I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Orākei Local Board will be held on:
|
Date:
Time:
Meeting Room:
Venue:
|
Thursday, 7
May 2015
3.30pm
St Chads
Church and Community Centre
38 St Johns Road
Meadowbank
|
|
Orākei Local Board
OPEN AGENDA
|
MEMBERSHIP
|
Chairperson
|
Desley Simpson, JP
|
|
|
Deputy Chairperson
|
Colin Davis, JP
|
|
|
Members
|
Ken Baguley
|
|
|
|
Troy Churton
|
|
|
|
Kate Cooke
|
|
|
|
Kit Parkinson
|
|
|
|
Mark Thomas
|
|
(Quorum 4 members)
|
|
|
Kim Lawgun
Democracy Advisor
29 April 2015
Contact Telephone: 021 302 163
Email: kim.lawgun@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
|
|
Orākei
Local Board
07 May 2015
|
|
ITEM TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE
1 Welcome 5
2 Apologies 5
3 Declaration of Interest 5
4 Confirmation of Minutes 5
5 Leave of Absence 5
6 Acknowledgements 5
7 Petitions 5
8 Deputations 5
9 Public Forum 5
10 Extraordinary Business 5
11 Notices of Motion 6
12 Auckland Council Property Limited Local Board Six-Monthly
Update 1 July to 31 December 2014 7
13 Colin Maiden Park Precinct Master Plan scenarios -
endorsement for public consultation 21
14 Review of local dog access rules 25
15 Review of alcohol bans 2015 95
16 Bastion Point Walking Entrance Art Integration 129
17 The Landing Fees and Charges 133
18 Orākei Local Board Community Fees and Charges - July to
December 2014 149
19 Orākei Community Grants Programme 2015/2016 169
20 Albert-Eden Local Board support for the retention of the
Central Joint Funding Committee 171
21 Developing the Empowered Communities Approach - Next Steps 175
22 Libraries Proposed Property Renewals Programme for 2015/2016 185
23 Auckland Transport Quarterly Update to Local Boards
For the quarter - 1 January to 31 March 2015 191
24 Auckland Transport Update: May 2015 223
25 Business Association Support Fund Allocation - Ellerslie
Business Association 231
26 Business Association Support Fund Allocation - Remuera
Business Association 247
27 Urgent Decision - ANZAC Day event budget 253
28 Chairperson's Report 261
29 Board Member Reports 287
30 Resolutions Pending Action 303
31 Local Board Workshop Record of Proceedings 309
32 Orākei Local Board Achievements Register 317
33 Consideration of Extraordinary
Items
2 Apologies
At the close of the agenda no apologies had been received.
3 Declaration of Interest
Members are reminded of the need to be vigilant to stand aside from
decision making when a conflict arises between their role as a member and any
private or other external interest they might have.
4 Confirmation of Minutes
|
That the Orākei Local Board:
a)
confirm the minutes of its ordinary meeting,
held on Wednesday, 1 April 2015 and the minutes of
its extraordinary meeting, held on Thursday, 23 April 2015, as a true and
correct record.
|
5 Leave of Absence
At the close of
the agenda no requests for leave of absence had been received.
6 Acknowledgements
At the close of the agenda no requests for acknowledgements had been
received.
7 Petitions
At the close of the agenda no requests to present petitions had been
received.
8 Deputations
Standing
Order 3.20 provides for deputations. Those applying for deputations are
required to give seven working days notice of subject matter and applications
are approved by the Chairperson of the Orākei Local Board. This means that
details relating to deputations can be included in the published agenda. Total
speaking time per deputation is ten minutes or as resolved by the meeting.
At the close
of the agenda no requests for deputations had been received.
9 Public Forum
A period of
time (approximately 30 minutes) is set aside for members of the public to
address the meeting on matters within its delegated authority. A maximum of 3
minutes per item is allowed, following which there may be questions from www
members.
At the close of the agenda no requests for public forum had been
received.
10 Extraordinary Business
Section 46A(7) of the Local Government Official Information and
Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:
“An item that is not on the agenda for a meeting may be dealt with
at that meeting if-
(a) The local authority by resolution so
decides; and
(b) The presiding member explains at the
meeting, at a time when it is open to the public,-
(i) The reason why the item is not on the agenda; and
(ii) The reason why the discussion of the item
cannot be delayed until a subsequent meeting.”
Section 46A(7A) of the Local Government Official Information and
Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:
“Where an item is not on the agenda for a meeting,-
(a) That item may be discussed at that meeting
if-
(i) That item is a minor matter relating to
the general business of the local authority; and
(ii) the presiding member explains at the
beginning of the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public, that the
item will be discussed at the meeting; but
(b) no resolution, decision or recommendation
may be made in respect of that item except to refer that item to a subsequent
meeting of the local authority for further discussion.”
11 Notices of Motion
At the close of the agenda no requests for notices of motion had
been received.
|
Orākei
Local Board
07 May 2015
|
|
Auckland
Council Property Limited Local Board Six-Monthly Update 1 July to 31 December
2014
File No.: CP2015/06963
Purpose
1. To give the
Ōrākei Local Board an overview of Auckland Council Property Limited’s
(ACPL) activities for the six months 1 July to 31 December 2014.
Executive Summary
2. ACPL’s vision
centres on “creating value from property assets” by providing commercial expertise
and value for money to Auckland Council in managing its property portfolio, and
acquisition and disposal activities. The concept of “value” includes but is
not limited to financial value. In addition to financial value, a growing
aspect of ACPL’s work has been to use surplus council property to help achieve
the council’s housing supply and urban regeneration objectives. We will also
identify opportunities to add value by improving the use of council service
property such as redevelopment of under-utilised sites.
3. This report
sets out a summary of ACPL activities for the past six months that contribute
to our seven key outcomes as outlined in our Statement of Intent (SOI) 2014 to
2017 and noted below. Activity detail is broken down by business unit or
work-stream, with a focus on local board specific activities where applicable.
4. ACPL’s seven
key outcomes:
· Properties managed for the council and
Auckland Transport (AT) are maintained to be fit for purpose and achieve
optimum net returns.
· Redevelopment/regeneration projects
involving other sector partners are efficiently planned and managed to help
achieve a quality compact Auckland.
· ACPL contributes exemplar housing
developments to increase the supply of housing in Auckland, particularly in the
more affordable spectrum of the market, working with partners.
· Council business interests are managed to
protect long term value and achieve budgeted net income.
· Property acquisitions are undertaken in a
commercially robust manner and in accordance with the council and AT agreed
requirements and relevant legislation.
· Properties are disposed of for the council
in a commercially robust manner once declared surplus.
· The council is provided with a commercial
perspective on planning and development initiatives to support effective
implementation of those initiatives.
5. Local board specific supporting
detail is included in Attachments A, B, and C.
|
Recommendation/s
That the Orākei Local
Board:
a) accepts the Auckland Council
Property Limited Local Board Six-Monthly update 1 July to 31 December 2014.
|
Comments
Workshops
and Meetings
6. A schedule of
Ōrākei Local Board workshops and meetings attended by ACPL
representatives from July to December is included as Attachment A. The
list includes property specific meetings and workshops relating to general
property management and the ongoing portfolio Rationalisation Process.
Property Portfolio Management
7. ACPL manages
property owned by the council and AT that are not currently required for
service or infrastructure purposes. These are properties that are not
immediately required for service delivery or infrastructure development but are
being held for use in a planned future project such as road
construction/widening or the expansion of parks.
8. The property
portfolio continued to grow during the last six months and now totals 1306
properties, an increase of 121 since our January-June 2014 update. The current
property portfolio includes industrial sites and buildings, retail tenancies,
cafés, restaurants, offices and a substantial portfolio of residential
properties.
9. ACPL’s
specialist property knowledge and understanding enables us to optimise revenue
streams and identify future opportunities. ACPL’s return on the property
portfolio for the six months ending 31 December 2014 provides the shareholder a
net surplus of $2.9m ahead of budget, with an actual surplus of $11.8m against
budget of $23m. The average monthly vacancy rate for the period is 1.68% which
is under the SOI targets of 5%.
10. A Properties
Managed schedule is included as Attachment B of this report. The
schedule details:
· Current ACPL-managed commercial and
residential property within the Ōrākei Local Board
· Each property’s classification or reason
for retention
· The nature of the property, such as a
café within a library, or a residential property with a tenancy in place
· The budget under which operating
expenditure and lease revenue for the property is reported eg regional or local
board.
11. A report
indicating portfolio movement in the local board area is attached as Attachment
C. The report details all new acquisitions including the reason for
acquisition, any transfers and the reason for transfer, and any disposals.
Portfolio Review and Rationalisation
Overview
12. ACPL is
required to undertake ongoing rationalisation of the council’s non-service
assets. This includes identifying properties from within council’s portfolio
that may be suitable for potential sale and development if appropriate. ACPL
has a particular focus on achieving housing outcomes. Identifying potential
sale properties contributes to the Auckland Plan focus of accommodating the
significant growth projected for the region over the coming decades, by
providing the council with an efficient use of capital and prioritisation of
funds to achieve its activities and projects.
Performance
13. July 2014 to June 2015
Target
|
UNIT
|
TARGET
|
ACHIEVED
|
COMMENTS
|
|
Portfolio Review
|
$30m disposal recommendations
|
$36.4m
|
These recommendations include $33.2m of sites that are
identified for development projects.
|
14. In setting future disposal
targets ACPL is working closely with the council and AT to identify potentially
surplus properties.
15. 2014/2015 Targets
|
UNIT
|
TARGET
|
COMMENTS
|
|
Portfolio Review
|
$30m gross value recommended for sale
|
These targets include disposal
recommendations and sales for sites that are identified for place-shaping and
housing development projects
|
|
Development & Disposals
|
$30 net value of unconditional sales
|
Process
16. Once identified
as a potential sale candidate a property is taken through a multi-stage
Rationalisation Process. The agreed process includes engagement with: the
council, CCOs, local board and mana whenua. This is followed by ACPL Board
approval, engagement with area ward councillors and the Independent Māori
Statutory Board and finally a governing body decision.
Under review
17. Properties
currently under review for future use opportunities via the Rationalisation
Process in the Ōrākei area are listed below. The list includes any properties
that may have recently been approved for sale or development and sale by the
governing body. Further details are included in Attachment B.
|
PROPERTY
|
DETAILS
|
|
207 Main
Highway, Ellerslie
|
Transferred
from ACPD as non-service. Rationalisation process commenced in September
2014. AT submitted expression of interest during internal consultation.
Issues raised are being worked through with AT. Local board engagement to
occur in 2015 following further advice from AT.
|
Redevelopment/Regeneration and Housing
Supply Initiatives
Overview
18. ACPL is
contributing commercial input into approximately 54 region wide council-driven
regeneration and housing supply initiatives. Involvement extends from provision
of initial feasibility advice through to implementation, with projects ranging
in size from $415k to in excess of $100million. ACPL works closely with the
local boards on ACPL-led developments to ensure we give effect to the local
boards’ place-shaping role.
19. ACPL is
working with the wider council group to formulate a process or approach for
identifying and realising optimisation opportunities that exist for service
assets. This will provide opportunities to work with local boards on
development opportunities that deliver wider strategic benefit consistent with
the Auckland plan such as intensification, town centre regeneration and
affordable housing. It will also improve service outcomes through obtaining
more effective use of property assets.
20. ACPL is also
actively contributing to the Housing Strategy Action Plan, which is a council
initiative focusing on non-regulatory efforts to encourage and increase
affordable residential development. We have an SOI target to undertake five
housing development projects over three years that will improve housing affordability
and the supply of affordable housing encompassing CHO involvement. We are
currently actively working on 13 such projects.
Local Activities
21. 4 Victoria
Avenue, Remuera – CAB and Plunket: The local board requested an assessment
of future options for the shared community space, with the assumption that the
existing onsite community-use must be catered for in any future development
proposal at the existing level of service or higher, if appropriate. The
project is in the early stages of development feasibility, including
investigating options for temporary relocation of services should any re
development progress. The local board has asked ACPL to undertake feasibility
studies to investigate how this can best be accomplished to offer the best community
outcome, and also add to the economic viability of Remuera town centre.
High level feedback as part of the
Board’s draft Local Board Plan consultation as to retaining community space at
the site was received, however further stakeholder consultation is required.
22. Colin
Maiden Park Master-planning & offset sales: ACPL is part of a
cross-council steering committee in respect of development of the new council
asset Colin Maiden Park. ACPL’s involvement includes exploration of the sale of
three council owned properties to off-set the park’s acquisition. A high level
status update on ACPL’s work on these properties is outlined in points below:
· 2-20 Stonefields Avenue, Stonefields
& 84-100 Morrin Road, St Johns: Council has agreed to explore the sale
of these properties to assist in off-setting the cost of acquiring Colin Maiden
Park. ACPL is leading work with council officers to plan an optimal disposal
process. This includes definition of the land to be retained as park around the
volcanic cone remnant known as Te Tauoma/Purchas Hill. Purchas Hill is a
feature of significance to local iwi and will require protection and
restoration as a new park through a draft concept plan and local consultation
supported by the local board. ACPL commenced iwi engagement on the Purchas Hill
work-stream. Noting that the Ōrākei Local Board has indicated a
preference to retain the full site for open space.
· Donnelly Street/Waiatarua Strip:
Council has agreed to explore the sale of this site to assist in off-setting the
cost of acquiring Colin Maiden Park. Noting that the Ōrākei Local
Board has indicated their support of the sale of this site for subdivision
purposes due to its low recreation values.
· 78 Merton Road, St John’s: Council
has agreed to explore the sale of this property to assist with the cost of
acquiring Colin Maiden Park. ACPL is undertaking word required to address the
necessary statutory processes to revoke reserve status for the land in advance
of any sale process. Noting that the Ōrākei Local Board has indicated
a preference to retain this site for open space. A key consideration ahead of
any sale includes the relocation of the incumbent BMX track.
Acquisitions
Overview
23. ACPL continues
to support council and AT programmes and projects by negotiating required
property acquisitions. All such acquisitions are funded through approved
council or Auckland Transport budgets. We also provide advice to assist with
budgets, business cases and strategy to support an acquisition.
24. From the commencement
of the 2015 financial year, 1 July 2014 to 31 January 2015, 73 property
purchases were completed for the council and AT to the value of $56m. All of
the property acquisitions met independent valuation thresholds agreed with
Auckland Transport, the council and Public Works Act 1981 requirements.
Council Acquisitions
25. Over the past
six months 15 properties were acquired to meet council open space and storm
water requirements and to contribute to City Transformation projects. These
included the following acquisitions in or neighbouring the Ōrākei
Local Board area.
|
PROPERTY
|
STAKEHOLDER
|
PURPOSE
|
LOCAL BOARD
|
|
3A Larchwood
Avenue, Westmere
|
Stormwater
|
Stormwater
|
Waitematā
|
Auckland Transport Acquisions
26. 58 properties were
also acquired over the past six months on behalf of Auckland Transport. The
focus was on acquisitions to support major transport projects including AMETI
(17 acquisitions) City Rail Link Property Acquisition (23 acquisitions) and
Northern Strategic Growth Area (4 acquisitions). Full details of relevant AT
projects and associated acquisitions will come to the local board directly from
Auckland Transport.
Business Interests
27. ACPL also
optimises the commercial return from assets it manages on council’s behalf.
This comprises two forestry enterprises, two landfills and four quarries. There
are currently no managed business interests in the Ōrākei Local Board
area.
Consideration
Local
Board views and implications
28. This report is for the
Ōrākei Local Board’s information.
Māori
impact statement
Whatungarongaro te
tangata, toitū te whenua. The importance of effective communication and
engagement with Māori on the subject of land is understood. ACPL has
accordingly developed robust engagement with the 19 mana whenua groups for our
core business activities.
29. Key engagement
activities include: identifying cultural significance concerns regarding
disposal properties, flagging commercial interests, development partnering
discussions and issues relating to property management such as protection of
wāhi tapu or joint management arising from the resolution of Treaty
Settlements. ACPL also engages with relevant mana whenua in respect of
development outcomes for ACPL lead projects where appropriate. ACPL will advise
the Ōrākei Local Board as appropriate of any discussions that arise
in the local board’s area.
30. ACPL has met with iwi
representatives, and will continue an ongoing dialogue with mana whenua in
relation to projects associated with Colin Maiden Park, including Te
Tāuoma Pa (Purchas Hill).
31. ACPL undertook to be part of
council’s Māori Responsiveness Plan (MRP) pilot programme. The project’s
key output is an operational document outlining ACPL’s contribution to
council’s strategic and operational commitments to Māori. The MRP was
finalised and approved by the ACPL Board in December 2014 and the focus will
move to identifying priority areas for implementation. A copy of this is
available on the ACPL website.
Implementation
32. There are no implementation
issues.
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
aView
|
Orākei Local Board Briefing Schedule 1 Jul - 31
Dec 2014
|
13
|
|
bView
|
Properties Managed by ACPL in the Local Board area
|
15
|
|
cView
|
ACPL Portfolio Changes 1 Jul - 31 Dec 2014
|
19
|
Signatories
|
Author
|
Ebony Duff - Local Board Liaison
|
|
Authoriser
|
David Rankin - Chief Executive Officer
|
|
Orākei
Local Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei Local
Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei
Local Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei
Local Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei
Local Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei
Local Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei Local
Board
07 May 2015
|
|
Colin Maiden Park Precinct Master Plan scenarios -
endorsement for public consultation
File No.: CP2015/02681
Purpose
1. To seek the approval of the Orākei
Local Board to undertake public consultation on three concept scenarios for
Colin Maiden Park Precinct Master Plan.
Executive
Summary
2. Three concept
scenarios for the future use and management of the Colin Maiden Park Precinct
have been prepared. These scenarios are based on the Colin Maiden Precinct
Master Plan principles adopted by the Orākei Local Board in December 2014
and have been developed in consultation with the precinct’s key users and
stakeholders.
3. Budget is
allocated in the draft Long-term Plan 2015-2025 to relocate the BMX track.
