 2014 that road marking and signage be provided at the corner of Austin/Kahikatea Flat Roads, Dairy Flat, where the absence of these makes the school bus drop-off/pick-up dangerous for children. On 16 September 2014 the local board's TPLs were advised that an AT engineer had undertaken an initial review of the issue raised and that further detailed investigation will be programmed, with an expected completion date of mid-December 2014. An update providing information on the outcomes and recommendations from the more detailed investigation can be expected by late January 2015. Referred to Road Corridor Operations staff.
7		Wainui and Kowhai Roads, Wainui	School bus stop upgrade at the intersection of Wainui and Kowhai Roads, Wainui.		Documentation explaining a proposed school bus stop upgrade at the intersection of Wainui and Kowhai Roads, Wainui, as a result of concerns raised by parents, the bus operator and the Police was forwarded to the local board's TPLs on 26 August 2014 with a request for feedback no later than Friday, 26 September 2014. No comments were received from Members.
8		SH16 Helensville - Parakai	Poor standard of footpath maintenance on SH16 Helensville - Parakai footpath.		At the local board's TPL meeting on 21 August 2014 the standard of maintenance on the footpath that stretches from Helensville to Parakai was noted as being very poor, with the path being no more than a goat track in places. Members asked that repairs and improvements be investigated. On 6 October 2014 the TPLs were advised that metal that has washed down from the road edge onto the footpath will be swept and the weeds sprayed and, once this work has been completed, a further inspection to highlight the faults will be undertaken so that any trip hazards and crack sealing requirements can be identified, together with any other issues resolved. At present there are no programmed renewals for this portion of walkway and, as there is an existing footpath, it is not on AT’s Walking and Cycling Team’s New Footpath Programme.
9		Warkworth /Matakana /Snells Beach areas	Request for repairs /maintenance in the Warkworth /Matakana /Snells Beach areas.		Local board staff forwarded a list of repairs / maintenance required in the Warkworth /Matakana/Snells Beach areas (specifically Morpeth and Elizabeth Streets, Sandspit, Mahurangi East, Matakana and Sharp Roads) submitted by Bryan Jackson of the Snells Beach Residents' and Ratepayers' Association in support of the Association's Local Board Plan submission. A response to CAS-385959-M7P6J6 was forwarded on 22 September, and 30 September (CAS-385498-L5N1C3), local board staff were advised that, while there are no issues on Sandspit Road 1.5km from Warkworth, at 3.1km there is a flushed area of seal that has been programmed for water cutting just before the entrance to the deer farm, to improve the texture/traction. This work will be completed before the end of October 2014. Referred to Road Corridor Maintenance.
10		Leigh and Ashton Roads, Whangateau,	Complaints regarding the response to previous case CAS-358807-Z7H4X8 about the standard of maintenance on Leigh and Ashton Roads, Whangateau.		A complaint from a Whangateau resident not happy with the response to previous queries about the standard of maintenance on Ashton Road, Whangateau, was forwarded by local board staff on 5 September 2014. On 14 October they were advised that work is planned to rework the temporary repair completed during May / June 2014 to level out the unevenness on this section of carriageway, with the work planned for completion during November 2014.
11		Haruru and Tahekeroa Roads, Makerau	Request for wildlife and one-way signage on Haruru and Tahekeroa Roads, Makerau.		On 16 September 2014 Cr Webster's governance support advisor requested the installation of two signs for wildlife on Haruru Road where there are straying turkeys, deer, cows, goats, pigs, pheasants etc., together with a one way sign on Tahekeroa Road between Monowai and Mick Dillon Roads where the road reduces to one way. On 23 October Cr Webster and Members Pirrie and Garner were advised that a sign to warn drivers about the presence of wildlife would be installed on Haruru Road by the end of December 2014. However, because there are no one-way sections on Tahekeroa Road, just one short section where a vehicle may have to give way to oncoming vehicles but which has good visibility, the request for a one way sign had been declined.
12		Haruru and Tahekeroa Roads, Makerau	Request for Maintenance on Haruru and Tahekeroa Roads, Makerau.		Cr Webster's governance support advisor noted on 16 September 2014 that Haruru Road had been reduced to one way for three months, that cones had been in place on the side of Tahekeroa Road Between Haruru and Mick Dillon Roads for three months, and that Tahekeroa requires maintenance. On 1 October 2014 the local board's TPLs were forwarded a copy of a response to Cr Webster advising that the reduced width of Haruru Road was the result of a washout and erosion around the culvert pipe, with the orange netting installed to ensure safety. AT’s contractor will be installing a new, extended culvert pipe and reinstating the full width of the road as part of the October 2014 maintenance programme. The cones on Tahekeroa Road had been placed as a precautionary measure at an over slip that had occurred as consequence of a recent storm, at the site of a large slip that had been repaired the previous year. More clay spoil had washed down and, while there was no imminent danger, the cones were in place while the site was being further monitored. Engineers had confirmed that Tahekeroa Road is currently in a good condition, with recently formed pot holes having been filled, and just an additional few requiring attention. It is not unusual for unsealed roads to become potholed over winter; however, regular inspections seek to identify and rectify these issues as they occur.
13		Alexandra Street Road Reserve, Riverhead	Request for permission to carry out work on unformed legal road.		A request from members of the Riverhead Community for permission to remove rubbish and beautify an area of unformed paper road in Alexandra Street Road Reserve, Riverhead, was forwarded by Board Chair, Brenda Steele, on 22 September 2014. Member Steele was advised that all the expense involved, including removal of the rubbish and purchase and installation of bollards, together with on-going maintenance costs of the area, will need to be funded by the local board or community group involved as AT has no funding for improvements to and on-going maintenance of these unformed legal roads. The request was considered by staff from AT’s Road Corridor Operations Team who are happy to support such initiatives providing they are established and maintained by the community at their cost. This particular proposal requires vegetation removal and some ground levelling, so staff will need to meet with the local group for further discussion prior to approval being granted (scheduled for early to mid-November).
14		Wharf Road, Leigh	Request for reinstatement of parking sign at the bottom of Wharf Road, Leigh.		Local board staff requested reinstatement of a parking sign at the bottom of Wharf Road, Leigh, on 25 September 2014 on behalf of a resident. The local board’s TPLs were advised on 22 October 2014 that the request had been forwarded to AT’s contractors for action.
15		880 Main Road, Kumeu	Proposed installation of Vector total pad transformer at 880 Main Road, Kumeu.		Documentation regarding the removal of one car park from outside 880 Main Road, Kumeu, necessary for the installation of a total pad transformer to address low voltage in the immediate vicinity, was sent to the local board's TPLs on 8 October 2014 with a request for response no later than 15 October. No comments were received from members.
16		Warkworth Car Park Building, Percy Street, Warkworth	Defective lights in the Warkworth Car Park Building, Percy Street, Warkworth.		Member Sayers advised on 10 October 2014 that several of the lights on the upper level of the Warkworth Car Park building were defective and asked that they be replaced. He was advised that, whilst the car park is an Auckland Council asset, AT is currently responsible for its operation. On 21 October 2014 the local board chairperson, deputy chairperson and Member Sayers were advised that an electrician had investigated and the defective lights had been repaired. AT’s contracts coordinator had phoned the resident who raised the matter with Member Sayers and provided her with contact details in case of future problems.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

