Agenda of Puketāpapa Local Board

Puketāpapa Local Board

28 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 Albert-Eden-Roskill Governing Body Members Update 7

13 Chairperson's Report, May 2015 9

14 Board Member Reports, May 2015 27

15 CDAC Capex Renewals 15/16 Work Programme 31

16 Puketapapa Local Board Performance Report 9 months ending 31 March 2015 33

17 Project P.E.T.E.R. Completed Business Plan 35

18 Project P.E.T.E.R Strategy Team meeting notes 75

19 Youth Advisory Panel - election of new representatives 79

20 Puketāpapa Christmas Events 2015 89

21 Alcohol Ban Review 2015 Proposal 97

22 Auckland Transport Report for May 2015 123

23 Auckland Transport Quarterly Update to Local Boards
For the quarter - 1 January to 31 March 2015 137

24 Manukau Harbour Forum Work Programme for 2015/2016 163

25 District Licensing Committee structure review: Puketāpapa Local Board feedback 187

26 Three Kings Proposed Land Exchange – Consultation, Reports and Issues 197

27 Developing the Empowered Communities Approach - Next Steps 359

28 Urgent Decisions by the Puketāpapa Local Board 371

29 Record of Puketāpapa Local Board Workshop Proceedings 375

30 Resolutions Pending Action Schedule, April 2015 381

31 Consideration of Extraordinary Items

1 Welcome

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 Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Thursday, 30 April 2015, including the confidential section, 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 Puketāpapa 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 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.

Puketāpapa Local Board

28 May 2015

CDAC Capex Renewals 15/16 Work Programme

File No.: CP2015/06785

Purpose

1. To gain the Puketāpapa Local Board support for the proposed 2015/2016 CDAC Capex renewals program.

Executive Summary

2. Community Facilities has undertaken strategic asset management planning (SAMP) to identify the asset management funding requirements across the whole Community Facilities portfolio. Assessment was based upon the value of the asset and the reasonable asset management costs that would be associated with an asset of this size across the lifespan of this facility.

3. The SAMP process gave a better indication of the level of budgets required down to a facility level and as a result there has been a redistribution of renewals budget at a local board level to better reflect these requirements. This redistribution means that there is better consistency in levels of funding across Local Boards.

4. On 4 March 2015, the draft Community Development Arts and Culture (CDAC) FY16 Capex renewal program was discussed in a workshop with the Board. The Board identified several other projects that it wanted considered and after following these up a program has been identified.

5. The CDAC renewal budget available is $416,640 and projects totaling $305,000 have been identified for endorsement.

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) receive the report.

b) endorse the 2015/2016 Community Development Arts and Culture Capex Renewal Programme.

c) delegate authority to the Local Board Chair to agree changes in scope and budget through the year as required in order that the programme can be implemented without delay.

Comments

6. On 4 March 2015 the draft Community Development Arts and Culture (CDAC) FY16 Capex renewal program was discussed in a workshop with the Board. In conjunction to the fire system upgrade and work to install flashings at the Wesley Community Centre roof, the Board identified several projects that it wanted to progress including;

· Installation of external doors from the Freyberg Room to the new patio area at the Mt Roskill War Memorial Hall

· Possible work to the floor at the Mt Roskill War Memorial Hall

· Upgrading the Wesley Community Centre reception area

· Alterations to the Three Kings Pumphouse

· Signage and heating at Three Kings Tennis.

· Removing external wiring on the Three Kings Pumphouse

7. These projects have been scoped by Property and the following program is now proposed for the Puketapapa Local Board consideration. The CDAC renewal budget available is $416,640.

Facility	Project	Cost
	Fire safety upgrade	$100,000
Wesley Community Centre	Parapet walls flashing	$38,000
Wesley Community Centre	Reception area upgrade	$35,000
Mt Roskill War Memorial Hall	External doors from Freyberg Room	$12,000
Mt Roskill War Memorial Hall	Flooring upgrade	$25,000
Three Kings Pumphouse	Upgrading band room kitchen, storage and outside seating. Removing external wiring	$85,000
Three Kings Tennis	Signage and heating upgrade	$10,000
Total		$305,000

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

8. This report is seeking Local Board input into the CDAC YR16 Capex renewal program

Māori impact statement

9. The matters being considered have no impact on Maori.

Implementation

10. Agreement of this renewal program will enable its successful delivery in 2015/2016.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Peter Loud - Snr Community Facilities Advisor (CAPEX)

Authorisers

Graham Bodman - Manager - Community Development, Arts and Culture

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

28 May 2015

Project P.E.T.E.R. Completed Business Plan

File No.: CP2014/26245

Purpose

1. This report presents the Project PETER business plan (‘Project PETER 2015-2016 Strategic Directive’) to the local board.

Executive summary

2. The Puketāpapa Local Board allocated $10,000 from the 2013/2014 budget to provide support to the Project PETER project team. This money funded the development of a business plan, entitled the ‘Project PETER Strategic Directive’. The plan is included with this report as Attachment A.

3. The document has been developed by community development staff with the advice from an external contractor from Change Innovation Agency.

4. The Project PETER team have established a new strategy team for the initiative. The strategy team invite the local board to nominate a board member to sit on their group.

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) receive the Project Peter Business Plan (2015-2016 Strategic Directive)

b) appoint a local board member to sit on the Project PETER strategy team.

Comments

Background

5. Project PETER was conceived in 2011 by the education and employment working group within the Roskill Community Network (RCN). (The project includes the Wesley Intermediate School, Migrant Action Trust, Wesley Community Centre and Roskill Youth Zone properties.) The RCN identified the need to create a collective community approach to increase local educational, training and work-readiness programmes that lead to meaningful employment. One of the key needs of local organisations is access to facilities.

6. In September 2014, two new groups were established:

· a steering group with strategic thinking and decision making authority

· an advisory group with practitioner expertise.

7. The two groups met fortnightly over a three month period to co-design the initiative. In December 2014, the two groups combined for one full day ‘visioning workshop’. These two groups were established for a set time of three months and were dis-established following the final workshop.

Collective Impact

8. Participating groups have adopted a Collective Impact approach to the structure and delivery of Project PETER. Collective Impact is a new way of working in Aotearoa New Zealand, yet a well adopted and successful approach used in other countries, particularly in the areas of education, health & well-being and community development.

9. Under the Collective Impact model, a group of people from different sectors commit to a common agenda for solving a specific social problem, using a structured form of collaboration. The approach of collective impact is placed in contrast to “isolated impact,” where organisations primarily work alone to solve social problems.

