2 Apologies
At the close of the agenda no apologies had been received.
3 Declaration of Interest
Members are reminded of the need to be vigilant to stand aside from
decision making when a conflict arises between their role as a member and any
private or other external interest they might have.
4 Confirmation of Minutes
|
That the Orākei Local Board:
a)
confirm the minutes of its ordinary meeting,
held on Thursday, 5 February 2015, as a true and
correct record.
|
5 Leave of Absence
At the close of
the agenda no requests for leave of absence had been received.
6 Acknowledgements
At the close of the agenda no requests for acknowledgements had been
received.
7 Petitions
At the close of the agenda no requests to present petitions had been
received.
8 Deputations
Standing
Order 3.20 provides for deputations. Those applying for deputations are
required to give seven working days notice of subject matter and applications
are approved by the Chairperson of the Orākei Local Board. This means that
details relating to deputations can be included in the published agenda. Total
speaking time per deputation is ten minutes or as resolved by the meeting.
At the close
of the agenda no requests for deputations had been received.
9 Public Forum
A period of
time (approximately 30 minutes) is set aside for members of the public to
address the meeting on matters within its delegated authority. A maximum of 3
minutes per item is allowed, following which there may be questions from www
members.
At the close of the agenda no requests for public forum had been
received.
10 Extraordinary Business
Section 46A(7) of the Local Government Official Information and
Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:
“An item that is not on the agenda for a meeting may be dealt with
at that meeting if-
(a) The local authority by resolution so
decides; and
(b) The presiding member explains at the
meeting, at a time when it is open to the public,-
(i) The reason why the item is not on the agenda; and
(ii) The reason why the discussion of the item
cannot be delayed until a subsequent meeting.”
Section 46A(7A) of the Local Government Official Information and
Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:
“Where an item is not on the agenda for a meeting,-
(a) That item may be discussed at that meeting
if-
(i) That item is a minor matter relating to
the general business of the local authority; and
(ii) the presiding member explains at the
beginning of the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public, that the
item will be discussed at the meeting; but
(b) no resolution, decision or recommendation
may be made in respect of that item except to refer that item to a subsequent
meeting of the local authority for further discussion.”
11 Notices of Motion
At the close of the agenda no requests for notices of motion had
been received.
|
Orākei
Local Board
05 March 2015
|
|
Auckland
Transport Update: March 2015
File No.: CP2015/00894
Purpose
1. The purpose of this report is to update the Board on a range of
transport related issues in Orākei area during
February 2015.
|
Recommendation/s
That the Orākei Local
Board:
a) receives the March 2015 report
from Auckland Transport.
b) approves $120,000 from the
Transport Capital Fund, to construct the Churchill Park Street Lights.
c) defers the Churchhill Park
Pathway Project of $60,000 from the Transport Capital Fund, to be revisited
if funds are available once projects with a higher priority are delivered.
d) approves $110,000 from the
Transport Capital Fund, to construct the entrance way at Eversham Drive.
|
Monthly
Overview
Orākei Local
Board Transport Capital Fund
2. The Process
for Discretionary Fund Projects
Either a Rough Order of Cost will be
provided to the Orākei Local Board for projects, or if a project does not meet the listed
criteria it will be declined.
When the Rough Order of Cost is provided
the Orākei Local Board must formally authorise the next step in the
delivery of these projects, which is detailed investigation, design, and a firm
estimate. The Board then approves or not, the project for construction. The
costs incurred for detailed investigation, design, consultation and
construction of these projects will be deducted from Orākei Local Board’s
Transport Capital Fund. Please see commentary on the progress of current Rough
Order of Cost’s.
3. The Landing
Background
A project to upgrade the main entrance to
the Landing has been proposed for the 2014/15 financial year and a budget of
$90,000 from Auckland Transport TRIPs funding has been allocated by the Orakei
Local Board to re-design and rebuild the entrance way. The primary drivers of
the project are to improve pedestrian and cycle safety.
Progress to Date
Auckland Council contracted Flow transport
planning and engineering specialists, to develop design options and solutions
for safety concerns and traffic flow at the entrance.
The project team have:
· Met with stakeholder groups from the
landing.
· Met with Orakei Local Board, landing
committee.
· Conducted surveys on trailer boat
owners using Okahu bay boat ramp.
· Reviewed crash analysis statistics for
the site.
· Met with Auckland Transport.
· Developed initial design options.
· Progressed design options ready for
detailed design and procurement.