Additional projects will need to be funded by the interested sports codes.
|
Recommendation/s
That the Orākei Local
Board:
a) agrees that public consultation
be undertaken in May 2015 on three concept scenarios for the future use and
management of the Colin Maiden Park.
|
Discussion
Background
4. Auckland
Council purchased Colin Maiden Park from the University of Auckland for sports
fields in February 2014. Budget was allocated to prepare a master plan for Colin
Maiden Park to guide decision making for its management and development.
5. In December
2014 the local board adopted guiding principles for the management and
development of the park. The guiding principles focus on the development of the
park as a regional quality community sports precinct.
6. Three concept
scenarios have been prepared based on these principles. The preparation of
scenarios has involved a site investigation, reference to the needs assessment
and workshops with the existing users and key stakeholders.
7. Budget is
available in the draft Long-term Plan 2015-25 to relocate the BMX track, and
asset renewals budget is programmed for the upgrade of the sports fields. Other
projects would need to be funded by the interested sports codes.
8. The Orākei
Local Board has delegated authority for
decision-making and planning for local parks, which includes Ngahue Reserve and
Colin Maiden Park.
Comments
9. The three
developed scenarios vary in the proposed level of change in the precinct. Each
scenario is outlined more fully in the attached master plan report (refer
attachment A –under separate cover).
10. Scenario
One this scenario is closest to the current provision in the precinct of
the three scenarios. It features a range of improvements to facilities and
infrastructure without making wholesale changes. Key proposals are:
· retain existing code locations and
expand their locations and facilities
· integrate complimentary codes within
existing codes / facilities
· Oceania Football Club and Netball as per
their development plans
· hockey located in the unallocated space
in the north west corner and sharing building facilities with rugby
· improved roading connections especially
through the area between netball and Oceania Football Club
· development of passive recreation links
and nodes
· Auckland University Recreation Centre and
Nutrition and Dietics Clinic removed
· commercial uses retained in same general
location.
11. Scenario
Two this scenario has much of the layout retained in the current format and
has slightly more intervention than scenario one and the current provision.
This scenario features more extensive building changes and additional codes
introduced to the precinct. Features include:
· introduction of a centralised parking
building on the old quarry face between netball and Oceania Football Club to
serve both codes and reduce the area of at-grade parking
· BMX to the western edge of netball
· hockey located in the unallocated space
in the north west corner and sharing building facilities with rugby
· improved roading connections especially
through the area between netball and Oceania Football Club
· commercial uses retained in same general
location
· development of passive recreation links
and nodes.
12. Scenario
Three proposes the greatest level of change above what is currently
provided. It represents a step change in the type of activities and facilities
provided in the precinct and would have the greatest costs to implement.
Features include:
· north western zone to feature a new
multi-use facility co-located with Oceania Football Club, Tennis Auckland and
Swimtastic. This building will accommodate commercial uses which have been
moved from the north east zone
· creation of a multi-use outdoor venue
which can be used for a wide variety of casual uses. This green will act at the
centre of attraction for the community for events and informal sports such as
ultimate frisbee, fitness and kilikiti. It is the major flexible space in the
ribbon of nodes and linkages throughout the precinct between the leased areas
· introduction of a centralised parking
building on the old quarry face between netball and Oceania Football Club to
serve both codes and reduce area of at-grade parking
· north eastern zone to feature a new
multi-use facility accommodating hockey, cricket, Australian Rules Football
Club, rugby, bowls and indoor training facility
· rugby, cricket and hockey number one
fields and oval all connected to new multi-sport building
· development of passive recreation links
and nodes.
13. Common to all
scenarios is a cycling/walking circuit around the perimeter of the precinct,
improved entries to the park and improving passive recreation areas.
14. The following
table provides a summary assessment of the degree to which each scenario
delivers against the adopted guiding principles. More comprehensive assessment
is in attachment A (under separate cover).
|
Guiding Principle
|
Scenario 1
|
Scenario 2
|
Scenario 3
|
|
Provide for organised sport
and focus on local clubs
|
P
|
PP
|
PPP
|
|
Consider the whole precinct
|
PPP
|
PPP
|
PPP
|
|
Maximise use of open space
|
P
|
PP
|
PPP
|
|
Minimise new building
footprints
|
P
|
PP
|
PPP
|
|
Encourages shared use of
facilities
|
P
|
PP
|
PP
|
|
Improves access and
connectivity
|
PP
|
PP
|
PP
|
|
Promote single entity
governance
|
P
|
PP
|
PPP
|
|
Delivers sport efficiently
|
PP
|
PP
|
PPP
|
Key PPP substantially meets the guiding
principle
PP partially meets the guiding
principle
P one or two elements meet the
guiding principle
15. It is
considered all three scenarios align with the guiding principles and provide
sufficient variation to obtain feedback.
Next steps
16. A programme of
community and stakeholder consultation is planned to gather feedback on the
three concept scenarios. Consultation information will clearly identify
available budget and be clear about some aspects being aspirational. Feedback
will assist future assessment of options and inform determination of the
preferred option.
17. Consultation
will take place for three weeks beginning in May 2015 and end on 29 May. It
will consist of:
· an open day at Colin Maiden Park
where staff, the project team and local board members are available to provide
further information on each of the scenarios and listen to feedback
· information about each of the
scenarios and an online feedback form available via Shape Auckland
· advertising in the community
newspaper, posts to Neighbourly and the Orākei Local Board Facebook Page
and an email to the Orākei Local Board database advising people of the
consultation and inviting people to participate in the consultation.
18. Following the
consultation, the feedback will be summarised and presented to the local board
in July. A preferred scenario will be identified and this scenario will be
developed further to include an assessment which includes indicative costings
and staging. This will be reported to the local board in August 2015.
Consideration
Local Board Views and Implications
19. The Orākei
Local Board has established a working party to develop a master plan for the
Colin Maiden Park Precinct. The three concept scenarios have been presented to
both the working party and a workshop of the Orākei Local Board.
Maori Impact Statement
20. Two hui have
been held with iwi, with attendees representing Ngati Paoa, Ngai Tai Ki Tamaki,
Ngati Maru and Te Akitai. Iwi have agreed to provide input into a preferred
scenario for the development of the Colin Maiden Park precinct. Areas of
particular interest to iwi are bilingual signage in the precinct, environmental
sustainability, treatment and reuse of water.
Implementation
21. An
implementation plan will be prepared as part of the final master plan. This
will identify staging and potential funding sources for projects.
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
a
|
Master Plan Report (Under Separate Cover)
|
|
Signatories
|
Author
|
Shyrel Burt - Principal Policy Analyst
|
|
Authorisers
|
Kataraina Maki - GM - Community & Social Policy
Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden &
Orākei Local Boards
|
|
Orākei
Local Board
07 May 2015
|
|
Review of local dog access rules
File No.: CP2014/29711
Purpose
1. To seek approval to options to be included in a statement of
proposal containing changes to local dog access rules for the Orākei local
board area.
Executive Summary
1. The
local board resolved at its 4 December 2014 business meeting to undertake a
review of local dog access rules on selected park, beach and foreshore areas.
2. As
part of the review process, the local board must adopt a statement of proposal
of any proposed changes to local dog access rules for public consultation, and
consider submissions to the proposal before making a final decision.
3. To
assist the local board decision on proposed changes to include in the statement
of proposal, staff have identified a range of options that the local board may
select from.
4. Staff
recommend adopting options that would:
· apply the
region-wide prohibition of dogs on sports fields on Thomas Bloodworth Park and
Shore Road Reserve to better protect the health of sports users, protect fields
from damage, and prevent interference with maintenance activity (Option 3)
· provide under
control off-leash dog access at any time on Wilson’s Beach and Gentlemans Bay,
but retain current time and season dog access on Ladies Bay due to its higher
visitor use (Option 3)
· retain current
under control off-leash dog access on Churchill Park and Roberta Reserve
(Option 1)
· prohibit dogs on
the foreshore between Glendowie Boating Club and Vista Crescent to protect
wildlife (Option 2)
· apply under control
on-leash dog access to parts of Orākei Basin West and East Reserves
(Option 2).
5. Following the decision on proposed changes, staff will update the
statement of proposal to reflect the option(s) selected by the local board.
|
Recommendation/s
That the Orākei Local
Board:
a) confirms its
preferred approach to local dog access in the following locations:
|
Location
|
Options
|
|
Thomas
Bloodworth Park and Shore Road Reserve
|
EITHER
Option 1: retain current rules, OR
Option 2: prohibit dogs on inner cricket field of natural wickets,
off-leash elsewhere on both reserves, OR
Option 3: region-wide prohibition of dogs on sports surfaces, on-leash
elsewhere (staff recommended option).
|
|
Wilson’s
Beach
|
EITHER
Option
1: retain current time and season rule, OR
Option
2: allow dogs off-leash rule (staff recommended
option), OR
Option
3: allow dogs on-leash
|
|
Ladies Bay
|
EITHER
Option
1: retain current time and season rule (staff
recommended option), OR
Option
2: allow dogs off-leash, OR
Option
3: allow dogs on-leash
|
|
Gentlemans
Bay
|
EITHER
Option
1: retain current time and season rule, OR
Option
2: allow dogs off-leash rule (staff recommended
option), OR
Option
3: allow dogs on-leash
|
|
Churchill
Park
|
EITHER
Option 1: retain current off-leash rule (staff recommended option), OR
Option 2: allow dogs on-leash on the ‘pink path’ and western and eastern
side of Churchill Park School, retain current off-leash rule elsewhere on
park, OR
Option 3: allow dogs on-leash on the ‘pink path’ and eastern side of
Churchill Park School, retain current off-leash rule elsewhere on park
|
|
Roberta
Reserve and associated foreshore
|
EITHER
Option 1: retain current rules with amended foreshore boundary, OR
Option 2: retain current off-leash rule on reserve, allow dogs off-leash
in water near bridge, prohibit dogs on foreshore (staff recommended
option).
|
|
Orākei
Basin West and East Reserves
|
EITHER
Option 1: retain current under control off-leash rule, OR
Option 2: retain current off-leash rule on most of the east reserve, and
allow dogs on-leash on most of west reserve (staff recommended option).
|
|
Address of
under control off-leash areas
|
Identify current off-leash areas by
street and suburb
|
b) confirms
its intention to amend the Auckland Council Policy on Dogs 2012 pursuant to
section 10(8) of the Dog Control Act 1996.
c) subject
to any amendments to reflect the local board decision in (a):
i) adopts
the statement of proposal titled ‘Statement of Proposal Amendments to
Auckland Council Policy on Dogs 2012 – Orākei Local Board Area May 2015’
in Attachment A for public consultation using the special consultative
procedure.
ii) confirms
that the proposed amendments contained in the Statement of Proposal:
· are consistent
with the policy, principles and criteria for making dog access rules
contained in the Auckland Council Policy on Dogs 2012
· are not
inconsistent with any decision in relation to region-wide dog access rules
contained in the Auckland Council Policy on Dogs 2012
· are in accordance
with relevant legislative requirements in particular the Local Government Act
2002 and Dog Control Act 1996.
iii) authorises
the Manager Social Policy and Bylaws to make any minor edits or amendments to
the Statement of Proposal to correct any identified errors or typographical
edits.
iv) authorises
the Manager Social Policy and Bylaws, in consultation with the local board
chair, to make any amendments to the Statement of Proposal to reflect
decisions made by the local board.
v) appoints
Board Member Churton (as chair), and Members Baguley, Cooke, Davis,
Parkinson, Simpson and Thomas as a panel to receive, hear and deliberate on
submissions and other relevant information and recommend changes to the
Board.
vi) delegates
to the Chairperson the ability to make changes to the panel appointed under
v) where this becomes necessary because of the withdrawal or unavailability
of any of those persons.
|
Background
6. Local
boards have the delegated responsibility to review dog access rules for local
park, beach and foreshore areas. This does not include the review of regional
parks.
7. The
governing body has established a standard annual process to assist local boards
with the review of local dog access rules as follows:
· the local board
will need to adopt a Statement of Proposal by May of proposed changes to local
dog access rules (the topic of this report). It is noted here that where no
changes are proposed, the review process for that location ends at this point
· the proposal
(together with proposals from other local boards) will be publicly notified for
submissions as part of the dog registration process in June
· the local board
will hold hearings, deliberations and make decisions on submissions by August
· the governing body
will review a report to update the bylaw on dogs in September
· changes to dog
access rules will commence in October.
8. The
board resolved at its 4 December 2014 business meeting (OR/2014/46) to
undertake a review of local dog access rules on selected park, beach and
foreshore areas in 2015 using this process.
9. To
assist the development of the Statement of Proposal information and community
views were obtained from:
· council parks,
animal management and environmental staff
· selected community
groups, organisations, maori, residents and visitors. This included an on-line
survey that attracted 427 respondents, 329 dog owners and 98 non-dog owners
(Attachment D).
10. The
decision required of the board is to decide whether or not to propose any changes,
and where necessary to adopt a statement of proposal for public consultation
and to appoint a hearing panel.
Decision-making requirements
11. In
making a decision on the statement of proposal, the local
board must be satisfied that any proposed changes
comply with a range of statutory, policy and delegated authority requirements.
12. The
most important statutory requirement is to ensure decisions on dog access
provide for public safety and comfort and the needs of dogs and their owners.
This means having regard to:
· the need to
minimise danger, distress, and nuisance to the community generally
· the need to
avoid the inherent danger in allowing dogs to have uncontrolled access to
public places that are frequented by children, whether or not the children are
accompanied by adults
· the importance
of enabling, to the extent that is practicable, the public (including families)
to use streets and public amenities without fear of attack or intimidation by
dogs
· the exercise and
recreational needs of dogs and their owners.
Section 10(4) Dog
Control Act 1996
13. The
most important practical requirement is to make dog access rules easy to
understand ‘on the ground’.
14. Further
detail of the decision-making requirements is provided in Attachment C.
Comments
15. Dog
access rules are an effective way to provide for public safety and comfort,
protection of animals, property and habitat, and the needs of dogs and their
owners.
16. How
this is to be achieved is guided by the Auckland Council Policy on Dogs 2012.
The policy seeks to manage requests for changes to dog access rules by ensuring
all (and often polarised) views are considered in a way to achieve a fair and
reasonable decision.
17. The
following is an analysis to assist the local board in determining whether or
not to propose any changes.
Dog access on Thomas Bloodworth and Shore Road Reserves
18. A
time and season rule currently applies to the sports fields and an under
control on-leash rule applies on the grass and paths elsewhere on both
reserves. Separate rules apply to artificial sports
surfaces, playgrounds, buildings, and Hobson Bay foreshore and wetlands and are
not part of the review.
19. The
sports fields are used for cricket in summer and rugby in winter.
Community and
staff views
20. Community
views were sought in relation to four options:
· retain current
rules
· prohibit dogs on
natural cricket wickets and inner fields with more dog access elsewhere on both
reserves
· more dog access on
Thomas Bloodworth Park and less on Shore Road Reserve (a premier park)
· apply region-wide
prohibition of dogs on sports fields.
21. These
options were based on resident concerns to better protect the use and
maintenance of sports fields.
22. Feedback
received from Auckland Council parks and animal management staff was that:
· dogs should be
prohibited on sports fields and allowed under control on-leash rule applies on
the grass and paths elsewhere on both reserves
· dog owners avoid
both reserves when used by sports groups in evening and weekends, and that
between 7am and 11am there can be up to 60 dog owners
· the main issues
relate to interference with maintenance activity, faeces and damage to sports
field (in particular the natural cricket wickets)
· there are ample
alternative off-leash opportunities on nearby Newmarket Park, Ayr Reserve,
Shore Road East Reserve and Waiatamoa Reserve.
23. Of
the 427 residents and visitors that responded to the on-line survey, dog owners
preferred to prohibit dogs on natural cricket wickets with more dog access
provided elsewhere on both reserves. Non-dog owners were divided between the
dog owner preference and applying the region-wide prohibition of dogs on sports
fields. A full summary of location specific feedback is contained in Attachment
A.
24. Other
key stakeholder feedback received from representatives of the Parnell Cricket
Club and Grammar Juniors Rugby Football Club was that they prefer dogs to be prohibited on sports fields and
allowed under control on-leash rule on the grass and paths elsewhere on both
reserves. Reasons include dog faeces and urine (heightened risk of
toxoplasmosis), and damage to natural cricket wicket.
Options in
relation to dog access on Thomas Bloodworth and Shore Road Reserves
25. Maps
of the options are shown in Attachment B.
|
Option[1]
|
Advantages and Disadvantages
|
|
Option 1 retain current rules
Effect of change
No change to rules. Retains current time and season rule on sports fields and
under control on-leash rule on the grass and paths elsewhere on both
reserves.
|
Advantages
· Provides for the needs of dogs and their
owners in a limited way (preferred by around a third of dog owners in on-line
survey).
Disadvantages
· Rules not easy to understand.
· Does not provide the level of protection
sought by around a third of non-dog owners, cricket and rugby clubs, and
council staff who prefer dogs to be prohibited on all sports fields (Option
3).
|
|
Option 2 prohibit dogs on inner cricket field of natural wickets,
off-leash elsewhere on both reserves
Effect of change
Provides more dog access than
Option 1.
Replaces time and season rule
on sports fields with a dog prohibition in summer on inner cricket field of
the natural cricket wickets, and allows under control off-leash rule at all
other times and all other cricket and rugby fields when not used for games,
training or maintenance, or closed.
Replaces under control
on-leash rule on grass and paths elsewhere on both reserves.
This excludes that part of
the Hobson Bay Walkway north of the stream in Thomas Bloodworth Park which
would remain an under control on-leash area.
|
Advantages
· Provides for the needs of dogs and their
owners (preferred by majority of dog owners).
· Around a third of non-dog owners
consider that their safety and comfort would be provided for with this rule.
· Better
protects sports users, sports fields, and maintenance activity but only in
relation to the inner cricket fields during summer.
Disadvantages
· Rules not easy to understand.
· Does not provide the level of protection
sought by around a third of non-dog owners, cricket and rugby clubs, and
council staff who prefer dogs to be prohibited on all sports fields (Option
3).
|
|
Option 3
(preferred option) region-wide prohibition of
dogs on sports surfaces, on-leash elsewhere
Effect of change
Provides less dog access than Option 1.
