I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Auckland City Centre Advisory Board will be held on:
Date: Time: Meeting Room: Venue:
|
Wednesday, 27 May 2015 3.00pm Rooms 1 &
2, Level 26 |
Auckland City Centre Advisory Board
OPEN AGENDA
|
MEMBERSHIP
Chairperson |
Dr Lucy Baragwanath |
University of Auckland |
Deputy Chairperson |
Kate Healy |
Ngati Whatua o Orakei Corporate Limited |
Members |
Dick Ayres |
Member, CBD Residents Advisory Group |
|
Mayor Len Brown, JP |
Auckland Council |
|
Shale Chambers |
Chair Waitemata Local Board |
|
Tim Coffey |
Member, CBD Residents Advisory Group |
|
John Coop |
Warren and Mahoney, NZ Institute of Architects |
|
Jillian de Beer |
de Beer Marketing & Communications |
|
Barbara Holloway |
Karangahape Road Business Association |
|
Andrea Hutchins |
Property Council of NZ |
|
Mike Lee |
Councillor, Auckland Council |
|
Nigel Murphy |
Auckland University of Technology |
|
David Wright |
Heart of the City |
(Quorum 6 members)
|
|
Tam White Democracy Advisor
22 May 2015
Contact Telephone: (09) 890 8156 Email: tam.white@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
|
Auckland City Centre Advisory Board 27 May 2015 |
|
1 Apologies 5
2 Declaration of Interest 5
3 Confirmation of Minutes 5
4 Extraordinary Business 5
5 Issues of significance 7
6 CCI Progress Update for Auckland City Centre Advisory Board - to 20 May 2015 9
7 Review of City Centre Masterplan targets 25
8 Auckland City Centre Advisory Board Workshop Feedback Summary 22 April 2015 29
9 City Centre Cycleway Report 33
10 Myers Park Stage II Upgrade 41
11 Integrated Transport 47
12 Update on the development of the City Centre Cleaning and Maintenance Plan 49
13 Consideration of Extraordinary Items
PUBLIC EXCLUDED
14 Procedural Motion to Exclude the Public 55
1 Apologies
At the close of the agenda no apologies had been received.
2 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.
3 Confirmation of Minutes
That the Auckland City Centre Advisory Board: a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Wednesday, 22 April 2015, as a true and correct record.
|
4 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.”
Auckland City Centre Advisory Board 27 May 2015 |
|
File No.: CP2015/09655
Purpose
1. To enable Board Members to discuss issues of significance that may affect the central city area.
Executive Summary
2. The following issues have been identified for discussion and an opportunity for Board members to raise any concerns they may have:
a. Harbour related
i. Wharves
ii. Port
b. Transport related
i. City Rail Link
ii. Bus network
iii. Light Rail
iv. Pedestrian/cycle ways
c. Street life-related
i. Safety
ii. Pollution
iii. Homelessness
iv. Public open spaces
That the Auckland City Centre Advisory Board: a) receive the information.
|
There are no attachments for this report.
Signatories
Author |
Tam White - Democracy Advisor |
Authoriser |
Andrew Guthrie – Programme Director – City Centre Integration |
Auckland City Centre Advisory Board 27 May 2015 |
|
CCI Progress Update for Auckland City Centre Advisory Board - to 20 May 2015
File No.: CP2015/09620
Purpose
1. To update the Auckland City Centre Advisory Board on City Centre Integration progress to 20 May 2015.
Executive Summary
2. The report provides a high-level overview of progress on projects and initiatives in the City Centre, including:
a. Targeted Rate Projects
b. Other City Centre Projects
c. City Centre Strategies / Initiatives
d. Information Requested in Response to Board Resolutions
e. Forward Planner.
That the Auckland City Centre Advisory Board: a) receive the City Centre Integration progress report, updated to 20 May 2015.
|
Comments
O’Connell Street Shared Space
3. The wind load model report for proposed O’Connell Street artwork is now complete, which offers two addresses suitable for the artwork to be installed on. Engagement with building owners are underway to agree to an address.
4. A debrief was held with the eight business representatives that initiated ‘Thursdays on O'Connell Street’. The businesses agreed that the support provided by Council was critical to their ability to deliver their event. This group continues to advocate for pedestrianising the street certain times every day (eg 11am-midnight or similar) to enable continued place activation and enhanced pedestrian experience.
5. Feasibility of closing the street to cars for parts of each day is being reviewed with Auckland Transport.
Bledisloe House Customer Services Centre and Bledisloe Lane
6. Practical completion has been granted and final defects are being completed on site
|
Bledisloe Lane Anzac Day |
Myers Park Upgrade – Stage 2
7. Professional services team has been appointed and is underway.
8. The concept design for Myers Park Stage 2 was presented to the Board in April - a budget shortfall to deliver the full scope was highlighted. Options to manage the budget and deliver an appropriate scope of upgrade works have been further developed and are provided in a separate paper.
Beach Road
9. Completion of work is now early August, due to design changes to:
a. design of the intersection at Tangihua Street, with the central median island cut back to accommodate designated oversize vehicle route.
b. rain gardens - removed due to insufficient available road space. Currently investigating alternatives.
Freyberg Square and Ellen Melville / Pioneer Women’s Hall
10. Cost Management (Stellar Projects) and Design Services (Isthmus Group / Stevens Lawson Architects) contracts have been awarded, and are underway.
11. A programme of design, engagement and delivery will be provided to the next meeting.
12. Construction is planned for 2016.
High Street
13. Heart of the City (HotC) has completed an on-line survey of local businesses and community members, requesting feedback on the recently completed O’Connell St upgrade and input to further potential upgrades in the High St precinct. A summary report is provided as a separate paper from HotC.
14. A strategy for the potential redevelopment of the wider High St precinct will be developed with engagement from the business and residential community. This will be informed by the HotC survey feedback as well as design and engagement on the Freyberg Square project.
Karangahape Rd
15. Projects aligned with the Karangahape Road Plan 2014 – 2044 will be presented to the June Board meeting for support from Targeted Rate funding.
16. The works leverage off AT’s commitment to deliver the K’Rd Cycle route in 2016-17, and CRL Station in approx. 2023, which will influence the form and function of K’Rd and the surrounding streets. Significant improvements to the urban realm are expected, including improved connections and public spaces.
Wayfinding Signage
17. At the April meeting the ACCAB;
a. Endorsed the strategic and design principles for the Regional Wayfinding Strategy
b. Supported testing in the Wynyard/Westhaven test precinct
c. Confirmed the Board’s previous resolutions to contribute funding from the City Centre Targeted Rate for implementation of the Wayfinding Strategy in the city centre up to the sum of $900,000
18. The Regional Signage Team has been meeting with the Local Boards and explaining the project objectives ahead of Phase Two testing that will include in situ signage in Wynyard Quarter.