32. This report is for the local board’s information.

Māori impact statement

33. No specific issues with regard to the Maori Impact Statement are triggered by this report.

Implementation

34. The activities detailed in this report do not trigger the Significance Policy, all programmes and activities are within budget/in line with the Council’s Annual Plan and LTP documents and there are no legal or legislative implications arising from the activities detailed in this report.

35. There are no implementation issues.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Author	Ellen Barrett, Elected Member Relationship Manager, Auckland Transport
Authoriser	Jonathan Anyon, Elected Member Relationship Team Manager, Auckland Transport

Rodney Local Board

10 November 2014

Auckland Transport Quarterly Update to Local Boards

File No.: CP2014/25168

Purpose

1. 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.

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) receive the Auckland Transport Quarterly Update report

Comments

Significant activities during the period under review

Key Agency Initiatives

East West Connections

2. 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.

3. 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.

4. Public consultation on these short listed options commenced in October. This included public open days and workshops.

PT Development

Otahuhu Interchange

5. 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.

6. 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

7. 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.

8. Following an evaluation process, Request for Proposal documentation for two enabling works contract packages were released to the ROI respondents in late August. A series of interface meetings are scheduled with respondents prior to receipt of proposals in November whereby a tender evaluation will be undertaken to procure the preferred tenderer. A project update was provided to manu whenua groups (seven iwi represented) mainly focussing on stormwater mitigation issues.

EMU Procurement

9. 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.

PT Operations

Bus Improvements

10. 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.

11. On-time performance across the entire bus network rose to 91.45% for September and has remained over 90% during the quarter.

12. 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).

13. 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

14. 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.

15. 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 .

16. 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

17. 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

18. 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.

19. 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

20. 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

21. 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.

22. The new William Harvey Bridge footbridge is now fully operational. The upgrade of Van Damme’s Lagoon, NCI and Watercare works are ongoing.

23. 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

24. 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.

25. 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.

26. 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

27. 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.

28. Results indicate that 6 weeks after the start of the trial 52% are continuing to use public transport and after 8 weeks there is only a slight drop to 41%.

29. 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

30. 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.

31. 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

32. 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)

33. Eight variable message signs (VMS) programmed for the 2013-14 year are now in place.

34. 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

35. 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

36. 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

37. 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.

38. 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

39. 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.

40. 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.

41. 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.

42. 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.

43. 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

44. 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.

45. 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

46. 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.

47. Currently for Year 4, 88 cabinet areas are in build, 43 are completed and 22 have moved into warranty.

Watercare Hunua 4 Bulk Watermain

48. 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

49. 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.

50. 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

51. 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.

52. The target timeframes for processing overweight permit applications are three (3) days for KPI 2, single trip, multi travel and continuous renewal permits and five (5) working days for KPI 3 continuous and area permits.

Parking and Enforcement

Parking machine replacement

53. 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.