Replaces time and season rule on sports fields with the region-wide
prohibition of dogs. No change to under control on-leash dog access on the grass and paths elsewhere on both reserves.
|
Advantages
· Rule easier to understand.
· Better
protects the health of sports users, better protects sports fields from
damage, and better reduces interference with maintenance activity summer and
winter.
· Alternative off-leash areas nearby
including Shore Road East Reserve, Waitaramoa Reserve, Ayr Reserve and
Newmarket Park.
Disadvantages
· Dog owners prefer Option 2 and do not
agree that there are adequate alternative off-leash areas nearby.
|
Recommendation
26. Staff
recommend to apply the region-wide dog prohibition on sports fields and retain
under control on-leash dog access on the grass and paths elsewhere on both
reserves (Option 3).
27. The
reasons for this recommendation are that this option:
· is consistent with the region-wide prohibition of dogs on
all sports fields
· better protects the health of sports users
· better protects sports fields from damage
· reduces interference with maintenance activity
· rules easier to understand
· is the preferred option for the sports clubs currently
based in the park
· there are alternative under control off-leash areas nearby.
Dog access
on Wilson’s Beach, Ladies Bay and Gentlemans Bay
28. A
time and season rule currently applies to all three beaches.
Community and
staff views
29. Community
views were sought in relation to three options.
· retain current time
and season rule
· allow dogs under
control off-leash at any time
· allow dogs under
control on-leash at any time.
30. The
options were based on resident concerns to provide at least some under control
off-leash at all time beaches in the Orākei local board area.
31. Parks
and animal management staff consider that Wilson’s Beach and Gentlemans Bay may
be appropriate as under control off-leash beaches, but that Ladies Bay should
retain a time and season rule because it is a higher use with visitors
(including visitors to Achilles Point). Boundary adjustments to Wilson’s Beach
are suggested to make the area bigger and boundaries more easily identifiable.
32. Of
the up to 151 residents and visitors that responded to the on-line survey, dog
owners preferred under control off-leash dog access on all three beaches. There
was an insufficient number of non-dog owner responses. A full summary of
location specific feedback is contained in Attachment A.
Options in
relation to dog access on Wilson’s Beach, Ladies Bay and Gentlemans Bay
33. Maps
of the options are shown in Attachment B.
|
Option[2]
|
Advantages and Disadvantages
|
|
Option 1 retain current time and season rule
Effect of change
No change
to rules. The current boundary of Wilson’s Beach would be increased to make
the under control off-leash area bigger and boundaries more easily
identifiable.
|
Advantages
· Better provides for public safety and
comfort, particularly for visitors to Ladies Bay from Achilles Point
· Boundary adjustment makes rule on
Wilson’s Beach easier to understand.
Disadvantages
· Dog owners prefer at least some under
control off-leash at any time beach to better provide for their needs and the
needs of their dogs.
|
|
Option 2 allow dogs off-leash
Effect of change
More under
control off-leash dog access on all three beaches. Boundary of Wilson’s Beach
increased as in Option 1.
|
Advantages
· Better provides for the needs of dogs
and their owners on Wilson’s Beach and Gentlemans Bay
· Boundary adjustment makes rule on
Wilson’s Beach easier to understand.
Disadvantages
· May not provide for the safety and
comfort of visitors to Ladies Bay, including visitors from Achilles Point due
to higher intensity of use.
|
|
Option 3 allow dogs on-leash
Effect of change
Less dog
access overall compared to current time and season rule. Will provide more
on-leash dog access in summer and no off-leash dog access in winter. No
boundary adjustment required on Wilson’s Beach.
|
Advantages
· Better provides for public safety and
comfort, particularly for visitors to Ladies Bay from Achilles Point
· The needs of dogs and their owners
provided for (albeit on-leash), and will include all day access in summer
· Makes dog access rules on Hobson Bay
easier to understand because the dog access rule on Wilson’s beach will align
to the wider bay (both beach and bay will be on-leash areas).
Disadvantages
· Dog owners prefer at least some under
control off-leash at any time beach to better provide for their needs and the
needs of their dogs.
|
Recommendation
34. Staff
recommend to allow dogs under control off-leash on Wilson’s Beach (with amended
boundaries) and Gentlemans Bay at any time, and to retain the current time and
season rules on Ladies Bay (Option 3).
35. The
reason for this recommendation is that this option better provides for the needs of dogs and
their owners on beaches where public safety and comfort will not be affected.
Dog access on Churchill Park
36. The
current dog access rule is under control off-leash. This rule does not apply to
car parks, tennis and bowls club, old golf club rooms area, and play centre in
Churchill Park. These areas are subject to separate rules and not part of the
review.
Community and
staff views
37. Community
views were sought on two options:
· retain current rule
· allow dogs under
control on-leash on western side of park.
38. The
options were based on resident concerns about off-leash dog access on the
western side of the park from Karaka Park Place to Forfar Road, including areas
to the west of Churchill Park School and the area locally known as the ‘pink
path’.
39. Auckland
Council parks and animal management staff are not aware of significant
dog-related problems on the western side of the park, but note that the area
has easily defined boundaries.
40. Of
the 278 residents and visitors that responded to the on-line survey, dog owners
preferred to retain the current rule. Non-dog owner views were divided. 25
respondents preferred on-leash dog access on the western side of reserve and 22
respondents preferred to retain the current rule. A full summary of location
specific feedback is contained in Attachment A.
Options in relation to dog access on
Churchill Park
41. Maps
of the options are shown in Attachment B.
|
Option
|
Advantages and Disadvantages
|
|
Option 1
(Preferred option) retain current off-leash rule
Effect of change
No change.
|
Advantages
· Provides for the needs of dogs and their
owners to the level desired by dog owners.
· There
is insufficient evidence of a significant risk public safety and comfort. Non-dog owners generally consider the majority of dog owners to
be responsible, and almost half of all non-dog owners support this option.
Disadvantages
· There is a public safety and comfort
concern. The marginal majority of non-dog owners prefer under control
on-leash dog access to provide for their safety and comfort which may extend
to children using the western side of the park to go to and from school.
|
|
Option 2 allow dogs on-leash on the ‘pink path’ and western and eastern
side of Churchill Park School, retain current off-leash rule elsewhere on
park
Effect of change
The ‘pink
path’ and park on the western and eastern side of Churchill Park School would
change from the under control off-leash area to an under control on-leash
area.
|
Advantages
· Provides for the needs of dogs and their
owners (albeit to a less than desired level). Dog access (albeit on-leash) is
still provided, and the majority of this very large park remains an under
control off-leash area.
· May better provide for public safety and
comfort, including children using the western and eastern side of park to and
from school.
· The western side of the park has
existing easily defined boundaries.
Disadvantages
· Does not provide for the needs of dogs
and their owners to the level desired.
|
|
Option 3 allow dogs on-leash on the ‘pink path’ and eastern side of
Churchill Park School, retain current off-leash rule elsewhere on park
Effect of change
The ‘pink
path’ and park on the eastern side of Churchill Park School would change from
the under control off-leash area to an under control on-leash area.
|
Advantages
· Provides for the needs of dogs and their
owners (albeit to a less than desired level). Dog access (albeit on-leash) is
still provided, and the majority of this very large park remains an under
control off-leash area.
· May better provide for public safety and
comfort, including children using the eastern side of park to and from
school.
· The ‘pink path’ has existing
easily defined boundaries.
Disadvantages
· Does not provide for the needs of dogs
and their owners to the level desired.
|
Recommendation
42. Staff
recommend to retain the current under control off-leash rule on the whole park
(Option 1).
43. The
reason for this recommendation is that there is insufficient evidence of a
significant risk to public safety and comfort to justify a change.
Dog access on Roberta Reserve and associated foreshore
44. The
current dog access rule is under control off-leash on Roberta Reserve and a
time and season rule on the associated foreshore. These rules do not apply to
the playground within Roberta Reserve which is subject to a separate rule (dogs
prohibited) and not part of the review.
Community and
staff views
45. Community
views were sought in relation to three options:
· retain current
rules with a clarification of boundaries
· prohibit dogs on
foreshore and retain off-leash rule on reserve
· prohibit dogs on
both the foreshore and reserve.
46. All
three options were based on residents concerns to better protect wildlife
within recognised significant ecological areas for feeding and roosting of
protected birdlife of regional and national significance. The middle of the
reserve is used as a roost but has not easily identifiable boundaries.
47. Environmental
staff and representatives of the Tahuna Torea Rangers consider that dogs should
be prohibited from the foreshore, but that Roberta Reserve (because the
roosting area has no easily identifiable boundaries) and the water near the
bridge (a popular dog swimming area) should be under control off-leash areas.
48. Tahuna
Torea Rangers representatives also suggest signage to remind dog owners to not
let their dogs chase wildlife on the reserve or to let their dogs run on the
mudflats.
49. Of
the 259 residents and visitors that responded to the on-line survey, dog owners
preferred to retain the current rules with a clarification of boundaries.
Non-dog owner preferred to protect wildlife on the foreshore[3]. A full summary of
location specific feedback is contained in Attachment A.
50. A
petition with 46 signatures sought to retain off-leash dog access on the
reserve.
Options in
relation to dog access on Roberta Reserve and associated foreshore
51. Maps
of the options are shown in Attachment B.
|
Option[4]
|
Advantages and Disadvantages
|
|
Option 1 retain current rules with amended foreshore boundary.
Effect of change
No change
to rules, but the foreshore prohibition of Tahuna Torea Reserve would shift
from Vista Crescent to the stream in Roberta Reserve.
|
Advantages
· Provides for the needs of dogs and their
owners based on dog owner preferences.
· Foreshore boundary between Roberta
Reserve and Tahuna Torea more easily identifiable with limited impact on
accessible and desirable dog access.
Disadvantages
· Does not provide the level of protection
to wildlife sought by council environmental staff, environmental groups and
majority of non-dog owners.
|
|
Option 2 (Preferred option) retain
current off-leash rule on reserve, allow dogs off-leash in water near bridge,
prohibit dogs on foreshore
Effect of change
No change for reserve. The time and season rule on the foreshore
from the Glendowie Boating Club to the Vista Crescent access way would be
replaced with a dogs prohibited rule, except in the water near the bridge in
Roberta Reserve which would be replaced with a under control off-leash at any
time rule.
|
Advantages
· The needs
of dogs and their owners are provided for on the reserve and popular dog
swimming spot.
· Better
protects birdlife on foreshore.
Disadvantages
· Majority
of dog owners sought to retain the current rules, although it is suspected
that the primary concern related to the reserve as opposed to the foreshore
which is less used for dog access.
|
Recommendation
52. Staff
recommend to retain the current under control off-leash rule on the reserve,
allow dogs under control off-leash in the water near the bridge, and to
prohibit dogs on the foreshore (Option 2).
53. The
reasons for this recommendation are that:
· better protect
birdlife on foreshore that is less used for dog access
· provides for needs
of dogs and their owners on reserve and popular dog swimming spot
· rules easy to understand.
Dog access on Orākei Basin West and East Reserves
54. The
current dog access rule is under control off-leash on both reserves.
55. However,
signage established at least since around 2010 indicate dogs are only allowed
under control off-leash from the bottom of the Lucerne Road access way to the
pathway to Upland Road.
56. This
issue was identified after the review commenced and not included in the on-line
survey.
Community and
staff views
57. Parks
and animal management staff are not aware of significant dog-related problems
and consider that under control off-leash dog access may be appropriate.
58. The
Orākei Basin Advisory Group support the dog access rules indicated by
signage with the clarification that dogs be allowed under control off-leash to
the car park in Orākei Basin West Reserve. Reasons include the narrow width
of the Lucerne Road access way and mixed use near the water in Orākei
Basin West Reserve.
Options in
relation to dog access on Orākei Basin East and West Reserves
59. Maps of the
options are shown in Attachment B.
|
Option
|
Advantages and Disadvantages
|
|
Option 1 retain current under control off-leash rule
Effect of change
No change
to rule, but would be a change to established signage.
|
Advantages
· Better provides for the needs of dogs
and their owners by providing the option of under control off-leash dog
access on both reserves at their discretion.
Disadvantages
· May not adequately provide for public
safety and comfort in the mixed use areas in Orākei Basin West Reserve.
|
|
Option 2
(Preferred option) retain current off-leash rule
on most of the east reserve, and allow dogs on-leash on most of west reserve
Effect of change
This
option would reduce the under control off-leash dog access that currently
applies on both reserves to that part between the Lucerne Road access way and
the pathway to Upland Road and car park in Orākei Basin West Reserve.
|
Advantages
· Formalises the current and likely more
known dog access rules.
· Better provides for public safety and
comfort in the mixed use areas in Orākei Basin West Reserve.
· Retains opportunity (albeit reduced) for
under control off-leash dog access in the more open Orākei Basin East
Reserve.
Disadvantages
· Dog owners may perceive a reduction in
under control off-leash dog access.
|
Recommendation
60. Staff
recommend to retain the current under control off-leash rule on most of the
east reserve, and allow dogs under control on-leash on most of the west reserve
(Option 2).
61. The
reasons for this recommendation are that:
· formalise current
and likely more known dog access rules
· better provides for
public safety and comfort in the mixed use areas in Orākei Basin West
Reserve, and narrow walkway from Lucerne Road
· retains opportunity
(albeit reduced) for under control off-leash dog access in the more open
Orākei Basin East Reserve.
Address of under control off-leash areas
62. The
inclusion of address information to under control off-leash parks has in some
instances created uncertainty about where the rule applies. The address
information was intended to make it easier to locate the park as opposed to
defining the extent of the rule. Staff recommend that street numbers be omitted
leaving the street name and suburb to help locating the park and reduce any
potential uncertainty.
Next steps
63. Following the decision on proposed changes, staff will update the
statement of proposal to reflect the option(s) selected by the local board.
64. The
statement of proposal (together with proposals from other local boards) will be
publicly notified for submissions as part of the dog registration process in
June 2015.
Consideration
65. The
views of other local boards have not been sought.
Maori Impact Statement
66. Managing
dog access in areas of significance to Maori can help achieve outcomes of the
Māori Plan for Tāmaki Makaurau. In this instance, no impacts have
been identified.
67. Feedback
from Mana Whenua representatives at a Hui held in March 2015 related to the
ability of iwi to determine dog access on Marae, a focus on control,
responsible dog ownership, and ensuring the protection of sensitive ecological
areas.
Implementation Issues
68. There are no implementation issues associated with this decision to
adopt a statement of proposal.
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
aView
|
Statement of Proposal
|
39
|
|
bView
|
Maps of options analysed
|
59
|
|
cView
|
Decision-making requirements
|
79
|
|
dView
|
On-line survey results
|
85
|
Signatories
|
Author
|
Paul Wilson - Team Leader Bylaws
|
|
Authorisers
|
Kataraina Maki - GM - Community & Social Policy
Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden &
Orākei Local Boards
|
|
Orākei
Local Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei Local
Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei Local
Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei Local
Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei Local
Board
07 May 2015
|
|
Review of alcohol bans 2015
File No.: CP2015/04465
Purpose
1. To adopt a
proposal on the review of alcohol bans in the Orākei Local Board area.
Executive Summary
2. The
Orākei Local Board has the delegated responsibility to review all 152
existing local alcohol bans in its local board area by 31 October 2015.
3. The purpose of the review is to identify which existing local
alcohol bans meet the new higher statutory threshold to enable them to be retained. Alcohol bans that do not
meet the threshold will lapse on 31 October 2015.
4. As
part of the review, the local board may choose to use a public submission
process in order to get a fuller understanding of the impact of alcohol use in
the current alcohol ban areas.
5. To
assist the local board, staff have undertaken an analysis of legacy council
information and recent police data. This information has been presented at
local board workshops in early 2015. During these workshops the local board
also expressed a preference for using a public submission process to complete
the review.
6. Staff
recommend to:
· use a public submission
process to complete the review and to adopt a proposal to facilitate this
(Attachment C)
· propose to retain
21 existing alcohol bans
· propose to lapse
131 existing alcohol bans unless sufficient evidence is
provided through the public submission process.
7. Staff
will update the proposal as necessary to reflect the decisions by the local
board.
|
Recommendations
That the Orākei
Local Board:
a) confirms the
use of a public submission process to complete the review of alcohol bans in
the local board area.
b) adopts the
proposal titled “Proposal Review of Alcohol Bans – Orākei Local Board
May 2015” in Attachment C for the purposes of the public
submission process.
c) confirms that the proposal contained in Attachment C is in accordance with relevant requirements of the Local
Government Act 2002 and Auckland Council Alcohol Control Bylaw 2014.
d) authorises the Manager Social Policy and Bylaws to make any minor
edits or amendments to the Proposal to correct any identified errors or
typographical edits.
e) authorises the Manager Social Policy and Bylaws, in consultation
with the local board chair, to make any amendments to
the Proposal to reflect decisions made by the local
board.
f) appoints Board Member Churton (as chair), and Members Baguley,
Cooke, Davis, Parkinson, Simpson and Thomas as a panel to receive, hear and
deliberate on submissions and other relevant information and recommend
changes to the Board.
g) delegates to the Chairperson the ability to make changes to the
panel appointed under (f) where this becomes necessary because of the
withdrawal or unavailability of any of those persons.
|
Background
8. Alcohol bans are an accepted and effective way of helping to reduce
alcohol related harm. They limit the amount of alcohol consumed in public
places. This helps reduce harm including levels of intoxication, noise, litter,
harm and disorder.
9. Recent amendments to legislation to require a review of existing
alcohol bans against the new higher threshold is intended to ensure that
alcohol bans are only retained in areas of high alcohol related crime or
disorder.
10. Alcohol
bans are made under the Auckland Council Alcohol Control Bylaw 2014. Alcohol
bans prohibit the consumption of alcohol in public places and
are enforced by the New Zealand Police using powers of
search, seizure, and arrest. Penalties include an infringement
fee of $250.