19. Work continues with external Prototyping companies for developing and sourcing the best products for the project. Good progress has been made in developing the test plan for the Wynyard precinct.
20. Building on feedback from the Phase One test signage along the Dominion Road Safe Cycle Route and Grafton Gully Cycleway, refinements are being made to the next round of signage for testing including larger font and improved visibility features for street blade signs.
21. At this stage the timing for installation of the test signage in Wynyard Quarter is scheduled to commence 3rd quarter -2015.
Other City Centre Projects
Hobson and Nelson Street upgrade
22. Reference design for both streets is near completion, currently being updated to reflect the traffic modelling outcomes for proposed reduction of traffic lanes, and public realm enhancement including for pedestrians and cyclists.
23. Project funding is not provided as a priority in the amended LTP proposal. The appropriateness of Targeted Rate funding will be considered by the Board through the programme workshop.
Victoria Street Linear Park
24. No further update.
Quay Street Streetscape Upgrade
25. Project funding is not provided as a priority in the amended LTP proposal. The appropriateness of Targeted Rate funding will be considered by the Board through the programme workshop.
26. Further planning and redevelopment of the streetscape upgrade will be informed by outcomes from the Central Wharves investigations, the Downtown Public Open Spaces review, and the timing and requirements of the Seawall seismic upgrade.
Quay St Seawall Seismic Upgrade
27. Project commencement is deferred until 2020 under the amended LTP proposal.
28. Further planning and redevelopment of the Seawall upgrade will be informed by outcomes from the Central Wharves investigations.
Ferry Basin Redevelopment
29. Further planning and redevelopment of ferry infrastructure will be informed by outcomes from the Central Wharves investigations.
30. Redevelopment will be staged to align with planned Quay St Seawall upgrades.
Westhaven Promenade
31. Stage 2 is provided in the amended LTP for construction 2017 – 2019. Design is underway.
Wynyard Quarter Redevelopment
32. Stage 1 - Construction of Halsey and Gaunt St upgrades due to start late May 2015. Priorities for completion are the services and street upgrades fronting the Fonterra development (planned for completion early 2016). Access to Wynyard Quarter via Halsey St will be restricted for the duration of the work.
33. Stage 2 - Construction of Madden and Packenham Streets upgrades due to start late 2015.
34. Engagement with key stakeholders is underway to manage traffic and pedestrian movements into and out of the Quarter during the works.
35. Resource consent has been lodged for the hotel development planned adjacent to Te Wero Bridge.
36. Options are being considered for redevelopment of the current Team NZ base at Site 18 on Beaumont St.
Transport Infrastructure
37. The AT Board considered a report on light rail options in April, and endorsed the strategic case for LRT as part of the response to increasing PT demand and congestion. Procurement and staging options are being further developed for formal endorsement.
38. The implications of potential LRT for currently planned projects in the city centre are significant and will inform sequencing and timing of those projects. It is expected that a ‘measured’ roll-out of LRT would require that significant bus volumes will need to be catered for in and through the city, which are then reduced / phased out over time, if and when LRT routes are introduced.
39. AT is commissioning a review of the city centre PT network, commencing shortly to revisit bus routes, capacities and volumes through the city. The study will consider the potential staged implementation of LRT.
40. Investigation and design for the Fanshawe Street/Wynyard Station works will be developed following the PT network review above.
41. Discussions continue with Precinct Properties to integrate Lower Albert St bus interchange facilities and infrastructure with the redevelopment of the Downtown Shopping Centre (DSC).
Cycle Network
42. A separate paper is provided outlining the development of the city centre cycle network.
43. Auckland Transport (AT) and New Zealand Transport Agency are working collaboratively to deliver the North-South (Nelson St) cycleway, extending from Upper Queen St to Quay St
a. Stage 1 will be completed by Sept 2015, and includes a shared path along Canada Street to Union Street, re-purposing the dis-used Nelson Street motorway off-ramp via a new bridge (delivered by NZTA). AT will also construct a separated cycleway along Nelson St, from Union Street to Victoria Street. Enhancement of the route through higher quality landscaping, lighting and urban design features is being considered, and may be an opportunity for the application of targeted rate funds.
b. Stage 2 includes the section of Nelson St north of Victoria St. Options under evaluation being either:
· Nelson St, Sturdee St, Lower Hobson St (to Quay St) OR
· Victoria St, Hobson St, Lower Hobson St (to Quay St)
Construction of this phase is programmed for completion by end of June 2016.
Nelson St Cycleway – New Canada Street Bridge
SkyPath
44. The resource consent hearing is confirmed for 2-8 June and the Officer's report has recommended that the resource consent be granted with conditions.
45. Due diligence work into the commercial proposal continues by the Council family.
City Centre Strategies / Initiatives
Programme and Funding
46. The City Centre Programme will be revisited with the Board in a workshop prior to the meeting.
a. The assessment criteria previously applied to the CBD Streetscape Upgrade Programme were generally agreed at the March Board meeting as being a useful starting point for evaluation of a programme of targeted rate-funded projects. Criteria have been updated for agreement at the workshop.
b. A draft programme will be presented with evaluation criteria applied, for review with the Board.
c. Options for allocation of targeted rate funding to new projects / initiatives will be proposed.
Communications
47. A cross-Council communications group has been established to provide an integrated approach which will engage city centre stakeholders and public, with a focus on momentum towards ‘the most liveable city’, future outcomes, the journey (how we manage effects while maintaining and growing a vibrant city economy and desirable place of residence).
48. The ‘City Centre Master Plan 2012’ proposed a number of Outcomes and Targets that the City Centre will seek to achieve by 2032, and noted that the targets proposed targets are subject to further review and development. A review is currently underway to:
a. Measure progress to date against the 2012 targets (where possible).
b. Propose updated targets which may be more appropriate, relevant and measurable as an indicator of the progress towards the goal of ‘most liveable city’.
c. A separate paper is provided for the Board’s information, outlining progress.
Precinct Frameworks
49. Framework documents are underway for key city centre precincts, to collate planning and project information and inform decisions on projects and initiatives.
a. Downtown – complete.
b. Aotea
· ‘Issues and Opportunities’ workshops were held in April with WLB, ACCAB, Learning Quarter, and CCI Chief Executives.
· An update on the framework is provided as a separate paper for information, including a record of feedback received from Board members.
· A workshop is due in late June with Councillors to:
o provide direction for the draft framework, and
o to review and endorse a brief of requirements for an Expression of Interest (EOI) process, which seeks to obtain a development proposal for the old Civic Administration Building.
c. Learning Quarter – start date deferred to 2016 with agreement from UofA and AUT
d. Victoria Quarter – to commence mid-2016
e. Quay Park
· To commence mid-2015. Initial work being led by Auckland Transport (and involving NZTA and POAL) is underway to review and refresh the Eastern Waterfront Access Study and Port Access Study work from 2012.
