Upper Harbour Local Board






Minutes of an extraordinary meeting of the Upper Harbour Local Board held in the Upper Harbour Local Board Office, 30 Kell Drive, Albany on Tuesday, 21 April 2015 at 9.30am.





Brian Neeson, JP


Deputy Chairperson

Lisa Whyte



John McLean



Margaret Miles, JP

From 9.38 am, item 10


Christine Rankin-MacIntyre






Callum Blair

For non-attendance



Upper Harbour Local Board

21 April 2015



1††††††††† Welcome


The chair welcomed all those present.


2††††††††† Apologies

Resolution number UH/2015/28

MOVED by Member CK Rankin-MacIntyre, seconded by Member JG McLean:

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a)         accept the apologies from membersí Margaret Miles for lateness and Callum Blair for non-attendance.




3††††††††† Declaration of Interest


There were no declarations of interest.


4††††††††† Leave of Absence


There were no leaves of absence.


5††††††††† Acknowledgements


There were no acknowledgements.


6††††††††† Petitions


There were no petitions.


7††††††††† Deputations


There were no deputations.


8††††††††† Public Forum


There was no public forum.


9††††††††† Extraordinary Business


There was no extraordinary business.


10††††††† Notices of Motion


There were no notices of motion.


Member MA Miles returned to the meeting at 9.38 am.




Local board advocacy and feedback on Long-term Plan 2015 Ė 2025 proposals




A copy of the tabled documents have been placed on the official copy of these minutes and can be viewed on the Auckland Council website as minutes attachments.




Member MA Miles left the meeting at 10.07 am.

Member MA Miles returned to the meeting at 10.28 am.




Resolution number UH/2015/29

MOVED by Member JG McLean, seconded by Deputy Chairperson LM Whyte:

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a)          express their concern about the ambiguity and leading nature of the questions asked to residents as part of the consultation material.

b)          confirm an updated list of advocacy points for the discussions with the Budget Committee on 24, 28 and 29 April 2015.

c)          provide the following feedback to the Long-term Plan 2015-2025 by theme:

Investing in Auckland

i)           The board does not support budget cuts being found in local parks, community and lifestyle activity areas but believe that budget cuts should be found in regional budgets.

ii)          The board does not support the proposed budget envelope for the parks, community and lifestyle theme, as these activities are the most significant for local boards, are the most valued by our communities and are seen as core services.

iii)         The board supports an adequately funded and timely renewals programme for all of our assets (including assets on parks and reserves, community facilities, pools and leisure centres, libraries and all other local assets), noting that the renewals programme should be funded from depreciation. The selection criteria to determine assets requiring renewal funding should be based on robust asset management plans and timely condition assessments.

iv)         The board supports a slowing down of Auckland Councilís entire new capital works programme (including CCOs and regional budgets), as well as a review of the Southern Initiative and a review of the urgency of the City Rail Link, to ensure that important local services continue, and that our communities do not experience significant rates increases.

v)          The board raises concerns regarding the unfair distribution of capital expenditure across the region, especially the acquisition of recreation and open space in new developments and the lack of securing land for future use.

vi)         The board once again requests further information and modelling around the funding allocated to regional projects, as well as what impact the slowing down of some of these projects may have on the overall budget.



vii)        The board supports investment in regional projects where they provide benefits to all Auckland residents, but query the speed of their delivery where this has a material impact on the ability to deliver local projects.

viii)      The board supports the ongoing development of pools and leisure services as an attractive service for all Auckland residents, as it not only generates income for the council but provides centres of development and family orientated programme opportunities, keeping families to be more active.

†††††††††† Fixing Transport

ix)         There needs to be fairness and equity in the determination of transport charges.† Due to the nature of the geography of the North Shore and the lack of alternative options, residents utilise both SH1 and SH18 as part of the local roads network out of necessity.†

x)          The transport funding options presented in the LTP were not adequate and restrictive. Alternate funding options need to be considered such as just fuel tax: or a motorway toll capped at 2 to 4 trips per day; or selling new main arterial roads, in Auckland Council ownership, for private management (not local roads); or leasing new main arterial roads, in Auckland Council ownership, for private management (not local roads); or investigate public / private partnerships.

xi)         The board supports maintaining the existing level of public transport service, with a view to increasing its accessibility for all residents in the long term.† Residents on the North Shore are extremely reliant on the bus network as there are very few other transport options.

xii)        The board supports the treatment of maintenance and renewals as a non-discretionary activity, to avoid a significant backlog of renewals occurring over the next 10 years. The board requests better oversight of Auckland Transportís renewals and maintenance programme in the Upper Harbour.

xiii)      The board supports additional minor safety projects, Local Board improvements and replacement of essential assets, due to the ongoing local impacts of these transport activities.

xiv)      The board supports Auckland Transportís continued treatment of the local board initiatives fund as a non-discretionary activity.† The fund provides each board with some ability to direct Auckland Transport investment and the continued existence and prioritisation of this fund is appreciated.† An example of where the board was able to utilise this fund was in addressing safety concerns, bus stop placement and other roading issues along the length of Tauhinu Road in Greenhithe.

xv)        The board supports the prioritisation criteria of Strategic Fit, Effectiveness and Efficiency in part as a professional, evidenced based approach is required, however these criteria should not preclude local projects from being prioritised and implemented.†





xvi)      The board agrees with the focus on continued improvement of public transport, due to the fact that traffic congestion is worsening across the region.† Public transport should however not be prioritised at the expense of providing for private vehicle users.† Public transport can only become a priority once suitable infrastructure exists to support a focus on the use of public transport.† Public transport infrastructure on the North Shore and in the west is still insufficient.

xvii)     The board supports the concept of a City Rail Link (CRL) and understands its benefits but the board is of the opinion that this project should only continue if there is a substantial financial contribution from central government and only when it can be afforded.† In the short term this project is of no benefit to commuters on the Shore and it is felt that the substantial budget could be applied better elsewhere in the region to alleviate congestion.†

xviii)    The board supports all current and future State Highway 1 (SH1) improvements and explicitly supports the extension of the Northern Busway from Constellation to Albany, and ultimately onward to Silverdale.† The share of bus use is highest in the corridor between the Central Business District (CBD) and the areas to the south and along the line of the Northern Busway.

xix)      The board also supports the principle of Auckland Transportís plan to accelerate the building and construction of the Auckland Cycle Network, as long as it considers the entire region.

xx)        The option of light rail is also supported by the board in principle, however, feeder services and the necessary sufficient infrastructure needs to be put in place prior to the consideration of light rail.†

xxi)      Given the demand on land, the board supports greater emphasis on Park and Ride buildings, as opposed to increased open areas, with a fair Ďusers paysí component.† Consideration should be given to single fare to park a vehicle at a Park and Ride facility and then use the bus service to commute, as well as a fare for bus use only.† The board is in support of an integrated fare system.

Your rates


xxii)     The board supports an equitable budget allocation which will ensure that the level of investment in Upper Harbour, as previously assured to our community, can continue.

xxiii)    Auckland Council cannot keep increasing rates on the one hand and taking away what is core expected service on the other.† It is time that Council re-evaluates its definition of core services, as there is a definite disconnect between what Auckland residents and Auckland Council consider core service.

xxiv)    The board believes that the UAGC should be set at $500 per household.

xxv)     The board supports a freeze on business rates in these austere financial times and believes that this should be reviewed at the next LTP.



Housing and Development


xxvi)    The board does not have a particular opinion about the formation of Development Auckland as long as specific outcomes are achieved, such quality urban form, high level amenities, good community provision, high quality urban design, good infrastructure provision, with a focus on open space delivery.†

xxvii)  It is imperative that realistic targets are set for Development Auckland and all other CCOs, to ensure that sound, professional, evidenced based decision making occurs.

Auckland Council Regional Policies with Local Impact

xxviii)   The Development Contributions Policy must consider current and future population growth and the subsequent need for infrastructure and the acquisition of open space to cater for the growth. Emphasis needs to be placed on the importance of neighbourhood parks, footpaths and the connectivity of new subdivisions to existing residential developments.† The board wants to ensure that previous mistakes of growth and poor planning are not repeated.† The board feels that the current development contributions policy will not deliver these outcomes and catchments need to be more locally focused which will then truly mitigate the effects of growth and development, which is the intent of the legislation.

xxix)     The board does not support any proposed adjustments to levels of service in our parks and reserves where there is a material impact on our ratepayersí experience of these assets.

xxx)††† The board supports the status quo as to oppose the introduction of chemical spraying.

xxxi)†† The board does not support the divestment of any parks and reserves as all open space is precious to our community.

xxxii)† The board supports a more empowered community approach for community development services and programmes.




a†††† 20150421,Upper Harbour Local Board, Item 11, Advocacy Items

12††††††† Consideration of Extraordinary Items


There was no consideration of extraordinary items.


10.31 am††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††† The Chairperson thanked Members for their attendance and attention to business and declared the meeting closed.