Agenda of Waitematā Local Board

Waitematā Local Board

12 May 2015

Auckland Transport Quarterly Update to Local Boards

File No.: CP2015/08464

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 include:

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)

Executive Summary

Recommendations

That the Waitemata Local Board:

a) Receives the Auckland Transport Quarterly Report.

Comments

Significant activities during the period under review

INVESTMENT AND DEVELOPMENT

SMART (formerly SWAMMCP)

3. 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

Otahuhu Bus Rail Interchange

4. 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.

Half Moon Bay Ferry Upgrade

5. 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.

City Rail Link

6. Enabling Works Package: Phase 1 Early Contractor Iinvolvement design service contracts 1 and 2 awarded. Construction is scheduled to commence early 2016. Main Works: Construction is subject to funding availability in the new LTP yet to be adopted by Auckland Council (assumed to be 2018).

EMU Procurement

7. 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

Public Transport overall

8. 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.

Rail Improvements

9. 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.

10. 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.

Bus Improvements

11. March was also a record-breaking month on the Northern Express, with patronage up almost 17% on the same month last year. The 12 month total reached 2.8 million. It was also a record for other bus services as patronage rose 8% to 56.6 million. Ferry numbers for the year totalled 5.4 million trips, up 5% on an annual basis.

12. 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

Te Atatu Road Improvements

13. 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.

Albany Highway

14. 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.

Lincoln Road Improvements

15. 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.

Mill Road Improvements

16. 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.

Cycle Initiatives

17. 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

Road Safety

18. 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.

19. 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.

Safer Communities and Schools Travelwise programme

20. 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.

21. 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.

22. Since 1 July 2014, 79 new Walking School Buses have been established, exceeding the KPI by 43 new Walking School Buses.

23. 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

Travel Demand

24. 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.

Walk 2 Work Day

25. 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

Overview

26. 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

January – March Quarter key highlights

27. 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.

28. 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

29. 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.

30. 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.

31. 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 (2014/2015) ending 31 March 2015	15
b View	Travelwise Schools activities broken down by local board	39
c View	Traffic Control Committee Decisions broken down by local board	41
d View	Local Board Advocacy Report	45
e View	Local Board Transport Capital Fund Report	49

Signatories

Authors

Various Auckland Transport Authors

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon - Elected Member Relationship Team Manager

Judith Webster - Relationship Manager

Auckland Transport Update - May 2015

File No.: CP2015/07530

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.

Executive summary

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

Recommendations

That the Waitemata Local Board:

a) Receives the Auckland Transport Update – May 2015 report.

b) Requests Auckland Transport to prepare a Rough Order Cost estimate under the Local Board Transport Capital Fund for a continuous pedestrian experience on Ponsonby Road, between Franklin Road to Williamson Avenue, which supports the principles of the Ponsonby Road Plan.

c) Requests Auckland Transport to prepare a Rough Order Cost estimate under the Local Board Transport Capital Fund for the six priority areas in the draft Newmarket Laneways Plan.

Comments

Project Updates

Residential Parking Zones

3. The Auckland Transport Board on 31 March 2015 approved the Parking in Residential Streets, Parking Permits and Coupons, and Parking on Arterial Roads section of the Parking Strategy.

4. The policy objectives are to manage parking in residential streets to reduce the negative impacts of high parking demand on local communities and to discourage commuter parking in city fringe suburbs.

5. A Residential Parking Zone (RPZ) will be considered for implementation when the parking occupancy is regularly above 85% occupancy at peak times.

6. Auckland Transport has commenced discussions with the Board on the RPZ programme for the Waitemata ward, which includes an extension of the St Marys Bay zone and new zones planned for Freemans Bay, Ponsonby, Parnell, Grey Lynn, and Grafton.

7. Dialogue with the Freemans Bay Residents Association in development of the first RPZ is underway, with public consultation anticipated in June 2015.

Works Underway

Ponsonby Road Resurfacing Works

8. Ponsonby Road resurfacing works are planned to begin on 10 May, with cycle feeder lanes being incorporated at the Ponsonby/Richmond Road and the Ponsonby/Franklin Road intersection.

Major Projects Delivery Programme 2014-15 – Waitemata

Projects Under Construction (as of May 15)		Projects Delivered (FY2014-15)
PT Infrastructure	Parnell Station	PT Network (Bus Priority Programme)	Symonds Street Bus Lanes
Roading/Public Spaces	Wynyard Quarter Road and Public Space Improvements	PT Infrastructure	Newmarket Station Square Signage Improvements
Walking & Cycling	Beach Road Walking and Cycling – Stage 2	Roading/Public spaces	O’Connell Street and Upper Khartoum Place
Walking & Cycling	Carlton Gore Cycleway	Walking & Cycling	Beach Road Stage 1
Walking & Cycling	Wynyard Quarter Interim Cycle Path	PT Network (Bus Priority Programme)	Fanshawe Street Bus Lane Improvements and Fanshawe/Sturdy Street Intersection
Road Maintenance	Ponsonby Road Resurfacing

Local Board Transport Capital Fund Update

9. Newmarket Rail Station Artwork Fencing - The Board through the Arts Portfolio has endorsed a fence design that complements the adjacent Reuben Paterson artwork to proceed to construction. The Board’s allocated $5,000 for an upgraded fence design will complement renewals work AT will undertake on the bridge over rail structure. Update: The fence and foundation detailed design has been completed and building consent has been granted. Construction is planned to be completed by end of June, depending on the fence manufacturing process.