· Key stakeholders will be engaged including KiwiRail, POAL and Ngati Whatua
f. City Centre Transport
· The framework will follow on from the regional Integrated Transport Plan (ITP), due in Sept 2015 (first draft).
· A review is underway of scope, issues and outcomes; including review of public transport options and freight / motorway interfaces with city centre movement.
Central Wharves Strategy
50. The separate Port Future Study will be managed through Council’s Central Planning Office (CPO), and will be completed by mid-2016.
51. The Working Group is continuing work on option 4 to report back to the ADC in 3rd quarter 2015.
52. The Central Wharves investigations will consider how the redeveloped wharves could function and address aspirations following a future transfer of Captain Cook Wharf from port operations, and what steps can and should be taken ahead of that to enable the interim demand for redevelopment of Downtown public spaces, cruise and ferry facilities.
Digital Auckland
53. Work has commenced with two workshops completed and industry capability interviews underway.
54. The Business Case is due to be completed in May 2015. It will inform how an integrated digital information network can be created, which is the first step to becoming a Smart City.
Urban Environment
55. CCI is coordinating the development of work around the management of construction effects in the city centre over the next LTP programme. An update will be provided mid-2015, which considers:
a. Quarter-by-quarter timeframe projections of construction effects
b. Mitigation of effects – traffic, noise, social environment, business
c. Communications – see comments in ‘City Centre Initiatives’ section above
56. The work is now progressing, following agreement to the LTP programme in May 2015.
57. An update on Homelessness in the City Centre will be provided to the next meeting.
Information Requested in Response to Board Resolutions
58. Refer to Attachment A – ‘Report on Progress from Previous Meetings’.
Consideration
Local Board views and implications
59. A workshop seeking Local Board input to the City Centre Targets and Outcomes update was held 14th May 2015. The Board was generally supportive of the proposal.
Māori impact statement
60. Monthly CCI Hui’s are set up with Iwi representatives - the next one is scheduled for the 12th June.
61. A Hui was held in May and considered the Central Wharves, Aotea Framework and Downtown Shopping Centre redevelopment (Precinct Properties Ltd). Copies of the Agendas, Attendees and Minutes have been provided to all invited parties, including the Independent Maori Statutory Board.
Implementation
62. Aotea Framework was workshopped with the Local Board, Learning Quarter and the Auckland City Centre Board in April. A workshop is arranged with the Auckland Development Committee in June.
No. |
Title |
Page |
aView |
Report on Progress from Previous Meetings |
19 |
bView |
Meeting Topics - Forward Planner |
23 |
Signatories
Author |
Andrew Guthrie – Programme Director – City Centre Integration |
Authoriser |
Rick Walden – General Manager – City Centre Integration |
Auckland City Centre Advisory Board 27 May 2015 |
|
Review of City Centre Masterplan targets
File No.: CP2015/09617
Purpose
1. To provide an update on the review of the City Centre Masterplan (CCMP) targets and outline of the process going forward.
Executive Summary
2. The CCMP, published in 2012, has nine outcomes and 36 targets. A review of the targets themselves was always envisaged, and this is seen as an opportune time to carry out that review and ensure the targets more accurately measure the city centre work programme. What is proposed is a significant reduction, at least in the headline targets, with a focus on measures that can be reported on regularly.
3. When finalised, the new targets will be publicised alongside analysis of performance against the existing targets.
4. Where possible and appropriate, the targets will simply be a repetition of existing targets owned by partners; this also serves to outline how the work of each partner contributes to delivering the city centre vision.
That the Auckland City Centre Advisory Board: a) support the review process and that members individually commit to supporting the establishment of SMART targets where they have specific expertise.
|
Comments
5. Analysis of the existing targets finds that many do not adequately measure the outcomes themselves, or are not available at city centre level, or – given progress since achieved in the centre – are not ambitious enough. The proposed measures are below – note, not all are complete and some are awaiting input. Next steps will be finalising these, clarifying the targets that sit alongside them and accountability for who owns the delivery.
6. Note – this review does not include changing the outcomes. However there is one exception, where it was thought the words ‘well connected to its urban villages’ sits better with Outcome 6 than with Outcome 7.
7. The total proposed targets consists of 15 headline measures and 15 supporting measures.
8. Proposed Outcomes and targets for the City Centre Masterplan
|
Outcome 1: A vibrant and engaging international destination – an iconic destination and ‘must-do’ for the international visitor to New Zealand. Headline target: - Total visitor nights increase from [x.x] million to [x.x] million by [year]. Supporting targets: - Visitors’ average length of stay increases from 2.2 nights to [x.x] nights by [year] - Visitors’ perceptions of the Auckland city centre are positive; NPS score increases from [x] to [x] by [year] |
|
Outcome 2: A globally significant centre for business – the Engine Room of the Auckland economic powerhouse with a vibrant and vital retail and commercial core Headline target: - Number of people employed in city centre increases from [x] to [x] by [year]. - Foreign direct investment – if possible, annual target comprising Ateed, Auckland Investment Office, NZTE Supporting targets: - Commercial space in city centre increases from [x] square feet to [x] square feet. - Retail expenditure in the city increases to $[x] by [year]. |
|
Outcome 3: A city centre that meets the needs of a growing and changing residential population Headline targets: - Increase in number of community facilities from [x] to [x]. - UNICEF child-friendly cities measure. Supporting targets: - Decrease in crime rates in city centre from [x] per 10,000 population to [x] per 10,000 population by [year]. - Increase in the proportion of residents who feel a sense of community in the city centre from [x%] to [x%] by [year]. - Perceptions of safety |
|
Outcome 4: A culturally rich and creative centre – a window on the world where all of Auckland’s many cultures are celebrated Headline targets - Number of projects that satisfy the Te Aranga Principles increases from [x] to [x] by [year]. - Events and festivals eg. attendance numbers or number of events/festivals Supporting targets: - Percentage of area in the city centre that has been assessed for historic heritage values |
|
Outcome 5: An exemplar of urban living – with a wide choice of high-quality residential options Headline target: - Population of city centre increases at 1000 people/year (tbc) Supporting target: - Residential mix – eg housing tenure or variety of dwelling types and sizes - Resident’s perceptions |
|
Outcome 6: Hub of an integrated regional transport system
– Headline target: - Continuing modal shift into the city centre from private motor vehicles to other modes. Targets of [x]% of journeys by bus, [x]% of journeys by rail, [x%] of journeys by ferry, [x]% of journeys by cycle by [year]. Supporting target: - Increase in the proportion of the Auckland population living within 30 minutes public transport travel time of the city centre from [x]% to [x]% by [year] |
|
Outcome 7: A walkable and pedestrian-friendly city centre – well connected to its urban villages Headline target: - Increase in pedestrian counts in city centre from [x] to [x]. - Measure of improved public realm? For pedestrians – eg. Square kilometres of footpaths/shared paces? Supporting target: - A measure related to the Jan Gehl Public Life Survey - Number of left-hand slip lanes decreases from [x] to [x] by [year]. |
|
Outcome 8: An exceptional natural environment and leading environmental performer Headline targets: - Increase in the number of New Zealand Green Building Council minimum 5-star-rated buildings in the city centre from [x] to [x]. - Air quality – PENAP or Greenhouse gas emissions Supporting targets: - increase in the number of street trees in the city centre by 25% by 2021 - Increase in harbour water quality from [x] to [x]. |
|
Outcome 9: World-leading centre for higher education, research and innovation – the hub of creative and innovative products and services Headline targets: - University measure – to be informed by the universities - Research/innovation/development measure – to be informed by ATEED |
Consideration
Local Board views and implications
9. The targets review was presented to the Waitemata Local Board on 14 May. The feedback and input from the board is being taken forward, and an update will be sent to the board within the next fortnight.