10. The five key characteristics for collective impact are described by the Stanford Social Innovation Review as:

· Common agenda: All participating organisations (government agencies, non-profits, community members, etc.) have a shared vision for social change that includes a common understanding of the problem and a joint approach to solving the problem through agreed upon actions

· Shared measurement system: Agreement on the ways success will be measured and reported with a short list of key indicators across all participating organizations

· Mutually reinforcing activities: Engagement of a diverse set of stakeholders, typically across sectors, coordinating a set of differentiated activities through a mutually reinforcing plan of action

· Continuous communication: Frequent communications over a long period of time among key players within and across organizations, to build trust and inform ongoing learning and adaptation of strategy

· Backbone organisation: Ongoing support provided by an independent staff dedicated to the initiative. The backbone staff tends to play six roles to move the initiative forward: Guide Vision and Strategy; Support Aligned Activity; Establish Shared Measurement Practices; Build Public Will; Advance Policy; and Mobilize Funding.

11. COMET are experienced in the Collective Impact model and provide strong research and data analysis in the areas of education and employment across Auckland. Developing a meaningful working partnership between Comet Auckland and Project PETER is now underway.

The Strategic Directive

12. The attached Strategic Directive document sets the strategic direction for Project PETER. The steering group and the advisory group met for three months to develop the thinking and direction for the project, facilitated by CDAC staff.

13. The document provides :

· background and context for the project’s location within Puketāpapa

· outlines how the project has developed

· explains the Collective Impact approach

· states the current structure and

· outlines the strategy for the next 20 months.

14. The Strategic Directive also includes photos and stories from local residents and quotes from participating partners. The Strategic Directive has three keys points of focus over the next year:

· approach: creating the conditions for change, increasing our public capital through community development practice. This will involve a broad range of activities from social gatherings, to organised spaces to interaction, and leadership development activities.

· structure: what Collective Impact looks like for us. Who’s involved, why they’re involved, and how we will work together.

· strategy: Understanding experiences of real change and creating pathways for others to get there. This will involve developing activities in education, training and employment that lead to meaningful employment for the people of Puketāpapa.

The year ahead

15. The new Project PETER strategy team first met on Monday 2 March 2015. Initially the strategy team will meet monthly, adapting the meeting times as necessary as the project develops.

16. The strategy team will assume the governance role of the Project PETER initiative. The team will remain small (currently 5 members), allowing it to respond to the changing needs of the communities that the initiative aims to serve.

17. Up to four new working groups will be established by the end of May 2015, as decided by the strategy team, who will focus in on developing and activating specific areas of interest.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

18. Discussions regarding the delivery of this service have progressed via the youth and the community development portfolio holders.

19. A memo was sent to the local board on 28 November 2014 updating them on the progress of the business plan.

20. A workshop was held with the local board on 4 February 2015 to present the ideas and approach being adopted for the initiative.

21. Bi-monthly workshops with the local board have been established to provide regular updates to, and gain regular feedback from local board members. These workshops began on 8 April 2015.

22. Notes or minutes from the monthly strategy team meetings will be presented to the local board at the following business meeting.

Māori impact statement

23. Project PETER has been designed with Maori in mind as one of the key participant groups, but more importantly as the Tangata Whenua of Tamakimakaurau who carry a holistic view towards education and overall wellbeing.

24. The design process was facilitated by Maori and using Te Whare Tapawha, the human development model created by Professor Sir Mason Durie.

25. Direct and indirect (via RCN, Te Auaunga Awa, Native Tree Nursery) conversations have been held regarding Project PETER with Maori stakeholders such as UNITEC Marae, Family Works Northern and their Social Worker in Schools (SWIS) staff member within Te Kura Kaupapa Maori o Nga Maungarongo, and also Te Roopu Kaumatua-Kuia o Owairaka ki Tamaki.

Implementation

26. Staff will continue to work with Project PETER participants to implement their strategic direction, as set out in Attachment A.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Project PETER 2015-16 Strategic Directives	39

Signatories

Authors

Manawa Udy - Community Development Facilitator (Central)

Richard Butler - Community Development Manager

Authorisers

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Graham Bodman - Manager - Community Development, Arts and Culture

Puketāpapa Local Board

28 May 2015

Youth Advisory Panel - election of new representatives

File No.: CP2015/06651

Purpose

1. This report outlines the selection process being used to elect a new Puketāpapa representative to the Youth Advisory Panel.

Executive Summary

2. In December of 2012, Mosa Mafile’o was elected as the Puketāpapa Youth Advisory Panel representative. Mosa’s term will conclude in July 2015 and an election is required to find the next representative. This report provides information on the selection process for the Youth Advisory Panel vacancy in Puketāpapa.

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) receive the report.

b) note the selection process for the Puketāpapa Youth Advisory Panel representative.

Comments

3. Mosa Mafile’o is the current Youth Advisory Panel representative for Puketāpapa. Mosa’s term will conclude in July 2015, at which time another representative must be elected.

4. The Youth Advisory Panel was established by council’s Regional Development and Operations Committee RDOC in April 2012. The panel’s role is to:

· identify and communicate to council the interests and preferences of the youth of Auckland in relation to the content of the strategies, policies, plans, and bylaws of the council, especially the economic development strategy; and any matter that the panel considers to be of particular interest or concern to the youth of Auckland

· advise the Mayor and the council’s governing body and local boards, in relation to council’s processes and mechanisms for engagement with the youth in Auckland, and

· consider any regional issues raised by the local youth bodies.

· Young people in all regional and local youth participation bodies are to be selected by young people, rather than by staff or elected representatives. This reflects both established best practice for youth participation and the wishes of young people (RDOC/2012/71).

5. Staff have set out guidelines and processes surrounding Auckland’s Youth Panels (Attachment A). Under these guidelines, any person meeting the following requirements may be nominated and stand as a youth advisory panel member:

· is aged 12-24 years

· lives in the local board area to which they are elected as a youth panel member.

6. The following principles apply to the selection of a new local representative for the Youth Advisory Panel:

· be flexible to evolve and fit the local context

· take into account the barriers which may prevent young people from participating, i.e. access to computers, transportation, language use, formality of process

· work with local community partners to ensure wide and diverse participation

· ensure young people are involved in the selection/election of the young person who will be representing them

· use marketing and language that is inclusive, words like ‘leadership’ and ‘youth council’ have connotations for young people that create barriers to engagement

· prioritise participation of rangatahi Maori, and groups of young people not usually engaged

· young people’s participation is by choice.

7. With regard to voting on the new representative, the guidelines also state that young people are eligible to vote if they are aged between 12-24 years and live in the local board area.

8. Community Development staff will undertake the selection process for the new Puketāpapa Youth Advisory Panel representative, with advice from the Puketāpapa Youth Caucus and learnings from other Youth Advisory Panel elections held across the region. Staff will follow the process set out in Table One below, taken from the attached selection guidelines (Attachment A).