11. Local boards
have the delegated responsibility to review existing local alcohol bans in
their local board areas by 31 October 2015. This does not include a review of
existing alcohol bans in areas of regional significance which is the
responsibility of the Regulatory and Bylaws Committee, nor consideration of new
alcohol bans which will be subject to a separate process to commence after 31
October 2015.
12. Since the commencement of the review in November 2014, the local
board at workshops has been presented with the statutory decision making
requirements, review process options, legacy council information, and recent
police data.
13. The local board has expressed a preference to use a public
submission process to complete the review. This process requires:
· the local board to
adopt a proposal by May 2015 (Attachment C)
· the proposal
(together with proposals from other local boards) will be publicly notified in
June 2015
· the local board to
hold hearings, deliberations and make decisions on submissions by August 2015
· any alcohol ban not
deemed to meet the statutory evidence test will lapse on 31 October 2015.
14. The
public submission process is specifically designed to obtain evidence of
alcohol-related crime or disorder from the public for those alcohol bans where
legacy council information or police data is limited. The decision required of
the local board is to decide which existing alcohol bans to propose to retain
and which to propose to lapse unless sufficient evidence is provided through
the public submission process.
Decision-making
requirements
15. In
making decisions, the local board must be satisfied that any existing alcohol bans proposed to be
retained comply with a range of statutory and bylaw requirements.
16. Changes
to the Local Government Act 2002 introduced a higher threshold to be met to
allow an existing alcohol ban to be retained. Alcohol bans that do not meet the
higher threshold will lapse on 31 October 2015.
17. The
most important requirements as outlined in the bylaw are:
· evidence that the alcohol ban area has experienced a high
level of crime or disorder that can be shown to have been caused or made worse
by alcohol consumption in the area
· that the alcohol ban is appropriate and
proportionate in the light of the evidence and can be justified as a reasonable
limitation on people's rights and freedoms
· consideration of community-focused
solutions as an alternative to or to complement an alcohol ban area
· consideration of
the views of owners, occupiers, or persons that council has reason to believe
are representative of the interests of owners or occupiers, of premises within the area to which the alcohol ban will apply
· consideration to using one of the
following times for consistency:
§ 24 hours, 7 days a week (at all times alcohol
ban)
§ 7pm to 7am daily (evening alcohol ban)
§ 10pm to 7pm daylight saving and 7pm to
7am outside daylight saving (night time alcohol ban)
§ 7pm on the day before to 7am on the day
after any weekend, public holiday or Christmas/New Year holiday period (weekend
and holiday alcohol ban).
18. Further
detail of the decision-making requirements is appended to the proposal in
Attachment C.
Comment
Current
local alcohol bans
19. There
are currently 152 alcohol bans in the Orākei Local Board area summarised
in the table below. These have been independently assessed and evidence is
included in Attachments A and B.
|
Type of alcohol ban area (number)
|
Alcohol ban time
|
|
Town centre
(3)
|
24 hours a day 7 days a week
|
|
Park, beach
and foreshore reserve (148)
|
Daylight saving 10pm – 8am
non-daylight savings 8pm – 8am
|
|
Street (1)
|
Daylight saving 10pm – 8am
non-daylight savings 8pm – 8am
|
Evidence
20. Evidence
of alcohol-related crime or disorder has been obtained from legacy council
files, and data from the New Zealand Police for the period 1 September 2013 –
30 September 2014 has also been supplied.
21. Other
sources of Auckland-wide alcohol-related crime or disorder information were
investigated but did not provide evidence able to be linked to particular
alcohol bans. Other sources included service request data lodged through the
council call centre, graffiti and Ambulance and Emergency Service data.
22. Evidence
may also be gathered through a public submission process. Documented evidence
may be provided by way of:
· a written account of incidents of
alcohol-related crime or disorder people have witnessed prior to, after, or
recently in relation to a particular alcohol ban having been introduced
· historical media articles.
Options
23. For
each of these areas, the local board has two options. To retain the alcohol ban
(with or without amendments to areas or times) or to allow the ban to lapse.
24. In
terms of which alcohol bans to retain or lapse, the local board can review the
summary of evidence provided for individual alcohol bans in Attachments A and B
and choose to:
· confirm the list of
alcohol bans proposed to be retained (Attachment A)
· confirm the list of
alcohol bans proposed to lapse (Attachment B)
· identify any
changes to the list of alcohol bans to be retained (Attachment A)
· identify any
changes to the list of alcohol bans to lapse (Attachment B).
25. It
is important to note that the statutory requirements of this review means the
retention of alcohol bans must be determined on evidence of high levels of
alcohol-related crime or disorder.
Recommendation
26. Staff
recommend:
· the use of a public submission process to complete the review and to
adopt the “Proposal Review of Alcohol Bans – Orākei Local Board May 2015”
to facilitate this (Attachment C)
· retain the following
21 existing alcohol bans:
o Ellerslie Town Centre
o Remuera Town Centre
o Atkin Reserve C (South)
o Cliff Road
o Colin Maiden Park (including
associated car park)
o Kohimarama Reserve
o Kupe North Reserve
o Martyn Wilson Fields & Sonia
Reserve (including associated car park)
o Meadowbank Community Centre (including
associated car park)
o Merton Reserve
o Nehu Triangle
o Ngahue Reserve
o Okahu Bay Reserve
o Orākei Basin West Reserve
(including associated car park)
o Orākei Road cnr
o Paritai Reserve
o Selwyn Reserve (including associated
car park and adjoining street)
o St Heliers Bay Beach Reserve
(including associated car park)
o Tamaki Drive (Kelly Tarltons)
o Tonks Reserve
o Watene Reserve
· allow
the remaining 131 alcohol bans to lapse unless sufficient evidence is provided
through a public submission process to justify their retention (Attachment B).
27. The
reasons for this recommendation are:
· there is sufficient
evidence of a high level of alcohol-related crime or disorder to retain 21
existing alcohol bans
· the alcohol bans retained are appropriate, proportionate,
and reasonable
· the hours of alcohol bans retained
are aligned to those contained in the bylaw
· the public submission process
provides an effective and efficient way to obtain further evidence (in a
useable format) to support decision making.
Next
steps
28. The
proposal (together with proposals from other local boards) will be publicly notified
in June 2015.
29. Staff
will update the proposal as necessary to reflect the decisions by the local
board.
Consideration
Local Board views and implications
30. Since the commencement of the review in November 2014, the local
board at workshops has been presented with the statutory decision making
requirements, review process options, legacy council information, and recent
police data.
Māori impact statement
31. Managing alcohol related harm associated with people consuming
alcohol in public places increases opportunities for health and wellbeing,
which is consistent with the outcomes of the Māori Plan for Tāmaki
Makaurau.
32. Feedback
from mana whenua representatives at a hui held in March 2015 supported alcohol
bans in principle, and believe that non-regulatory approaches should be
considered to help reduce alcohol related harm.
Implementation
33. There
are no implementation issues associated with this decision to adopt a proposal.
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
aView
|
Alcohol bans proposed to retain
|
101
|
|
bView
|
Alcohol bans proposed to lapse
|
111
|
|
cView
|
Proposal
|
121
|
Signatories
|
Authors
|
Daniel Pouwels - Principal Policy Analyst
Kylie Hill - Policy Analyst
|
|
Authorisers
|
Kataraina Maki - GM - Community & Social Policy
Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden &
Orākei Local Boards
|
|
Orākei
Local Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei Local
Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei Local
Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei Local
Board
07 May 2015
|
|
Bastion Point Walking Entrance Art Integration
File No.: CP2015/06854
Purpose
1. Staff
will present this report to the local board, along with a verbal presentation
of the creative team recommended to undertake the project (a recommended team
had not been selected at time of writing). This report seeks the local board’s
approval for staff to engage the recommended creative team to deliver the
Bastion Point Walking Entrance Art Integration.
Executive Summary
2. The
Bastion Point Walking Entrance Art Integration opportunity was identified in
the Ōrākei Local Board’s 2012 Public Art Plan
and noted in the approved 2014/2015 Ōrākei Local
Board work programme (OR/2014/7) with a budget allocation of $63,099 local
board capex.
3. The
Ōrākei Reserves Board confirmed support of further investigation of the
Bastion Point Walking Entrance Art Integration at their meeting on 19 May 2014
and requested council to consider contributing regional public art capex to the
project.
4. The
Arts Culture and Events Committee approved $20,000 regional public art capex
for the Bastion Point Walking Entrance Art Integration in the 2014/2015 Arts
and Culture work programme (Resolution ART/2014/26).
5. The
scope of the Bastion Point Walking Entrance Art Integration was developed by
staff from Arts and Culture, Parks and City Transformation. Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei Whai Maia Limited provided expert
cultural advice due to the project site’s proximity to Takaparawhau/Bastion
Point.
6. A
recommended creative team for the Bastion Point Walking Entrance Art
Integration was identified through a robust contestable process that included
an Expressions of Interest call and the commission of four concepts. All
finalist teams and concepts were reviewed according to the agreed selection
criteria and project objectives set out in the project’s Expressions of Interest
call.
7. The
four shortlisted teams were presented to the local board at a workshop on 6
May. Staff will present the recommended concept to the local board during the
discussion of this report (the recommended option was not yet identified at
time of writing).
|
Recommendation/s
That the Orākei Local
Board:
a) approves engagement of the creative team to implement the
recommended concept for the Bastion Point Walking Entrance Art Integration.
|
Comments
Background
8. The
Bastion Point Walking Entrance Art Integration opportunity was identified in
the Ōrākei Public Art Plan (OR/2012/14628).
The local board allocated budget of $63,099 local board capex for the art
integration is noted in the approved 2014/2015 Ōrākei Local
Board work programme (OR/2014/7).
9. The
Ōrākei Local Board is the primary funder of the Bastion Point Walking
Entrance Art Integration and approved the following objectives for the project:
· contribute to increased
visibility, safety and accessibility of the walking entrance to Bastion Point
during both day and night
· insert dynamic visual
improvements that complement the immediate vicinity’s rich natural and heritage
features
· create innovative
expression of the unique character of the area, its people, history and locale
and/or interpretation of the area’s significance to the development of Auckland
· improve public amenity
and support Auckland Council and Auckland Transport open space improvements and
Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei
environmental and safety initiatives within the project area and surrounds.
10.
The project fulfils the following:
· Priority 4 of the Ōrākei Local Board Plan: Investing in our communities and
maintaining our local character
· contributes to the
fulfilment of Key Move 6 in the local board’s Tāmaki Drive Masterplan:
‘recognise the special status of Whenua Rangatira’.
· Auckland Plan’s
Strategic Direction 3: “Integrate arts and culture into our everyday lives”
· the four outcomes
Auckland Council seeks to achieve with public art as noted in Public Art
Policy: unique and distinctive; delights, welcomes and challenges all
Aucklanders; artistic and cultural richness; transformation of public places.
11. On
19 May 2014 the Ōrākei Reserves Board confirmed support
for further investigation of the Bastion Point Walking Entrance Art Integration
and requested that a contribution of regional public art capex to the project
be proposed. This resulted in the allocation of $20,000 from the 2014/2015
budget approved by the Arts Culture and Events Committee (ART/2014/26).
12. The
Mission Bay Business Association is identified as a key project stakeholder and
has received updates on the project from staff.
Selection of creative teams to deliver the art
integration project
13. A
call for Expressions of Interest (EOI) was developed and agreed with the local
board and set out the project’s objectives and criteria for creative team
selection.
14. The
EOI was open between 24 February and 11 March 2015, resulting in 29
submissions. The project team, comprised of staff from Arts and Culture, Parks
and Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei Whai Maia
Limited, reviewed and assessed the EOI submissions according to the selection
criteria set out in the Expressions of Interest call:
· strength of work
samples
· rationale for
interest in the project location and/or knowledge of the place
· evidence of
professional capacity.
15. Through
this process five artists and/or teams responding to the EOI call were invited
to interview with the project team on 2 April. Of these five, two artists
submitting separately agreed to collaborate at the suggestion of the project
team, resulting in four finalist teams for the opportunity.
16. All
four finalist teams attended a site briefing on 15 April 2015 and were provided
with background materials including the Tāmaki Drive Masterplan, location advice commissioned from Richmond
Planning, the Atkins Avenue Final Report, the Ōrākei greenways
map and a Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei Iwi
Management Plan.
17. The
four finalist teams presented their final concept proposals to the project team
on 5 May 2015. The project team assessed and rated these proposals against the
project’s objectives established by the local board. Staff presented these
concepts to the local board members at a 6 May 2015 arts portfolio catch up for
discussion.
Next steps
18. The
next step for the Bastion Point Walking Entrance Art Integration is to engage
the creative team. Staff will present the highest-rated concept to the local
board during discussion of this report, and will request the local board’s
approval to engage the creative team to implement the recommended concept.
19. The
project is scheduled to be complete by December 2015.
Consideration
Local Board views and implications
20. The
Ōrākei Local Board has received status updates on the project’s
development at portfolio catch ups, workshops and via memos.
21. The
Ōrākei Local Board was invited to join the 15 April 2015 site briefing
with the finalist creative teams.
Māori impact statement
22. The
project site is adjacent to the threshold of Takaparawhau Bastion Point, an
important Auckland site and Whenua Rangatira, an area of land with deep
spiritual and cultural significance set aside as reserve for the benefit of the
Hapū and people of
Auckland.
23. Takaparawhau
Bastion Point has a direct physical relationship with the Ōrākei Block (Hapū
land), the recognised turangawaewae of Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei.
24. Auckland
Council’s Public Art Policy, adopted September 2013, enshrines council’s
intention to create art for Auckland’s shared public places that express the
stories of our people and place, and to enfold Mātauranga Māori –
traditional knowledge, wisdom and understanding.
25. A
staff member of Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei Whai Maia
Limited is a project team member providing expert cultural advice due to the
project site’s proximity to Takaparawhau/Bastion Point.
26. The
Ōrākei Reserves Board endorsed further investigation of the Bastion
Point Walking Entrance Art Integration at their meeting on 19 May 2014 and
requested that a contribution of regional public art capex be proposed. The Ōrākei Reserves Board will continue to receive updates on the project
at key milestones.
Implementation
27. Pending the local board’s approval, staff will engage the
recommended creative team to deliver the project.
28. Parks and City Transformation staff will continue to provide advice
and support to Arts and Culture staff throughout the implementation period. As the project site is road reserve, land
owner approval by Auckland Transport is required.
Attachments
There are no attachments for
this report.
Signatories
|
Author
|
Carole Anne Meehan - Manager Public Art
|
|
Authorisers
|
Graham Bodman - Manager - Community Development, Arts
and Culture
Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden &
Orākei Local Boards
|
|
Orākei
Local Board
07 May 2015
|
|
The Landing Fees and Charges
File No.: CP2015/04866
Purpose
1. The purpose
of this report is to present a recommendation to increase fees and charges for
dinghy locker hire and hardstand operational services at The Landing for
consideration of the local board. Sponsorship of events through use of hard
stand space is also presented for consideration.
Executive Summary
2. Fees and
charges are usually reviewed annually by local boards and changes incorporated
in the annual plan. The Landing fees and charges have not been reviewed since
the local board took office in late 2010 and the last time fees were increased
was 2007.
3. Fees and
charges presented for review are
· Dinghy locker fees
· Haul-out charges
· Hardstand storage
· Waterblasting
4. A staged
approach to increasing the fees and charges is recommended and informally
supported by the local board. All current charges are below the market mean or
regional level of fees for similar services. Given some of these charges have
not been reviewed since 2007, it is recommended that they be adjusted by 17
percent in phase one, which simply deals with the equivalent of a consumer
price index increase. However, despite this increase, it has been established
that the price bracket for dinghy lockers are below regional fees or market
mean and therefore a second phase of increase is recommended followed by
regular increases in line with the consumer price index to ensure the value
remains appropriate and the impact on users is minimised.
5. Demand for
events at The Landing using hardstand space in agreement with The Landing
manager is growing. These events are effectively being sponsored due to the
loss in revenue that occurs during event times. Formalising the approach to
these arrangements is recommended and a draft policy to cover this is attached
for the board’s consideration.
|
Recommendations
That the Orākei Local
Board:
a) agrees
to phase in an increase in charges for dinghy locker storage at The Landing
to reflect an inflation adjustment catchup in phase one, a move towards
regional alignment of dinghy locker charges in phase two and a standard
consumer price index annual fee increase is applied thereafter (unless
otherwise varied by decision of the Orākei Local
Board):
|
Landing Charges
|
From 1 June 2015
|
From 1 July 2016
|
|
Types
|
Price
|
|
Secure
under cover lockers
|
$377 incl.
GST
|
$ 400 incl.
GST
|
|
Outside
dinghy racks
|
$146 incl.
GST
|
$150 incl.
GST
|
b) agrees to an
increase in charges for haul-out, hardstand storage and water blasting as per
Option 1 of Table 4 of Attachment B of this report, bringing most charges
close to or slightly above 20 percent below the market mean. That the new
charges be implemented from 1 July 2015 with a 20 percent discount applying
over the winter season 1 April to 31 August each year to encourage a greater
spread of demand across the year.
c) agrees that
further increases to charges for haul-out, hardstand storage and water
blasting services be considered, when investment in new haul-out equipment
occurs bringing an increased level of service and revenue stream for The
Landing.
d) approves the
Landing Hardstand Events Policy outlined in Attachment C of this report.
|
Comments
Background
6. Fees
and charges at The Landing have not been reviewed by the local board since
Auckland Council was establishment in late 2010. The last review of dinghy
lockers charges was 2007 when a 15% increase was applied. The local board has
allocation for decision-making for local fees and charges on sports parks. Fees
and charges are usually reviewed annually and changes incorporated in the
annual plan.
Dinghy Locker fees and charges
7. The
moving of dinghies from the Auckland Sailing Club building into new covered
temporary storage lockers (containers) in 2015 offers an ideal opportunity to
implement new fees for dinghy storage.