Māori impact statement
10. The review has not been discussed with iwi. However, one of the areas lacking within the existing targets is a measure of embedding cultural identity. With the Te Aranga design principles now established, it is proposed that one of the headline measures be the ‘number of projects that satisfy the Te Aranga principles’.
Implementation
11. The next steps involve reviewing feedback and gaining subject matter expert input on specific measures; reviewing the use of headline and supporting measures; considering the targets to align to each measure and potentially having staggered targets – emphasising that we expect growth to continue during extensive development works in the city centre, but that growth will accelerate following that.
12. The new targets will be put to the Auckland Development Committee for adoption.
There are no attachments for this report.
Signatories
Author |
Oliver Roberts, Strategy and Communication Manager, City Centre Integration |
Authoriser |
Andrew Guthrie, Programme Director, City Centre Integration |
Auckland City Centre Advisory Board 27 May 2015 |
|
Auckland City Centre Advisory Board Workshop Feedback Summary 22 April 2015
File No.: CP2015/09647
Purpose
1. To discuss feedback received from the workshop held on 22 April 2015.
Executive Summary
2. This draft Issues and Opportunities Paper was pre circulated and presented to the Auckland City Centre Advisory Board at a workshop on Wednesday 22 April 2015. The members in the group represent a wide range of opinions and diversities. Whilst some of the comments heard may be in contrast to each other, the following provides a summary of the key themes and directions from all at the workshop, as well as keenly interested individual members over recent weeks.
That the Auckland City Centre Advisory Board: a) discuss feedback received from the workshop held on 22 April 2015.
|
Comments
Background
3. The Aotea Quarter will experience within the next 10 years unprecedented transformation in the context of public transport accessibility resulting from the City Rail Link Aotea Station (programmed to open in 2023), improvements to Wellesley Street as a civic public transport (bus priority) street and the potential Light Rail Transit along Queen Street.
4. The opportunity is to ensure that this significant transport investment is harnessed as a catalyst for realising the Quarter as a growth node. A land-use/development strategy is required that anticipates this shift and optimises the value capture potential of Council’s substantial land holdings whilst supporting the other identified outcomes for the Quarter.
Purpose
5. Preparation of the Aotea Quarter Framework is being co-ordinated by the City Centre Integration team. As with the recently completed Downtown Framework it is intended that the Aotea Quarter Framework will be a non-statutory plan that presents a 20 year strategic vision and direction for the Quarter. As a holistic document covering the four well-beings it will provide the context for relevant Council policy and strategy, establish priorities for action and inform future decision making.
6. Work commenced on the Framework in late 2014 with “Towards the Aotea Quarter Framework” issued in April 2015 as a means of capturing the key issues and opportunities affecting the Quarter. The document poses a series of questions which are being used to elicit further input from across the Council group and key stakeholders prior to producing a consultation draft Framework in July 2015. A final Framework Plan is targeted for adoption by the Auckland Development Committee (ADC) in late2015.
7. From work to date, building on the previous Aotea Quarter Plan (2007), four broad Outcomes for the Quarter have emerged:
a. A civic, arts, cultural and entertainment hub for the city centre and region, focused in the core of the Aotea Quarter. [Note. this is the focus of the existing Quarter vision]
b. A destination experience further defined by its public spaces, heritage buildings, distinctive built form character, and vibrant activity.
c. A growing and diverse residential + mixed-use neighbourhood encircling and supporting the core.
d. Transport investment as a catalyst for realising the Quarter as a growth node with Council optimising value capture and the outcome potential of its substantial land holdings.
Feedback
8. This draft Issues and Opportunities Paper was pre circulated and presented to the Auckland City Centre Advisory Board at a workshop on Wednesday 22 April 2015. The members in the group represent a wide range of opinions and diversities. Whilst some of the comments heard may be in contrast to each other, the following provides a summary of the key themes and directions from all at the workshop, as well as keenly interested individual members over recent weeks:
High level messages:
a) Vision: The current vision is sound as a distinctive identity for the area. Don’t try and make it everything or else it will dilute its key point of difference. Innovation, sustainability and accessibility are all filters that should transcend from the vision into the draft outcome statements / goals. They do not need to be specifically represented in the vision.
b) There is a “massive opportunity” and role in the Quarter framework to re-amalgamate all of Auckland – this could be translated into the way the area is perceived as a welcoming people space for Aucklanders (not just local residents, although they are the key ‘primaries’ for marketing new events).
c) The strategy should be collaborative, between Council and the arts & entertainment community/sector, so that both buy in.
d) Local residents are keen on a more ‘gentle’ quality space of Aotea Square (as opposed to the more glamorous Waterfront) in terms its identity and future activation programme. This is in light of the high levels of residential growth in and around the area, without the commensurate increase in open space area to offset higher densities.
e) Rather than promoting the ‘creative cool’ vibe that K Road offers (due to flexible space management, long term relationship building and the creativity that emerges from little funding), leverage the potential relationships from the existing arts communities that already exist around the Art Gallery such as Fingers contemporary jewellery, Gow Langsford Gallery;
f) A long term commitment by Council and its local partners needs to be made to see a successful activation programme developed which offers delight and surprise and sees both locals and people from all over Auckland coming back.
g) There is huge potential in this area which is very exciting – need to make it distinctive and beautiful for all Aucklanders.
h) What is the role of the area moving forward and what is its point of difference?
i) What can we do to also reflect the increasingly multi-cultural nature of our city?