Table One: Process for running an election night or series of election events with possible changes resulting from Youth Caucus and/or Youth Development portfolio holder recommendations:

Process step

Ensure admin support is available

Agree on the selection model

Communicate as early as possible with schools, youth organisations, community organisations – a letter of encouragement from the Local Board Chairperson always helps. Distribute posters and voting packs etc.

Establish a named contact at schools, youth organisations, community organisation

Call for nominations and check eligibility

Deliver briefing session with candidates on the process, as advised by the Youth Caucus and role of Youth Advisory Panel

Organise officials to issue ballot papers and scrutinize votes

Print ballot papers and arrange ballot boxes

Hold election event/s in a youth friendly and accessible venue

Appoint officials to count votes

Tally votes

Congratulate all candidates and announce that the winning candidate’s appointment will be subject to approval by Mayors Office

Ask winning candidate to complete consent forms and a paragraph biography describing the young person, their age, occupation and community involvement

Await confirmation of appointment

Once appointment confirmed, announce results publicly

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

9. The local board has been informed of the need to elect a new Youth Advisory Panel representative, and the process for doing so, through regular conversations with the Youth Development Portfolio holder.

Māori impact statement

10. Maori units in local high schools, sports and youth collectives form the basis for the Maori engagement in this selection process.

Implementation

11. Staff will administer the selection of a new Puketāpapa Youth Advisory Panel member, following the process outlined in this report.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Running a youth selection process for the Youth Advisory Panel	83

Signatories

Authors

Carminia Adona - PA/Business Coordinator

Roger Earp - Senior Facilitator

Authorisers

Graham Bodman - Manager - Community Development, Arts and Culture

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

28 May 2015

Puketāpapa Christmas Events 2015

File No.: CP2015/05984

Purpose

1. This report outlines current local board-supported Christmas events in Puketapapa, and proposes action to develop an event that better serves the Puketapapa community.

Executive Summary

2. Staff have reviewed the two existing Christmas events (Carols by Candlelight and the Santa Parade) funded by the Puketapapa Local Board and considered options for improvements or changes which could be made to the events.

3. Attendance at the events has not been significantly increasing. The nature of Puketapapa residents has changed and legacy events need to be revitalised, but not lost.

4. Staff propose scoping one event featuring the Carols by Candlelight and elements of the Santa Parade as well as new, more inclusive elements to increase attendance and better meet local community needs.

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) receive the report.

b) endorse scoping of a new Christmas event.

omments

5. Currently the Puketapapa Local Board supports two Christmas events in the local area:

· Carols by Candlelight

· Puketapapa Santa Parade

6. These two events have been surveyed this year and both received overall satisfaction scores well below the target of 85%, Puketapapa Santa Parade at 42% and Carols by Candlelight at 63%. This shows a need to consider the design of these events as it is evident they are not meeting community expectations. Copies of the survey summary reports are attached.

7. Event staff have had discussions with the local board event portfolio members regarding the 2014 Christmas events. It was considered that changes could be made to the existing events to increase their effectiveness and this may include merging the events together.

Santa Parade

8. 2014 was the Puketapapa Santa Parade’s fourth year. Attendance this year is estimated at 600 and has not increased significantly in recent years.

9. The event has a relatively high administration cost and low attendance, and is not considered cost-effective.

Carols by Candlelight

10. This event has been held for a number of years at the Three Kings reserve. Over the years, various schools and community organisations have organised and been part of the event.

11. Carols by Candlelight attendance this year was 1250 and has been static in recent years.

12. There is a feeling from local board members that people who do attend Carols by Candlelight feel strongly about it continuing. The event has a strong legacy in the area, and is enjoyed by those who attend.

13. This event is very traditional in style and does not necessarily appeal to the increasingly diverse community.

New Event Concept

14. In response to the issues highlighted above staff propose that the local board consider an alternative replacement event The event could combine elements of Carols by Candlelight and the Santa Parade, whilst also introducing new elements more inclusive of the Puketapapa community in its current form.

15. This would be more efficient financially and could free up funds to be put towards empowering community groups, schools and businesses to participate. Staff would work towards building local capacity to enable the festival to be community-delivered in future.

16. The form of the new event and level of savings to be achieved through consolidating the events has not yet been determined and will depend on final event design developed through discussions with the local board.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

17. This report has been prepared at the request of the local board to review their Christmas events.

Māori impact statement

18. In conjunction with the Community Development Arts and Culture Senior Advisor – Māori an appropriate plan to engage with local Iwi would be developed.

Implementation

19. Following agreement from the local board to scope one Christmas event, consultation with community groups, schools and business association will be undertaken and a scoping document will be prepared by CDAC Event Delivery at the July local board events portfolio meeting..

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Puketapapa Santa Parade 2014 Event Survey Report	93
b View	Carols by Candlelight 2014 Event Survey Report	95

Signatories

Authors

Penny Mitropoulos - Team Leader Event Delivery, Events

Authorisers

Graham Bodman - Manager - Community Development, Arts and Culture

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

28 May 2015

Alcohol Ban Review 2015 Proposal

File No.: CP2015/04683

Purpose

1. To adopt a proposal on the review of alcohol bans in the Puketāpapa Local Board area.

Executive Summary

2. The Puketāpapa Local Board has the delegated responsibility to review all 84 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 15 existing alcohol bans

· propose to lapse 69 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.

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) receive the report.

b) confirm the use of a public submission process to complete the review of alcohol bans in the local board area.

c) adopt the proposal titled “Proposal Review of Alcohol Bans – Puketāpapa Local Board May 2015” in Attachment C for the purposes of the public submission process.

d) confirm 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.

e) authorise the Manager Social Policy and Bylaws to make any minor edits or amendments to the Proposal to correct any identified errors or typographical edits.

f) authorise 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.

g) appoint [insert name] (as chair), and [insert at least two more board members names] as a panel to receive, hear and deliberate on submissions and other relevant information and recommend changes to the Board.

h) delegate to the Chairperson the ability to make changes to the panel appointed under (e) 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 84 alcohol bans in the Puketāpapa 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 (1)	24 hours a day 7 days a week
Park, beach and foreshore reserve (81)	Daylight saving 10pm – 8am Non-daylight savings 8pm – 8am
Cemeteries (2)	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 proposed to retain (Attachment A)

· identify any changes to the list of alcohol bans proposed 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 – Puketāpapa Local Board May 2015” to facilitate this (Attachment C)

· retain the following 15 existing alcohol bans (Attachment A):

- Mount Roskill Town Centre, amended to include the Clock Tower Reserve

- Freeland Reserve

- Hillsborough Cemetery (1 and 2)

- Hillsborough Reserve (1 and 2)

- Keith Hay Park (north and south)

- Molley Green Reserve

- Nash Road walkway (Dominion Rd Extension)

- Plantation Reserve

- Robinson Reserve

- Turner Reserve

- War Memorial Park (including associated car park)

· allow the remaining 69 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 15 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
a View	Alcohol bans proposed to retain	103
b View	Alcohol bans proposed to lapse	109
c View	Proposal	115

Signatories

Authors

Daniel Pouwels - Principal Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Kataraina Maki - GM - Community & Social Policy

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

28 May 2015

Auckland Transport Report for May 2015

File No.: CP2015/06935

Purpose

1. The purpose of the report is to respond to local board requests on transport-related matters and to provide information to Elected Members about Auckland Transport (AT) activities in the local board area since the last report.

Monthly Overview

2. The Transport Portfolio Lead briefing on transport matters in the Puketapapa area was scheduled for 18 May 2015. Matters on the agenda for discussion included:

· Mt Roskill Safe Routes Scheme

· An update on capital projects

· Updates on issues raised

3. Workshops were held with the Puketapapa Local Board in May covering these topics:

· Regional Passenger Transport Plan Variation

· Simplified Fare zones

· Light Rail investigation

· Proposed new network bus routes in the Puketapapa Local Board area

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board receive the report.

Reporting Back

Consultation Report

4. A safety proposal for Gifford Ave (Attachment B) was presented to the Puketapapa Local Board Transport portfolio lead in late October 2014.

5. Further to that presentation, AT has carried out detailed design and public consultation with the local residents. The consultation was extended to the Wesley Community Centre and the residents on Gifford Ave and the adjacent side streets.

6. Below is a key summary of the proposal and the consultation outcome:

Background

7. Auckland Transport identified the need to improve road safety along Gifford Ave following feedback received from some local residents.

8. Gifford Avenue is a local road in the Mount Roskill area and provides access to a number of residential properties and nearby community facilities. Last year, Auckland Transport installed two speed humps along the section of Gifford Avenue between Mayn Avenue and May Road to promote a safer speed environment in the vicinity of new pedestrian and cyclist access to the War Memorial Park near No. 51 Gifford Avenue.

9. Further to those works, AT has investigated the concerns raised in regard to the speed at which vehicles tend to travel along this route. The investigation has identified that there are numerous reported crashes along Gifford Avenue, the majority of which are speed related. The crash record also revealed that there was an incident involving a pedestrian near Elphinstone Avenue. All of these instances confirmed that speeding is an issue on Gifford Avenue and that speeding poses a safety risk to residents as well as school children attending nearby schools and community facilities.

10. As a result, Auckland Transport proposes to extend the speed calming measures to encourage safer driving speeds along Gifford Avenue. A new crossing facility is also being proposed near the off-street carpark adjacent to Wesley Community Centre to improve pedestrian amenity and safety.

Consultation Summary

11. We have consulted with 157 local stakeholders regarding this proposal. This covers all residents and property owners along Gifford Ave and the adjacent side streets.

12. Seven responses were received and five were in support of the traffic calming proposal.

13. Two of the residents queried the need for improvement work and questioned the crash statistics for this street. Based on the police crash database, there were 12 reported crashes over the last ten years and majority of them were speed related. This information has been communicated to the residents.

14. Based on the responses received and the safety benefits that this proposal will bring to the local community, AT is looking to proceed with the implementation of this work in June 2015.

Local Board Capital Projects

15. The Puketapapa Local Board has a fund available for the construction of transport related projects in its area. This fund is administered by Auckland Transport. Each year, Local Board’s transport capital fund allocation is $379,117, and this amount can be consolidated within each electoral term.

16. Puketapapa Local Board currently has $421,909 unallocated in its Transport Capital Fund but it is expected that this will be utilised for the Sandringham Road/Ernie Pinches cycle project.

17. As the electoral term extends beyond the financial year, it is also possible to anticipate the allocation from the first year of the new electoral term. It is recommended that Local Board considers this option in order to get projects designed early and to ensure that any savings from the 2013-2016 allocation are not lost if final costs are less than the firm cost estimates.

18. The Puketapapa Local Board could consider the work needed to finish the Keith Hay Park lighting programme at Richardson Road carpark and/or another project that will utilise the new term first year transport capital fund allocation.

19. Updates on the current projects being progressed by Auckland Transport on Puketapapa Local Board behalf are detailed below.

Mt Albert Road Pedestrian Crossing Facility

20. This project will convert the existing pedestrian refuge into a pedestrian zebra crossing.

21. A letter explaining reasons for the delay with this project has been sent to the Local Board along with an apology for the extended time taken for its delivery. As explained, all new zebra crossings must have adequate lighting and this must be installed before the crossing is delivered. Auckland Transport is working with Vector to enable these connections as soon as possible.

Local Board Capital Projects approved:

Project	Resolution	Update
Duncumbe Street	Nov 2014:confirms the project “Duncombe Street Greenway” proceed to detailed design with the basic cycleway as described to a budget of $170,000.	Project Manager appointed and investigation has begun. The PM will discuss progress with TPL in May 2015.
		May 2015: - the concept designs are being prepared for internal discussion within AT. Once this is completed, the project manager will discuss this with the transport portfolio lead, it is expected this will be most useful at the June catchup.
Fearon Park	Nov 2014: Agree to add the widening of the path through Fearon Park to the Duncumbe Street greenway proposal to a budget of $190,000.	AT have appointed a project manager. He is in discussions with AC Parks to coordinate the upgrade of the park and the construction of the shared path.
		May 2015: - Auckland Council is undertaking the redevelopment of the park and the design of the cycleway is part of that work. The cycle path is not expected to be completed until stormwater works in the park are completed.
Lynfield Reserve	Nov 2014: Agree to the installation of a shared path for the Lynfield Reserve to a maximum of $30,000.	This will be delivered by Auckland Council Parks and funded through the Auckland Transport capital fund. A funding agreement was drafted by AT and the signed MoU was received back on 16 April.
		May 2015: – This is now with Auckland Council Parks to construct.
Keith Hay Park Lighing project	Dec 2014: Agree to fund the Keith Hay Park Lighting Project ROC $330,000 subject to availability of funds within the 2014/15 financial year with priority given to the northern section (ROC $189,000) if full funds are not available.	Auckland Transport is currently engaging a consultant to complete the electrical design, utility liaison and consenting for the work. One this is completed a Firm Estimate of Cost will be brought back to the Board for consideration and approval.
		March 2015 - The firm estimate of costs is expected to be known at the end of March and will come back to the Local Board in April for final approval to move to construction, if it falls within the LB’s allocation. Auckland Council and Auckland Transport can then work through who is best to deliver the project and in what timeframe.
		April 2015 – the firm estimate of costs from the consultant has been calculated now that the lighting design is complete. The firm estimate of costs for both sections from the South Western Motorway to Noton Road (excluding the pathway by the kindergarten to Richardson Road) is close to the $330k mark. This includes 45 lights. To complete the pathway and light it through from Notons Road to Richardson Road would require additional funding as path widening needs to occur by the kindergarten as well as a realignment of the car park. Therefore to keep the costs for the lighting project within the 330k allocation suggested by the Local Board, it is recommended to light through only to Notons Road. Final costs will only be known once the project is tendered. If the tender indicates savings on the estimate, AT requests an indication from the Local Board if the saving can be spent on the carpark design.
	April 2015: b) Agree that Auckland Transport work with Auckland Council to deliver the Keith Hay lighting project within a fiscal envelope of $330,000 (from the Board’s Transport Capital Fund) after a site visit with Board members and Parks advisor to confirm the project scope. c) agree that if the tender process indicates savings on the allocated $330,000, that this money be spent on the Richardson Road carpark design	May 2015: - A site visit with Local Board members Holm and Wood has been arranged with appropriate officers.
Parau/Duke Street	Nov 2014: Agree to fund the Parau Street/Duke Street safety project to $25,000.	Completed.
Ernie Pinches to Wesley Community Centre cycleway	Oct 2014: Move forward to discussions with the local community on the broad concept of the Sandringham Road Extension to Wesley Community Centre cycle link to gauge community support through its engagement advisor.	AT and the LB’s engagement advisor took the concept out to the community in December 2014/January 2015.
	Oct 2014: Allocate $25,000 from the Transport Capital Fund for investigation of the Sandringham Road cycleway from Ernie Pinches Drive across SH20 to the Wesley Community Centre and War Memorial Park following successful consultation on the draft concept.	Consultation was completed in January 2015. Community support for the project was noted.
	Feb 2015: Reconfirm Resolution CP2014/24495 that 25,000 from the TCF be released for investigation of the Sandringham Rd Extn cycle link from Ernie Pinches Drive across SH 20 to the Wesley Community Centre and War Memorial Park following successful consultation on the draft concept.	April 2015: A project brief is being prepared and from there a project manager will be appointed.
		May 2015: The project brief has been completed and a project manager has been appointed. Further updates to the LB are expected in the next month or two.

Mt Roskill Safe Routes Scheme

22. The detailed design process for the cycleway is almost completed. The final design will then proceed through a safety audit and peer review process before consents are lodged with Auckland Council in May/June. It has been agreed that the iwi request for rain gardens can be incorporated into the design and the seven additional angle parks on Somerset have been also been incorporated into the design.

23. The project manager is scheduled to meet with the transport portfolio lead to discuss the final design at the May transport catchup. Funding for construction was unconfirmed at the time of writing.

Regional Public Transport Plan Variation

24. Auckland Transport (AT) has proposed a variation to the Auckland Regional Public Transport Plan (RPTP). The RPTP describes the services that are integral to the Auckland’s public transport network, and the policies and procedures that apply to those services.

25. Consultation on the variation opened on 11 May and will run to 5June. A copy of the draft variation has been sent to Local Boards for their information. Submissions and comments are invited from Local Boards and the public.

26. The current RPTP was completed in 2013 but since then some new public transport initiatives have reached the stage where they need to be added, these include simplified zone fares, light rail, ferry development and New Network services.

The Simplified Zone Fare System

27. Simplified Zone Fares mean that for people using AT HOP cards for bus and train journeys, instead of being charged a separate fare for each ride, the fare will be calculated for the total journey regardless of whether you transfer between different services.

28. The proposed zone map has 14 zones and boundaries are generally at 10km intervals from the CBD, so that radial trips of similar distance will pay the same fare. Fares will be calculated according to the number of zones travelled through the entire journey and you won’t be penalised for transferring between bus and train services. (See Attachment A).

29. Where zone boundaries occur at major interchanges like Newmarket, New Lynn, Otahuhu, Manukau it is proposed that there will be zone overlaps with stops being in both zones.

30. Auckland Transport is also looking at a much simpler set of fare products. AT HOP card users will have the choice of using the stored value on their card to pay for each journey, or a simple monthly pass that will allow unlimited bus and train travel across all zones. A day pass is also proposed allowing unlimited travel on buses and trains, as well as inner-harbour ferries.

31. A new Family Weekender pass is also proposed, it would let two children to travel free with each adult using an AT HOP card during weekends and public holidays.

32. It’s proposed the Single All Day pass for all zones will cost $18. The proposed cost for a Monthly Pass, all zones on buses and trains would be $200 to $210.

33. At this stage, ferry travel will not be included because the different ferry operators offer a range of weekly and monthly passes. Auckland Transport is continuing to work on how we can bring ferries into the simplified zone fares system but it will take some time.

Light Rail Transit

34. Investigations into alternative public transport options for those parts of the Auckland isthmus that cannot be served by the Metro rail network have identified that light rail is the best public transport option to provide for increased capacity, reliability and speed. The recent public consultation on the Regional Land Transport Plan also revealed strong support for the concept of light rail. As a result, AT is investigating its introduction on some critical routes as part of a multi-modal improvement package.

Ferry Development Plan

35. Amendments to the current RPTP are proposed to give effect to the Ferry Development Plan prepared in 2014. The Ferry Development Plan identifies actions needed to better integrate ferry services into the wider public transport network, and outlines proposed improvements to ferry infrastructure and service levels.

New Network Service Descriptions

36. To enable implementation of the new bus network (New Network) in areas where community consultation has been completed, changes to the service descriptions in the RPTP are required. Detailed community consultation has already occurred in south Auckland and west Auckland. The consultation processes showed strong community support for the New Network, but also identified some improvements to the planned services that have now been incorporated. As a result of this process, the New Network will be rolled out over the next year or so.