Table 1. – Current
Prices for Dinghy Locker Storage at The Landing
|
Landing
|
|
|
|
|
Types
|
Number
|
Price
|
Waiting list
|
|
Secure
under cover lockers
|
49
|
$322 incl. GST
|
3
|
|
Outside
dinghy racks
|
125
|
$125 incl GST
|
|
8. Auckland
Council Property Ltd (ACPL) has recently reviewed charges for dinghy lockers
under their management. ACPL has raised charges for dinghy lockers based on an
assessment of charges across the region, demand (i.e. level of waiting lists)
and what they assess is appropriate for the market.
9. Charges
now range from $200 incl GST at Sandspit and Northcote to $460 incl GST at
Devonport (Stanley Point, Queens Parade and Callipe Street) for single lockers
representing increases from nil to 188% increase- see Table 2.
Table 2- Charges for
Dingy Lockers Managed by ACPL
|
Area
|
Location
|
Size
|
Price (inc GST) per annum
|
Current Price (inc GST) per annum
|
Difference (inc GST ) and %
|
|
Birkenhead
|
Hinemoa Park
|
Standard
locker
|
$345 (inc GST)
|
$180
|
$165 (92%)
|
|
Devonport
|
Calliope Road
Queens Parade
Stanley Point
|
Standard
lockers
|
$460 (inc GST)
|
$200
|
$260 (130%)
|
|
Northcote
|
Sulphur Beach
Rd
|
Standard
locker
|
$200 (inc GST)
|
$200
|
No change
|
|
Sandspit
|
Sandspit
Wharf
|
Standard
locker
|
$200 (inc GST)
|
$75
|
$125 (167%)
|
Source: ACPL
10. By comparison,
club facilities offer storage at the following rates:
Table 3 – Dinghy Locker Storage Charges
across Auckland
|
Location
|
Size
|
Price (incl. GST) per annum – to note yacht club
membership fees will be additional
|
|
Richmond
Yacht Club
|
Standard
Locker
|
$350
|
|
Royal
Akarana Yacht club
|
Standard Locker
|
$400
|
|
Panmure
Yacht Club
|
Standard Locker
|
$110
|
|
Devonport
Yacht Club
|
Standard Locker
|
$85
|
|
Outdoor
Boating Club
|
Standard Locker
|
$110
|
|
Takapuna
yacht club
|
Standard Locker
|
$149
|
Source; ACPL
11. If
CPI is applied to The Landing charges for the period from 2007 to 2014 then
dinghy locker charges become:
· Secure locker $377
inc. GST (17% increase)
· Outside dinghy rack
$146 inc. GST (17% increase)
12. It
is proposed that this inflation adjustment occurs as the first phase of
increase for dinghy locker charges at the beginning of July 2015 to coincide
with the new temporary lockers.
13. Based
on the prices charged for Devonport, which is also a high socio-economic
community with a high demand for boating services, there is an opportunity for
further alignment of charges on top of the adjustment for CPI. Demand for
lockers will likely increase as the number of secure lockers will reduce to 40
when the new temporary storage is in place and there will be an overall loss of
dinghy lockers on The Landing when AMST is developed. A second phase of
proposed increase to charges are set out below:
|
Landing from 1 July 2016
|
|
|
|
|
Types
|
Number
|
Price
|
% change incl GST
|
|
Secure
under cover lockers
|
40
|
$400 incl. GST
|
$78
24% increase
|
|
Outside
dinghy racks
|
125
|
$150 incl. GST
|
$25
20% increase
|
14. Thereafter
it is recommended that a standard CPI increase be applied each year in order to
keep the fees current and reduce the impact in any given year on the users.
The Landing
hardstand charges
15. The
Landing hardstand operation offers haul-out, boat storage (whilst maintenance
is carried out) and water blasting services to a range of boat owners
predominantly from the inner Waitemata harbour area. The operation has
historically been priced below the commercial market rate because the equipment
used for haul-out makes it tide dependent limiting the times it can operate to
two hours either side of high tide, it is susceptible to northerly swells
making it less reliable than other services and has filled a niche to service
small boat owners particularly those using swing moorings in the Waitemata
Harbour.
16. A
market comparison of charges carried out in October 2014 for haul-out,
hardstand storage and water blasting across Auckland is set out in Attachment
A. This shows that charges at the Landing are between 41-57 percent below the
market mean for haul-out, 41- 76 percent below the market mean for hardstand
storage and 14- 23 percent below the market mean for water blasting dependent
on the size of the boat and whether it is a mono or multi-hull.
17. The
haul-out, hardstand storage and water blasting charges have also not been
increased since 2007. Two options for increasing charges is Option 1, to
increase by inflation which equates to a 17 percent increase since charges were
last increased in 2007, or set prices at 20 percent below the market mean, Option
2 to reflect the lower and less reliable level of service (haul-out is limited
to 2 hours either side of high tide and is weather dependent) as set out in
Table 4 in Attachment B.
18. It is
suggested that, in the first instance, haul out, hardstand storage and water
blasting fees are raised by the level of inflation i.e. Option 1. As demand for services offered from The Landing is variable across the
year i.e. is highest in the period from September to March, which results in
the hardstand often being at capacity and a waiting list for haul-out, that a
discount on fees i.e. 20 percent is offered in the winter to encourage a
greater spread of demand.
19. Options for
replacing the equipment used at The Landing for haul-out are currently being
investigated. Alternates to the current trolley and cradle system will increase
the window and speed at which boats can be hauled, greatly increasing the
capacity of the hard-stand for haul-out and improving the service to customers.
It is currently proposed that the investment in a new haul out system is made
by the contractors. The business case for this investment is yet to be
completed but it is anticipated that the increased service level and capacity
and functionality would justify a further increase to charges beyond inflation.
Events
20. A portion of
the hardstand is often used for event storage as identified on The Landing
concept plan in conjunction with and to support other users of The Landing. The
demand for use of this space is growing. This often results in a loss of
revenue for the period of the storage as space for boats are taken up by event
activity and haul-outs/storage cannot happen in that area for that period.
There are also a range of events that use the space but do not take up boat
storage space because they are either smaller in scale or are at a time when
the yard is not at capacity.
21. It is
recommended that a maximum of four events be sponsored annually, each
consisting of no more than one vessel (e.g.; large waka) or less than 7 days in
duration and utilising no more than half the hardstand area. Dependant on the
type of event, the sponsorship is worth between $3,000 and $4,000 per event,
which equates to a maximum sponsorship of $16,000 per annum. Occupation of
greater than half the hardstand area will count as two sponsorship events (i.e.
in general it is anticipated that the space taken up by events will enable at
least half of the hardstand commercial bookings to continue). It is not
anticipated that a full month will be given up each year as it is expected that
events will generally be either single vessel sponsorship or less than seven
days of duration on each occurrence.
22. It is noted
that all current sponsorship activity is driven by or through other occupants
of the site. Therefore, if demand exceeds supply, it is proposed that an
annual bid for sponsored events occurs whereby each user has an opportunity to
tender for use of this free space. If this is triggered an evaluation will be
conducted to ensure the users of greatest need are catered for. It is possible
that all applications will have a charity status and a rationale for support.
As such there should be periodic review of this policy to assess the demand
versus supply. In recommending this baseline it is acknowledged that the
hardstand is part of a commercial offer and is generally providing for
community demand based on a user pays model albeit with fees set below market
value to acknowledge the public benefit of this service.
Consideration
Local
Board views and implications
23. The local
board considered a review of fees and charges at a workshop in October 2014.
The board supported a staged increase to charges for dinghy locker storage
based firstly on CPI adjustments and then a move towards regional alignment of charges.
This approach then provides certainty of charges to hirers during the term of
the board up until October 2016.
24. The local board also supported
inflationary adjustments to the charges for haul-out, hardstand storage and
water blasting but consider that any further movement in charges towards the
market mean should be based upon the customers receiving a higher level of
service and increased revenues being generated for The Landing through the
acquisition of new and improved haul-out equipment. This requires a positive
return on investment for the proposed new equipment.
Māori impact statement
25. Ngāti
Whātua Ōrākei, as mana whenua of the area, has a strong interest
in all aspects of the development and management of The Landing. They have a
particular interest in water quality and development of the eastern end of The
Landing. This proposal will not adversely impact on water quality and
formalises some of the sponsorship support offered to waka ama, some of which
is a Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei sponsored or supported activity.
Implementation
26. Phase one of
the dinghy locker charge increase will be implemented to coincide with the
completion of the installation of the new temporary secure lockers. These
charges will be effective immediately for any new hirers but will effectively
phase in over the following 12 months based on the renewal dates for each
existing hirer.
27. Increases to
charges for haul-out, hardstand storage and water blasting will be implemented
on the first of July 2015.
28. All increased
charges will be notified to existing customers by end of May 2015 and displayed
via temporary signage at the current dinghy storage facilities at the same
time.
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
aView
|
Haul out and hard stand fees comparison
|
139
|
|
bView
|
Dinghy locker fees comparison
|
145
|
|
cView
|
Hardstand Events Policy
|
147
|
Signatories
|
Authors
|
Jane Aickin - Manager Local and Sports Parks Central
Pippa Somerville - Parks Advisor
|
|
Authorisers
|
Ian Maxwell - General Manager Parks, Sports and
Recreation
Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden &
Orākei Local Boards
|
|
Orākei
Local Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei Local
Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei Local
Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei Local
Board
07 May 2015
|
|
Orākei Local Board Community Fees and Charges -
July to December 2014
File No.: CP2015/07244
Purpose
1. To
present the usage and revenue data from council-managed community facilities
within the local board area for the period 1 July to 31 December 2014 and to
highlight any significant impact of the new fees and charges that were
introduced on 1 July 2014.
2. To
recommend community facilities fees and charges for the 2015/2016 year.
Executive Summary
3. On
19 March 2015, members of the Orākei Local Board met at a workshop to
consider the impact of the new fees and charges introduced on 1 July 2014.
Please refer to Attachment A for the fee schedule for 2014/2015.
4. The council’s ‘Hire Fee Framework – For Hire
of Auckland Council’s Community Facilities’ (the framework) was developed over
a two-year period from 2012-2014 and was based on good practice principles. New
fees and charges, which would help ensure fairness and transparency for all
users, were to be introduced for all council facilities across the region on 1
July 2014. Most local boards adopted the framework although six, including Orākei, chose
to vary from the recommended fees and charges.
5. There are four council-managed community
facilities In the Orākei Local Board area: Ellerslie War Memorial Hall, Leicester Hall, Orākei
Community Centre and Tamaki Ex-Services Association Hall.
6. After 1 July, the council received enquiries
from five of the 39 regular hirers across these four venues. All five accepted
a transition arrangement until the end of September 2014. There were no
cancellations as a result of increased fees and charges. For the full list of
regular hirers, please refer to Attachment B.
7. For a table of fees and charges per venue for
the July to December period, please refer to the summary in Attachment C.
Attachment D shows the number of sessions booked by activity type.
8. The table below summarises the combined
activity of the council-managed facilities in the Orākei Local Board area
for the July to December period. Please note that some figures are reported as
percentage points (pp), while others are shown as a percentage (%). Please
refer to the glossary of terms (Attachment E) for more information on
percentage points.
|
Utilisation
|
Visitors
|
Revenue
|
|
 -6 pp
|
 -12,063 (-15%)
|
 +$9,733 (+17%)
|
9. Over
the six-month period, utilisation (booked hours divided by 10 available hours
per day) of the facilities decreased by six percentage points (pp). Over the
same period, visitor numbers decreased 12,063 (-15 per cent) and revenue
increased by $9,733 to $65,983 (+17 per cent).
10. Mitigating factors: The increase in revenue is in contrast to the utilisation and
visitor decrease and is possible by a change in customer types to those paying
a higher fee or an increase in the fees paid by customers. In July 2014, a new
process was introduced to book the available spaces in most of the
council-managed community facilities across the region and to ensure the
cancellation charge was applied where appropriate. This has greatly helped to
record more accurate utilisation and visitor numbers than in previous years.
11. For the 2014/2015 financial year, revenue from
community facilities is expected to increase for the Orākei Local Board.
12. The framework includes a number of good
practice principles including accountability and fairness. A number of hirers
in the Orākei Local Board area are currently on reduced rates, some of which have
been in place for several years due to legacy hire arrangements. These special,
non-standard rates are not available to other hirers. Exacerbating this
inequality is the cost of administering small monetary transactions. As such,
council staff recommend that these non-standard rates be raised to the same
level as those paid by all other hirers. A transition time of 9-12 months would
provide a sufficient adjustment period for the hirers involved. For the full
list of these hirers, please refer to Attachment F.
|
Recommendation/s
That the Orākei Local
Board:
a) agrees
that the 2014/2015 community facilities hire fees will remain, uninflated,
for the 2015/2016 year, as per Attachment A, which will apply to all new and
existing hirers using the facilities with the exception of the groups listed
in Attachment F which will benefit from transitional rates.
b) approves a transitional arrangement for the groups listed in
Attachment F of a 10 per cent increase on their specific 2014/2015 fee.
c) requests council staff communicate with the groups in transition
(as listed in Attachment F) to confirm the new rates and that the 2015/2016
year will be the final year of transitional arrangements.
d) requests council staff to provide regular updates on the impact of
the hire fees and the performance of council-managed community facilities as
part of the quarterly reports.
|
Comments
13. The council’s ‘Hire Fee Framework – For Hire
of Auckland Council’s Community Facilities’ (the framework) was developed over
a two-year period from 2012-2014. It took account of the wide range of legacy
hire arrangements that were recorded or published and acknowledged that ‘access
to safe, affordable places for people to pursue their interests provides many
benefits to the wider community…’ The framework included these good practice
principles: good public management, lawfulness, accountable, transparent
(openness), value for money, integrity and fairness.
14. Most local boards adopted the framework
although six, including Orākei, chose to vary from the recommended fees and charges. (Resolution
number OR/2014/42 in April 2014 and OR/2014/20 in August 2014.)
15. When the new framework was implemented, it
became clear that across some local boards there were a large number of
exceptions to the published hire rates that had not been recorded in the past
or visible to the organisation. The experience of the local boards that
accepted the recommended fees and charges is averaged as follows:
· 12 per cent
of regular hirers enquired about the new fees and charges
· Those facing
significant price increases were allowed transition rates until the end of
September 2014.
· Less than one per cent of these regular hirers cancelled their
bookings.
16. Members
of the Orākei Local Board met for a workshop on 19 March 2015 to consider the
impact of the new fees and charges introduced on 1 July 2014. Please refer to
Attachment A for the fee schedule for 2014/2015.
17. It
was the view of some local board members that the current legacy hire and
special hire arrangements for the groups listed in Attachment F be continued
and, if raised, be capped at a 10% increase.
18. These special, non-standard rates are not
available to other hirers. Exacerbating this inequality is the cost of
administering small monetary transactions. In terms of fairness and good public
management, council staff recommend that these non-standard rates be raised to
the same level that other hirers are required to pay. A transition time of 9-12
months would provide a sufficient adjustment period for the hirers involved.
19. Impact
of implementing new fees and charges: In the July
to December 2014 period, the council received enquiries from five of the 39
regular hirers in the Orākei Local Board area. All five accepted a
transition arrangement until the end of September 2014. There were no
cancellations as a result of increased fees and charges. For the full list of
regular hirers, please refer to Attachment B.
20. Summary of utilisation, visits and revenue
by local board area
Please note that some
figures in the following graphs are reported as percentage points (pp), while
others are shown as a percentage (%). For a table of fees and charges per venue
for the July to December period, please refer to the summary in Attachment C.
Attachment D shows the number of sessions booked by activity type.
21. Orākei
Local Board – Utilisation hours booked
22. All
of the local board’s council-managed facilities had lower utilisation in the
range of minus one per cent to -15 per cent. The average was a six per cent
decrease when compared with the same six-month period last year.
23. Orākei
Local Board – Visits
24. Visitors
to the local board’s four council-managed community facilities decreased on
average by 15 per cent when compared with the same period last year, with all
facilities reporting decreases. This is in-line with the lower utilisation of
the facilities.
25. Highlights/exceptions/mitigating factors
Orākei Community Centre had marked changes
in performance. Utilisation and visits at a facility level are shown on the two
graphs below.
26.
27.
28. Orākei Community Centre: Compared to the same period last year
this venue reported a 15 percentage point decrease in utilisation, while visits
to the centre over the six-month period fell by 4,620, which is nearly a third.
29. Mitigating
factors: In July 2014, a new process was introduced
to book the available spaces in most of the council-managed community
facilities across the region and to ensure the cancellation charge was applied
where appropriate. This has greatly helped to record more accurate figures,
particularly with the last-minute cancellations or
‘no shows’ for bookings. Back in the same period for 2013/2014, the utilisation
and visitor figures may not have reflected these actions by the users.
30. Revenue
31. The local board earned more revenue when
compared with the same period last year and this is in contrast with the lower
utility and visitor numbers. This is likely due to a number of factors such as
the new booking system, a change in customer types to those paying a higher fee
or an increase in the fees paid by customers and a tighter charging of
cancellation fees.
Summary
32. For
the period 1 July to 31 December 2014, utilisation of council-managed community
facilities in the Orākei Local Board area decreased by six percentage
points (pp). Over the same period, visitor numbers decreased 78,475 to 66,412
(-15 per cent) and revenue increased by $9,733 to $65,983 (+17 per cent).
|
Utilisation
|
Visitors
|
Revenue
|
|
-6 pp
|
-12,063 (-15%)
|
+$9,733 (+17%)
|
33. For
the 2014/2015 financial year, revenue from community facilities is expected to
increase for the Orākei Local Board. This could help contribute to the
maintenance of these facilities and reflects the good practice principles
imbedded in the framework.
Consideration
Local Board views and implications
34. The
impact of the new community facilities fees and charges introduced on 1 July
2014 were work shopped with members of the Orākei Local Board on 19 March
2015.
35. It
was the view of some members at this workshop that the current legacy hire or
special hire arrangements for the groups listed in Attachment F be continued
and, if raised, be capped at a 1.3% increase. If this is the approach the Orākei
Local Board wishes to adopt the resolution should be modified as follows:
Approves a
transitional arrangement for the groups listed in Attachment F of a 1.3 per
cent increase on their specific 2014/2015 fee.