Specific points
a) The draft outcome statements lack an emphasis on ‘places for people’. The Destination experience won’t be much affected by the ‘heritage buildings’ and current ‘distinctive built form character’, but more by the public spaces and ‘vibrant’ activity.
b) Attention needs to be given to the growing tension between the multiple and sometimes competing requirements of a residential neighbourhood (accommodating the needs of families, young people and students, people wanting peace and quiet vs people wanting stimulation from the central city ‘buzz’) and an arts and entertainment hub. There is unlikely to be a way to fully satisfy both; compromises will be required. What models are there overseas?
c) Safety issues not captures as well as they might in the Issues / ou8tcome statements: “a safe, vibrant place to...”– homeless rough sleeper problem can devalue properties and create perceived safety issues. Another perspective: Rough sleepers are not generally dangerous but can be intimidating – especially when congregating. Moving them along is not the answer. Almost half of them are under 25; they need help.
d) Provide a seamless link to the other neighbouring quarters, esp the LQ – to which pedestrian access from Queen St is not all that attractive, being a rather steep climb.
e) As corporates leave their AQ buildings and head for the waterfront, care must be taken to ensure that residential redevelopment of the empty office towers is of suitable quality. The last thing the AQ needs is a proliferation of cheap, low-end accommodation. A predominance of low quality accommodation would kill the Quarter. However, there may be an opportunity to work with education providers to meet the demand for accommodation for students?
f) Sound levels in the CBD are out of touch with the residents who are living there. However it was noted by another member that new building mass could mitigate noise effects of Aotea Square and reflective light.
g) Victoria Street Linear Park – tension over bus route should be transferred to Victoria Street and Wellesley Street to become a linear park. Ensure that Wellesley St remains pedestrian-friendly.
h) The Aotea Square experience is currently contrived and an activation strategy needs to foster an extroverted persona. Introverted activities such as the ice skating rink (cattle fencing around) will never foster a sense of place which adds value to the visitor.
i) The social fabric in the area is weak without a real community space e.g. where can people congregate inside other than the Myers Park playground? Opportunity for the Town Hall as civic space for the community to use (for free)? People and relationships are everything.
j) Question the market idea in Neales Lane. However there is value in starting small, test the capacity and then adapting.
k) Aotea Square is the city’s town square, but currently lacks reasons to stay (especially families). Also, more shelters are needed as one minute sunny and the next raining.
l) The tone of the Square needs to be authentic and not fill it all the time with activity, but a little bit of activation is definitely a good thing e.g. Good quality cafes, bars and retail, Small stages, platforms for spontaneous performances; a ‘speakers corner’, pop-up’ galleries.
m) Aotea Square should be for the region – how do we encourage the rest of Aucklanders here so they can understand the city a little better e.g. invite the APO to do matinee performance in Aotea Square for free.
n) Arts Infrastructure base – needs to be emphasised.
o) Lack of public toilets (showers) and rough sleepers are a city-centre wide issue so potentially do not need to be solved in the Aotea Quarter Framework.
Consideration
Local Board views and implications
9. Ongoing discussions with the Waitemata Local Board and Mana Whenua are scheduled and the Auckland Development Committee workshop is planned for the end of June.
Māori impact statement
10. Hui’s have been held with Iwi representatives.
Implementation
11. Following feedback from the Youth Collective, CDAC (events and safety teams), Auckland City Mission, noise model within the Aotea Square (resulting from the new PAUP rules and the proposed building envelope opportunities on the south and eastern edges of the square), as well as synthesising the results of the recent Public Life Survey, the Draft Issues and Opportunities Paper will be finalised and work on the Draft Aotea Quarter Framework will commence early June.
There are no attachments for this report.
Signatories
Author |
Nic Williams - Principal Specialist Urban Designer |
Authorisers |
Tim Watts - Manager City Centre Design Andrew Guthrie – Programme Director – City Centre Integration |
Auckland City Centre Advisory Board 27 May 2015 |
|
File No.: CP2015/09627
Purpose
1. To update the Auckland City Centre Advisory Board on the City Centre Cycleway.
Executive Summary
2. A significant investment is proposed for cycling projects in Auckland by Auckland Transport and its partners from 2015-18. The proposed investment will be approximately $207 million and consist of dedicated cycle programmes as well other projects that will deliver cycling facilities.
3. Auckland Transport and the Transport Agency have submitted a joint Auckland bid to the Urban Cycle Fund (UCF) for $82 million.
4. Following the announcement of the UCF, Auckland Transport has proposed an accelerated dedicated cycling programme of $111m for the coming three years to leverage the funding available through the UCF. This will deliver over 53 km of new cycle routes resulting in annual cycle journeys increasing from 900,000 to 2.5 million per year.
That the Auckland City Centre Advisory Board: a) receive the City Centre Cycleway report for information. |
Comments
Strategic context
5. This strategic context for the proposed cycling programme is set out below:
· Transform and elevate customer experiencing by providing modal choice.
· Prioritise rapid, high frequency public transport by integrating active travel.
· Build network resilience and optimisation through the one network approach and by integrating active transport.
6. The proposed programme references and reflects the objectives for cycling in the Auckland Plan, Regional Public Transport Plan, Integrated Transport Plan and AT strategic themes. The Auckland Plan proposes to deliver 70 per cent of the Auckland Cycle Network (ACN) by 2020.
Background
7. Investing in cycling is an integral part of Auckland’s transport strategy. It will help to make Auckland a more liveable city and one in which residents have good transport choice. Auckland’s temperate climate, the geography and its tradition of outdoor activities provide an incredible opportunity for cycling. Despite the limited investment in cycling to date, the number of people travelling by bike in Auckland is gradually increasing. Since 2010 automatic counters in Auckland have reported a 23.8 per cent increase in people travelling by bike. Research indicates that there is a strong demand for cycling in Auckland, with almost one in four people owning a bike.
8. Research by AT shows that 60 per cent of Aucklanders would cycle if separated cycle facilities were installed. Internationally the correlation between high levels of cycling and cycle infrastructure separated from volume and speed motor traffic is strong. AT’s own research shows that single greatest barrier to cycling in Auckland is that its roads are perceived as unsafe to cycle.
9. In 2012 AT published the ACN, as part of the ITP, which was revised from the Regional Cycle Network of legacy Councils. It set out a framework for the investment in new cycle infrastructure. In 2014, with the support of the Cycle Advisory Group (CAG), over 1000km of cycleways were prioritised for investment.
10. The Draft LTP proposes a $55 million investment in cycling in the next ten years, which would deliver one new cycle route in the next three years.
11. In September 2014 the Ministry of Transport announced a new funding opportunity, the UCF, which was set up to accelerate the delivery of cycling projects in New Zealand’s urban centres over the next three years. The focus of this fund is to deliver connected networks of cycle facilities within city centres. Taking into account the UCF, AT, together with the Transport Agency, have developed an accelerated programme for investment in cycling for the coming three years. The joint bid was submitted in March 2015, and is summarized in Appendix One.
12. The Auckland Plan Network proposed a $300 million investment in cycling in the next ten years, which would deliver 25 new cycle routes in the next three years, with the acceleration of investment provided by the UCF.
Issues and options
13. AT and the Transport Agency reassessed the existing prioritisation of delivery of the ACN to align with the criteria of the UCF. This means that the majority of the proposed accelerated programme will deliver cycle routes within and leading to the City Centre. An additional $30 million from AT’s dedicated cycling programme will deliver projects that are already committed elsewhere in Auckland and projects that are strategically important to Auckland.
14. Focussing delivery of cycle infrastructure within the City Centre will have the benefit of constructing facilities that serve the neighbourhoods that currently record the highest cycle modal share for journeys to work and connecting them to the largest work centre in Auckland.
Financial impact
15. The proposed investment in cycling in Auckland, by AT and its partners, within the next three years consists of:
a. A total investment of $179 million on dedicated cycle projects.
b. Approximately $20 million of cycle facilities delivered through other projects.
c. Over $8 million on marketing, training and behaviour change programmes to facilitate growth in cycle journeys.
Benefits
16. Increase in cycling: The proposed investment in the Auckland Plan will, by 2025, produce 8,400,000 additional trips per year from the 2013/14 baseline of 915,000 trips per year.
17. Increase in cycle infrastructure: The Auckland Plan will result in a further 28 per cent of the ACN completed by 2025, in addition to the existing 27 per cent of the network already existing. At this rate the ACN would be completed by 2042, twelve years behind the Auckland Plan target.
18. Improved Safety: In 2014, Auckland cyclist deaths and serious injuries (DSI) were 42 (2 deaths plus 40 serious injuries) equating to a total social cost of $36,540,000. While Auckland cyclists make up 9 per cent of Auckland Death or Serious Injury (DSI), cycling accounts for only 1 per cent of all of Auckland’s travel hours. This suggests cycling is the second riskiest form of transport in Auckland after motorcycle use, and is further supported by research that suggests Auckland has a cycle on-road injury rate between 1.5 to 2.5 times greater than the rest of New Zealand. International research indicates that the most effective means of reducing cycle injuries is investing in high quality cycle infrastructure.
19. Health: Investment in cycling has potential benefits for the health of Aucklanders. Physical activity has beneficial impacts on the potential for coronary heart disease, stroke, diabetes and some kinds of cancer. Health and fitness are consistently rated as the key reasons for cycling in AT surveys, and an increase in cycle modal share would deliver considerable health benefits.
20. Environment: It is not just those cycling that will receive health benefits as a result of increased cycling in Auckland. Every trip switched from a mechanised mode to a bike will see a reduction in emissions, both local pollutants and greenhouse gases.
Stakeholder engagement
21. AT worked with the CAG, a steering committee set up by the Mayor to improve cycling in Auckland, to prioritise the delivery of the ACN. The CAG includes cycle advocacy groups, the AA, Local Boards, Auckland Council, and Bike NZ amongst others. The routes that have been proposed by AT and the Transport Agency for the UCF align with this prioritisation of projects.
22. AT and its partners propose to run consultation on the proposed programme through a series of engagement activities, as well as statutory consultation on the specific routes. The aim of this approach is to increase awareness of the proposed investment in cycling, to ensure the most appropriate routes are being investigated and to facilitate more efficient consultation on the specific routes.
Customer impact
23. Delivery of a connected network of cycle facilities in and around the City Centre will provide AT’s customers with better travel choice.
24. AT will balance the delivery of cycle facilities with the need to provide sufficient capacity for general motor traffic, to provide appropriate levels of parking near people’s homes and businesses, to facilitate improved pedestrian links, and to provide efficient public transport infrastructure.
25. An integral part of the proposed investment in cycling will be a coordinated programme of marketing and behaviour change. AT is currently undertaking research to establish the demographic with the highest propensity to cycle. We will utilise this research to develop a targeted programme of cost effective interventions to ensure the highest possible use of the proposed cycle facilities.
Next steps
26. Following the approval of the LTP, Auckland Transport and its partners will continue with the delivery of the projects making up the Auckland Cycling Programme.
Consideration
Local Board views and implications
27. Refer stakeholder engagement (21).
Māori impact statement
28. We will undertake comprehensive and meaningful engagement with Iwi around the entire programme, as well as the individual projects within it.
Implementation
29. Following the approval of the LTP, Auckland Transport and its partners will continue with the delivery of the projects making up the Auckland Cycling Programme.
No. |
Title |
Page |
aView |
Urban Cycle fund and propsed cycleway maps |
37 |
bView |
Proposed Walking and Cycling accelerated Programme 2015-2018 |
39 |
Signatories
Author |
Kathryn King - Walking and Cycling Manager |
Authorisers |
Andrew Allen - General Manager Transport Services Andrew Guthrie – Programme Director – City Centre Integration |
Auckland City Centre Advisory Board 27 May 2015 |
|
File No.: CP2015/09375
Purpose
1. To update the City Centre Advisory Board on project progress, recommended changes to the project scope of the Myers Park Stage II upgrade and seek approval.
2. To update the City Centre Advisory Board on the project budget shortfall and seek approval for additional funding of $1.25m.
Executive Summary
3. At their November 2014 meeting the City Centre Advisory Board were provided with an overview of the scope for the Stage II upgrade of Myers Park, and passed a resolution to support the scope and allocate $3.3m of targeted rate to the project.
4. The board also resolved that project staff should progress with detailed design and report back with a project update and revised budget and any associated amendments to implementation priorities.
5. On 2 April 2015, project staff provided a design update to the board, but detailed costings for each element had not yet been obtained.
6. The Mayoral Drive underpass design component is currently out as a Request for Proposal (RFP) with several iwi artists and submissions will be assed at the end of May 2015.
7. The project team are now in possession of detailed costings for the Stage II upgrade elements, which are presented in this report, along with information on the private development at Poynton Terrace.
8. An overall budget shortfall of $1.25m has been identified, details of which are presented in this report
9. A high risk associated with delivering the Poynton Terrace upgrade at this time has also been identified.
10. The project team recommend changing the scope of the project as follows:
a) removing the Poynton Terrace works from the current project scope, noting that this project could be delivered once the private development has been completed, and that the City Centre Advisory Board may wish to consider funding this at a later date
b) reallocating the $800,000 Poynton Terrace budget component to the rest of the project
c) adding the splash pad element back into the project scope, noting it is already designed and fully consented.
11. To achieve this change in scope, an additional $1.25m would be required from targeted rate.
12. All works identified in the revised project scope would still be completed within the original project timeframe of end of June 2016.