37. Consultation on the proposed variation to the RPTP runs until 4pm on Friday 5 June. For further information: www.AT.govt.nz/rptp

Issues Raised through/ by Board Members

Location or Name of Issue	Description	AT Response
Goodall Street	A request has been received for traffic calming in Goodall Street.	This is being investigated with a response likely before the end of June 2015.
Denny Avenue	A request for an investigation of vehicle speeds on Denny Avenue.	This has been logged for investigation.
Vic Butler Place	Complaints about parking for the sport field at Keith Hay Park impacting on their street. Requests for improved street lighting, more BYLs, bigger clearway signs, residential parking permits.	Auckland Transport has looked at the lighting in this street and it agrees that it does need to be addressed. New lighting for the street will be addressed in the new budgets from July 1, but in the meantime the lights here will be changed from yellow to white light which is preferable. In terms of parking issues, restrictions are already in place on one side of the street. The area is not suitable for a resident parking scheme as the issues being experienced are not commuter based. Parking Enforcement will visit this area at weekends when the problem occurs and residents are encouraged to ring Auckland Transport to ask for enforcement when problems occur. This will assist in educating visitors to comply with the existing restrictions.
Marydale Drive	A request to assess this street for additional parking restrictions as residents have complained about inconsiderate parking of vehicles causing safety concerns.	Enforcement history - two tickets were issued last December for illegal parking. When it was visited recently, two further tickets were issued to vehicles parking illegally on the bend (half on footpath). This street does not have occupancy issues in relation to parking spaces available. The question is around whether AT continues to enforce illegal parking behaviour or install yellow lines to stop this behaviour from occurring. When considering the installation of broken yellow lines, other factors also need to be considered. As Marydale Drive is approximately 9m wide, if AT installed broken yellow lines on the bend to formally restrict parking, it might encourage vehicles to increase their speeds as they travel around the bend. The traffic engineer’s recommendation is therefore to continue to request parking enforcement officers to attend in order to educate residents to park more considerately.
Haycock Avenue	A request to assess this street for additional parking restrictions as residents have complained about inconsiderate parking of vehicles causing safety concerns.	Enforcement History - 6 tickets have been issued for illegal parking this year, all called in by the same complainant. This street does not have occupancy issues in relation to parking spaces available. The question is around whether AT continues to enforce illegal parking behaviour or install yellow lines to stop this behaviour from occurring. There are already existing broken yellow lines next to the 25km/h advisory sign at the bend. The recommendation here is also to continue to request parking enforcement to educate residents to park more considerately.
Bus Lane Markings	Green bus lane marking paint has been seen to flake off and to be washed into stormwater drains. AT has been asked to consider whether this is having any environmental impact.	AT minimises the use of the green surfacing material where it can, and uses a range of products. Generally the road surfacing used is certified and goes through a process (environmental controls) to ensure it is not harmful to the environment. It is understood to be non-toxic when properly applied.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Map of Simplified Zones	131
b View	Gifford Avenue Local Area Traffic Management and Pedestrian Refuge project	133

Signatories

Authors

Lorna Stewart, Elected Member Relationship Manager, Auckland Transport

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon, Elected Member Relationship Team Manager, Auckland Transport

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

28 May 2015

Auckland Transport Quarterly Update to Local Boards
For the quarter - 1 January to 31 March 2015

File No.: CP2015/07900

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to inform local boards about progress on activities undertaken by Auckland Transport (AT) in the three months January – March 2015 and planned activities anticipated to be undertaken in the next three months.

2. Attachments:

A. Auckland Transport activities

B. Travelwise 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 Puketāpapa Local Board receive the Auckland Transport Quarterly report for the quarter, 1 January to 31 March 2015.

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 Involvement 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 totaled 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
a View	Schedule of activities undertaken for the third quarter (2014/15) ending 31 March 2015	143
b View	Travelwise Schools activities broken down by local board	155
c View	Traffic Control Committee Decisions broken down by local board	157
d View	Local Board Advocacy Report	159
e View	Local Board Transport Capital Fund Report	161

Signatories

Authors

Various Auckland Transport authors

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon, Elected Member Relationship Team Manager

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

28 May 2015

Manukau Harbour Forum Work Programme for 2015/2016

File No.: CP2015/08301

Purpose

1. To forward the recommendations of the Manukau Harbour Forum to all nine member boards requesting funding for the forum’s 2015/2016 work programme, including its communication plan. The full report is appended as Attachment A.

Executive Summary

2. At its meeting of 14 July 2014, the Manukau Harbour Forum (the forum) resolved on a work programme to deliver on the Manukau Harbour Action Plan 2013-2015, recommending that the forum’s nine member boards contribute funding for this work programme for the three years. The work programme is comprised of the flagship sites programme, research hui and the communications plan (see Attachments B and C).

3. The forum’s recommendations for funding of the first year of the work programme (2014/2015) were circulated to member boards in August 2014. At its meeting of 28 August 2014 the Puketāpapa Local Board resolved as follows:

PKTPP/2014/1

MOVED by Member DA Holm, seconded by Member MP Wood:

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) agree to allocate $8,500 from its SLIPS 2014/2015 Opex budget, conditional upon having sufficient funding available after resolving Item 16, to enable the action plan and work programme development of the Manukau Harbour Forum

b) agree to consider the requested contribution to the Manukau Harbour Forum for the development of the action plan and work programme in future years ($15,800 for Year 2 and $15,800 for Year 3) as part of its Long Term Plan budget.

4. The forum’s resolution of 14 July 2014 estimated that the second year of the work programme (2015/2016) would cost $15,800 per member board. The forum has subsequently been provided with three options for year 2 of the communication plan with detailed costings, and the forum resolved to recommend an option which would result in a lower overall cost to member boards for the 2015/2016 work programme than estimated in its July 2014 resolution.

5. At its 13 April meeting, the forum resolved on the second year of the work programme, recommending that member boards:

Resolution number MHFJC/2015/2

MOVED by Member BM Graham, seconded by Member D Wrightson:

a) That the Manukau Harbour Forum notes the information in the Update on Work Programme report.

b) That the Manukau Harbour Forum recommends to member boards that funding be allocated to support a flagship sites programme and research hui in 2015/2016.

c) That the Manukau Harbour Forum recommends option 2 for year 2 of the communication and activation plan for recommendation to member boards for funding.

d) That the Manukau Harbour Forum thank officers for their attendance.

6. The forum’s recommendation that member board fund year 2 of the work programme with option 2 of the communication brings the overall cost per member board to $11,889 for the 2015/2016 year. It should be noted that the cost per board of the work programme with option 2 of the communications plan is incorrectly stated in Attachment A as being $12,300.

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) receive the report.

b) support the request from the Manukau Harbour Forum and agree to allocate $11,889 to enable the Manukau Harbour Forum’s work programme for 2015/2016 to proceed.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Report on to the Manukau Harbour Forum on the 2015/2016 Work Programme and Communications Plan	165
b View	Flagship Sites Update	171
c View	Communications Plan	183

Signatories

Authors	Mary Binney - Local Board Advisor - Maungakiekie-Tamaki
Authorisers	Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

28 May 2015

District Licensing Committee structure review: Puketāpapa Local Board feedback

File No.: CP2015/08217

Purpose

1. To provide feedback on the District Licensing Committee structure review (the review).

Executive Summary

2. When the Governing Body approved the formation of the District Licensing Committee under the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012 (the Act) in August 2013 (Governing Body resolution GB/2013/82), it was agreed that the structure of the Committee should be reviewed after one year of operation.

3. The objective of the review is to evaluate the current structure of the District Licensing Committee to assess compliance with the Act, community input, consistency of approach and cost efficiency.