4. Development of the Landing Entrance Design
Three designs options were developed for
the Landing entrance and Auckland Transport was consulted on the three
designs.
The design preferred by stakeholders and
the Local board landing committee, involved detouring path users inside the
landing entrance behind the exiting traffic and over a raised table in the
roadway.
This design was rejected by Auckland
Transport for the following reasons:
· It does not fit with current best
practice of a drive way design.
· Will not achieve the pedestrian or
cycle safety outcomes being sort.
· Is inconsistent with the Tamaki Drive
master plan.
· Is inconsistent with the future
provision of a protected cycleway along Tamaki Drive.
The other two designs did not sufficiently
address the objectives of the project. Auckland Transport recommended that the
redevelopment of the entrance be designed to recreate the visual effect of a
driveway entrance, including the following elements:
· Provide driver cues indicating a driveway entrance.
· The path needs to follow the alignment of Tamaki Drive, rather than
detour into the site.
· keep the path close to the curve of Tamaki Drive make it appear to
be a driveway.
· Strip away the features that indicate a road i.e. give way signage,
refuge island and road markings.
· provide no less than the current sight distance provisions.
· Construct path on an incline – this is to be the maximum allowed in
Auckland City Council driveway standards.
· The width of the driveway will be wider than standard driveways. To
allow for vehicles towing boats.
· Build a lip adjacent to the carriageway, utilising maximum slope of
driveway using black oxidised concrete to form footpath.
· Utilise temporary signs to advise people of the change.
· Possible provision of an education programme with users of The
Landing.
The most resent design has largely captured
these requirements and has been accepted by Auckland Transport to move towards
detailed design.
Conclusion
During design development there has been a
significant disconnect between the aspirations of stakeholders and management
of the Landing and Auckland Transport requirements.
The latest version of the design recreates
the landing entrance into a driveway entrance, where the prevailing road rules
will apply and vehicles will need to give way to people using the path.
Given the busy nature of Tamaki Drive,
there may be operational effects of the proposal –those turning in left may
hold up following traffic as they give way to path users. Similarly, those
turning in right may need to wait longer to find a gap in opposing traffic as
well as give way to path users. Current road layout on Tamaki drive can
accommodate these possible effects.
The current design intends to take away
confusion, prioritise pedestrians, slow vehicle traffic and improve overall
safety. The design is ready to move to detailed design, develop specifications
and tender documents in preparation for procurement of a contractor.
5. Churchill Park Pathway – Bay
Road Entrance
This was resolution n) from October 2014 meeting.
The project has been assessed as follows:
· It
consists of the design and construction of a path running from the existing Bay
Road footbridge to the Kinsale Road turning circle
· This
cost includes initial RMA consultation and an allowance for meeting RMA
requirements (especially stormwater management, which can only be confirmed
with further investigation. The park is a not identified as a closed landfill
site although an RMA application for contaminated consent may be necessary.
· The
ROC allows for a 1.5 metre wide concrete path.
· The
ROC is $60,000
This is considered a third tier priority for the local board
capital fund, there is currently more projects than funds available.
6. Churchill Park Street Lights
This was resolution o) from October 2014 meeting.
The project has been assessed as follows:
· It
consists of the design and construction of streetlighting for the accessway and
carpark near Churchill Park School
· The
ROC includes lighting, cabling, switchboard, and power connection
· The
ROC is $120,000
This project is considered to be number 1 priority for the
Orakei Local Board to meet park and transport needs in this area.
7. Churchill Park Eversham Entranceway
This was resolution m) from October 2014 meeting.
This resolution was ‘to proceed with a project to seal the
Eversham Rd entranceway to Churchill Park.’
The project is in fact formalising the existing pedestrian
link and includes formation of a gravel path, timber/gravel steps and a
boardwalk/bridge across a stream area to link with an existing path in the
park. It does provide a pedestrian link into the park and therefore is
considered to meet the new criteria.
The project has been assessed as follows:
· It
consists of the design and construction of a new path, steps, boardwalk and
bridge from Eversham Ave to existing path.
· The
cost includes an estimate for RMA processes and an allowance for meeting RMA
requirements including stormwater flow, arboreal and other consents, which can
only be confirmed with further investigation.
· The
ROC is $110,000
This project is considered to be number 1 priority for the
Orakei Local Board to meet park and transport needs in this area.
8. Waiatarua Entrance and Abbots
Way to Grand Drive Shared Path
The ROC for these projects were assessed as
one project, the total for both projects came to $510, 000. Following
discussions with the Transport and Park Leads, it has been requested that we
separate the two projects to be delivered in stages if there is not sufficient
funding to deliver both.
9. Tamaki Drive to Glen Innes
Cycleway
Consent for this project has been lodged. This is working
towards a construction start date of April 2015. Currently Auckland Transport
is investigating key linkages to the third stage of the project, from St Johns
Road to Orakei Basin.
10. Public
Transport (PT) Update
The Orakei Local Board has successfully
lobbied for a feeder bus services for their residents. The first trial, the
Stonefields Loop begins on 23 February, route number 632, will operate Monday
to Friday from 6am to 7.15pm, running between Glen Innes Train Station and a
loop around Stonefields. Auckland Transport plans to begin the trial before the
end of February 2015. The Stonefields Loop trial is part of the New Network, an
Auckland-wide project to create a simpler and more integrated public transport
network. Proposed changes for the eastern suburbs’ New Network will be out for
consultation in 2015.
11. Road
Resurfacing
Purpose
Roads require periodic resurfacing
(resealing) to keep the sealed surface waterproof and maintain good skid
resistance. The bitumen in the surfacing oxidises over time causing it to
become brittle and either crack, unravel or lose chip. Similarly the chip can
become polished and/or the road surface flushed resulting in a loss of skid
resistance over time.
If resurfacing is carried out at the right
time then the surface remains waterproof, skid resistance is maintained and
surface water does not penetrate the road pavement. It can be considered to be
much the same as repainting a house – if it is left too long and water
penetrates the surface then much more costly repairs are required.
Surfacing Types
Roads are resurfaced using either a chip seal
or a thin asphaltic concrete surfacing (hotmix). Generally chip seals have a
life of 8-12 years while hotmix can be expected to last 10-14 years
Chip seals are the most cost-effective
method of resurfacing and in many situations are the only method that can
practically be used to restore the road surface to a suitable condition.
Hotmix is generally only used on high trafficked roads (those carrying more
than 10,000 vehicles per day) or in high stress areas such as at intersections
or cul-de-sac heads.
Chip seals cost in the order of $4-8 per
square metre while hotmix costs $20-30 per square metre depending on the type
of mix used. In the 2014/15 year we will resurface 430 km of roads at a cost
of approximately $50 million – 80% of the resealing carried out will be chip
seals.
Prior to resurfacing pre-seal repairs such
as digouts, crack sealing and surface levelling are undertaken. There is also
considerable effort made to coordinate the resurfacing works with other planned
renewal and improvement works in the road corridor (both road and utility
related) so as to ‘dig once’.
Chip Seals
Chip seals can be either single coat or two
coat seals though in most cases now two coat seals are used as they are more
resistant to turning stresses.
Each resurfacing site is subject to a
specific seal design and the choice of surfacing and chip size used is
dependent on factors such as the traffic volumes and loading, the existing
surface texture and pavement strength, turning stresses etc.
Issues
Many resurfacing complaints arise from the
resurfacing of existing aged hotmix surfaces with chip seal when they reach the
end of their service life. These hotmix surfaces were usually constructed by
developers at the time of subdivision and when they are resurfaced with a chip
seal this is not welcomed by adjoining landowners. The need to periodically
resurface the road to avoid water ingress into the road pavement is often not
understood by the adjoining residents and they consider the rougher chip seal
surface to be inferior to that of the smoother hotmix.
Chip seals also continue to shed excess
chip for several months following resurfacing which is a nuisance for adjoining
landowners and can create the mistaken impression that the new chip seal
surface is defective. Following resurfacing new chip seals particularly
two-coat seals can require 4-5 sweeps to remove excess chip from the surface.
It is also usual for the bitumen to soften
during warm weather for several years following application until such time as
the kerosene fully evaporates from the bitumen. At this time it will be
susceptible to scuffing from turning vehicles. These areas can be treated with
the application of fresh sealing chip.
12. Remuera
Auckland Transport have been evaluating the
car park structure in Clonbern Road, with aim of ensuring it is safe, providing
ongoing monthly monitoring of the facility and considering all options, which
include working through options within the broader organisation concerning a
possible disposal.
We have taken advice of professional
structural engineers to ensure the safety of the structure with ongoing monthly
surveys, and applying weight restrictions on the top deck.
No decision has been taken as to the
potential disposal of the facility. AT recognise that there are interested
stakeholders with whom discussion has to take place and has a meeting to update
the Orakei Local Board on 26 February.
The first project of the Remuera Upgrade is
the Remuera Road Entrance to the Village Green, this will be constructed as
night works, to minimise disruption and will commence on 23 March.
Implementation
Issues
|
AT Ref #
|
TPL Ref #
|
Issue
|
Discussion
|
Action
|
|
AT2012/007954
|
9.8
|
Suggestions for
new Pedestrian Crossing layouts in Ellerslie Town Centre
|
Auckland Council
Urban Design staff has suggested options for improving pedestrian crossings
in this town Centre.
|
June 2014, The
road safety team is currently reviewing the implementation of pedestrian
crossings suggested by the operations team.
|
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
Stonefields
Parking
|
It has been
reported that the high density housing units that are currently being built
only have one car park for each three bedroom unit and there are no parking
bays on the streets.
Many of the new
units are used as rental properties and have multiple vehicles at each
residence.
This is
resulting in the streets having cars parked down both sides, some partly on
the berms and reducing the road width (at times) to one lane only.
|
This issue was
discussed at the May 2013, Orakei Local Board Meeting.
Auckland Transport
was asked to comment on a memo from Auckland Council.
Auckland
Transport has provided comment and has asked for this matter to be removed
from the ‘Issues Register’.
At the July 2013
Orakei Local Board meeting members requested that this item remain on the
register.
A meeting with
Auckland Transport and the Stonefields Residents association was held on 26
March 2014.
June 2014, The
board approves a resolution for a ROC to install additional parking bays as
part of their Transport Capital Fund.
November 2014,
apologies that this has not been completed; this will be available for the
December meeting.
December 2015
Proposal is provided in the body of the report for the board’s consideration.
Feb 2015, no
agreement has been reached and it has been referred back to the residents
association for further comment.
|
|
N/A
|
|
Support Orākei
Local Board urban design initiatives
|
Auckland
Transport has been requested to work with Auckland Council’s Urban Design
Team on the following issues:
1. Creating a boulevard effect by
planting further oak trees on the north side of Remuera Rd around the
Victoria Ave shops; and
2. Issues relating to the Village Green
project in respect of aspects where Auckland Transport has a role.
|
Auckland
Transport continues to work with Auckland Council to support development of
the Village Green plan on an as required basis. There is no intention for AT
to undertake further involvement than as a support and advocate for the Board
to deliver these projects.
Feb 2015, the
first project will begin on 23 March and will be the entrance to the village
green from Remuera Road..
|
Notes: N/A – A Customer Service Reference Number is
not applicable to this item because either it was handled directly by the EMRM
or it is a legacy issue or the request was for information that was outside the
boundaries of a service request.
Attachments
There are no attachments for this report.
Signatories
|
Author
|
Melanie Dale – Elected Member Relationship Manager –
Auckland Transport
|
|
Authorisers
|
Jonathon Anyon - Elected Member Relationship Team
Manager – Auckland Transport
Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden &
Orakei Local Boards
|
|
Orākei
Local Board
05 March 2015
|
|
Local board input on the draft Regional Land Transport
Plan 2015-2025
File No.: CP2015/01058
Purpose
1. To outline the
options for local boards to provide feedback on the draft Regional Land
Transport Plan 2015-2025 and agree the approach the Orakei Local Board will
take to provide their feedback.
Executive
Summary
2. The draft
Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 (RLTP) was endorsed by Auckland
Transport’s Board at their 16 December 2014 meeting. It sets out the programme
of work Auckland Transport (AT) proposes to deliver over the next ten years,
within the funding available, and the models used to prioritise projects.
Attachment A is the draft RLTP.
3. Local boards
had three opportunities at different workshops in 2014 to discuss the RLTP
process, prioritisation mechanisms and proposed projects with Auckland
Transport management and staff.
4. Following on
from these workshops, local boards are now encouraged to provide formal feedback
about the draft RLTP. There are two ways boards can do this. AT would like to
encourage boards to take up both opportunities.
a) Speak at the AT
Transport Stakeholder event that is taking place on the 10 and 11 March. This
is a hearing style event where local board members will be heard by members of
the AT board.
b) Provide written
feedback to AT by 16 March.
|
Recommendation/s
That the Orākei Local
Board:
a) agree to
provide feedback to Auckland Transport on the draft Regional Land Transport
Plan 2015-2025 by:
i) speaking at
the Auckland Transport Transport Stakeholder event.
ii) providing
written feedback to Auckland Transport.
b) delegate to
the Chair and the transport portfolio holders the power to speak on behalf of
the board at the Auckland Transport Transport Stakeholder event.
c) delegate to
the chair and the transport portfolio holders the power to approve the
board’s written feedback to Auckland Transport on the draft Regional Land
Transport Plan 2015-2025.
|
Discussion
The draft RLTP
5. The draft
Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 (RLTP) was endorsed by Auckland
Transport’s Board at their 16 December 2014 meeting. It sets out the programme
of work Auckland Transport proposes to deliver over the next ten years, within
the funding available, and the models used to prioritise projects. Attachment A
is the draft RLTP.
6. In addition,
the draft RLTP identifies an alternative transport investment package that may
be possible if additional funding can be secured.
7. The council’s Long-term Plan (LTP) and the RLTP
are developed under a very similar timeline and cover largely the same
transport issues. Rather than consulting with Aucklanders on the same
issues at the same time, this year a single consultation process will be used
to seek Aucklanders’ feedback on transport and inform both the LTP and the
RLTP. This consultation is taking place between 23 January and 16 March.
Local board input on the draft RLTP
8. Local boards
had three opportunities at different workshops in 2014 to discuss the RLTP
process, prioritisation mechanisms and proposed projects with Auckland
Transport management and staff. Therefore boards should already be familiar
with the broad direction of the draft RLTP and the constraints involved.
9. Following on
from these workshops, local boards are now encouraged to provide formal
feedback about the draft RLTP. There are two ways boards can do this. AT would
like to encourage boards to take up both opportunities.
a) Speak at the AT
Transport Stakeholder event that is taking place on the 10 and 11 March. This
is a hearing style event where local board members will be heard by members of
the AT board. From those boards speaking at these events, AT is seeking a
written summary in advance of the event as well as written feedback (see below
for details) which generally summarises and reflects their verbal
presentations. Boards will need to delegate to member/s the power to speak on
behalf of their board at this event.
b) Provide written
feedback to AT by the 16 March by delegating to member/s the power to approve
the board’s written feedback prior to submitting it to AT.
10. These deadlines
are important because Auckland Transport staff must analyse all submissions and
prepare a revised draft of the RLTP for the April 2015 AT Board meeting. The
revised draft RLTP must be provided to New Zealand Transport Agency by 30 April
to ensure central government considers Auckland’s programme alongside all other
regional programmes from across New Zealand.
11. Local boards
have already undertaken extensive community engagement to inform their local
board plans and advocacy plans, including on transport. This is in addition to
the ongoing conversations boards have with their communities about their
priorities and the engagement taking place as part of the LTP and RLTP
consultation. This information will be useful to inform local board feedback on
the draft RLTP.
12. When providing
feedback on the draft RLTP, it is useful to remember that:
a) it is the
governing body not AT that will decide the level of funding that will be made
available to deliver on the transport programme.
b) the RLTP
presents a proposed programme of work that is able to be delivered within the
funding the draft LTP has made available for transport.
13. Therefore if
boards have feedback on the level of funding that has been allocated to
transport in the LTP this can be advocated to the governing body. Feedback on
the draft RLTP could focus on the proposed programme of work and the
prioritisation model that has been used to determine this.
14. In addition to
local boards providing feedback on the RLTP, the community also has the
opportunity through the LTP/RLTP consultation to give their views to AT.
15. Local board
feedback will be analysed along with all other feedback AT receives through the
RLTP consultation. This will inform any amendments to the draft RLTP which will
be reported back to the AT Board in April.
Consideration
Local
Board Views and Implications
16. This report sets
out how local boards have already been engaged in the development of the draft
RLTP and how they can now choose to provide formal feedback.
Maori
Impact Statement
17. This report is
about how local boards can provide feedback to AT on the draft RLTP. In terms
of the process boards can follow for this, there are no specific impacts on Māori. There may be some consideration
in boards’ feedback to AT on how the transport programme affects Māori. In addition there are also two
regional stakeholder hui that will take place as part of the LTP/RLTP
consultation.
Implementation
Issues
18. The final RLTP
will be posted on AT’s website as soon as possible after adoption, and printed
copies will be made available prior to the statutory deadline of 31 July 2015.
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
a
|
Draft Regional Land Transport Plan 2015 - 2025
(Under Separate Cover)
|
|
Signatories
|
Author
|
Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden &
Orakei Local Boards
|
|
Authoriser
|
Karen Lyons – Manager – Local Board Services
|