54. 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.

55. 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

56. 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.

57. 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	Schedule of activities undertaken for the first quarter (2014/2015) ending 30 September 2014 and forward works programme for the second quarter (2014/2015) ending 31 December 2014	143
b View	Travelwise Schools activities broken down by local board	159
c View	Traffic Control Committee Decisions	161
d View	Local Board Advocacy Report	163
e View	Local Board Transport Capital Fund Report	165

Signatories

Authors	Various
Authorisers	Jonathan Anyon, Elected Member Relationship Team Manager, Auckland Transport

Rodney Local Board

10 November 2014

Draft Community Facilities Network Plan

File No.: CP2014/24094

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 Rodney Local Board:

a) Provide feedback of the Draft Community Facilities Network Plan which will guide council’s provision of community facilities, including any specific feedback on the strategic framework, provision framework, action plan, implementation approach and prioritisation criteria.

b) Notes proposed revised timeframes to include libraries in the Community Facilities Network Plan and that further engagement with local boards will be undertaken to discuss the libraries content and the final revised network plan.

Comments

Draft Community Facilities Network Plan

10. Community facilities contribute to building strong, healthy and vibrant communities by providing space for people to connect with each other, socialise, learn skills and participate in a range of social, cultural, art and recreational activities. Community facilities contribute to improved lifestyles and a sense of belonging, identity and pride among residents.

11. The draft plan outlines how council will provide and invest in community facilities to respond to community needs and population growth and changes.

12. The draft plan sets out a strategic framework for community facilities to articulate why council invests in the provision of community facilities, the desired outcomes from this investment and the key objectives for future provision. This is aligned with the strategic direction and transformational shifts in the Auckland Plan, local board plans and relevant strategic action plans.

13. The proposed common purpose for community facilities is “Vibrant and welcoming places at the heart of where and how communities connect and participate”.

14. The draft plan sets out four proposed key objectives to guide and underpin the future provision of community facilities:

· Undertake robust and consistent planning to ensure future decisions on the provision of community facilities are based on clear evidence of needs and assessment of all options.

· Maintain, improve and make the best use of existing community facilities where they continue to meet community needs and investigate the future of facilities that no longer meet community needs.

· Provide flexible and multi-purpose facilities that are co-located and/or integrated with other community infrastructure.

· Look for opportunities to leverage and support partnerships.

Future Provision Framework

15. The draft plan proposes provision frameworks for each type of community facility to guide council’s approach to the provision of new facilities in the future.

Community Centres

16. The proposed provision approach for community centres is to continue to maintain and deliver community centres at the local level across the region, recognising the important role they play in meeting local community needs for spaces to deliver a wide range of community, recreation, learning, events, arts and culture activities.

Venues for hire

17. Given the wide range of providers of venues to hire, the draft plan proposes the council does not invest in any more new stand-alone venues for hire. It is proposed that bookable space is included in multi-purpose community centres (new or existing/redeveloped), guided by community needs assessments. 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	175
b View	Draft Community Facilities Network Plan stakeholder feedback	241

Signatories

Authors

Anita Coy-Macken - Principal Policy Analyst – Central

David Shamy - Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Penny Pirrit - Regional & Local Planning Manager

Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager

[2] A ‘dog related complaint’ is a dog related service request that relates to a dog incident (e.g. dog attack). In addition to dog related complaints, dog related service requests include such things as requests for property inspections and lost dog notifications.

[3] Auckland Council (2011)– Dog Control - Issues and options discussion paper.gust 2011

[4] While some caution needs to be taken when interpreting the results of these surveys as they were self-selecting, the results were also mirrored in a statistical study in Adelaide in 2004, which found 43 per cent of respondents were afraid of dogs. In addition the study found that being frightened by a dog was not related to having been attacked, however being threatened by a dog was a significant indicator of whether a person was likely to be frightened by dogs.

Boyd, C., Fotheringham, B., Litchfield, C., McBryde, I., Metzer, J., Scanlon, P., . . . Winefield, A. (2004). Fear of dogs in a community sample: Effects of age, gender and prior experience of canine aggression. Anthrozoos, 17 (2).

[5] Manukau City Council ( 2007) Understanding Dog and Dog Owner Physical Exercise Habits

[6] Refer to Governing Body Agenda Item 12, 22 November 2012 (GB/2012/157)

[7] The dog exercise area at Eyres Point is now part of the Te Arai Regional Park (see footnote 1) and therefore is excluded from any local board beach and foreshore rules and the rule of the relevant regional park will apply.

Chairperson	Brenda Steele
Deputy Chairperson	Steven Garner
Members	James Colville
	Warren Flaunty, QSM
	Thomas Grace
	Beth Houlbrooke
	John McLean
	Phelan Pirrie
	Greg Sayers

Asset Mapping	Kumeu/Huapai and Riverhead
Beacon Neighbourhood Survey	Kumeu/Huapai
Synthesise findings into report or community plan	Kumeu/Huapai and Riverhead
Expert Community Workshop	Riverhead

Authors	Raewyn Morrison - Local Board Democracy Advisor
Authorisers	Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager