Agenda of Franklin Local Board

1 Welcome

The Chairman will open the meeting and welcome everyone present.

2 Apologies

An apology has been received from Member Crompton.

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 Franklin Local Board confirms the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Tuesday, 24 March 2015, as a true and correct record.

5 Leave of Absence

A request has been received from Board Member Kay for a leave of absence.

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

8.1 Long-term plan feedback

Purpose

1. Providing an opportunity for two residents to speak to their feedback on the long-term plan.

Executive Summary

2. Feedback forms were received from Derek and Jennifer Gates who requested to be heard at a hearing in Franklin.

3. The long-term plan consultation process agreed upon was hosting of “Have Your Say” events, of which two were held in Franklin. However, as the submitters did not attend these events they have been invited to make a deputation to the Franklin Local Board at their April business meeting where they will provide feedback on the long-term plan to the Governing Body.

4. The feedback forms are attached for consideration.

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board receives the verbal submissions from Derek and Jennifer Gates and thanks them for their attendance.

Attachments

a Feedback forms from Derek & Jennifer Gates................................... 125

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.

9.1 New Foundations Trust

Purpose

1. Providing an opportunity for a representative from New Foundations Trust to speak to the Board.

Executive Summary

2. Sue Dickens, General Manager of the New Foundations Trust has requested an opportunity to speak in public forum to introduce the Trust and their programmes (refer Attachment A).

3. As per standing orders the Chairman has approved the request to speak in public forum, noting the speaker has 3 minutes including questions.

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board thanks Sue Dickens from the New Foundations Trust for her attendance.

Attachments

a Letters of introduction and support....................................................... 129

9.2 Waiuku markets

Purpose

1. Providing an opportunity for Tracy Hyland to speak to the Board regarding the Waiuku markets.

Executive Summary

2. Tracy Hyland has requested an opportunity to speak in public forum regarding the Waiuku markets.

3. As per standing orders the Chairman has approved the request to speak in public forum, noting the speaker has 3 minutes including questions.

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board thanks Tracy Hyland for her attendance.

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.

Franklin Local Board

21 April 2015

Facility Partnership Fund 2014/2015

File No.: CP2015/05618

Purpose

1. To allocate the balance of $34,548 of Franklin Local Board Facility Partnership Fund 2014/2015.

Executive Summary

2. In considering the allocation of the balance of $34,548, four potential projects were identified and groups were invited to submit expressions of interest.

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board considers the request for funding allocates/declines Waiuku Golf and Squash Club Inc. $32,058 towards the upgrade of the men’s and ladies clubroom ablution facilities.

That the Franklin Local Board transfers the unallocated balance of $2,490 from the Facility Partnership Fund to the Local Board Discretionary Operational Fund.

Discussion

3. The purpose of the Facility Partnership Fund is to assist with the development of accessible multi-use community facilities with an emphasis on maximising use, increased community participation and to support community groups to leverage funds from other funding organisations.

4. The Facility Partnership Fund provides financial support to not-for-profit organisations undertaking asset development work with a total project value over $50,000 or a feasibility study up to $50,000 for a facility upgrade or development.

5. The funding available to the Franklin Local Board in 2014/2015 financial year was $109,548. An amount of $75,000 was allocated to projects on 25 November 2014 which leaves a balance of $34,548. The Franklin Local Board requested that a second round be advertised to allocate the balance of this fund.

6. On 25 November 2014 the Franklin Local Board resolved minute number FR/2014/165 refers:

a) That the Franklin Local Board approves/declines and partially funds the applications in this round as follows:

Applicant	Funds required for	Total cost of the project	Funding Approved
Auckland Rowing Association	Development of a Regional Watersports Centre	$1,939m	Approves $25,000
Glenbrook School BOT	Redevelopment of the Glenbrook School Community Hall	$608,720	Declines
Te Puru Community Charitable Trust	Complete an optimisation & feasibility study for future developments to Te Puru Community Centre	$50,000	Approves $30,000 (optimization study only)
Waiuku Golf and Squash Club	Not applicable	$100,000	Declines
Whitford Tennis Club	Resurface four tennis courts, fencing repairs and to build a volley wall	$103,000	Approves $20,000
Totals		$2,800,720	$75,000

b) That the Franklin Local Board notes there is $34,548 remaining and requests a second round of applications for Facility Partnership Funding be carried out early in 2015.

7. A contestable process was undertaken to allocate the Facility Partnership Fund with funding decisions made on the 25 November 2014. At this time the available budget was not fully allocated so staff asked four groups to submit an expression of interest. These groups were identified as having previously made enquiries for facility partnership funding in the Franklin Local Board area being; Clevedon Cricket Club Inc.; Franklin Community Toy Library; Franklin Gymsports Inc. and Waiuku Golf and Squash Club Inc.

8. One group is being considered in this report and details of the facility partnership application are:

Waiuku Golf and Squash Club Inc.

Waiuku Golf and Squash Club Inc. for $32,058 towards the toilet upgrade of the men’s and ladies clubroom ablution facilities.

The total cost of the project is $32,058 and the application relates to:

1. Men’s; to remove wall linings and existing shower mixers; strip stainless flooring and prepare floor; install new waste for new ardex floor covering; install new shower misters and pipework for new slide showers, new mixer and wash down hose for cleaning; reline walls in selected wall finish; install temperclad screens between 3 x showers.

2. Ladies; remove existing showers and floors; alter wastes in concrete floor and remove concrete nib; replace shower mixers and re-pipe for new slide rails; fit new shower well enclosures complete with doors.

The Waiuku Golf and Squash Club has been incorporated since 1926. Based on approximately 34 hectares of Auckland Council land on Racecourse Road, Waiuku, it caters for golf and squash players throughout the district. Many local community groups make use of the club’s facilities, including; Lions Club, Business Association, Fire Service and NZ Police. The club desires to share its clubhouse and facilities with other sporting and community groups having recently carried out a feasibility study investigating potential amalgamations. Following various initiatives club membership has experienced growth over recent years, particularly with squash membership growing from 24 to 77 members.

A prior application was made by the Waiuku Golf and Squash Club Inc. and considered at the Franklin Local Board business meeting on 25 November 2014. The project which gave rise to the application did not meet the funding criteria and accordingly was not supported.

9. The Franklin Local Board Plan 2014/2015 highlights priorities identified below:

Proud, safe and healthy communities:

· Identified priority facilities to be developed such as, the Waiuku Sports Park, a multi-sport facility on Bledisloe Park and upgrades to Te Puru Recreation Centre.

The Waiuku Golf and Squash Club currently operates as a multi-sport club and is investigating the opportunities to expand the codes offered. For this reason council staff considers that the above project aligns with Local Board’s identified priorities.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

10. The recommendations in this report fall within the Local Board’s delegated authority.

11. The decisions sought by this report do not trigger the Auckland Council Significance Policy.

Māori impact statement

12. The Facility Partnership Fund assists with the development of accessible multi-use community facilities to increase community participation, including the potential to increased community participation for Māori. No particular negative implications for Māori community or Māori stakeholders have been identified as arising from this report. Given the demographic make-up of the local board area and the nature of the some projects for which funding is requested it is likely some Māori will benefit from these.

Implementation

13. A standard Council funding agreement will be developed for any successful applicants and progress towards agreed project outcomes monitored throughout the project.

14. Further quotations would be required prior to any funding agreements being entered into.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Kim Squire - Sports and Recreation Advisor

Authorisers

Ken Maplesden - Sport and Recreation Adviser

Lisa Tocker - Manager, Recreation Facilities & Service Delivery Central

Ian Maxwell - General Manager Parks, Sports and Recreation

Teresa Turner - Relationship Manager

Franklin Local Board

21 April 2015

Franklin Local Board Community Grants Programme 2015/2016

File No.: CP2015/04885

Purpose

1. The purpose of the report is to present the Franklin Local Board Community Grants Programme 2015/2016 for adoption.

Executive Summary

2. The new Auckland Council Community Grants Policy was adopted in December 2014. This policy guides the allocation of local, multi-board and regional grants to groups and organisations delivering projects, activities and services that benefit Aucklanders.

3. The Community Grants Policy supports each local board to adopt their own local grants programme to be attached to the policy as an appendix.

4. This report presents the Franklin Local Board Community Grants Programme 2015/2016 for adoption (see attachment A).

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board adopts the Franklin Local Board Community Grants Programme 2015/2016.

Comments

5. The new Community Grants Policy was adopted in December 2014 and implementation will commence on 1 July 2015.

6. The policy supports each local board to develop a Community Grants Programme for 2015/2016. This local board grants programme will guide community groups and individuals when making applications to the local board.

7. One workshop with the local board was undertaken in February and a portfolio meeting was held in April, to discuss and develop the local board’s grants programme.

8. The Franklin Local Board Community Grants Programme includes:

· outcomes outlined in our local board plan:

o cherished natural environment

o thriving local economy

o excellent transport connections and infrastructure

o growth in the right place, at the right time

o proud, safe, and healthy communities

· specified local board funding priorities:

o events funding aims to promote environmental responsibility through supporting events that aim for zero waste (reduce, reuse, recycle)

o encourage smoke-free events, particularly those targeting children, young people and their families

o support events that celebrate our distinctive local communities and enable people to come together

o support events which encourage visitors to spend more time in Franklin as a destination

o support events that aim to be financially sustainable and become a regular and celebrated part of the Franklin event calendar

o community funding aims to support community groups to be effective and contribute to the community, particularly in shaping and developing their areas to be better and safer places

o assist young people to move from school to work or further training

o support initiatives that celebrate our arts, culture and heritage

o work with local partners to help to make the community feel safe

o environmental funding aims to support local environmental initiatives

o encourage activities that reduce waste to landfill, prevent illegal dumping and preserve the beauty of our environment

o support the prevention of kauri dieback in our native forests

o encourage a weed and pest-free natural environment

o support community initiatives to enhance waterways and the coastline, including as beach clean-ups and planting

· grant types which will operate locally, the number of funding rounds and when these will open and close

o quick response will be for a minimum of $200 and a maximum of $2,000 and operate five times a year

o local grants will be for grants over $2000 and operate twice a year

o discretionary grants will be for urgent grants only

· additional criteria or exclusions that will apply

o travel

o salaries

o catering

o vehicles

· other factors the local board consider to be significant to their decision-making

o the local board requires recipients fo a grant over $2,000 to conduct a self-review, including how the group achieved their planned outcomes, to be supplied to the local board with an accompanying photo of the activity or event.

9. An implementation plan is underway to support an integrated and simplified approach to grants programme administration. Funding staff from different departments are working together to ensure a co-ordinated approach, expected to benefit applicants and streamline internal processes.

10. Once the local board community grants programme has been adopted, the types of grants, funding rounds, criteria and eligibility with be advertised through an integrated communication and marketing approach which includes utilising the local board channels.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

11. The Community Grants Programme has been developed by the local board to set the direction of their grants programme. This programme can be reviewed on an annual basis.

Māori impact statement

12. All grant programmes should respond to Auckland Council’s commitment to improving Maori wellbeing by providing grants to organisations delivering positive outcomes for Maori.

Implementation

13. An implementation plan is underway and the local board grants programme will be locally advertised through the local board and council channels. Targeted advertising and promotion will be developed for target populations, including migrant and refugee groups, disability groups, Maori and iwi organisations.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Franklin Community Grants Programme 2015/2016	17

Signatories

Authors

Marion Davies - Community Funding Programme Manager

Authorisers

Graham Bodman - Manager - Community Development, Arts and Culture

Teresa Turner - Relationship Manager

Franklin Local Board

21 April 2015

Attachment A

Franklin Local Board – Local Grants Programme 2015/2016

Our Local Grants Programme aims to provide contestable and discretionary community grants to local communities.

Outcomes

Our grants programme will support the following outcomes outlined in our local board plan:

· cherished natural environment

· thriving local economy

· excellent transport connections and infrastructure

· growth in the right place, at the right time

· proud, safe, and healthy communities

Our priorities for grants

Franklin Local Board is keen to support its strategic goals through providing grants to local communities. The board has developed the following specific objectives to guide applicants.

Events funding

With its funding grants, the board aims to:

• promote environmental responsibility through supporting events that aim for zero waste (reduce, reuse, recycle)

• encourage smoke-free events, particularly those targeting children, young people and their families

• support events that celebrate our distinctive local communities and enable people to come together

• support events which encourage visitors to spend more time in Franklin as a destination

• support events that aim to be financially sustainable and become a regular and celebrated part of the Franklin event calendar

Community funding

With its funding grants, the board aims to:

• support community groups to be effective and contribute to the community, particularly in shaping and developing their areas to be better and safer places

• assist young people to move from school to work or further training

• support initiatives that celebrate our arts, culture and heritage

• work with local partners to help to make the community feel safe

Environmental funding

With its funding grants, the board aims to:

• support local environmental initiatives

• encourage activities that reduce waste to landfill, prevent illegal dumping and preserve the beauty of our environment

• support the prevention of kauri dieback in our native forests

• encourage a weed and pest-free natural environment

• support community initiatives to enhance waterways and the coastline, including as beach clean-ups and planting

Lower Priorities:

The Franklin Local Board has identified the following activities as lower priorities for funding:

· Travel

· Salaries

· Catering

· Vehicles

Investment approach

The Franklin Local Board has allocated budgets to support the local grants programme as follows:

· Quick Response Local Grants: 50% of total fund per annum

o Minimum amount per grant: $200

o Maximum amount per grant: $2,000

· Local Grants: 50% of total fund per annum

The Franklin Local Board will support match funding as part of the Local Grants fund.

Application dates

Grant rounds will be as follows:

Quick Response Local Grants

Funding rounds	Opens	Closes	Decision made	Projects to occur after
Round One	July	August	September	September
Round Two	September	October	October	November
Round Three	January	February	March	March
Round Four	March	April	May	May
Round Five	May	June	July	July

Local Grants

Funding rounds	Opens	Closes	Decision made	Projects to occur after
Round one	20 July 2015	31 August	September/October	October
Round two	19 February	31 March	April/May	May

Accountability measures

The Franklin Local Board requires successful applicants to provide:

For local grants (over $2,000) - a self-review, including how the group achieved their planned outcomes, to be supplied to the local board with an accompanying photo of the activity or event.

Franklin Local Board

21 April 2015

Road Name Re-Approval for one Road within an approved subdivision at 521 Buckland Road, Buckland (Reference S06260)

File No.: CP2015/04727

Purpose

1. This report outlines the background for the Applicant (Green Valley Limited) to seek re-approval from the Franklin Local Board to name one Road at 521 Buckland Road, Buckland (Reference S06260).

Executive summary

2. The Local Board approved the road name ‘Pure Wood Glade’ for a public road and ‘Glory Way’ for a Private Way at its meeting on 9 December 2015. The Board then rescinded its decision for the public road name due to insufficient consultation with potentially affected parties.

3. The legacy Franklin District Council had an existing road naming policy which set out the requirements and criteria of the Council for proposed road names. These requirements and criteria have been applied to ensure that consistency of road naming within the former Franklin area, until a new road naming policy is adopted by Auckland Council.

4. The Applicant has since consulted with all affected persons and has re-submitted a proposed road name. The preferred road is ‘Meadowbrook Place’. The alternative names are ‘Meadowview Place’ and ‘Purewood Glade’.

5. As part of the previously lodged road name application, Local Iwi strongly opposed the names proposed and the name ‘Tutaenui’ was put forward for the Private Way. No response has been received for this road naming application.

6. Comments have been received by people who use the new road and the preferred name is ‘Meadowbrook’ and ‘Meadowview’. ‘Meadowbrook’ meets the road naming criteria policy, but the name ‘Meadowview’ already exists in the Auckland region as ‘Meadow View’.

7. The preferred name ‘Meadowbrook Place’ for the Road meets the road naming policy criteria. This name is recommended to be considered by the Local Board. The alternate name ‘Purewood Glade’ also meets the criteria.

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board, pursuant to section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974, considers for approval the name ‘Meadowbrook Place’, for the one new Road pursuant to section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974, noting that the alternative name ‘Purewood Glade’ also meets the criteria.

Comments

8. The legacy Franklin District Council had an existing road naming policy which set out the requirements and criteria of the Council for proposed road names. These requirements and criteria have been applied to ensure consistency of road naming within the former Franklin area, until a new road naming policy is adopted by Auckland Council.

9. The 17 lot Village-zoned subdivision, at 521 Buckland Road, will be accessed by one Road. The Local Board approved the name ‘Glory Way’ at its meeting on 9 December 2014. This Private Way provides access to Lots 1 – 12.

10. Shown below is a copy of the subdivision plan highlighting the location of the proposed road to be named with the Applicants preferred names attached.

11. The Applicant has put forward one preferred name and two alternative names for the road name. Following consultation with the local Iwi as part of the previously approved road name and private way name, Ngati Tamaoho and Ngati Te Ata strongly opposed the names put forward and the alternative name Tutaenui was put forward by local Iwi for the Private Way.

12. The Applicant has consulted with local Iwi again as part of the re-naming of the road and no comments have been received.

13. As a result of consultation with people who share the same access, ‘Meadowbrook’ and ‘Meadowview’ have been put forward for the road.

Consultation

Number 2 Pure Wood Glade: Titus and Sandra

Number 4 Pure Wood Glade: Kelvin and Gail Littin

Number 10 and adjoining number 13: Denis Deihl

Table One

Applicant Preferred Name	Background or significance
Road One
Meadowbrook Place	Pukekohe was well known for its market-gardening and horticultural uses prior to people setting into the area and has since attracted more people to live here over time. The rural landscape in the Buckland/Pukekohe area usually contain open grassy paddocks or land planted with crops which indicates strong resemblance to meadows. ‘Brook’ is an alternative word for stream; as there is a local stream flowing at the rear end of the sections, this it is believed that it is reasonable to incorporate ‘brook’ with meadow’. This unique name reflects the surrounding context and help convey the desirably imagery or these sections in the local area. A ‘Place’ stands for a short, sometimes narrow enclosed road-way.

Applicant Alternative Name
Meadowview Place	The term ‘meadow’ refers to grassland with non-woody plants, and are ecologically important to the natural environment. The local area exhibits rural land and natural features which makes it a desirable destination for countryside living opportunities. The sections within this subdivision provide stunning views over the surrounding landscape which portray the unique characteristics seen in the Buckland/Pukekohe area. A ‘ Place’ stands for a short, sometimes narrow enclosed road-way

Purewood Glade	New Zealand is a country known for its ‘green’ image and natural environment, therefore this name is to convey that New Zealand is 100% pure. A ‘Glade’ represents a valley of trees such as those alongside the Tutaenui Stream (which adjoins the subdivision). A ‘Glade’ represents a valley of trees such as those alongside the Tutaenui Stream.

Iwi alternative name	No comments have been received from local Iwi

Suggested names from people who use the same road for access	‘Meadowbrook’ and ‘Meadowview’ – see above for explanation.

Decision Making

14. The Auckland Council, by way of the Auckland Council Long Term Community Plan (2012 – 2022), allocated the responsibility for naming of new roads, pursuant to section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974, to Local Boards.

15. The Applicant’s preferred road name and the alternative names submitted by the Applicant and by local Iwi have been assessed against the criteria set out in the legacy Franklin District Council Road Naming policy, C.1.2(a), as follows:

Table Two

The duplication of names in current usage in the Auckland metropolitan area (either spelling or pronunciation) should be avoided.

Names should be reasonable brief

Short roads will be given short names to avoid cartographic problems

The use of more than one word in is generally to be avoided. Hyphens to connect to parts of names is to be avoided and the name should be written as one word or as separate words.

The possessive form is not acceptable, e.g. Hector Avenue not Hector’s Avenue

Descriptive names are acceptable provided they are not ambiguous

Council encourages the use of names which have historic and/or geographic significance and the use of names of early explorers, early settlers and early notable people and events having regard to the area concerned

The use of Maori names when known is encouraged.

Council welcomes suggestions from subdividers, community groups and residents and it encourages the road names on a theme. The use of any name is entirely at the discretion of the Council, whether for policy reasons or other considerations.

Where there is an association or grouping of names in a locality, names submitted should have an appropriate association with other names in the locality and the introduction of names void of significance or inappropriate to the nomenclature in a locality should be avoided.

Terms such as ‘road’, ‘avenue’ etc are to be used in circumstances appropriate to the situation.

The Council may take into account any additional relevant factors outside its stated policy as may arise on a case by case basis.

Road Names should be checked with New Zealand Post

16. Assessment Outcome

Table Three

Applicant’s Preferred Name	Meets criteria
*Road One*
Meadowbrook Place	Yes

Applicant Alternative Name
Meadowview Place	No
Purewood Glade	Yes

Proposed name of people using the same new road
Meadowbrook	Yes
Meadowview	No

Consideration

Local board views and implications

17. The decision sought from the Franklin Local Board for this report does not trigger any significant policy and is not considered to have any immediate impact on the community.

Māori impact statement

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

Implementation

19. The Southern Resource Consents Team is involved in ensuring that signage for the appropriate road names will be installed accordingly once an approval is obtained for the new road names.

Financial and Resourcing Implications

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

Legal and Legislative Implications

21. The decision sought from the Franklin Local Board for this report is not considered to have any legal or legislative implications

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Mineke Meyerink - Intermediate Planner

Authorisers

Julie Bevan - Acting General Manager Resource Consents

Teresa Turner - Relationship Manager

Franklin Local Board

21 April 2015

New Road Names Approval for the subdivision by Jack Ridge Limited at 371 Whitford Park Road & 500 Brookby Road

File No.: CP2015/05210

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to seek approval from the Franklin Local Board for new road names for two private right of ways created by way of subdivision at 371 Whitford Park Road & 500 Brookby Road.

Executive Summary

2. The legacy Manukau City Council had an existing road naming policy which set out the requirements and criteria of the Council for proposed road names. These requirements and criteria are applied in this situation to ensure consistency of road naming in the Manukau area, until a policy is developed for the Auckland Council.

3. Following assessment against the road naming criteria, the road names “Haunui Way”, “Kakaha Lane” and “Jemar Lane” for Right of Way 1; “Ridgeline way”, “Ella Lane” and “Jemar Lane” for Right of Way 2 were determined to meet the road naming policy criteria.

4. Ten iwi groups were consulted and have yet to provide the Applicant with their preference for the road names proposed.

5. The names “Haunui Way”, “Kakaha Lane” and “Jemar Lane” for Right of Way 1 ; “Ridgeline way”, “Ella Lane” and “Jemar Lane” for Right of Way 2 proposed by the Applicant, are recommended for approval to the Local Board.

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board, pursuant to section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974, considers for approval the road names “Haunui Way” and “Ridgeline way” for Right of Way 1 and Right of Way 2 respectively, proposed by the Applicant, created by way of subdivision at 371 Whitford Park Road & 500 Brookby Road, noting that these names meet the relevant road naming criteria.

Comments

Background

Applicant: Jacks Ridge Limited

Site Address: 371 Whitford Park Road & 500 Brookby Road

Council’s Reference: Resource Consent No. 44768 SP11434

6. The legacy Manukau City Council Road Naming Policy allowed, that where a new road needs to be named as a result of a subdivision or development, the subdivider/developer shall be given the opportunity of suggesting their preferred new road name for Council’s approval.

7. The subdivision will be serviced by two new private right of ways that come off Whitford Park Road. In this case, road name approval is being sought for the two new right of ways within the subdivision (Right of Way 1 and Right of Way 2).

8. The Applicant has proposed the following names for consideration for the new private right of ways created as part of the development at 371 Whitford Park Road & 500 Brookby Road.

Road Number

Proposed New Road Name

Right of Way 1

HAUNUI WAY (preferred name)

KAKAHA LANE (first alternative name)

JEMAR LANE (second alternative name)

Right of Way 2

Ridgeline way (preferred name)

Ella Lane (first alternative name)

Jemar Lane (second alternative name)

Text Box: Right of Way 1 Text Box: Right of Way 2 Text Box: Whitford Park Road

Figure 1 - Location of the two new right of ways for the subdivision at 371 Whitford Park Road & 500 Brookby Road

9. These right of way names were submitted as part of this development for the following reasons:

For Right of Way 1

a. Haunui Way is the name of the old Haunui stud location. The old Haunui stud is well known in this area.

b. Kakaha, is Maori for Bush Lily.

c. Jemar is an acronym for the developers’ children that have grown up on the subject property. Jack, Ella, Mary Anne and Ruby are the names of the developers’ children.

For Right of Way 2

d. Ridgeline Way recognises the geographic significance of the prominent ridge the proposed lots back onto within the area.

e. Ella Hawkeswood is the owner’s daughter who was born and has grown up on the property.

f. Jemar is an acronym for the developers’ children that have grown up on the subject property. Jack, Ella, Mary Anne and Ruby are the names of the developers’ children.

Decision Making

10. The Auckland Council, by way of the Auckland Council Long Term Plan (2012 - 2022), allocated the responsibility for the naming of new roads pursuant to section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974, to Local Boards.

Assessment

11. The Applicant’s proposed road names have been assessed against the following criteria set out in the legacy Manukau City Council road naming policy;

Manukau City Council Road Naming Policy Assessment

(a) Not a duplication of names already in current usage in the Auckland region either in spelling or pronunciation;

(b) Brief, melodious and easily and readily pronounced;

(c) Avoids cartographic problems as the length of the name matches the length of the new road;

(d) Being associated with the nature of the environment or have historic or local significance

(e) Being a descriptive;

(f) Not of possessive form;

(g) Has appropriate association with other names in the area;

(h) Not in poor taste or likely to cause offence and;

(i) Suffix for road name is suitable for road layout

12. All five of the proposed road names for right of ways 1 and 2 are consistent with the legacy road naming policy.

13. As the preferred names of the Applicant (“Haunui Way” and “Ridgeline Way”) meet the criteria of the road naming policy, it is considered appropriate that these names are recommended for approval to the Local Board.

Consideration

Significance of Decision

14. The decision sought from the Franklin Local Board for this report does not trigger any significant policy and is not considered to have any immediate impact on the community.

Maori impact statement

15. The decision sought from the Franklin Local Board on this report does not adversely affect Maori communities as the naming of roads is not linked to one of Council’s strategic priorities for Maori.

16. Despite the above, the Applicant has initiated consultation with the local iwi to provide them with the opportunity to comment on the proposed road names and offer alternative road names to be put forward for approval if they wish to do so.

Consultation

17. The Applicant undertook consultation with Ngāi Tai Ki Tāmaki, Ngāti Tamaoho, Te Akitai Waiohua, Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua, Ngāti Paoa, Ngāti Maru, Ngāti Whanaunga, Ngāti Tamaterā, Te Patukirikiri and Waikato-Tainui as mana whenua of the area for all five names. Ngati Te Ata responded by absenting to any comments and will leave any comments to iwi Ngati Tai. To date, no feedback has been received from the other iwi.

18. New Zealand Post has been consulted and indicated that there should be no postal issues with any of the preferred and alternative names for the two private right of ways.

Financial and Resourcing Implications

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

Legal and Legislative Implications

20. The decision sought from the Franklin Local Board for this report is not considered to have any legal or legislative implications.

Implementation

21. The Southern Resource Consenting Team is involved in ensuring that appropriate road name signage will be installed accordingly once an approval is obtained for the new road name.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Gayatri Devi - Resource Consent Administrator

Authorisers

Julie Bevan - Acting General Manager Resource Consents

Teresa Turner - Relationship Manager

Franklin Local Board

21 April 2015

New Road Names Approval for the subdivision by Lily Investments Limited at 227 Brownhill Road, Whitford

File No.: CP2015/05423

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to seek approval from the Franklin Local Board, for three new road names for one road and two access lots created by way of subdivision at 227 Brownhill Road, Whitford.

Executive Summary

3. Following assessment against the road naming criteria, the road names ‘Springhill Road’, ‘Countryside Springs Road’, ‘Ebb Way’, ‘Toetoe Way’, ‘Countryside Terrace’ and ‘Harakeke Terrace’ were determined to meet the road naming policy criteria. However, given the definition of ‘ebb’, it is considered that ‘Toetoe Way’ be more appropriate in the context of this development. In the interest of creating a theme for the road names, the use of ‘Harakeke Terrace’ in conjunction with ‘Toetoe Way’ is considered to be appropriate for the other access lot.

4. Ngai Tai Ki Tamaki was consulted and did not oppose the suggestions and indicated a preference for Maori names.

5. The names ‘Springhill Road’, ‘Countryside Springs Road’, ‘Ebb Way’, ‘Toetoe Way’, ‘Harakeke Terrace’ and ‘Countryside Terrace’ proposed by the Applicant, are recommended for approval to the Local Board.

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board, pursuant to section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974, considers for approval of the road names ‘Springhill Road’, ‘Countryside Springs Road’, ‘Ebb Way’, ‘Toetoe Way’, ‘Harakeke Terrace’ and ‘Countryside Terrace’ proposed by the Applicant, for the new roads created by way of subdivision at 227 Brownhill Road, Whitford, noting that these names meet the relevant road naming criteria.

Comments

Background

Applicant: Lily Investment Ltd

Site Address: 227 Brownhill Road, Whitford

Council’s Reference: Resource Consent No. 42716 and 45949

6. The legacy Manukau City Council Road Naming Policy allowed that where a new road needs to be named as a result of a subdivision or development, the subdivider/developer shall be given the opportunity of suggesting their preferred new road name for Council’s approval.

7. The residential subdivision will be serviced by one new road to be vested in Council and two jointly owned access lots that come off Redoubt Road, Flat Bush. In this case, road name approval is being sought for the new road and the jointly owned access lot within the subdivision (Road 1, JOAL 1 and JOAL 2).

8. The Applicant has proposed the following names for consideration for the new road and access lots created as part of the development at 227 Brownhill Road, Whitford.

Road	Proposed New Road Name	Definitions
Road 1	Springhill Road (preferred name) Countryside Springs Road (first alternative name) Ridgeway Road (alternative name)
JOAL 1	Ebb Way (preferred name) Toetoe Way (first alternative name) Countryside View Way (alternative name)	Ebb: (of tide water) to flow back or recede. Toetoe: Being native plants with long, grassy leaves with a fine edge and saw-like teeth.
JOAL 2	Countryside Terrace (preferred name) Harakeke Terrace (first alternative name) Kahikatea Terrace (alternative name)	Harakeke: Being native plant with long, stiff, upright leaves and dull red flowers. Kahikatea: A tall coniferous tree of mainly swampy ground.

9. The developer has decided on the following names in reference to the surrounding context of the development. ‘Toetoe Way’, ‘Harakeke Terrace’ and ‘Kahikatea Terrace’ are referring to the existing and proposed native planting in the area. ‘Springhill Road’, ‘Countryside Springs Road’, ‘Ridgeway Road’, ‘Countryside View Way’ and ‘Countryside Terrace’ are in reference to natural features within close proximity to or are visible from the proposed development.

10. The proposed suffixes of ‘Road’, ‘Way’ and ‘Terrace’ are considered to be appropriate for their respective roads and access lots as they are consistent with the definition as per the Manukau City Council Road Naming Policy.

Figure 1 - Location of the new roads for the subdivision at 227 Brownhill Road, Whitford

Decision Making

11. The Auckland Council, by way of the Auckland Council Long Term Plan (2012 - 2022), allocated the responsibility for the naming of new roads, pursuant to section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974, to Local Boards.

Assessment

12. The Applicant’s proposed road names have been assessed against the following criteria set out in the legacy Manukau City Council road naming policy;

Manukau City Council Road Naming Policy Assessment

(a) Not a duplication of names already in current usage in the Auckland region either in spelling or pronunciation;

(b) Brief, melodious and easily and readily pronounced;

(c) Avoids cartographic problems as the length of the name matches the length of the new road;

(d) Being associated with the nature of the environment or have historic or local significance

(e) Being a descriptive;

(f) Not of possessive form;

(g) Has appropriate association with other names in the area;

(h) Not in poor taste or likely to cause offence and;

(i) Suffix for road name is suitable for road layout

13. Six out of nine of the proposed road names are consistent with the legacy road naming policy. ‘Ridgeway Road’ and ‘Kahikatea Terrace’ are not considered consistent as they exist elsewhere in the Auckland Region and ‘Countryside View Way’ is too long for the length of the proposed access lot and may result in cartographic problems.

14. ‘Ebb Way’ is consistent with the road naming policy, however, given the definition of “ebb” (relating to tidal waters), it is suggested that it would be more appropriate for roads within close proximity to an estuary or stream. it is recommended that the first alternative name (‘Toetoe Way’) for JOAL 1 would be more appropriate road name for this development. Furthermore, in the interest of creating a theme for the road names, it is recommended that ‘Harakeke Terrace’ would be a more appropriate road name for JOAL 2.

15. Therefore, it is appropriate for Local Board to consider ‘Springhill Road’, ‘Toetoe Way’ and ‘Harakeke Terrace’ for approval. However, it is noted that ‘Countryside Springs Road’, ‘Ebb Way’ and ‘Countryside Terrace’ are still appropriate for consideration.

Consideration

Significance of Decision

16. The decision sought from the Franklin Local Board for this report does not trigger any significant policy and is not considered to have any immediate impact on the community.

Maori impact statement

17. The decision sought from the Franklin Local Board on this report does not adversely affect Maori communities as the naming of roads is not linked to one of Council’s strategic priorities for Maori.

18. Despite the above, the Applicant has initiated consultation with the local iwi to provide them with the opportunity to comment on the proposed road names and offer alternative road names to be put forward for approval if they wish to do so.

Consultation

19. The Applicant undertook consultation with Ngai Tai Ki Tamaki as mana whenua of the area. Ngai Tai Ki Tamaki did not oppose the suggestions and indicated a preference for Maori names.

20. New Zealand Post has been consulted and indicated that there were no issues with the road names proposed.

Financial and Resourcing Implications

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

Legal and Legislative Implications

22. The decision sought from the Franklin Local Board for this report is not considered to have any legal or legislative implications.

Implementation

23. The Southern Resource Consenting Team is involved in ensuring that appropriate road name signage will be installed accordingly once an approval is obtained for the new road names.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Debby Blackburn - Resource Consent Administrator

Authorisers

Julie Bevan - Acting General Manager Resource Consents

Teresa Turner - Relationship Manager

Franklin Local Board

21 April 2015

Auckland Transport Update – April 2015

File No.: CP2015/05758

Purpose

1. Providing an update on transport matters for the information of the Franklin Local Board and a register of transport issues in the Franklin Local Board area, as collated by Auckland Transport’s Elected Member Relationship Manager (South).

Executive Summary

2. This report covers matters of specific application and interest to the Franklin Local Board and its community, matters of general interest relating to Auckland Transport activities or the transport sector, and Auckland Transport media releases for the information of the Board and community.

3. In particular, this report provides information on:

· The Franklin Local Board’s transport capital fund

· Pukekohe and Waiuku buses New Network update

· Mill Road update

· Crown Road level crossing update.

Recommendation/s

That the report entitled ‘Auckland Transport Update – April 2015’ and the attached issues register from Auckland Transport’s Elected Member Relationship Manager (South) be received.

Discussion

Franklin Items

A1. Local board transport capital fund (LBTCF)

4. The Franklin Local Board’s funding allocation under the LBTCF is currently $434,966 per annum.

5. The Board’s current LBTCF projects are included in the table below (in which ROC = rough order of costs, and FEC = firm estimate of cost):

ID#

Project Description

Progress/Current Status

083

Pukekohe East Road-Mill Road/Harrisville Road intersection, Bombay/Pukekohe – installation of variable 70 km/h rural intersection activated warning signage (RIAWS)

· FEC estimate of $67,000

· On 26-Nov-13, the Board gave construction approval for the project based on the FEC of $67,000.

· The nation-wide trial sites for RIAWS were only for the period from Jul-12 to Jul-14.

· The NZTA is currently evaluating the results of the other sites around the country and will determine criteria and standards for the permanent approval of such sites by the middle of this year. At this time, RIAWS signs could be installed to the new standard at this site as a permanent facility.

· Waikato District Council is expecting to formalise the permanent variable speed limit during its current Speed Limits Bylaw review.

ID#

Project Description

Progress/Current Status

074

Third View Avenue, Beachlands – install 300m of new kerb and channel between Sunkist Bay Road and Cherrie Road (both sides)

· FEC estimate of $230,000

· On 15-Apr-14, the Board gave approval to proceed with construction.

· Construction has been in progress for two months and is expected to be completed by mid Apr-15.

254

Tobin Street carpark lighting improvements

· ROC estimate of $35,000

· On 26-Aug-14, the Board resolved to proceed to detailed design and costing stage.

· On 10-Mar-15, the Board’s transport portfolio gave construction approval under delegated authority.

· Construction commenced in late March and should be completed by the end of Apr-15.

247

Awhitu peninsula intersection flag lighting

· FEC estimate of $21,000

· Final cost of $21,337.

· On 28-Oct-14, the Board gave approval to proceed with construction at the 14 sites identified, based on the FEC of $21,000.

· Construction was completed in Mar-15.

· The final cost was $21,337.

249

Pukekohe North streetlighting improvements

· ROC estimate of $201,000

· Project currently on hold

· On 26-Aug-14, the Board gave approval to proceed with construction.

· On 24-Mar-15, the Board resolved to put this project on hold pending further advice from AT on when its regional streetlighting upgrade project may be implemented in the Pukekohe and Waiuku urban areas.

250

Waiuku South streetlighting improvements

· ROC estimate of $70,000

· Project currently on hold

· On 26-Aug-14, the Board gave approval to proceed with construction.

· As per the above, this project has been put on hold.

348

Kaiwaka Road new footpath, Waiuku

· ROC estimate of $50,000

· On 26-Aug-14, the Board gave approval to proceed with construction.

· Design is complete. Construction is expected to start in May-15.

349

Pacific Street new footpath, Waiuku

· ROC estimate of $67,500

· On 26-Aug-14, the Board gave approval to proceed with construction.

· Design is complete. Construction is expected to start in Jun-15.

371

Whitford bus interchange

· FEC estimate of $200,000

· On 23-Sep-14, the Board gave approval to proceed with construction, based on the FEC of $200,000.

· Construction commenced in mid Mar-15 and is expected to be completed in mid May-15.

· In error, four Pohutukawa trees donated by a parishioner of nearby St Thomas Anglican Church were removed. AT has been in contact with relevant parties to redress the situation.

248

Hunua pedestrian facility

· FEC estimate of $54,000

· On 9-Dec-14, the Board gave approval to proceed with construction, based on the FEC of $54,000.

· AT is currently finalising traffic control approval prior to calling tenders for the physical works.

6. The Franklin Local Board’s transport capital fund to date is summarised below.

Franklin Local Board transport capital fund summary:

*Total funding available (across 5 FYs – 2012/12 to 2016/17)*	$2,174,830
Completed projects reporting actual costs (Second View Ave kerb and channel; Patumahoe/Waiuku/Attewell Roads investigation; Pukekohe station overbridge; Ardmore School footpath; Harris St bench; Pukeoware School signs; Waiuku pavers upgrade; Third View kerb and channel projects x1; Awhitu flag lighting)	-$564,692

Projects approved for construction based on rough or firm estimates (Mill/Harrisville electronic signage; Third View kerb and channel projects x1; Pukekohe North streetlighting improvements; Waiuku South streetlighting improvements; Kaiwaka Rd footpath; Pacific St footpath; Whitford bus interchange; Hunua pedestrian facility; Tobin St car park lighting)	-$974,500
Projects approved for construction but placed on hold (Pukekohe North x18 & Waiuku South x3 streetlighting improvements)	+$271,000
*Funding still available to allocate*	$906,638

A2. Pukekohe/Waiuku New Network update – final decisions

7. New Network bus service proposals for Pukekohe and Waiuku were publicly consulted on between 22 September and 17 October 2014. Overall 939 submissions were received.

8. Auckland Transport officers held a feedback session with the Franklin Local Board on 3 March to discuss the consultation outcomes and draft recommendations that would be reported to the Auckland Transport Board for endorsement.

9. The Auckland Transport Board considered a report on the Pukekohe/Waiuku New Network consultation at its meeting on 31 March and endorsed the recommendations contained in the report.

10. Included at Attachment A is a memorandum to Franklin Local Board members regarding the final decisions made in relation to the New Network proposals for Pukekohe and Waiuku. The memorandum also includes a copy of the formal report to the Auckland Transport Board and the accompanying consultation summary and decisions report.

11. In brief, of the four bus routes proposed for Pukekohe, Auckland Transport will make one route change as a result of the feedback.

12. For Waiuku, of the three route options consulted on, Auckland Transport will implement a peak hour service between Waiuku and Papakura (route option 1 along Glenbrook, Kingseat and Linwood Roads), and implement a variant of route option 3 between Waiuku and Pukekohe during off-peak hours and weekends (to travel via a loop within Waiuku and through Patumahoe).

13. Pre and post consultation maps are included in the last four pages of Attachment A, noting those route variations.

14. In terms of implementing the decisions made by the Auckland Transport Board, it is intended that the Pukekohe/Waiuku New Network will be part of the first round of PTOM tendering negotiations and implemented at the same time as other South Auckland New Network contracts in mid-2016, following tender in mid-2015.

15. With the construction of the Pukekohe interim bus/rail interchange by the end of June 2015, elements of this network may be negotiated with current operators and implemented before the end of 2015.

A3. Redoubt Road-Mill Road Corridor project update

16. Auckland Transport identified its preferred route for the northern section of the Redoubt Road-Mill Road corridor upgrade and applied to Auckland Council in November 2014 to designate land (Notices of Requirement) for the project.

17. The key reasons for the project are to provide for significant housing growth in the area and to improve the corridor’s poor safety record. Safeguarding this route will provide certainty to both existing and future property owners on what land is required for the upgrade. New housing areas can then be built knowing where the transport infrastructure to support it will be.

18. Auckland Council has advised it will publicly notify the Notice of Requirement in mid-April. Legislation requires at least 20 working days for submissions. A public hearing will subsequently be held by independent commissioners to test Auckland Transport’s proposal.

19. Auckland Transport is organising two public information days on 17 April (11am to 2pm) and 18 April (10am to 1pm) at Westfield Manukau, so interested people can find out more to assist with their submissions.

20. Any member of the public can make submissions supporting or challenging the proposal. Auckland Transport encourages people to make submissions if they have concerns about the project or the assessments carried out.

21. Auckland Transport has already contacted affected property owners directly about the project to discuss their land owner rights and the planning process, and has met with the majority of them.

A4. Update on Crown Road level rail crossing, Paerata

22. The NZTA has provided the following update on the Crown Road level crossing mitigation project:

· All design, consenting conditions, mitigation measures and land use agreements have been finalised for the ‘hook turn’ changes at the SH22/Crown Road intersection

· Physical works on site are being coordinated with nearby KiwiRail maintenance works at the level crossing over Easter weekend

· The required relocation of electrical posts has been agreed with the utility company and will commence shortly

· Construction activity on site should begin around 13 April.

A5. Waiuku pavers update

23. Auckland Transport is working closely with the Franklin Local Board over its desire to investigate future options and alternatives for paving in the Waiuku town centre.

24. An initial meeting to consider possible alternatives to the existing pavers was held on 8 April. A second meeting has been scheduled for 22 April.

A6. Consultation documents on proposed improvements

25. Consultation documents for the following proposals have been provided to the Franklin Local Board for its feedback. As the Board’s transport portfolio holders provide feedback on the Board’s behalf, the material below is included for general information purposes only.

26. Proposed interim bus stops, Customs Street, Pukekohe – Auckland Transport is committed to improving public transport in the region and improving the interface between bus and rail networks. At Pukekohe, the planned introduction of New Network bus service improvements will require a new bus/rail interface on Customs Street, including new bus stops and a bus turning area. While a larger interchange facility to better integrate the two networks is planned, financial constraints within the current financial year meant this was not possible and an interim proposal has therefore been designed as shown on the plan at Attachment B. The interim proposal will also require the closure of two vehicle crossings on Customs Street due to the number of bus stops required to support the proposed New Network.

27. Proposed conversion of passing lanes to slow vehicle bays, Whitford-Maraetai Road (Whitford) and Whitford Road (Mangemangeroa Gorge) – Auckland Transport is committed to improving road safety and reducing the number of people killed or injured on the road network, with a focus on high risk corridors. The network of Whitford, Whitford-Maraetai, Brookby, Papakura-Clevedon, Whitford Park and North Roads has together been identified as high importance for road safety in this area.

28. Auckland Transport has analysed this road network and public discussions of the key road safety issues in the area have been conducted. These issues included the passing lanes at ‘Siberia Hill’ on Whitford-Maraetai Road and in the Mangemangeroa Gorge on Whitford Road. There were 6 crashes in the past 5 years each on these two passing lanes including fatal, serious and minor injury crashes. Auckland Transport also received feedback from local residents and Police about further unreported crashes at these passing lanes.

29. The Siberia Hill passing lane is situated between Waikopua Road and Jack Lachlan Drive with a speed limit of 100km/h. The passing lane is situated on a steep eastbound hill and heavy commercial vehicles are slowed considerably over this section. Site observations have identified that the existing passing lane arrangements encourage high speeds and occasionally unsafe overtaking manoeuvres. Furthermore, the merge section at the end of this passing lane has limited forward visibility and this may contribute to some of the crashes along this section.

30. Whitford Road is rural in nature over the section from Somerville Road to Whitford Village, with a speed limit of 80km/h. There are passing lanes in Mangemangeroa Gorge for eastbound and westbound traffic either side of the Mangemangeroa Stream Bridge. Safety concerns have been raised by New Zealand Police relating to high speeds on the westbound passing lane in the Gorge. The horizontal curves throughout the passing lane are unsuitable for higher speeds, making it difficult for vehicles to overtake while safely negotiating the bends.

31. Auckland Transport is therefore proposing to convert these two passing lanes to slow vehicle bays, which will result in only slow moving vehicles using the left lane and remove the incidence of unsafe speeds or overtaking manoeuvres in the right lane.

32. The proposal for the Siberia Hill passing lane is shown on the plans at Attachment C, while the proposal for the Mangemangeroa westbound passing lane is shown on the plans at Attachment D.

General Information Items

B1. Submissions on Long Term Plan (LTP)

33. Auckland Council’s LTP 10-year budget consultation received 27,353 written submissions, with the majority of Aucklanders opting to support the advanced transport network.

34. Aucklanders provided feedback on a number of issues, including what needs to be done to fix the region’s transport problems.

35. Figures show that 50% opted for the advanced transport network and 29% supported the basic transport plan. On the question of funding the transport options, 34% supported motorway tolls, while 27% favoured a fuel tax and rates rises.

B2. Review of Regional Public Transport Plan (RPTP)

36. Auckland Transport has commenced a process to update the Auckland RPTP.

37. The timetable for the variation involves the preparation of a draft proposal by late April, followed by a public consultation phase during May 2015. Hearings would be planned for late May/early June.

38. The variation will cover the following issues:

· The proposed introduction of a new zone-based integrated fares system

· Proposals for a new light rail transit network on some major arterial routes on the central Auckland isthmus

· Service and infrastructure changes arising from the Ferry Development Plan

· Revised service descriptions on the new bus network.

B3. Harbourmaster moves to Auckland Transport

39. The Harbourmaster and Harbourmaster team will transfer from Auckland Council’s Civil Defence and Emergency Management Division to Auckland Transport on 27 April 2015.

40. The move will allow the Harbourmaster team to work more closely alongside Auckland Transport Operations Centres (ATOC). This will ensure a more integrated approach across all transport coming into Auckland, as well as better access to transport support functions.

B4. Public Transport Monthly Patronage statistics – February 2015

41. Auckland public transport patronage totalled 77,088,240 passenger trips for the 12 months to Feb-15, an increase of +0.8% on the 12 months to Jan-15 and +9.5% on the 12 months to Feb-14. February monthly patronage was 6,683,047 – an increase of 608,194 boardings or +10.0% on Feb-14 (normalised to ~ +11.9% accounting for only special event patronage, as there were the same number of business and weekend days in Feb-15 compared to Feb-14). In the financial year to date (YTD), overall PT patronage has grown by +10.2%.

42. Rail patronage totalled 12,994,815 passenger trips for the 12 months to Feb-2015, an increase of +1.6% on the 12 months to Jan-15 and +19.5% on the 12 months to Feb-14. Patronage for Feb-15 was 1,209,882 – an increase of 204,509 boardings or +20.3% on Feb-14 (normalised to ~ +34.1%). In the financial YTD, rail patronage has grown by +22.1%.

43. The Northern Express bus service carried 2,732,222 passenger trips for the 12 months to Feb-15, an increase of +1.1% on the 12 months to Jan-15 and +16.8% on the 12 months to Feb-14. Northern Express bus service patronage for Feb-15 was 226,656 – an increase of 30,117 boardings or +15.3% on Feb-14 (normalised to ~ +19.1%). In the financial YTD, Northern Express patronage has grown by +20.5%.

44. Bus services (excluding the Northern Express) carried 56,009,807 passenger trips for the 12 months to Feb-15, an increase of +0.5% on the 12 months to Jan-15 and +7.6% on the 12 months to Feb-14. Bus services excluding Northern Express patronage for Feb-15 was 4,690,676 – an increase of 281,939 boardings or +6.4% on Feb-14 (normalised to ~ +6.4%). Financial YTD bus services excluding Northern Express patronage has grown by +7.6%.

45. Ferry services carried 5,351,396 passenger trips for the 12 months to Feb-15, an increase of +1.7% on the 12 months to Jan-15 and +4.0% movement on the 12 months to Feb-14. Ferry services patronage for Feb-15 was 555,833 – an increase of 91,629 boardings or +19.7% on Feb-14 (normalised to ~ +19.7%). In the financial YTD, ferry patronage has increased by 7.0%.

Media Releases

C1. Car share scheme

46. Auckland Transport is looking for a car share operator to launch a large scale scheme in Auckland, based on Plug-in Electric Vehicles.

47. Auckland Transport has released a Request for Proposal (RFP) from car share operators to create a scheme here. It would initially have 250 – 300 vehicles which Auckland Transport will match with a similar number of car parks dedicated to care share vehicles. It’s expected that, in time, the fleet would increase to at least 500 cars.

48. A new large-scale scheme in Auckland would be a private venture with all significant costs borne by the operator, not by Auckland ratepayers. Auckland Transport’s main contribution would be to designate dedicated car parks around the city.

49. Car share schemes are based on members who pay a membership fee which entitles them to use a scheme-owned car on demand, for which they pay a per-trip charge based upon the time used.

50. There are already about five million people world-wide who are members of a car share scheme and the numbers of both users and cities with a scheme are growing rapidly, changing transportation habits in the process.

51. Auckland already has a commercial car-share operator, called City Hop. There is also a community-based scheme, called NZ Car Sharing, on Waiheke Island. Auckland Transport has worked with both, which are relatively small-scale operators, for a number of years and will continue to do so.

C2. 2015 Public Transport Fare Review

52. The focus of this year’s public transport fare review, announced by Auckland Transport on 16 March, is to better align short and long distance fares in preparation for a change to a simpler zone based system (integrated fares) next year.

53. Improving the fare structure with integrated fares will allow the introduction of the New Network which will see more frequent services on key routes at a minimum average of every 15 minutes, 7am to 7pm, seven days a week.

54. Integrated fares, the introduction of the AT HOP card, electric trains, the first step towards the construction of the City Rail Link and an investigation of the benefits of light rail are all initiatives designed to give Aucklanders choices.

55. The changes to public transport fares through the 2015 review include:

· Small increases of 5-10 cents for stage one and two trips for those using the AT HOP card

· No increases on longer AT HOP trips on buses and trains, other than for stage five journeys which receive a tertiary concession

· Stage six and seven child fares using AT HOP reduce

· Some cash fares will increase by 50 cents to further encourage passengers to switch to using AT HOP to receive fare discounts

· Tertiary and child concession fares will now be available on the InnerLink bus service

· There will also be some changes to pricing for the CityLink bus service now that an earlier subsidy has ended.

56. On average, fares contribute 47% to the total cost of providing public transport services – the remainder is provided through government (NZTA) contributions and rates subsidies.

57. For more: https://at.govt.nz/farechange

C3. Dedicated motorcycle parking

58. Auckland Transport is gearing up for the increasing number of people using two wheels to get to their destination by adding free, dedicated, motorcycle and scooter parking areas to its CBD parking buildings, in addition to existing bicycle parking areas. There is also a dedicated entry lane for motorbikes at the Downtown car park to complement the 112 dedicated spaces installed.

59. The Civic car park has also been fitted out with more motorcycle and scooter parking and Victoria Street carpark will be developed in the near future.

C4. City Rail Link (CRL) contract award

60. The CRL took another significant step forward with the announcement on 7 April of the appointment of two construction consortia to commence the first phase of the CRL construction in the Downtown area.

61. There was wide interest from the New Zealand construction industry and Auckland Transport has appointed two Joint Venture contractors for the work; Downer NZ and Soletanche Bachy JV and Connectus (McConnell Dowell and Hawkins JV) for the first phase of design at a cost of about $3 million. The next phase will provide for a negotiated contract to construct the CRL.

62. The Downer lead joint venture has been chosen to progress the CRL work through and under Britomart Station and Queen Street to the Downtown Shopping Centre site with construction likely to start in early 2016.

63. The contract includes establishing temporary accommodation for Britomart Station’s ticketing and customer service operations, underpinning the historic former Chief Post Office building, to allow the construction of the rail tunnels beneath and reinstating Britomart Station and upgrading urban space and surrounding roads.

64. The Connectus Consortium will construct the cut and cover tunnels under and along Albert Street from Customs Street to Wyndham Street. The work is likely to start in October with the relocation of a major stormwater line in Albert Street between Swanson and Wellesley Streets.

65. Once completed, CRL will turn a one way cul-de-sac rail system at Britomart into a two way through system that will be able to carry 30,000 people an hour, providing an efficient and reliable transport choice for Aucklanders.

Issues Register

66. The regular monthly issues register is Attachment E to this report.

Consideration

Local Board Views

67. The Board’s views will be incorporated during consultation on any proposed schemes.

Implementation Issues

68. All proposed schemes are subject to prioritisation, funding and consultation.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Memorandum and attachments re Final Decisions - New Network for Pukekohe/Waiuku (Under Separate Cover)
b View	Plan of proposed bus stops, Customs Street, PukekoheStreet and Court Street, Waiuku	45
c View	Plan of proposed slow vehicle bay, Whitford-Maraetai Road, Whitford	47
d View	Plan of proposed slow vehicle bay, Whitford Road, Mangemangeroa Gorge	53
e View	Issues Register – Franklin Local Board – April 2015	59

Signatories

Authors	Jenni Wild – Elected Member Relationship Manager (South); Auckland Transport
Authorisers	Jonathan Anyon – Elected Member Relationship Team Manager; AT Teresa Turner - Relationship Manager

Franklin Local Board

21 April 2015

Developing the Empowered Communities Approach

File No.: CP2015/04989

Purpose

1. This report provides an overview of the Empowered Communities Approach (ECA), including local board involvement in developing the approach.

Executive Summary

2. The Mayor’s Proposal for the Long Term Plan 2015-2025 (LTP) includes developing a more empowered community approach to the work of Auckland Council. The proposed changes are:

· to transition delivery to a more empowered community approach.

· to move away from direct delivery (and therefore save overheads) and fund community groups to deliver more.

· for local boards to play a much more active role by allocating more funding through them.

3. The purpose of the Empowered Communities Approach (ECA) is to develop a new, more effective and empowering approach to the way council delivers services and supports community activities. The ECA will establish a new operating model for the Community Development and Safety (CDS) unit which will shift its service delivery to have a greater focus on local and community empowerment, with a view to embedding this way of working across council departments and council- controlled organisations.

4. A reduction in the cost to deliver community development over time is expected, starting with savings in the 2015/2016 financial year.

5. A political advisory group (PAG) has been established to provide strategic advice and guidance as staff develop the ECA. Discussion has centred on what empowered communities look like, and what shifts are required within council to support them. The PAG meeting in March endorsed the proposed approach. PAG feedback included the importance of meeting local needs, rather than a ‘one size fits all’ approach. Two further PAG meetings will be held on 16 April and 4 May.

6. An engagement programme with local boards is underway. Key steps in this are:

· two chairs and portfolio holder workshops.

· individual board workshops in April.

· a report to local board business meetings in May/ early June.

· The final empowered communities approach and the CDS operational model will be reported to the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee for endorsement in June 2015, for implementation in July-December.

7. A targeted programme of community engagement is underway.

Recommendation/s

a) That the Franklin Local Board receives the Developing the Empowered Communities Approach report.

b) That the Franklin Local Board where required by the timing of the existing business meeting, the local board either delegate, hold an extraordinary meeting or accept a late report so that the board can provide formal feedback during the period 5 May – 3 June.

Comments

Background

8. The Mayor’s Proposal for the Long Term Plan 2015-2025 (LTP) includes developing a more empowered community approach to the work of Auckland Council. The proposed changes to the community development function are:

· to transition delivery to a more empowered community approach.

· to move away from direct delivery (and therefore save overheads) and fund community groups to deliver more.

· for local boards to play a much more active role by allocating more funding through them.

9. The purpose of the Empowered Communities Approach (ECA) is to develop a new, more effective and empowering approach to the way council delivers services and supports community activities. The ECAP will establish a new operating model for the Community Development and Safety (CDS) unit which will shift its service delivery to have a greater focus on local and community empowerment, with a view to embedding this way of working across the council family.

10. A reduction in the cost to deliver community development over time is expected, starting with savings in the 2015/2016 financial year.

11. A political advisory group (PAG) has been established to provide strategic advice and guidance as staff develop the empowered communities approach. Discussion has centred on what empowered communities look like, and what shifts are required within council to support them.

Political Advisory Group

12. A Political Advisory Group (PAG) has been established to provide strategic advice and guidance to staff during the development of the empowered communities approach. Membership of the PAG includes the Mayor, six local board members (Andrew Baker, Efeso Collins, Vanessa Neeson, Kay McIntrye, Peter Haynes, Julia Parfitt), five governing body members (Cathy Casey, Linda Cooper, George Wood, Alf Filipaina, Penny Hulse) and a representative from the Independent Māori Statutory Board (Karen Wilson).

13. At their meeting on 6 March 2015 the PAG endorsed the proposed approach. The key points discussed were:

· ‘Empowered Communities: Enabling Council’: The approach is underpinned by a two-way relationship between council and the community; leading to improved outcomes for Auckland.

· Describing empowered communities: an empowered community is one where individuals, whanau and communities have the power and ability to influence decisions, take action and make change happen in their lives and communities. This includes communities of place, interest and identity.

· How to support community empowerment: community empowerment is about providing real opportunities for people to participate and fostering the conditions that support this. An empowered communities approach is a ‘way of working’ that empowers people to play a more active role in the decisions that affect their communities.

14. Working in a way that empowers communities requires ‘whole of council’ shifts to:

· provide a gateway / portal into council resources and information.

· provide more support for local boards and other areas of council to work together in joined-up ways with local communities.

· facilitate and embed the empowered communities approach across council.

· develop and implement creative new engagement and participation practices.

· support the devolution of resources / functions / control to communities.

15. Other key feedback from the PAG included:

· the model should involve high trust between council and the community and be based on building good relationships.

· the path Māori have been on provides an example for the ECA, which should draw from the Māori Responsiveness Framework.

· one size does not fit all and the model may look different across different activities of council and in different communities, reflecting the make-up of those communities and their capability and capacity.

· all parts of council need to work collaboratively to make this work. This should include the council-controlled organisations (CCOs).

· capacity building is important and there need to be examples of how to do this effectively.

· recognition that embedding this approach will take time.

16. Staff will report back to the PAG on 16 April with the following:

· revised approach.

· the proposed operating model for the CDS unit.

· supporting tools.

· budget and implementation implications.

ECA timeline

17. The key milestones are shown in the table below.

Stage	Date	Purpose
Local board business meetings	15-23 April	Context setting report
Political Advisory Group	16 April	Provide strategic advice on revised approach and proposed CDS model of operation
Chairs and portfolio holders workshop	20 April	Wider discussion of material presented at PAG
Local board workshops	21 April – 1 May	Discussion by individual boards
Political Advisory Group	4 May	Provide strategic advice on revised CDS model of operation
Local board business meetings	5 May – 3 June	Formal resolutions on proposal
Budget Committee	7-8 May	LTP budget decisions including CDS budget for 2015/2016
Regional Strategy and Policy Committee	4 June	Endorse ECA and the CDS operational model
Implementation	July - December

18. For some local boards, the timing of the May-June local board business meetings may require the local board to either delegate, hold an extraordinary meeting or accept a late report so that the board can provide formal feedback during the period 5 May – 3 June.

Consultation and engagement

19. Engagement with community stakeholders is ongoing, with initial feedback workshops held in March across the region. At the workshops, staff explored with participants what capabilities and ideas for empowering communities, equity issues and activities the community see themselves as best delivering. Engagement was sought on what is best kept as council core functions in relation to community development and safety.

20. Internal staff consultation is ongoing as the approach is developed. A number of workshops have been held with staff from all departments in the operations division in the first instance.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

21. The empowered community approach aims to provide a much more active role for local boards in community development.

22. ECA builds on the strong focus on community led planning and development in the Local Board Plans 2014.

23. Local boards views will be sought through the process outlined above.

Māori impact statement

24. The ECAP has the potential to impact on Māori over time. Engagement with mataawaka and mana whenua will be undertaken during the engagement phase to enable staff to understand potential impacts.

25. A representative from the Independent Māori Statutory Board sits on the PAG.

Implementation

26. The model will be implemented in CDS in 2015/2016. The approach will be rolled out across the whole of council over time.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Helen Dodd - Local Board Strategic Advisor

Authorisers

Karen Lyons - Manager Local Board Services

Teresa Turner - Relationship Manager

Franklin Local Board

21 April 2015

Long-term Plan 2015 - 2025 consultation feedback report for Franklin Local Board

Purpose

This report summarises all feedback received through Long-term Plan 2015 - 2025 (LTP) consultation on Franklin Local Board proposals. It also summarises feedback on the regional proposals from people or organisations based in the Franklin local board area.

The purpose of this report is to inform the Franklin Local Board of the views of their local community on the LTP proposals. This will build on the board’s understanding of community priorities and preferences as established in the development of the 2014 Franklin Local Board Plan.

The feedback received will inform the Franklin Local Board decisions on allocation of their local budgets in their local board agreement for 2015/2016. It will also inform the Franklin Local Board discussions with the Budget Committee on local priorities in relation to the regional budgets and proposals.

Executive Summary

Feedback was received from 1632 people in the Franklin Local Board area, on both the local board and regional proposals. Feedback was received in written format (online, email and hardcopy forms), in person at two Have Your Say events, and informally at eight community events held in Franklin.

LB proposals for 2015/16 – Franklin local board proposed the following priorities for 2015/16 and feedback was received as indicated:

· Coastal erosion control $170k – 82% support

· Development of Waiuku Sports Park $2.5m – 49% support

· Facilities Partnership Scheme $110k – 65% support with some lack of clarity about what it actually is.

· Events, grants and community support $400k – 81% support

· Environmental initiatives with a focus on waterways - 89% support

Local board proposals for 2016/25 – Franklin local board proposed the following priorities for 2016-2025 and feedback was received as indicated:

· Continued coastal erosion control $800k – 83% support

· Upgrade Pukekohe Town Centre $1.5m – 39% support

Other proposals - Franklin local board sought feedback on the option of paying a local targeted rate to provide additional community facilities in Franklin. This was not specified for any particular facility at this stage, but was intended to gauge how the community felt about the concept. Feedback received on this proposal showed 44% support.

Regional proposals

Investing in Auckland:

· 42% support for the proposed 3.5% average rates increase

· 84% support for a lower than 3.5% average rates increase

Fixing Transport:

· 54% support for the proposed Auckland Plan transport network

· 47% support for funding the additional $300m per annum required to deliver the Auckland Plan transport network through motorway charges and an additional 12% supporting a partial motorway charge

Your rates:

· 54% support for retaining the Uniform Annual General Charge (UAGC) at $385

· 36% support to gradually reduce the business rates proportion

Housing and Development:

· 43% support for the proposal to create a new development agency to allow council to take a more active role in the development of Auckland.

Context

This report is being provided to the Franklin Local Board summarising the local consultation feedback received on the LTP. A recent change in legislation enabled council to receive feedback in a wider range of forms, including in person at community engagement events, through written forms and on online through social media. People were invited to attend Have Your Say events held in their local board area to interact with decision makers. These events replaced hearings and the feedback has also been collected and included in this report.

Feedback on Franklin Local Board local proposals and on regional proposals from the Franklin local board area was received through:

· Written feedback – 384 feedback forms (online, emailed and hard copy forms were received)

· In person – Feedback was received through 2 Have your say events and 8 community events

· Social media – 11 comments through Twitter and Facebook

Overview of feedback received on local proposals

Feedback was received from 1632 people in the Franklin local board area. Feedback was received on both the regional proposals and the local issues that the board sought feedback on. Two Have Your Say events were held – one in Pukekohe and one in Maraetai/Beachlands. In addition the board held the following engagement events:

· Business stakeholders’ briefing

· Key stakeholders’ discussion on regional issues

· Franklin Youth Advisory Board discussion

· Information session at Whare Oranga Nga Hau e Wha Marae

· Information session at Pukekohe A&P Show

· Clevedon youth discussion

· Two road trips to inform community and seek input

Feedback was provided by the community through the following channels:

Ethnicity of those providing feedback is summarised below, this is largely representative of the general ethnic profile of Franklin.

The age profile of those providing feedback is summarised below – this is relatively evenly spread from 35 – 74 years, with lower numbers of youth providing feedback.

This report provides a general overview of the feedback received on both local and regional issues.

1) Local board proposals for 2015/2016

The community was asked for feedback on the local board proposals. They were asked if they supported the local board proposals for 2015/2016 and 2016 – 2025. Feedback was also sought on whether or not the community would generally support a local or targeted rate to provide additional community facilities in Franklin. 470 responses were received – 58% of feedback overall was in support of the local board proposals.

A summary of the feedback received is provided below.

a) Feedback received

The following proposals were what the local board sought feedback on for 2015/2016 and the levels of support, or otherwise are shown in the accompanying charts:

Support for coastal erosion control ($170k)

· I object to spending 2.5 million for a sports park while only $170k is applied to coastline erosion control, preparing the community landscape for stronger storms and associated rising sea levels of climate change is vastly more important than sports grounds. What is the case for this expenditure?

· Erosion is a natural process, control should only occur when necessary to prevent damage to public facilities after considering the effects on others of this intervention.

Mixed support for the development of the Waiuku Sports Park ($2.5m)

· I support most of the proposals except for the amount of money to be spent on the sports park in Waiuku.

· Mostly yes, But surely we don't need to spend 2.5M on a sports park for Waiuku - It's a 20 min drive (or less) to use existing facilities in Pukekohe.

Support for the Facilities Partnership Scheme $110k – there were some comments seeking clarity about what this actually is.

· "Facilities Partnership Scheme"? what's that when it's at home?

Support for events, grants and community support $400k

· I disagree with the money spent on events and grants with little or no regulation.

· Cut any and all non-essential expenditure on 'social and grant' schemes.

· We generally support the Franklin Local Board's spending proposals, although we believe there is room for cutting down some events and activities (such as outdoor movie screenings). We would also like to see justification for the planned spend of $1.5 million on upgrading the Town Centre over the next 10 years.

· Insufficient budget for community services, parks and lifestyle projects.

· No event funding. Do:

a) 1)Roads, 2)Lights, 3)Parks, 4)Seashore Improvement, 5)Public Libraries, 6)Animal Management, 7)Public Pool, 8)Rubbish

Support for environmental initiatives, focusing on waterways

· Not enough money in these budgets to be effective.

· Environmental initiatives - some streams running near properties are littered and overgrown. e.g. opposite the train station and waterways running through Pukekohe North. Some grower roads are in disgraceful state e.g. Blake Rd, Calcutta Rd, Dazely Rd

· In particular - "Improve connectivity between outdoor areas used by the public". Here in Clevedon embracing our local river as part of the community area by including public space and walkways around it will help ensure that water quality is a focus for all.

2) Local board proposals for 2016 - 25

Key themes across all feedback received are:

· Support for continuation of coastal erosion control developments ($800k)

· Mixed support for the upgrade of the Pukekohe town centre ($1.5m)

A summary of the feedback received is provided below.

a) Feedback received – Coastal erosion

The following graph shows the high level of support for the board’s proposed investment in controlling coastal erosion. With a large coastline throughout Franklin this is a key challenge and some of the comments below through the feedback highlight some of the challenges in particular areas.

· Coastal erosion needs to be well thought out with a long term strategy along all of Auckland’s coastline.

· The budget for shore erosion works is brainless and the work will be of no lasting benefit.

· I support all except Coastal Erosion Control for the benefit of private property. Coastal Erosion is a natural process, public monies should not be used to fund a private benefit.

· Coastline erosion is a problem so I support its control but we need it around Maraetai and Beachlands too. Local board should share the funds for this and target areas liked ours.

· Coastal erosion is a major problem. The council needs to be more open minded about other solutions rather than reapplying the same techniques which are not working. We strongly support more planting of native grasses which have proven to work in the Tauranga region. The council appears to want to keep replacing hard structures which get washed out with every major storm.

b) Feedback received – Pukekohe Town Centre upgrade

The following graph shows that half of the feedback received was not in support of continuing the upgrade of the Pukekohe Town Centre. This represents the final stage of an upgrade which has been underway for ten years. Some of the comments below outline the

· Part of the Pukekohe Town Centre has been upgraded and further improvements not warranted.

· I support the Pukekohe town centre upgrade as long as it's something good - seems in the past 'upgrades' mean replacing a few paving stones and that's it.

· I do not support the upgrade of Pukekohe town centre. There are already many sporting facilities in the region and recent work done in Pukekohe has been costly without providing significant benefits.

· Pukekohe is the main centre for the area and needs to be developed as such. I think, however, it is important that development enhances rather than detracts from the existing heritage landscape and buildings.

· Pukekohe town has a growing population funding going towards upgrading the town centre is necessary.

3) Other Proposals

The Franklin Local Board asked the community how they would feel about paying a local targeted rate to provide additional community facilities in the Franklin local board area. Feedback did not indicate strong support either for or against a proposed local targeted rate as the following chart shows.

Some of the comments received on this proposal include:

· Before looking at a targeted rate I would like to understand what facilities will be going into growth areas such as Flatbush, e.g. if there is a swimming pool going into the Flatbush area?

· Do not support a local targeted rate as this would amount to just another tax increase, especially for those who do not use the targeted project.

· Any targeted rate to provide additional facilities/services should be agreed to and directed only to the community or local area that directly benefits from the same. Do not spread the cost to those that can't use the new facility due to the distance from the same.

· No. Rates are already high enough. Use some of the rates already collected to fund development in rural areas. We don't all live in towns or in the City centre.

· Yes please more recreational facilities for community like Lloyd Elsmere Pool, gym and recreation centre. Franklin is missing out. We need another indoor pool & recreation centre.

· I support targeted rates for Franklin Local Area Board to be able to give some more priority to local needs of our community. As we are not a densely populated Area, it would appear that the prioritisation process for projects does not favour Franklin.

· Yes targeted rates do work. But I thought Auckland wanted things uniform across the whole region including the largely forgotten area where we live.

· The targeted rate should be specific to each community which will benefit directly from the additional community facility not a general Franklin targeted rate. It may be progressive so that the further away you are from the facility the less you pay. It could be based on local board wards. If you are in the ward you pay. However, someone in Hunua would pay less toward a facility in Beachlands Maraetai than a ratepayer in that area and vice versa

A number of other comments were made on issues outside those that were proposed. Karaka Sports Park, and its importance as a local sporting facility was raised by 434 submitters.

Requests for new pools or upgrades to existing pools in Pukekohe, Waiuku and Beachlands were received.

Requests for a new library in Beachlands were also received.

Overview of feedback received on regional proposals from Franklin Local Board area

The consultation on the proposed LTP focused on four key issues, Investing in Auckland, Fixing transport, Housing and development and Your rates, however people were also asked to provide feedback on the other regional proposals. The written feedback received from the Franklin local board area on the key consultation topics is summarised below, along with an overview of the other areas of feedback on regional proposals.

1) Investing in Auckland

The question asked of Auckland’s residents and ratepayers was whether they agree with the proposed overall average general rates increase of 3.5 per cent each year, which will enable the proposed investment and spending outlined in the consultation document.

The graphs below give an overview of the responses from the Franklin local board area. 49% of those who provided feedback do not support the proposed 3.5% rates increase. 557 responses were received.

A further breakdown is provided with regards to what the rates rise should be – 84% support an increase lower than the proposed 3.5%. 176 responses were received.

With regards to where council should be spending rates, the following graph indicates which areas should have more or less spending allocated to them than what is proposed in the Long-term Plan. 135 responses were received

2) Fixing Transport

People were asked whether they supported the basic transport network or whether Auckland Council should invest more to get the Auckland Plan transport network that would address Auckland’s transport problems. They were then asked if the decision was made to invest in the Auckland Plan transport network, how they thought Aucklanders should pay for it.

The graphs below give an overview of the responses from the Franklin area.

Preferred transport funding option – do you support the basic transport option of the Auckland Plan transport network (which requires an additional $300m funding per year above that allocated in the LTP) – 535 responses were received

Preferred transport funding option

In order to fund the additional $300m to deliver the Auckland Plan transport network, is a fuel tax and additional rates charge, or motorway user charge supported? 529 responses were received.

Areas for transport focus

What specific transport projects or priorities should we focus on? 653 responses were received.

People were asked to identify specific projects or priorities that should be a focus for delivery. The main local transport projects or programmes thought to be a priority by those feeding back are:

· the need for a strategic approach to solving Auckland’s transport issues

· improved passenger transport

o reliability, frequency, better connections

o electrification to Pukekohe

o more ferry/bus/train services within Franklin

o better park and ride facilities

· cycleways and walkways

· Central government funding for things like motorway upgrades

· A number of specific examples of projects were also mentioned by individual submitters such as:

o motorcycle lanes on motorways

o Manukau to Pukekohe train

o Beachlands to Botany road

o Waiuku public transport services

o Access to the Pine Harbour ferry

3) Your Rates

Auckland’s residents and ratepayers were asked to provide their thoughts on sharing the rates burden, in particular they were asked:

· what they thought the fixed portion of rates (UAGC) that everyone pays should be, and

· whether they supported gradually reducing the business property rates from 32.8 per cent of all rates to 25.8 per cent over the next 10 years.

The graphs below give an overview of the responses from the Franklin local board area.

Uniform Annual General Charge (UAGC) What level should the UAGC be? $385 was proposed. 537 responses were received.

Business Rates Should the business rates proportion be gradually reduced over the next 10 years? 531 responses were received.

4) Housing and Development

People were asked if they supported council taking a more active role in the development of Auckland through replacing two existing Council Controlled Organisations with a new development agency.

The graph below gives an overview of the responses from the Franklin local board area.

Development Auckland – do you support the proposal? 517 responses were received.

5) Other regional proposals with local impact

The following table shows the top 20 topics that were commented on at a regional level.

Chairperson	Andrew Baker
Deputy Chairperson	Jill Naysmith
Members	Malcolm Bell
	Alan Cole
	Brendon Crompton
	Angela Fulljames
	Sarah Higgins
	Murray Kay
	Dr Lyn Murphy

Authors	Debra Langton - Senior Local Board Advisor
Authorisers	Teresa Turner - Relationship Manager

Authors	Gaylene Harvey - Democracy Advisor
Authorisers	Teresa Turner - Relationship Manager