That the Auckland City Centre Advisory Board: a) approve the recommended changes to the Myers Park Stage II project scope b) approve an increase to the Myers Park Stage II project budget of $1.25m, bringing the total approved budget to $4.55m. c) support the Request for Proposal (RFP) process for the Mayoral Drive underpass, noting that the final proposed design will be presented to the Waitematā Local Board and City Centre Advisory Board. d) acknowledge the Poynton Terrace upgrades as a potential future City Centre Advisory Board project. |
Background
13. At their November 2014 meeting the City Centre Advisory Board passed a resolution approving the original scope of works for Stage II. The scope included:
a) Greys Avenue and Mayoral Drive Stairs
b) Mayoral Drive underpass
c) stormwater detention dam and bio filtration area
d) pedestrian link from Pitt St via Poynton Terrace to Myers Park
e) Queen Street entrance and kindergarten parking
f) investigate restoration options for changing shed and caretakers cottage
g) design and consent for restoration of heritage buildings.
14. At that time, the project team were not in a position to confirm a detailed project budget breakdown and were asked to update the board in due course.
15. The board were provided with a project design update at their April 2015 meeting and provided feedback on the designs to date and asked for the final Mayoral Drive underpass design to be presented to them at their May 2015 meeting.
Project update
Mayoral Drive Underpass, Greys Avenue and Mayoral Drive stairs
16. The design process to date for the Mayoral Drive underpass has included:
a) site investigations, including stormwater and engineering constraints, preparation of basic concepts, with indicative 3D model views of different cladding approaches for discussion with the Waitematā Local Board. The local board parks portfolio holders provided their preference on options, with some being removed as unsuitable.
b) meeting with iwi to confirm their interest in the project, and discuss/agree a way forward regarding an arts project.
c) preparation of a draft artist brief for review by iwi.
d) brief agreed and issued to iwi to select appropriate artists for a request for proposal (RFP) process.
e) artists confirmed and briefed on site by project team.
17. In addition to the design elements, work has progressed on items not affected by the RFP process, i.e. stormwater retention, capacity and relocation and Mayoral Drive east and west stair/entrance design.
18. The following stages in the design process are still to occur:
a) artists to complete their proposals, and present to the evaluation team (comprising project team members and iwi reps) on Friday 29 May 2015
b) successful artist/proposal to be selected
c) report back to the Waitematā Local Board and City Centre Advisory Board on final design
d) appointed artist to work collegially with project team and engineers to develop proposal suitable for consenting/tendering/construction.
19. Future-proofing the final design to allow for the later implementation of a privately-funded installation is a crucial factor in this process.
Poynton Terrace improvements
20. The concept designs were presented to the City Centre Advisory Board at their April 2015 meeting, and feedback was noted.
21. The construction works for the new apartment block at 26 Poynton Terrace are forecast to start in 2015 and expected to continue to mid/end 2016.
22. These works will include frequent, heavy construction machinery movement within Poynton Terrace
23. There is also a high likelihood of a resource consent condition being imposed on any Poynton Terrace upgrade works, restricting works until the new apartment block is completed.
24. Given the above points and project timeline for Stage II completion, the project team recommend that this element be removed from the scope of Stage II and that no further work on the Poynton Terrace designs occur.
25. Given the budget shortfall outlined below, it is further recommended that the existing budget project budget of $800,000 allocated to this element of Stage II, be reallocated towards the overall shortfall of the remaining Stage II works.
26. The Poynton Terrace improvements could be considered by the City Centre Advisory Board as a future project to be funded by targeted rates, once the private development has been completed.
Queen Street entrance and kindergarten parking
27. Concept designs for the kindergarten car parking were presented to the Waitematā Local Board and parks portfolio holders earlier in 2015 and a preferred option was identified by the local board parks portfolio holders.
28. The preferred concept design was then presented to the City Centre Advisory Board at their April 2015 meeting
29. Minor improvements to the Queen Street entrance, including threshold improvements to improve the legibility of the park entrance were fully designed and consented as part of the Stage I upgrade project, but couldn’t be implemented due to overall project budget constraints.
Caretakers Cottage and Changing Shed
30. Consideration of the future use for these two park building, and subsequent design and consenting work, is included in the Stage II scope.
31. Work will begin on this later in 2015, starting with a Waitematā Local Board workshop to discuss possible community uses.
32. Stage II does not include implementing any physical works to these buildings, which would need future funding.
Splash play area
33. This element was fully designed and consented as part of the Stage I project but implementation was deferred for budgetary reasons.
34. The Waitematā Local Board and project team are keen to see this important element of the overall development plan implemented, and the local board chair recommended adding this to the revised scope of the Stage II project.
Revised Stage II budget
35. Initial project budget estimates provided in the November 2014 report, were high-level and indicative, as no detailed work had been completed at that time.
36. The City Centre Advisory Board acknowledged this in their resolution, approving allocation of $3.3m, but noting that the project team should submit a revised budget in due course.
37. A revised project budget is included in the table below:
Current Stage II scope (excl Poynton Terrace) |
estimated cost |
Myers Kindergarten carpark |
$175,000 |
Mayoral Drive underpass and entrances |
$2,900,000 |
Queen Street entrance |
$125,000 |
Architectural assessment of heritage buildings & resource consent |
$100,000 |
Professional Services fees, Auckland Council costs and consenting costs (incl contingency of 25%) |
$475,000 |
subtotal |
$3,775,000 |
Proposed additions to Stage II scope |
estimated cost |
Feature architectural lighting & CCTV design for Mayoral Drive underpass |
$125,000 |
Underground stormwater detention design and construction |
$350,000 |
Splash play area construction |
$200,000 |
Professional Services |
$100,000 |
subtotal |
$775,000 |
Total project budget (incl additions to scope) |
$4,550,000 |
current project budget |
$3,300,000 |
additional budget required |
$1,250,000 |
Consideration
Local Board views and implications
38. The Stage II upgrade was most recently workshopped with the Waitematā Local Board on the 3 March 2015, at which time feedback was sought on the design of Poynton Terrace entrance, Myers Kindergarten car park, and Mayoral Drive underpass.
39. Progress updates have been provided to the parks portfolio holders on 2 April and 7 May 2015.
40. At their last meeting on 7 May 2015, the parks portfolio holders confirmed that they supported the proposed change in scope and the request to the City Centre Advisory Board for additional funding.
41. They also recommended returning the splash pad to the scope of works
Māori impact statement
42. The project team continue to work with the original three iwi that expressed an interest in the Myers Park development; Ngati Whatua, Ngai Tai ki Tamaki and Ngati te Ata.
43. In addition, when iwi expressions of interest were sought for design input into the Mayoral Drive underpass treatment, Ngati Maru also indicated their interest.
44. Workshops were held on 16 March 2015 and 8 April 2015, when the concept designs for the various elements of Stage II were discussed with iwi.
45. Individual meetings with each iwi-nominated artists then occurred through early to mid-May 2015
46. The assessment panel for the underpass Request for Proposal will include representatives from each interested iwi.
Implementation
47. Experience form Stage I has shown that Myers Park is a challenging site to develop, given the archaeological, heritage and arboricultural constraints.
48. However, Stage I has allowed the project team to develop good working relationships and protocols with the key internal council stakeholders and regulatory teams.
49. The requirement that all project budgets be committed before the end of FY16 adds an additional challenge, but the project team are confident that this can be achieved, providing no significant unforeseen circumstances arise.
50. The project team will continue to report back to the Waitematā Local Board and City Centre Advisory Board at key project milestones or if any key decisions are required.
There are no attachments for this report.
Signatories
Author |
Mark Miller - Parks Advisor - Waitemata |
Authorisers |
Jane Aickin - Manager Local and Sports Parks Central Andrew Guthrie – Programme Director – City Centre Integration |
Auckland City Centre Advisory Board 27 May 2015 |
|
File No.: CP2015/09656
Purpose
1. Auckland Transport Project Director, Theunis van Schalkwyk will update the Auckland City Centre Advisory Board on key strategic initiatives.
That the Auckland City Centre Advisory Board: a) receive the presentation.
|
There are no attachments for this report.
Signatories
Author |
Tam White - Democracy Advisor |
Authoriser |
Andrew Guthrie – Programme Director – City Centre Integration |
Auckland City Centre Advisory Board 27 May 2015 |
|
Update on the development of the City Centre Cleaning and Maintenance Plan
File No.: CP2015/09427
Purpose
1. To update the Auckland City Centre Advisory Board on the work underway across Auckland Council and Auckland Transport to address ongoing issues with cleaning and maintenance of Auckland City Centre, including city centre targeted rate funded projects.
Executive Summary
2. In March 2015 council staff provided the Auckland City Centre Advisory Board with an update on the work underway to address ongoing issues with cleaning and maintenance of City Centre, including Targeted Rate funded projects. The work will form the basis of a new integrated cleaning and maintenance delivery model to be rolled out across the City Centre as part of the renegotiations of the existing maintenance contracts.
3. Senior management staff from both Auckland Council Solid Wastes, Auckland Council Parks and Auckland Transport have worked together over recent months to establish:
· the range of cleaning and maintenance standards across the city centre, who delivers what and the outcomes they aim to achieve
· the streets and spaces to which the standards apply and how much it costs per annum to deliver these standards
4. These standards and costs were reported to the City Centre Advisory Board in March 2015.
5. Since that time staff from Auckland Council and Auckland Transport have been working together to agree an integrated and simplified approach to cleaning and maintenance across the City Centre. It has been agreed that an integrated and simplified approach is required to improve quality of cleaning and maintenance in the city centre and to make cleaning and maintenance processes easier to understand and communicate to the public
6. Details of this integrated and simplified approach include:
· Proposed high, medium and standard level of service (Attachment A)
· Proposed application of these standards to City Centre streets and squares (Attachment B)
7. Staff are continuing to work together to establish the cost of these changes and how these changes could be implemented. A key focus of this work is to identify whether a more efficient service delivery model can be developed which will deliver the improved service whilst reducing the requirement for additional operational expenditure.
8. Initial work indicates that the proposed changes to the standards and where they apply (Attachment B) will result in an additional operational expenditure cost of $3.25m per annum.
9. This figure includes costs to Auckland Transport associated with replacing and repairing damaged street furniture, which totals on average $450,000 per annum. Under the current City Centre Targeted Rate Policy, the current 2.5% allocation of targeted rate funding to enable increased levels of service to be provided to targeted rate projects totals $500,000 per annum.
10. Staff are currently scoping whether there is opportunity for the City Centre Targeted Rate Policy to be amended so that the current 2.5% allocation can be dedicated to the replacement and repair of damaged street furniture. If this was to proceed, cleaning of the City Centre including Targeted Rate funded projects would be funded from the General Rate.
11. A workshop has been held with contractors to start this propose, with further workshops planned on a monthly basis. In addition staff from across Auckland Transport and Auckland Council have also undertaken a joint audit of the City Centre. This was a very successful exercise and it proposed that these are done on a quarterly basis together with members of the City Centre Advisory Board.
12. Six key themes are emerging from the workshops and audit include:
a) Improving education and enforcement
b) Consolidation of responsibilities so that one contractor is responsible for cleaning across the city centre regardless of asset type and or/ownership.
c) Establish a ‘one stop shop’ organisational structure to monitor and manage maintenance within the Council family. This includes the current proposal to create an Asset Management and Maintenance Services Unit within the Chief Operations Office.
d) Simplifying customer service and communication of expected standards, including ability of customers to report complaints and for staff to respond to ‘hot spots’.
e) Reviewing design process to ensure design decisions are made based on a clear understanding of the demands and practicalities of maintenance and cleaning
f) Review the existing CBD Furniture suite and undertake a competitive procurement process to ensure value for money.
13. Staff and contractors will continue to work together to establish whether these themes will achieve a more efficient service delivery model which will facilitate an improved service whilst reducing the requirement for additional operational funding.
14. The proposed new approach to maintenance and cleaning in the City Centre will be incorporated into a City Centre Maintenance Plan. Staff will continue to update the City Centre Advisory Board on the development of this plan on a monthly basis.
15. The Plan will form the basis of a new integrated cleaning and maintenance delivery model to be rolled out across the City Centre as part of the renegotiations of the existing maintenance contracts in 2017.
That the Auckland City Centre Advisory Board: a) receive the Update on City Centre Cleaning and Maintenance report |
No. |
Title |
Page |
aView |
Proposed high, medium and standards levels of cleaning across the city centre |
51 |
bView |
Proposed application of high, medium and standard levels of cleaning across the streets and squares of the City Centre |
53 |
Signatories
Author |
Rachael Eaton - Team Leader City Transformation - Central/Islands |
Authorisers |
John Dunshea – Manager City Transformation Projects Andrew Guthrie – Programme Director – City Centre Integration |
Auckland City Centre Advisory Board 27 May 2015 |
|
Exclusion of the Public: Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987
That the Auckland City Centre Advisory Board:
a) exclude the public from the following part(s) of the proceedings of this meeting.
The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter, and the specific grounds under section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution follows.
This resolution is made in reliance on section 48(1)(a) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 and the particular interest or interests protected by section 6 or section 7 of that Act which would be prejudiced by the holding of the whole or relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting in public, as follows:
C1 Auckland City Centre Advisory Board membership
Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter |
Particular interest(s) protected (where applicable) |
Ground(s) under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution |
The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7. |
s7(2)(a) - The withholding of the information is necessary to protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person. In particular, the discussion will cover the personal attributes that board members should possess. |
s48(1)(a) The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7. |