4. Feedback from local boards and other key stakeholders is being sought as part of the review process.

5. Any feedback provided by the Puketāpapa Local Board will be considered as part of the review and will be appended to the report on the review to the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee in June 2015.

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board

a) receive the report.

b) provide feedback on the review of the District Licensing Committee structure and operation.

Comments

Background

6. In August 2013, the Governing Body considered the formation of Auckland Council’s District Licensing Committee (DLC) as required by the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012 (the Act). In particular, the Governing Body considered whether Auckland Council should establish localised DLCs or a region-wide pool of chairs and members.

7. The Governing Body approved a region-wide pool as the preferred structure, but resolved that a review of the structure would be conducted after a year of operation (res GB/2013/82).

8. The District Licensing Committee structure review (the review) is now underway and will be reported to the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee in June 2015. The review will cover:

· how the existing region-wide structure is working

· the impact of local board objections to alcohol licence applications

· feedback from the reporting agencies (New Zealand Police, Medical Officer of Health and alcohol licensing inspectors)

· feedback from staff, local boards, DLC members and chairs

· any recommendations for improvement.

Terms of Reference

9. The review’s objective (set out in attachment A) is to evaluate the current structure of the DLC and advise the council whether it is achieving the following outcomes:

· decisions are made in accordance with the Act

· community views are able to be heard in accordance with the Act

· the DLC is consistent in its approach

· the structure is cost-effective for Auckland Council.

Feedback sought

10. Feedback is sought from the Puketāpapa Local Board (the board) on:

· what is working well

· what isn’t working well

· what we can do to improve

· the impact of local board objections to alcohol licence applications.

11. It is recognised that the board may have feedback on the operation of the DLC beyond the scope of the terms of reference for the review. Any additional feedback will be considered and incorporated into the report to the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee.

Applications received and hearings held

12. In the first year of operation (January 2014-January 2015 inclusive), 10,121 alcohol licence applications were received by the DLC, including 5,447 applications relating to the Central area (made up of the the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki, Waitematā, Waiheke, Great Barrier, Albert-Eden, Puketāpapa, Orākei and part of Whau local boards). Of the total number of applications received, 85 resulted in an oral hearing.

13. Up until 28 April 2015 no hearings have been held for alcohol licence applications relating to premises in the Puketāpapa Local Board area. The board has made no objections to applications.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

14. All elected members were sent a copy of the terms of reference for the review in March 2015. In early April 2015 local board chairs and relationship managers were invited to provide feedback through their preferred forum, including workshops, business meetings or in writing.

15. Feedback from local boards will be incorporated into the review and appended to the report to the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee in June 2015.

Maori impact statement

16. The current region-wide structure of the DLC is designed to provide broad participation across all demographics in the Auckland region. A representative from the Independent Māori Statutory Board was involved in the DLC member appointment process, which included assessing candidates against criteria including the Treaty of Waitangi and community awareness.

17. The review is not considered to impact significantly on Māori.

Implementation

18. The review is currently underway, with stakeholder feedback being collated and analysed during April and May 2015.

19. The findings of the review, including local board feedback, will be reported to the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee in June 2015.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Terms of Reference - District Licensing Committee Structure Review	191

Signatories

Authors

Elizabeth McKenzie - Principal Advisor Hearings

Authorisers

Marguerite Delbet - Manager Democracy Services

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

28 May 2015

Three Kings Proposed Land Exchange – Consultation, Reports and Issues

File No.: CP2015/09169

Purpose

1. To receive the Planning Advice Report (Final), the Public Consultation Feedback Report, and the Iwi Consultation report on the land exchange proposal related to Masterplan 17H-1B and PA372, and for the Puketapapa Local Board to provide feedback to the Auckland Development Committee on the issues for discussion at the workshop to be held with the Auckland Development Committee on 5 June 2015.

Executive Summary

2. On 26 March 2015, Auckland Council Property Ltd reported to the Board in detail on the revised land exchange proposal relating to PA372.

3. At that meeting, the Board resolved that the proposal be put out for public consultation, that community feedback receive serious analysis and consideration, and that the Board would have the opportunity to make comment on the exchange proposal following public consultation (PKTPP/2015/37).

4. On 30 April 2015, the Board agreed the views outlined in the ‘Puketapapa Local Board Views on Proposed Private Plan Change 372’ for inclusion in the s.42A Report. The views included a number of issues relating to the land exchange proposal.

5. The land exchange proposal was put out for public consultation between 31 March and 28 April and the feedback report is attached as Attachment 1.

6. ACPL has discussed the exchange proposal with Antipodean Properties Ltd and Housing New Zealand and their feedback is included in the public consultation report.

7. Consultation with iwi has also been running throughout April and early May and a summary of that consultation is attached as Attachment 2.

8. Beca has completed the report containing planning advice on the land exchange and that report is attached as Attachment 3. The interim report was provided to the Board in April.

9. A list of the main issues raised by the community during the consultation period, together with the issues highlighted by the Board for inclusion in the s.42A Report, are attached as Attachment 4. A workshop is to be held by the Board on 20 May at which these issues can be discussed and reviewed.

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) receive the report.

b) accept the public consultation feedback report dated 8 May 2015, the iwi consultation report dated 12 May and the Planning Advice on the Three Kings Land Swap Proposal Final report dated 28 April 2015.

c) provide feedback to the Auckland Development Committee on any outstanding issues relating to the land exchange proposal for discussion at the Auckland Development workshop on 5 June 2015.

Comments

10. A full analysis of the revised exchange proposal has been reported to the Board on 26 March, and at its meeting of 30 April the Board has expressed issues relating to the proposal. These where referred to in the report titled ‘Puketapapa Local Board views on Proposed Private Plan Change 372’ that was prepared for inclusion in the s.42A report for the plan change hearings.

11. With regard to the land exchange section, the issues raised by the Board relate:

a) to the quality of the landscaping and usability of the open space that links the central park area with Smallfield Avenue;

b) the need to provide high quality multi use reserve in this area;

c) the need to find a design solution for the lighting to the sports fields to maximise use in peak demand times in winter;

d) a concern that the development only produces a net gain of one field;

e) a request that the plaza area is held in council ownership; and

f) a request that dedicated cycleways are provided in the development around the central park area and along loop road to Grahame Breed Drive.

12. Other issues raised by the Board in that report regarding plan change 372 were related to fill levels, landscape rehabilitation, north/south and east/west connections and connection to the maunga, and affordable housing.

Feedback Report - Public Consultation

13. This public consultation ran between 31 March and 28 April. Key stakeholders were contacted, an information flyer was posted to over 1,500 dwellings in the immediate area, and two drop-in events were held. Information was available on Council’s website, Shape Auckland, and flyers were available in the library and the local board office. Feedback was possible online or by hard copy.