36. These special, non-standard rates are not
available to other hirers. Exacerbating this inequality is the cost of
administering small monetary transactions. In terms of fairness and good public
management, council staff recommend that these non-standard rates be raised to
the same level as those paid by all other hirers. A transition time of 9-12
months would provide a sufficient adjustment period for the hirers involved.
37. The
recommendations within this report fall within the Orākei Local Board’s
authority relating to local recreation, sport and community facilities.
Māori
impact statement
38. The
fees and charges framework is not specifically targeted for Maori populations.
However, it aims to be clear and transparent to all users, including Maori.
Implementation
39. The information included in this report will inform the fees and
charges to be adopted for the 2015/2016 Annual Plan, in April this year.
40. The recommendations in this report do not trigger the Auckland
Council Significance Policy.
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
aView
|
Fee schedule for 2014 2015 Orākei
|
157
|
|
bView
|
List of regular Hires Orākei Local Board Area
|
159
|
|
cView
|
Summary of fees and charges data July - December 2014
|
161
|
|
dView
|
Sessions booked by activity Type
|
163
|
|
eView
|
Glossary of terms Orākei fees and charges
|
165
|
|
fView
|
List of hirers with special fees Orākei Local
Board Area
|
167
|
Signatories
|
Author
|
Kat Teirney - Manager Community Occupancy Community
Facilities
|
|
Authorisers
|
Graham Bodman - Manager - Community Development, Arts
and Culture
Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden &
Orākei Local Boards
|
|
Orākei
Local Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei Local
Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei Local
Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei Local
Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei Local
Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei Local
Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei Local
Board
07 May 2015
|
|
Orākei Community Grants Programme 2015/2016
File No.: CP2015/04376
Purpose
1. The purpose
of the report is to present the Orākei 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. The Orākei
Local Board Community Grants Programme 2015/2016 will be tabled at the 7 May
2015 business meeting, due to final approval needing to be obtained from the
chair, who has been on leave.
|
Recommendation/s
That the Orākei Local
Board:
a) adopts the Orākei
Community Grants Programme 2015/2016, as tabled at the 7 May 2015 business
meeting.
|
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. The local
board community grants programme can include:
· outcomes as identified in the local
board plan
· specific local board funding priorities
· budget allocated to the grants programme
· which grant types will operate locally,
the number of funding rounds and when these will open and close
· any additional criteria or exclusions
that will apply
· an indication of participation in
multi-board funding
· other factors the local board consider
to be significant to their decision-making
8. 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.
9. 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
10. 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
11. 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
12. 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
There are no attachments for this report.
Signatories
|
Author
|
Marion Davies - Community Funding Programme Manager
|
|
Authorisers
|
Graham Bodman - Manager - Community Development, Arts
and Culture
Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden &
Orākei Local Boards
|
|
Orākei
Local Board
07 May 2015
|
|
Albert-Eden Local Board support for the retention of
the Central Joint Funding Committee
File No.: CP2015/07477
Purpose
1. To inform the
Orākei Local Board of recent resolutions from the Albert-Eden Local
Board’s April 2015 business meeting.
Executive Summary
2. At the recent
Albert-Eden Local Board business meeting held on Wednesday 1 April 2015, the
board resolved to adopt their Albert-Eden Community Grants Programme for
2015/2016.
3. In addition,
the Albert-Eden Local Board also resolved to support for the retention of the
Central Joint Funding Committee and the legacy funds it administers including
accommodation support, community group assistance and heritage funds.
4. The
Albert-Eden Local Board also noted that if the Central Joint Funding Committee
and its associated funds are not retained, it would result in a loss of funding
opportunities for numerous community groups within the central isthmus area.
5. Attached to
this report is a copy of the Albert-Eden Local Board April 2015, item 15
resolutions.
|
Recommendation/s
That the Orākei Local
Board:
a) receives the Albert-Eden Local
Board support for the retention of the Central Joint Funding Committee report
and notes the attached resolutions.
|
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
aView
|
Resolutions from the Albert-Eden Local Board April 2015
business meeting
|
173
|
Signatories
|
Author
|
Kim Lawgun - Democracy Advisor
|
|
Authoriser
|
Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden &
Orākei Local Boards
|
|
Orākei
Local Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei Local
Board
07 May 2015
|
|
Developing the Empowered Communities Approach - Next
Steps
File No.: CP2015/07387
Purpose
1. This report
provides an update on the Empowered Communities Approach (ECA), and enables the
Orākei Local Board to provide formal feedback. Resolutions will be
reported to the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee on 4 June 2015.
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.
3. The Community
Development, Arts and Culture Department of the Operations Division is leading
the development of ECA, with support from Local Board Services and others.
4. The purpose
of the 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 the
council family.
5. The proposed
approach builds on the Thriving Communities Action Plan Ngā Hapori Momoho
(April 2014).
6. The proposed
approach is guided by the principle of Empowered Communities: Enabling Council
resulting in improved outcomes for Aucklanders. The approach identifies what will
change, what council will do and enabling ways of working.
7. The proposed
approach was reported to local boards and the Regional Strategy and Policy
Committee in April 2015.
8. The key
functions of the new operating model are to support local boards, build
community capacity and capability, increase diverse community input into the
work of council, catalyse the approach across the whole of council and build
the capacity of the organisation to work in ways which empower communities.
9. There will be
a shift from delivering community development activities directly to
communities, to using community development practices to achieve local board
and governing body aspirations and outcomes.
10. The proposed
operating model will consist of three components which together will better
support the delivery of local board plans as well as address complex community
issues across Auckland. These components are provisionally called: local
community brokers, the community practice hub and Auckland-wide response.
11. A reduction in
the cost to deliver community development over time is expected, starting with
savings in the 2015/2016 financial year.
12. Community
development and engagement is at the heart of the role of local boards. The
local board plans all include a focus on developing strong communities.
Proposed changes to council’s community development approach are of significant
interest to local boards.
13. To date the
ECA has been informed by the following input from local boards: Political
Advisory Group (PAG), two chairs and portfolio holders’ workshops and
individual local board workshops.
14. Community and
council staff consultation has also informed the approach.
15. The final PAG
meeting is on 4 May 2015. Feedback from that meeting is either attached to this
report, or where local board meetings are early in May, will be tabled at the
meeting.
16. The transition
timeline is for work to be done on models and roles from now until the end of
June. From July to December the approach will be implemented to meet local
board needs and in 2016 as the approach matures and evolves it will be extended
across the council family.
17. This report
enables the Orākei Local Board to make resolutions on the ECA. These
resolutions will be reported to the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee on 4
June 2015.
|
Recommendation/s
That the Orākei Local
Board:
a) resolves on
the proposed Empowered Communities Approach, for consideration as part of the
report to the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee in June 2015.
|
Comments
Background
18. 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.
19. The purpose of
the 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 the
council family.
20. The proposed
approach builds on the Thriving Communities Action Plan Ngā Hapori Momoho
(April 2014). It will bring to life the principles, focus areas and actions by
providing a clear operational direction to enable implementation of the plan
across council.
21. The approach
also provides an implementation framework for the High Performing Council’s
special focus area ‘Engaging and Enabling Communities’. The approach could play
a significant role in building best practice across the organisation in the
four high performance behaviours: develop, serve, collaborate and achieve.
22. The approach
is guided by the principle of Empowered Communities: Enabling Council resulting
in improved outcomes for Aucklanders. The approach identifies what will change,
what council will do and enabling ways of working. This approach was reported
to local boards and the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee in April 2015.
More information is provided in attachment A.
The new operating model
23. A primary
focus for the new unit will be on working with other parts of council to provide
community development support, expertise and assistance to local board projects
and activities so that every opportunity for council to work in ways that are
enabling of communities is maximised. There will be a shift from delivering
community development activities directly to communities, to using community
development practices to achieve local board and governing body aspirations.
24. The key
functions of the new operating model are to:
· support the council to work seamlessly
together at local board level
· build community capacity and capability
· increase diverse community input into
the work of council
· embed the approach across the whole of
council and build the capacity of the organisation
· to work in ways that empower
communities.
25. The proposed
operating model will consist of three components which together will better
support the delivery of local board plans as well as address complex community
issues across Auckland. These components are provisionally called: local
community brokers, the community practice hub and Auckland-wide response.
26. The local
community brokers are strategic roles. They will be co-located alongside local
board services teams. They will work alongside local board advisors to support
and join up the work of all departments delivering on local board outcomes and
will support devolving more resources to the community. The broker’s work
programme will be based on local board outcomes. The role will be tailored to
meet local board and community needs and they will provide a portal into
council for the community.
27. The community
practice hub consists of a dedicated team of expert practitioners with skills
including community development, facilitation and project management. They will
work alongside the local board teams to deliver programmes and tools, capacity
building for communities, inclusive engagement and participation programmes and
also provide operational support for local community brokers, local boards and
across the council family.
28. The local community
brokers will work with the local board members and advisors to identify which
projects offer opportunities to work in a more empowered communities way and
are priorities for support from the community practice hub. The hub will then
develop a work programme incorporating priorities from across local boards.
29. If new
community priorities start to emerge, the local community brokers will work
with local board members and staff to agree next steps. The community practice
hub will have some capacity to support work on emerging issues if they become
local board priorities.
30. The
Auckland-wide response will be a team of people with specialist skills. They
will work on significant and/ or complex issues that would benefit from an all
of Auckland approach, internal systems and processes and barriers and activity
where a regional response delivers efficiency/ effectiveness benefits.
31. Different
responses will be needed around Auckland taking into account community
capacity, strength and resilience. This range of responses will need to cover
those areas where there is well developed community capacity to opportunities
to further development community capacity and newly formed communities.
32. The impact of
the approach will be that:
· local boards are able to access tailored
and strategic support
· community development practice enhances
the work of the whole of the council family
· communities have more access to
resources and support to do things for themselves
· the empowered communities approach is
embedded throughout the organisation.
33. There are a
number of empowering initiatives and activities, both new and existing, which
could be further developed to empower communities.
34. A reduction in
the cost to deliver community development over time is expected, starting with
savings in the 2015/2016 financial year.
35. Community
development and engagement is at the heart of the role of local boards. The
local board plans all include a focus on developing strong communities. Proposed
changes to council’s community development approach are of significant interest
to local boards.
36. This report
provides the opportunity to provide formal feedback. This will be reported to
the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee on 4 June 2015.
Political Advisory Group
37. A Political
Advisory Group (PAG) has provided strategic advice and guidance to staff during
the development of the empowered communities approach.
38. At their
meeting on 16 April 2015 the PAG supported:
· the key functions of the new unit
· the three components of the new
operating model (local community brokers, community practice hub and
Auckland-wide response).
39. Other feedback
from the PAG included the need to consider the relationship with the Māori
Responsiveness Framework and the need for staff to have cultural competencies.
There was also discussion around whether the local community brokers should be
located within Community Development and Safety or Local Board Services, and
comment that local board outcomes are the same as community aspirations.
40. Staff will
report back to the PAG on 4 May with the following:
· revised approach and model
· approach to devolving resources
· tools to support implementing the
approach.
41. Feedback from
the PAG meeting on 4 May forms attachment 2 to this report. However, due to
the timing of this PAG, where local boards are meeting early in May this will
mean the tabling of attachment B.
ECA timeline
42. The remaining key milestones are
shown in the table below.
|
Stage
|
Date
|
Purpose
|
|
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
|
Consultation
and engagement
43. The community
was consulted through a limited number of community-led, and staff run,
workshops around the region. Staff were also consulted.
44. The key points
from the consultation were:
· use a high trust model that is values
based
· value what communities bring to the
table
· one size does not fit all
· capacity building is critical and a
fresh approach is required
· a whole of council approach
· respond to the diversity of Auckland’s
communities.
Consideration
Local
Board views and implications
45. The ECA aims
to provide a much more active role for local boards in community development.
46. ECA builds on
the strong focus on community led planning and development in the local board
plans 2014.
47. Local board
chairs met to consider ECA on 30 March. The following four principles arose
from this meeting:
· local boards need to be empowered
themselves so that they can in turn empower their communities in a way that
suits the area
· local board outcomes are community
outcomes and need to be central to and drive the community empowerment approach
and focus under the direction of the local board.
· community empowerment is not as simple
as channelling funds through community groups, which has risks. Community
empowerment is an approach and any change to the current needs to be carefully
staged and made appropriate for each local board.
· within change there are always
opportunities but they carry risks which can be minimised through careful
planning, full engagement of the main parties and undertaken within a timeframe
that is feasible for significant change to take place.
48. Local boards’
formal views are sought through this paper. This builds on earlier
opportunities to provide informal feedback at local board workshops during
April and at two workshops for local board chairs and portfolio holders.
49. The summary
feedback from the chairs and portfolio holders meeting on 20 April was:
· the budget approach and costs associated
with the proposed model are required to be able to make an informed response.
There was also desire for better utilisation of the budget to achieve improved
outcomes. Additionally, it was unclear how the model will deliver more
resources to local boards
· the broker role needs to operate on a
continuum that is tailored to local boards and can deliver across the continuum
from those with contracted out services to communities with less capacity to
take on additional services
· the broker role bests sits in local
board services but the overlap with local board advisor roles needs to be
explored
· the community practice hub services are
valuable but local boards do not want to have to pitch for resources. A bottom
up approach is preferred and the hub should also use resources from other areas
of council and the community. It was also unclear where the expertise exists
to deliver the hub services
· uncertainty over what the Auckland wide
response team will deliver and concern that it will not deliver local board
priorities. Local boards could be supported to work collaboratively on common
issues as community development is delegated to local boards. The community
brokers can collaborate to tackle the systemic issues. Regional issues should
be funded by the governing body and Community and Social Policy can cover these
Auckland wide issues
· the need to respond to diverse and
disempowered communities
· the transition process was unclear and
raised concerns over delivery in coming months.
There were also recurring themes from
early discussions:
· one size does not fit all
· the model needs to focus on delivering
local board priorities, which are the same as the communities’ priorities.
Māori
impact statement
50. The ECA has a
direct relationship with the Māori Responsiveness Framework, which sets
out two key areas of activity; the first being understanding the rights and
interests of Māori. The second, and closely intertwined, is acting on the
needs and aspirations of Māori.
51. To be a High
Performing Organisation a key component is engaging with and enabling
communities, which means considering and understanding Māori needs and
issues and having the capability and capacity to improve process and systems to
enhance involvement. The approach described in this report sets out a shift in
the way the organisation delivers services, which includes improving outcomes
for Māori. The Council Māori Responsiveness Leadership Group has been
established to enable better outcomes with Māori in the areas of cultural,
social, economic effectiveness for Māori and treaty settlements and moving
to a more empowered community way of working will help make progress in all
these areas.
52. There are a
number of initiatives underway which can help inform the Empowered Community
Approach such the Māori Input to Decision Making project in the south of
Auckland. This, and other activities being undertaken in partnership with Mana
Whenau around the environment, provide strong examples of how Māori can be
engaged with and participate to embed the proposed approach to communities.
53. Engagement
with mataawaka and mana whenua is ongoing to enable staff to understand
potential impacts.
54. A
representative from the Independent Māori Statutory Board sits on the PAG.
Implementation
55. The transition
timeline is for work to be done on models and roles from now until the end of
June. From July to December the approach will be implemented to meet local
board needs and in 2016 as the approach matures and evolves it will be extended
across the council family.
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
aView
|
Empowered Communities: Enabling Council
|
183
|
|
b
|
Feedback from PAG meeting 4 May 2015 (Under
Separate Cover)
|
|
Signatories
|
Author
|
Helen Dodd - Strategic Advisor - Local Board Services
|
|
Authoriser
|
Karen Lyons - Manager - Local Board Services
|
|
Orākei
Local Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei Local
Board
07 May 2015
|
|
Libraries Proposed Property Renewals Programme for
2015/2016
File No.: CP2015/06997
Purpose
1. This report seeks approval from the Orākei Local Board for
proposed 2015/16 property renewal capital works for Libraries.
Executive Summary
2. The property renewals programme is an annual capital works
programme. The programme ensures that each Council facility can operate to the
current level of service articulated in the relevant asset management plan.
The Orākei Local
Board proposed property renewals programme for 2015/16 is detailed in this
report as Attachment 1.
In the 2015/16 financial
year, the Orākei Local Board’s budget for each Libraries property renewal
and FF&E programme is $76,000.
A list of all Libraries’
proposed property renewal projects for all Auckland Council Local Boards for
2015/16 is provided for your information as Attachment 2.
|
Recommendation/s
That the Orākei Local
Board:
a) receives
the Orākei Local Board 2015/16 Proposed Property Renewals report
b) approves
the property renewals programme 2015/16 as listed in Attachment 1
c) delegates
responsibility to Valerie Brown, Service Delivery & Logistics Support
Manager, to approve any moderate changes to the budget in the event that
there is a variation to identified costs for its property renewals programme
d) allows for any project surplus to be held as contingency for other
renewals projects included within this report for this board.
|
Comments
3. Community
facilities are an important part of realising the vision of Auckland to become
the world’s most liveable city. They contribute to building strong, healthy,
and vibrant communities by providing spaces where Aucklanders can connect,
socialise, learn, and participate in a wide range of social, cultural, art, and
recreational activities. These activities foster improved lifestyles and a
sense of belonging and pride among residents.
Investment in this
property renewals programme will ensure that Council facilities remain
valuable, well-maintained community assets that continue to meet user
expectations. Not undertaking timely property renewals will have an undesirable
impact on the customer experience and put asset performance at risk, and
ultimately increase the cost to maintain the facility.
The property renewals
programme is a planned and documented process comprising of seven project
management framework phases. These phases are: data collection, feasibility,
initiation, planning, execution & transition, closure, and benefits
realisation. Local Board sign-off is within the third phase (initiation) of the
Property Renewals Programme process.
The property renewals
programme process ensures that the proposed work-lists (Attachment 1) have
received extensive input and assessment from both property and activity
officers.
Consideration
Local
Board views and implications
4. Council
officers are seeking Local Board approval for the proposed Orākei Local
Board property renewals programme for 2015/16. Council officers will report
quarterly to the Local Board, including any reduction in project costs, to
enable a review of budget options.