14. Adverts promoting the consultation were run twice in the Central Leader, and the newspaper also ran a full front page article on the proposed land exchange on 10 April.

15. There were 120 pieces of feedback, 100 online and 20 hardcopy or email, with 25 pieces being anonymous. Around 60 people visited the drop in meetings at the Library and the Three Kings Plaza. The feedback report is attached in Attachment 1.

16. Of those that gave an address (87), 52% were from Three Kings/Mt Roskill (45), 16% from Mt Eden and then a mix from local surroundings areas (Hillsborough, Mt Albert, Epsom) and as far away as Pakuranga.

17. The stakeholders who provided feedback were Auckland Cricket, Cornwall Cricket Club, Three Kings Athletics, Mt Roskill Historical Society, Three Kings United Group, Mt Roskill Grammar school, Volcanic Cone Society, Antipodean Properties Ltd, Epsom South Planning Group, Housing New Zealand

18. 65% of the feedback indicated a preference for the land exchange option (PA372), 17% preferred the development option contained within the quarry area (PA373), and 18% did not support either plan change option.

19. Those in favour of the exchange gave their support for the creation of new sports fields, improved open space configuration and improved integration of residential, retail and reserve land uses, and the provision of new housing and the rehabilitation of the quarry.

20. Those who did not support the land exchange raised concerns that there was an inequality of exchange in the developer’s favour; that the fill level in the Environment Court decision was being ignored; that there is no master plan; that the process is too rushed, that residential density was too high, that traffic congestion would worsen; that parking would be more difficult; and that informal open space would be lost.

21. Other comments referred to the need to ensure the utility of the sports fields would not be compromised by flooding, that view shafts be protected, that landscaping be done to a high standard, that connections must be usable and visually appealing.

22. Housing New Zealand supported the exchange but advocated for the narrow walkways and a triangular parcel of land adjoining their properties be excluded from the land exchange, be closed, and then be amalgamated with the surrounding residential land.

Antipodean Properties Ltd supported the land exchange proposal but advocated that some flexibility be incorporated into the land exchange to allow the plan change process to determine the urban design outcome as the current alignment of residential apartments by the Three Kings Plaza is too specific.

Iwi Consultation

23. Further to the resolution of the Auckland Development Committee of 12 March 9AUC/2015/42, ACPL has undertaken an iwi consultation process on the proposed land exchange.

24. Representatives of the collective of 13 Mana Whenua iwi/hapū of the Tupuna Taonag o Tamaki Makaurau Trust, together with the chair of the Maunga Authority, were contacted with information on the proposal.

25. Panui were extended to iwi to attend a hui to discuss the exchange, and this was held on 14 April 2015 with seven Mana Whenua representatives present. Detailed notes of the meeting were taken, and it was agreed that responses and feedback on the exchange should be provided by 7 May.

26. Mana Whenua are broadly supportive of the exchange proposal and noted that the RFRs attached to crown land would be attached to the new reserve land. Questions were raised around mana whenua access to, and participation in, affordable housing; the use of development contributions to be applied to marae development; the need for more sports fields in the area; and the support for the FRL proposal to provide for and fund one third of the cost of a Whare manaaki in the development.

27. Correspondence and discussion continue around the provision of affordable housing with one iwi and a further meeting is likely to be held with that iwi to discuss how iwi can work with FRL to address the particular needs of mana whenua.

28. A summary of the iwi consultation is attached in Attachment 2

Beca Planning Advice - Final Report

29. The Board has been provided with the Interim Report dated 14 April and the Final Report dated 28 April is attached in Attachment 3.

30. The planning advice report assesses the two proposed alternative plan changes against the aspirational outcomes of the following key spatial plans - The Auckland Plan 2012, the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan 2013, the Parks and Open Spaces Strategic Action Plan 2013, the Auckland Sports and Recreation Strategic Action Plan 2014-2024, and the Three Kings Plan 2014.

31. The report provides an overall comment on the relative contribution of PA372 and PA273 ‘to contribute to’, ‘detract from’ or ‘is neutral’ to each plan’s aspirational outcomes.

32. The report’s overall findings are that PA372 will contribute more positively to the outcomes sought by Auckland’s spatial documents compared to PA373, but recognises that the vision provided by the master plan of PA372 needs to be delivered through to the physical development, and some outcomes have a higher degree of risk of not being converted into reality than others.

33. The report assumes that the zone changes under the plan change process, and the exchange of land will secure certain outcomes. The report identifies features that have a higher risk of non-delivery to include; a holistic approach to the connections and integration of the site with the surrounding environment; the stormwater management system (scoria soak pits and wetlands); the proposed public art and sculptural landscapes and the reinstatement of original flora and natives in landscaping execution.

Land Exchange Proposal - Community Concerns and Board Issues

34. The community consultation provided a range of comments on the land exchange and the table attached in Attachment 4 lists the concerns that were mentioned the most times in the community feedback.

35. In addition to the community concerns, the table also includes the issues that were raised by the Board in the report providing views for the s.42A report under the RMA. These issues have been detailed earlier in this report.

36. An ADC workshop is scheduled for 5 June, prior to which the Board will have the opportunity to consider and discuss the community concerns and identified issues at a workshop on 20 May.

37. From this discussion, feedback will be able to be provided to the Auckland Development Committee prior to the workshop on 5 June.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

38. Earlier in this report the Puketapapa Local Board’s views resolution of 30 April was referred to in respect of the Local Board’s views

Māori impact statement

39. Mana Whenua are involved in an ongoing consultation process that has been described in the body of the report and in Attachment 2 to this report/

Implementation

40. The Board will hold a workshop on Wednesday 20 May to consider the public feedback from the consultation, consider the list of concerns and issues, and confirm the Board’s priorities for the land exchange.

41. The Board will confirm its views at its meeting of 28 May.

42. A Workshop will be held on 5 June attended by the Board and by Auckland Development Committee and council officers.

43. The Auckland Development Committee will resolve whether or not to support a land exchange proposal at its meeting on 11 June 2015.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Public Consultation Feedback Report, 8 May 2015	203
b View	Iwi Consultation Report, 12 May 2015	283
c View	Planning Advice on the Three Kings Land Swap Proposal Final, 28 April 2015	285
d View	List of Board and Community issues for review	357

Signatories

Authors

Nigel Hewitson - Team Leader Disposals

Authorisers

Grant Sextone – Acting Manager Acquisitions & Disposals

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

28 May 2015

Developing the Empowered Communities Approach - Next Steps

File No.: CP2015/07622

Purpose

1. This report provides an update on the Empowered Communities Approach (ECA), and enables the Great Barrier 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 Great Barrier 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 Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) receive the report.

b) provide feedback 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 2.

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