Māori impact statement
5. The
Orākei Local Board 2015/16 Proposed Property Renewals property renewals
programme will ensure that all facilities continue to be well-maintained
community assets benefiting the local community, including Māori.
Implementation
6. Council
officers have consulted with Local Board representatives and relevant Council
departments in order to formulate both the property renewals process and the
attached lists of proposed renewals. Consultation will continue with all
stakeholders throughout the financial year while this programme is implemented.
This work will be
implemented as part of Council’s Property Department’s usual business practice
and delivered in partnership with Libraries.
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
aView
|
Attachment 1
|
187
|
|
bView
|
Attachment 2
|
189
|
Signatories
|
Author
|
Hannah Alleyne - Principal Special Asset Planning
|
|
Authoriser
|
Kim Taunga - Manager Cust. Experience - South and East
Libraries
|
|
Orākei
Local Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei Local
Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei Local
Board
07 May 2015
|
|
Auckland Transport Quarterly Update to Local Boards
For the quarter - 1 January to 31 March 2015
File No.: CP2015/07326
Executive
summary
1. The purpose of
this report is to inform Boards about progress on activities undertaken by
Auckland Transport in the three months January - March 2015, and the planned
activities anticipated to be undertaken in the three months.
2. Attachments
include:
· A – Auckland Transport activities
· B – Travel-wise Schools activities
· C – Decisions of the Traffic Control Committee
· D – Report against local board advocacy issues
· E – Report on the status of the local board’s projects under the
Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF).
|
Recommendation/s
That the Orākei Local
Board:
a) receives the
Auckland Transport Quarterly Report.
|
Comments
Significant activities
during the period under review
Investment and Development
3. SMART (formerly SWAMMCP)
Investigation
into protecting a rail (rapid transit) corridor from Onehunga to the Auckland
airport then connecting back to the main trunk line at Puhinui forming a rail
loop. NZTA and AT have completed the design work on the Kirkbride Interchange,
which is now future proofed for rail. Also the remaining SH20A corridor has
been re-assessed for rail, taking into account the improvements that NZTA is
proposing. Work is also continuing on updating the business case for the
project.
PT Development
4. Otahuhu Bus Rail Interchange
Detailed
design completion is expected in April/May 2015. Site pre-loading and rail
platform enabling works are now underway. The signal box will be lifted off
the rail platform during Queens Birthday Block of Line. Main works are due to
commence in July 2015 and scheduled for completion in March 2016 (subject to
funding availability). Go-live date for Interchange depends on the South
Public Transport Operating Model Network roll-out; currently scheduled for May
2016.
5. Half Moon Bay Ferry Upgrade
The pontoon
and gangway contract has been awarded for completion of fabrication by the end
of June 2015. Design of the wharf is on-going in readiness for consent
submission to council mid-May 2015.
6. City Rail Link
Enabling Works Package: Phase 1 Early Contractor Iinvolvement
design service contracts 1 and 2 awarded. Construction is scheduled to
commence early 2016.
Main Works: Construction is subject to funding availability in the
new LTP yet to be adopted by Auckland Council (assumed to be 2018).
7. EMU Procurement
AT currently has a total of 51 three-car units in Auckland with 42
of these issued with provisional acceptance. Five six-car services are
operating during Manukau peak times. Non-peak services have been operating
between Britomart and Papakura and driver conversion trains are running out to
Swanson on a regular basis.
PT
Operations
8. Public Transport overall
There has been
another big jump in the numbers using public transport in Auckland. Annual
patronage now exceeds 78 million boardings, an increase of 10%. In March, there
were 8.4 million boardings, a jump of more than 1 million on March 2014.
9. Rail
Improvements
The big performer was
rail which reached 13.4 million passenger trips for the year, an annual
increase of 21%. March saw a monthly record high of 1.56 million train trips,
an increase of 29% on March last year. The growth is put down to the enhanced
travel experience and additional capacity provided by the new electric trains
and greater service frequency introduced over recent years.
Auckland
Transport is aiming to have a full electric network by the end of July, except
for the link between Papakura and Pukekohe which will continue to use diesel
trains. These will be refurbished over time to provide an enhanced
experience. The electric trains will provide improved travel experience and
more capacity on the Southern and Western Lines.
10. Bus Improvements
March was also a
record-breaking month on the Northern Express, with patronage up almost 17% on
the same month last year. The 12 month total reached 2.8 million. It was also
a record for other bus services as patronage rose 8% to 56.6 million. Ferry
numbers for the year totalled 5.4 million trips, up 5% on an annual basis.
Growth on bus services is attributed to
increased services and frequency, improving travel times from new bus priority
lanes and a significant improvement in service punctuality being achieved by
bus operators through new timetables. Further service level increases and
punctuality improvements are planned for later this year along with the
introduction of double decker buses on a number of routes. New network designs
will also be introduced from later this year.
Road Design and Development
11. Te Atatu Road
Improvements
Road Corridor Improvement project on Te Atatu Rd from School
Road/Edmonton Road intersection to SH16. Building consents have now been
obtained. Three contractors been short-listed to submit a tender for the
physical works. Construction is targeted to start in July 2015 with a view
towards completion around January 2017.
12. Albany
Highway
The Albany Highway North Upgrade is a 4km road widening of Albany Highway
between Schnapper Rock Road and Albany Expressway. Construction is
approximately 25% complete. The majority of the site is operating with a 30
km/hr speed limit, which results in a 2-3 minute delay to vehicles. Disruption
to neighbouring land owners due to construction is well managed, with some
positive feedback received regarding the construction team's approach to
resolving issues.
13. Lincoln Road Improvements
The project
involves widening Lincoln Road between Te Pai Place and Motorway Interchange to
accommodate additional transit/bus lanes on both sides. A stakeholders
workshop was conducted in March to discuss the best identified options for
storm water treatment sites. At the same time a meeting was arranged with Parks
and Planning to come-up with best layout for the road access for the properties
between Daytona Reserve and Lincoln Road.
14. Mill Road Improvements
The Redoubt
Road - Mill Road corridor provides an arterial road connection east of State
High 1 between Manukau, Papakura and Drury and includes Murphys Road from
Redoubt Road to Flatbush School Road. The Notice of Requirement has been
notified for the northern section of this project and submissions close in May
2015. AT held public open days in mid-April.
15. Cycle
Initiatives
An information day has been held to share design concepts for the
second stage of the Beach Road walking and cycling project. Stage two will
deliver a streetscape upgrade and continue the cycleway along Beach Road from
the intersection with Mahuhu Crescent through to Britomart Place. Construction
is expected to begin in February and be completed in July.
Services
16. Road Safety
A regional alcohol
#Drunksense #Straightsense campaign was delivered. The programme targeted
males aged 18-25 years. To reach the target audience, a combination of cinema
advertisements, Facebook and social media activities were undertaken.
Localised interventions including promotions of key messages was undertaken at
Auckland Council Movies in the Park, NRL Auckland Nines, Kumeu A&P Show and
Pasifika.
AT delivered a Red
Light Running regional campaign supporting the installation of new red light
cameras and locations in partnership with enforcement support by NZ Police.
17. Safer
Communities and Schools Travelwise programme
Over 120 students from
25 secondary schools attended the regional Travelwise Secondary Schools Summit
on 18 March 2015. The objective of this event was to introduce Travelwise
leaders to the resources and skills they need to ‘get going’ on developing a
successful Travelwise campaign for their school community. Students
participated in an AT Metro public transport challenge, and worked in teams to
develop and present a road safety campaign that they would deliver in their
school.
In March 2015, 414 students
and 77 Travelwise lead teachers attended four area-based Travelwise Primary
student workshops. The workshops were an opportunity for students and teachers
to share ideas and be motivated to further develop road safety activities and
initiatives in their schools.
Since 1 July 2014, 79
new Walking School Buses have been established, exceeding the KPI by 43 new
Walking School Buses.
The following schools
received safety infrastructure over the last quarter to support the schools’
travel plan initiatives:
· Mayfield School
· Koru School
· Favona School
· Otahuhu Intermediate
· Otahuhu Primary School
· St. Josephs School
· Pakuranga College
18. Travel Demand
Auckland Council and AT have jointly developed a business action
plan for the Auckland Council Travel Plan. The travel plan was approved for
implementation by the Executive team at the end of January. The travel plan is
currently in the process of being approved by PSA delegates before it goes out
for staff consultation. Auckland Council also celebrated ‘Go By Bike Day’ with
Cycle Information Sessions at the main centres. The sessions included route
planning advice for cyclists, safety tips and distribution of resources.
19. Walk
2 Work Day
National ‘Walk2Work Day’ was held on Wednesday
11 March. AT supported the day with a regional radio campaign, a dedicated web
page and an online photo competition. On the day, AT organised the ZM Black
Thunder radio station vehicles to engage with people walking near Victoria Park
and on Karangahape Road. AT also worked with Living Streets Aotearoa to engage
with people walking to work or to public transport at Devonport Wharf, and the
Sunnynook and Smales Farm bus stations.
Road Corridor Delivery
20. Overview
The Road Corridor Group is tasked with the responsibility for a wide
range of activities within the Road Corridor. These include but are not
limited to:
· The Delivery of roading and streetlight maintenance and renewal
programmes
· Managing the access, co-ordination and traffic management impacts of
activities taking place within the road corridor
· Promote design innovation and efficiency around how work is carried
out on the network
· The development of long term asset management plans and modelling
which support the decision making process around the management of our roading
assets.
21. January –
March Quarter key highlights
The Road Corridor
Delivery Team have a Year to date (YTD) target to deliver 580.9 km of
resurfacing or pavement and footpath renewals. Sealed roads require periodic
resurfacing to keep the sealed surface waterproof with good skid resistance.
Roads are resurfaced using either an asphalt or chipseal coating. Pavement
rehabilitation is undertaken when the road pavement reaches the end of its
service life and is either too rough, or expensive, to maintain. New
pavements are designed with a life expectancy of 25 years.
As outlined in figure
1, to date AT has delivered 489.5km or 85% of the YTD programme and is on
track to complete the full programme by the end of the financial year in June.
Figure 1:
Actual vs planned lengths (km) for February YTD
|
Renewal
Activity
|
Full Year
Target
(km)
|
Completed length
at end of March
(km)
|
Completion v. Full Year Target
(%)
|
|
Pavements
|
36.4
|
24.3
|
67
|
|
Resurfacing
|
428.2
|
380.6
|
89
|
|
Footpaths
|
116.4
|
84.6
|
73
|
|
Total
|
580.9
|
489.5
|
85
|
The renewal forward
work programme for 2015/2016 will be published at the end of April. This will
identify the planned renewal works for roads, footpaths, structures and public
transport.
The streetlight tender
process for the procurement of five contracts is well underway. These
contracts will commence on 1 July 2015 and coincide with a programme to replace
40,000 x 70w luminaires currently on the network with Light Emitting Diodes.
This is a five-year renewal programme aimed initially at residential streets.
A priority matrix will be developed for other key areas such as town centres.
The use of LEDs not only reduces electricity consumption by 50-60% but also
plays a part in producing a clearer white light which helps in the overall
effort to improve road safety.
To date the management
of the 6,885km footpath network has been subjected to the policies of the
legacy councils and, as a result, has created inconsistencies across the region
in standards and practice. In response a regional footpath renewal strategy is
now being developed. The aim is to achieve a consistent and coherent approach
to the renewal and maintenance of AT’s footpath assets. The approach will also
align with level of service requirements whilst taking into account key factors
such as affordability and value for money for the ratepayers of Auckland.
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
aView
|
Schedule of activities undertaken for the third
quarter (2014/15) ending 31 March 2015
|
197
|
|
bView
|
Travelwise Schools activities broken down by local
board
|
213
|
|
cView
|
Traffic Control Committee Decisions broken down by
local board
|
215
|
|
dView
|
Local Board Advocacy Report
|
217
|
|
eView
|
Local Board Transport Capital Fund Report
|
219
|
Signatories
|
Authors
|
Various Auckland Transport Authors
|
|
Authoriser
|
Jonathan Anyon, Elected Member Relationship Team
Manager
|
|
Orākei
Local Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei Local
Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei Local
Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei Local
Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei Local
Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei
Local Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei
Local Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei
Local Board
07 May 2015
|
|
Auckland Transport Update: May 2015
File No.: CP2015/00896
Purpose
1. The purpose of this report is to update the Board on a range of
transport related issues in Orākei area during
April 2015.
|
Recommendation/s
That the Orākei Local
Board:
a) receives the
May 2015 report from Auckland Transport.
b) approves
that the $100,000 previously allocated from the Transport Fund for
construction of the Wilsons Beach to Shore Road Walkway is changed to $30,000
for detailed design and construction costs.
c) approves
$73,000 to be allocated from the Transport Capital Fund to construct a
turning circle for cars on Waitara Road (Glover Park).
d) approves
that the $20,000 allocated to the Pedestrian Crossing Colouring and Countdown
Clocks – Remuera Road be returned to the Transport Capital Fund for
allocation to other projects.
e) approves
that the remaining funds from the $90,000 allocated to The Landing – Footpath
and Cycleway be returned to the Transport Capital Fund for allocation to
other projects.
f) approves
the allocation of $120,000 from the Transport Capital Fund for detailed
design and construction of planter boxes at the intersection of Benson Road
and Upland Road, outside the Maple Room.
g) declines the
Rough Order of Costs of $510,000 for the Waiatarua Path and Entrance Way from
the Transport Capital Fund.
h) approves
that $248,000 be allocated from the Transport Capital Fund to construct a
footpath around Glover Park from Riddell Road to the Playground at the
entrance of Glover Park.
i) approves
that $60,000 be allocated from the Transport Capital Fund to Auckland Council
Parks to construct a footpath in Glendowie Park from Riddell Road.
j) approves
that $110,000 be allocated from the Transport Capital Fund to construct a
pedestrian refuge on Shore Road at the entrance of the walkway and shared
path around Martyn Wilson Reserve.
k) approves
that $30,000 be allocated from the Transport Capital Fund to investigate,
design and proved a rough order of cost (ROCs) for a
shared path and service lane through Colin Maiden Park.
l) approves
that $10,000 be allocated from the Transport Capital Fund to construct three
additional locations for a moveable speed sign.
|
Monthly
Overview
Orākei Local
Board Transport Capital Fund
2. The Process
for Local Board Transport Capital Fund Projects
The Orākei Local
Board has a large number of projects that will spend the Transport Capital
Fund. The allocation is $549,949 per year. There are a number of potential
projects with significant rough orders of costs (ROCs) that have costs assigned
to them. If all of these potential projects are approved this will spend all of
the Transport Capital Fund until the end of the 16/17 financial year. (Eight months
into the electoral term)
Below is an update on all current projects
and ROC’s:
3. 109 Mission Bay Local Centre Enhancements
Auckland Transport,
Drive Holdings and the Orākei Local Board, have been working together to
complete a streetscape upgrade for Tamaki Drive. This project is scoped to go
from the shops on Patterson Avenue to the driveway beside Barfoot and Thompson
real estate. The proposal is to widen the footpath, by removing the car parks
along that stretch of Tamaki Drive. There will be a new mobility park installed
in Patterson Ave, as a result of removing the existing mobility car park.
Parking on Patterson Ave will remain as it is, with exception of the allocation
of the mobility park. This will require the use of two existing car parks.
The Orākei Local
Board have agreed to contribute $150,000 of the $950,000 total cost of the
project. Currently this project is being tendered for construction with an
estimate completion date of October 2015.
4. 119 Walkway Wilsons
Beach to Shore Road Reserve (Tinana Reserve Walkway)
Previously the Orākei Local Board allocated $100,000 to this
project as a contribution to construction of this walkway. This project is
still in concept stage currently and requires detailed design and cost for
construction. This means that the allocated amount cannot be spent for the
construction before the end of June 2016.
Auckland Transport has spoken to Auckland Council Parks and
Auckland Transport proposes $30,000 of the current allocation be given to
Auckland Council Parks to develop a detailed design for the walkway, also to
provide a cost for construction for the Orākei Local Board to approve. It
is expected that given time required completing a detailed design it is
unlikely that this project will be ready for construction in this electoral
term. Auckland Transport propose that if the Orākei Local Board wish to use
an allocation of Transport Capital Fund for construction of this project that
it be applied for in the 16/19 electoral term.
Auckland Transport then proposes that the Orākei Local Board
allocate $30,000 from the Transport Capital Fund to enable Auckland Council
Parks to develop a detailed design and construction cost for this walkway and
return the remaining $70,000 to the Transport Capital fund for allocation to
other projects.
5. Remuera Upgrade Projects
(REVup)
6. 284 Remuera Road Footpath Enhancement (entrance to the
Village Green)
This project began on the 23rd March and has been completed.
7. 215 Clonbern Service Lane
Improvements
This project began on the 7th April,
there has been work included in this project to allow the fence panels to be free
standing from the retaining wall of the car park. The new seal has been laid
and there needs to be a 6 week waiting time before we can overlay the colour
markings. The completion date of this project is expected to be June 2015.
There is currently underspend on this project, due to the need to lay the
foundations for the fence. Any savings will be reported to the board in June.
8. 285 Clonbern Service Lane
Fencing
There have been small design changes to
ensure that these panels can be freestanding, previously these were intended to
be anchored in the retaining wall of the car park. The fences have been ordered
and are currently being constructed offsite. They will be installed before the
marking of the service lane.
9. 293 Pedestrian Crossing
Colouring and Countdown Clocks – Remuera Road
This intersection is the only
intersection proposed for the LED trial that has not had any alterations made
to it. It is vital to the integrity of the NZTA/AT trial that this intersection
does not have any changes made to it until the trial is complete. That includes
changing the timing of the phases, adding countdown clocks or making physical
changes to this intersection. An outcome of this trial is to drive changes
nationally, for the treatment of intersections with significant pedestrian
interaction.
Auckland Transport is aware of the
Remuera Business Association and the Orākei Local Board’s requirement to
improve the pedestrian amenity of this intersection.
In previous reports, it was mentioned
that this project is likely to be delayed until the end of 2015, however given
the aspirations of the local board. Auckland Transport is fast tracking this
project and hope to be able to have the project implemented by the end of June
2015. However, the trial requires a full year of data be collected to
accurately understand the trends and patterns.
It is proposed that as this trial will
ensure that the funds allocated to these projects will not be able to be spent
in this electoral term, that they are returned to the Transport Capital fund.
Following the trial if the Orākei Local Board wishes to pursue this
project it could be considered in the next electoral term.
10. 386 Remuera Footpath Widening
The ROC for this project includes planter
boxes on Remuera Road and Victoria Ave, the cost is estimated to be $250,000 as
the camber of the road will need to be changed to ensure there are no flooding
issues. This proposal was presented to the REVup working group in March.
As stated above, this project would be
unable to be delivered until the LED trail is completed at the earliest June
2016. It is therefore proposed that this project be deferred until the next
electoral term.
11. 226 Waitara Road (Glover Park) Turning Bay
Auckland Transport was asked to provide a ROC for a turning circle
at the end of Waitara Road, at the top of Glover Park. This initial request was
to enable a bus to turn around. Auckland Transport engineers have investigated
this request and determined that there is insufficient space for buses to turn
in this location; however, there is a possibility of improving facilities for
cars to turn.
The ROC to implement this project is $73,000.
12. 227 Summerhill Place Footpath
This project is
due for completion in May.
13. 295 The Landing - Footpath and Cycleway
The Orākei Local Board requested that funding be allocated to
improve the entrance to the Landing, including for pedestrians and cyclists.
The entrance to The Landing is a driveway and legally there is a
requirement that pedestrians and cyclists are given priority over vehicles at
this type of crossing point. The designs that were presented to Auckland
Transport for approval (previously approved by The Landing Stakeholder Group)
gave clear priority, through design, to vehicles. For legal reasons Auckland
Transport were unable to approve these designs but helped Auckland Council
Parks to develop a design that gave priority to pedestrians and cyclists by
clearly demarking this area as a driveway. This included removing the existing
splitter island, as this no longer aligns with Auckland Transports walking and
cycling strategy.
A solution to this issue is for this entrance to the landing to
become a road, rather than a driveway. This would allow a design that provides
for priority to vehicles and allow some of the previously approved design
features to be reconsidered.
It is understood there is a stakeholder meeting to be held early in
May. Without pre-empting the decision of this group, Auckland Transport
proposes that this project, as it currently stands, not be funded from the
Transport Capital Fund and that further options for the entrance be considered
by the Orākei Local Board and Landing stakeholder group and, if funding is
available a proposal be put to the fund at a later date.
14. 296 Orākei and Meadowbank Stations – Secure Cycle Parking
Meadowbank has had the cycle stands replaced with new stands at the
train station. At the Orākei Train station, Auckland Transport is waiting
for a design to be approved following recent trials before constructing this bike
shelter. This is expected to be completed by the end of the calendar year.
15. 297 Benson Road Upland Road Footpath Enhancement
The project outside Benson Road Deli was completed in March 2015. It
was so successful that the Orākei Local Board have asked Auckland
Transport to design a similar project for the current orange brick planters on
the opposite side of the road. This project requires liaison with Auckland
Council Parks as trees must remain in this area. A ROC has been completed for
the Maple Room Side, of Benson Road and Upland Road and it is $120,000 for
bluestone planter boxes and tree pits, to ensure resource consent is approved
by Auckland Council Parks.
16. 338 Stonefields Additional Car parking
The Orākei Local Board were presented with a ROC for the
implementation of additional car parks in Stonefields. The cost was $8,000 to establish the site then
$10,000 per car park. Creating a parking bay requires new kerb and channel work
and aligning this to the service connections so they don’t flood.
This cost was higher than the Orākei
Local Board expected and have asked Auckland Transport
to meet with the Stonefields Residents Association (SRA) again to provide
possible solutions that do not require new parking facilities.
Auckland Transport at the request of the Orākei
Local Board has implemented a feeder bus service to the
Glen Innes Train station. This trial began in February 2015, currently there is
an average of 2 people per trip on this service, and however there are signs of
improvement with 10 people currently catching the 7:40am bus to meet the 8am
train.
It is proposed that this project be removed from the list of
Transport Capital Fund projects and if following discussions with SRA parking
bays are required then a new proposal be brought to the Orākei Local Board.
17. 339 Remuera Railway Station Signal Box Secure Bicycle Parking
This project is
in detailed design and will be completed by June 2015.
18. 341 Abbotts Way Footpath Safety
This project sits on the border between Orākei and Maungakiekie-Tamaki
Local Boards. The MP for this area, Simon O’Connor, has requested this project
be a priority, as the residents of Edmund Hillary Village feel unsafe walking
to Lunn Ave. A ROC of $50,000 was presented at the April Meeting, with a
suggestion that a contribution from Maungakiekie-Tamaki be requested. This
request was made, however this is not a priority for this Boards Transport
Capital Fund at this time. It should however be noted that in the past the
Maungakiekie-Tamaki Local Board made a significant contribution to the upgrade
of the walkway from Felton Matthew Ave to the Glen Innes Train Station, which
is in the Orākei Local Board area.
The proposal is that the initial ROC of $50,000 that was approved in
April stand and that construction of this project begin before the end of June
2015.
19. 382 Liston Park Walkway/Cycleway
This project is waiting for Auckland City Parks to sign a funding
agreement; this will enable Auckland Transport to establish the funding codes
to begin the works.
20. 387 Waiatarua Reserve Pathways and Entrance Upgrade
The ROC for this project is $510,000, this is broken down into
$100,000 for the pedestrian refuges and entrance way and $410,000 for the
pathway. However, the entrance way on its own would not qualify as a project
under the Transport Capital fund.
If the Orākei Local Board agree to progress this project as it
currently stands then this would prevent other projects being completed.
The Orākei Local Board has asked if a treatment other than
concrete can be used for the path. At this point there is no other option;
however, the walking and cycling team are investigating other surface
treatments for cycle paths around New Zealand and Overseas.
It is proposed that this project be removed from this list and be reviewed
in the next electoral term, when there is a possibility that products other
than concrete might be able to be used on this path.
21. 388 Michaels Ave Shared Path
This
project is waiting for Auckland Council Parks to sign a funding agreement and the
design will be included in the wider Michaels Ave Park plan.
22. 389 Churchill Park – Eversham Entrance Sealing
This project is waiting for Auckland Council Parks to sign a funding
agreement; this will enable Auckland Transport to establish the funding codes
to begin the works.
23. 390 Churchill Park Access Road Lighting
This project is waiting for Auckland Council Parks to sign a funding
agreement; this will enable Auckland Transport to establish the funding codes
to begin the works.
24. 392 Glover Road Footpath
The Orākei Local Board requested a ROC to construct a new
footpath around Glover Park, following Glover Road from Riddell Road to the
playground at the entrance to Glover Park. The cost to deliver this project is
$248,000.
This project could be completed within the allocation of this term’s
Transport Capital Fund. It is proposed that this project be approved for
detailed design and construction.
25. 393 Glendowie Park Footpath Widening
The ROC for delivering a footpath in Glendowie Park is $60,000; this
will take the path from Riddell Road and connect to an existing path within the
park. This project will be managed by Auckland Council Parks, with a funding
agreement in place from Auckland Transport.
26. 394 Martyn Wilson Shared Path and Pedestrian Refuge
This project ROC is $110,000 to put a pedestrian refuge on Shore
Road, where the new walkway comes out and then create a new path through the
park to join the existing path that joins Orākei Road.
Auckland Transport and Auckland Council Parks will deliver this
project jointly.
27. 419 Colin Maiden Park Shared Path and Service Lane
As part of the master plan for Colin Maiden Park, there is a desire
from the Orākei Local Board to have a connection through the park linking
College Road to Merton Road. It is proposed that $30,000 be allocated from the
Transport Capital Fund to investigate and design this connection and provide a
ROC to the Orākei Local Board for further decisions.
28. 417 Moveable Speed Indicator Signs
In the April 2015 meeting the Orākei Local Board approved
$10,000 for a fixed speed indicator sign on Omahu Road, as this had been very
successful as a moveable speed sign. This ROC of $10,000 is for an additional
moveable sign for 3 new locations in Orākei. It is proposed that the
locations be agreed outside the meeting by the Chair and TPL.
Implementation
Issues
|
AT Ref #
|
TPL Ref #
|
Issue
|
Discussion
|
Action
|
|
AT2012/007954
|
9.8
|
Suggestions for
new Pedestrian Crossing layouts in Ellerslie Town Centre
|
Auckland Council
Urban Design staff has suggested options for improving pedestrian crossings
in this town Centre.
|
June 2014, The
road safety team is currently reviewing the implementation of pedestrian
crossings suggested by the operations team.
August 2014,
there is no update at this point.
Feb 2015,
Auckland Transport is waiting on the Ellerslie Residents association to
provide feedback on their priority for this project.
|
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
Stonefields
Parking
|
It has been
reported that the high density housing units that are currently being built
only have one car park for each three bedroom unit and there are no parking
bays on the streets.
Many of the new
units are used as rental
properties and
have multiple vehicles at each residence.
This is
resulting in the streets having cars parked down both sides, some partly on
the berms and reducing the road width (at times) to one lane only.
|
This issue was
discussed at the May 2013, Orākei Local Board Meeting.
Auckland
Transport was asked to comment on a memo from Auckland Council.
Auckland
Transport has provided comment and has asked for this matter to be removed
from the ‘Issues Register’.
At the July
2013 Orākei Local Board meeting members requested that this item remain
on the register.
A meeting with
Auckland Transport and the Stonefields Residents association was held on 26
March 2014.
In June 2014,
the board approved a resolution for a ROC to install additional parking bays
as part of their Transport Capital Fund.
November 2014,
apologies that this has not been completed; this will be available for the
December meeting.
December 2015
Proposal is provided in the body of the report for the boards consideration.
Feb 2015, no
agreement has been reached and it has been referred back to the residents
association for farther comment.
March 2015,
The Orākei
Local Board transport lead has asked the Stonefields residents to speak to
the developers regarding additional car parks.
5/15 OLB
requests that AT meet with the SRA to assist in resolving issues for
residents of Stonefields.
|
|
N/A
|
|
Support
Orākei Local Board urban design initiatives
|
Auckland
Transport has been requested to work with Auckland Council’s Urban Design
Team on the following issues:
1. Creating a boulevard
effect by planting further oak trees on the north side of Remuera Rd around
the Victoria Ave shops; and
2. Issues relating to the
Village Green project in respect of aspects where Auckland Transport has a
role.
|
Auckland
Transport continues to work with Auckland Council to support development of
the Village Green plan on an as required basis. There is no intention for AT
to undertake further involvement than as a support and advocate for the Board
to deliver these projects.
Feb 2015, the
first project will begin on 23 March and it will be the entrance to the
village green from Remuera Road.
|
Notes: N/A – A Customer Service Reference Number is
not applicable to this item because either it was handled directly by the EMRM
or it is a legacy issue or the request was for information that was outside the
boundaries of a service request.
Attachments
There are no attachments for this report.
Signatories
|
Author
|
Melanie Dale, Elected Member
Relationship Manager, Auckland Transport
|
|
Authoriser
|
Jonathan Anyon, Elected Member
Relationship Team Manager, Auckland Transport
|
|
Orākei
Local Board
07 May 2015
|
|
Business Association Support Fund Allocation -
Ellerslie Business Association
File No.:
CP2015/07261
Purpose
1. This
report provides the Orākei Local Board with the Ellerslie Business
Association application form received in April 2015 for the Business
Association Support Fund.
Executive
Summary
2. The
Orākei Local Board is committed to assisting groups to provide activities,
projects, programmes, initiatives and events that make a positive contribution
within the Board area. This includes supporting Business Improvement Districts
(BIDs) and other business associations with funding on application to the
Board, for activities that support economic development in their communities.
3. This report recommends that the Orākei Local Board allocates $7,250
towards the ARTerslie 2014 project from its 2014/2015 Business Association
Support Fund.
|
Recommendation/s
That the Orākei Local Board:
a)
receives the Ellerslie Business Association
Business Association Support Fund application and approves $7,250 from its
2014/2015 Business Association Support Fund to the Ellerslie Business
Association for the ARTerslie 2014 project.
b)
notes that there is $5.30 remaining in the
2014/2015 Business Association Support Fund for future Ellerslie Business
Association applications.
|
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
aView
|
Ellerslie Business Association
Application for Business Association Support Fund
|
233
|
Signatories
|
Author
|
Kim Lawgun - Democracy Advisor
|
|
Authoriser
|
Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden &
Orākei Local Boards
|
|
Orākei
Local Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei Local
Board
07 May 2015
|
|
Business Association Support Fund Allocation - Remuera
Business Association
File No.:
CP2015/07259
Purpose
1. This
report provides the Orākei Local Board with the Remuera Business
Association application form received in April 2015 for the Business
Association Support Fund.
Executive
Summary
2. The
Orākei Local Board is committed to assisting groups to provide activities,
projects, programmes, initiatives and events that make a positive contribution
within the Board area. This includes supporting Business Improvement Districts
(BIDs) and other business associations with funding on application to the
Board, for activities that support economic development in their communities.
3. This report
recommends that the Orākei Local Board allocates $10,000.00 towards the
Bastille Day Street Festival from its 2014/2015 Business Associations Support
Fund.
|
Recommendation/s
That the Orākei Local Board:
a) receives
the Remuera Business Association Business Association Support Fund
application and approves $10,000.00 from its 2014/2015 Business Association
Support Fund to the Remuera Business Association for the Bastille Day Street
Festival.
b) notes
there are nil funds remaining in the 2014/2015
Business Association Support Fund for future Remuera Business Association
applications.
|
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
aView
|
Remuera Business Association
Application for the Business Assocation Support Fund
|
249
|
Signatories
|
Author
|
Kim Lawgun - Democracy Advisor
|
|
Authoriser
|
Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden &
Orākei Local Boards
|
|
Orākei
Local Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei Local
Board
07 May 2015
|
|
Urgent Decision - ANZAC Day event budget
File No.:
CP2015/06480
Purpose
1. To inform the Orākei Local Board that an urgent decision was
made and approved by the Chair and Deputy Chair of the Orākei Local Board
to allocate the 2014/2015 ANZAC operational expenditure budget.
|
Recommendation/s
That the Orākei Local Board:
2. notes the urgent decision on the 2014/2015 ANZAC operational
expenditure budget..
|
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
aView
|
Urgent Decision
|
255
|
|
bView
|
College Rifles application
|
257
|
Signatories
|
Author
|
Kim Lawgun - Democracy Advisor
|
|
Authoriser
|
Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden &
Orākei Local Boards
|
|
Orākei
Local Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei Local
Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei Local
Board
07 May 2015
|
|
Chairperson's Report
File No.: CP2015/00909
Purpose
1. To provide the Chairperson with
an opportunity to update the Orākei Local Board on projects and issues
they have been involved with since the last meeting.
|
Recommendation/s
a)
That the Chairperson’s report to the Orakei Local Board be received.
|
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
aView
|
Chairperson's Report - May 2015
|
263
|
Signatories
|
Author
|
Kim Lawgun - Democracy Advisor
|
|
Authoriser
|
Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden &
Orākei Local Boards
|
|
Orākei
Local Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei Local
Board
07 May 2015
|
|
Board Member Reports
File No.: CP2015/00919
Purpose
1. To provide Board Members the
opportunity to update the Orākei Local Board on projects and issues they
have been involved with since the last meeting.
|
Recommendation/s
a) That the Orākei
Local Board Member reports be received.
|
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
aView
|
Board Member Churton - May 2015
|
289
|
|
bView
|
Board Member Cooke - May 2015
|
291
|
|
cView
|
Board Member Davis - May 2015
|
293
|
|
dView
|
Board Member Parkinson - May 2015
|
298
|
|
eView
|
Board Member Thomas - May 2015
|
299
|
Signatories
|
Author
|
Kim Lawgun - Democracy Advisor
|
|
Authoriser
|
Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden &
Orākei Local Boards
|
|
Orākei
Local Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei Local
Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei Local
Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei Local
Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei
Local Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei Local
Board
07 May 2015
|
|
Resolutions Pending Action
File No.: CP2015/04691
Purpose
1. To provide the Orākei Local
Board with an opportunity to track reports that have been requested from
officers.
|
Recommendation/s
a) That the Orākei Local Board
resolutions pending action report be received.
|
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
aView
|
Resolutions Pending Action
|
305
|
Signatories
|
Author
|
Kim Lawgun - Democracy Advisor
|
|
Authoriser
|
Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden &
Orākei Local Boards
|
|
Orākei
Local Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei
Local Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei
Local Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei
Local Board
07 May 2015
|
|
Local Board Workshop Record of Proceedings
File No.: CP2015/00933
Purpose
1. To provide the Board with the
record of proceedings for the Orākei local Board workshops held on 26
March 2015, 16 April 2015 and 23 April 2015.
|
Recommendation/s
a) That the record of proceedings
for the Orākei Local Board workshops held on 26 March 2015, 16 April
2015 and 23 April 2015 be received.
|
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
aView
|
Workshop Proceedings 26 March 2015
|
311
|
|
bView
|
Workshop Proceedings 16 April 2015
|
313
|
|
cView
|
Workshop Proceedings 23 April 2015
|
315
|
Signatories
|
Author
|
Kim Lawgun - Democracy Advisor
|
|
Authoriser
|
Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden &
Orākei Local Boards
|
|
Orākei
Local Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei Local
Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei Local
Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei Local
Board
07 May 2015
|
|
Orākei Local Board Achievements Register
File No.: CP2015/00804
Purpose
1. To track the achievements of the
Orākei Local Board during 2013/2016 political term.
|
Recommendation/s
a) That the Orākei Local
Board achievements register be noted.
|
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
aView
|
Orākei Local Board Achievements Register
|
319
|
Signatories
|
Author
|
Kim Lawgun - Democracy Advisor
|
|
Authoriser
|
Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden &
Orākei Local Boards
|
|
Orākei
Local Board
07 May 2015
|
|
|
Orākei
Local Board
07 May 2015
|
|