10. Drinking Fountains Programme – The Board resolved on 18 March 2014 [WTM/2014/37,WTM/2014/38] the intention to install three drinking fountains within their ward. A resolution was passed on 13 June 2014 to install a drinking fountain as part of the Upper Queen Street Bridge Cycleway project and on 10 March 2015 resolved to install a drinking fountain as part of the Carlton Gore Cycleway project and as part of Nelson Street Cycleway project. Update: AT is incorporating the drinking fountains in to the respective project implementation plans.

11. Waitemata Greenways Route G1 Grey Lynn Park Shared Path – The route was included in Auckland Council’s (AC) consultation on the Grey Lynn Park Development Plan. Update: The Waitemata Greenways Route has been included on the NZTA Urban Cycleways Programme list for funding. Decisions on the next round of funding are expected in mid-2015, and this route will also be included as part of AT’s public consultation on the wider Auckland Cycle Network.

12. Ponsonby Road Pedestrian Experience – The project for a continuous pedestrian experience supports one of the outcomes of the Ponsonby Road Plan. The designs for the raised pedestrian table have been circulated to AC’s City Transformation Team for review. Update: At the Board’s 5 May workshop, AT and City Transformation officers recommended that the Board pass a resolution for AT to undertake a Rough Order Cost estimate for a continuous pedestrian experience to be provided for on Ponsonby Road between Franklin Road to Williamson Avenue.

13. Newmarket Laneways Streetscape Improvements – The Newmarket Laneways Plan is being managed by AC’s City Transformation Team. AT has been working alongside City Transformation to develop proposals for delivery. Following public consultation and confirmation of Council budgets under the LTP, AC’s City Transformation Team will bring a funding proposal to the Board for a decision. Update: To understand the costs associated with the six priority areas proposed in the Newmarket Laneways Streetscape Improvements Plan, AT and City Transformation officers recommended that the Board pass a resolution for AT to undertake a Rough Order Cost estimate on the six priority areas to inform discussion on potential projects after public consultation is analyzed.

14. The Board has $1,404,786 from 2012-13 to 2015-16 to allocate and has the ability to allocate the 2016-17 year budget of $469,789 at the board’s discretion. Of the total $1,874,575, the Ponsonby and Newmarket projects will consume a significant portion of that budget once projects are identified for delivery.

Consultations

15. AT undertook consultation with the Waitemata Local Board Transport Portfolio Leaders on the proposals listed in Attachment A should any further comments by the full Board wish to be made.

16. Projects that may be of particular interest to the Board are detailed below.

Park Road Bus Priority Lane Project

17. AT is improving bus reliability and travel time between the Auckland Hospital to the Carlton Gore Road intersection to support Auckland Transport’s frequent service network.

18. AT has undertaken surveys to quantify the benefits of installing bus lanes as three options were considered. As a result, the option that had the most significant public transport travel time savings has been advanced.

19. Following a workshop with the Board on 5 May, AT is separately investigating a cycling connection from Carlton Gore Road to Karangahape Road, however, any recommendations from this investigation will be advanced from future cycling programmes.

20. AT is seeking formal feedback from the Board on this proposal, Attachment B.

Newmarket Level Crossing (Cowie Street Bridge)

21. AT met with the Board on 28 April to discuss the revised leading design following consultation feedback and a traffic safety audit.

22. A Community Liaison Group (CLG) meeting was held on 29 April with interested stakeholders to discuss the preferred design and AT’s intention to lodge a Notice of Requirement and resource consents in June/July 2015, and as a publicly notified consent.

23. AT is seeking formal Board feedback on the Cowie Street Bridge road alignment, Attachment C. The appropriate landowner approval process for the parks component of the project has also commenced.

Media

Mayor backs major new investment in transport

24. The Mayor’s report on the 2015-25 Long-term Plan proposes that council seek government support for a motorway user charge to fund the additional $12 billion needed to deliver the full transport network Aucklanders have asked for.

25. Given that a user charge would require legislation and take a number of years to put in place, the Mayor is proposing to fund immediate new investments of $500 million over the next three years through an interim fixed levy on ratepayers.

26. It is intended to meet urgent needs for investment in public transport, including new rail, bus and cycleways. In order to make a difference the levy has been calculated at an average of $99 a year for non-business ratepayers and $159 for business ratepayers.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

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

Māori impact statement

28. Mana whenua and Mana waka are consulted on Auckland Transport’s capital programme and proposed changes to policy.

Implementation

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

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Consultation Register - April 2015	55
b View	Park Road Bus Priority Consultation	59
c View	Newmarket Level Crossing Option 4	61

Signatories

Authors	Priscilla Steel – Auckland Transport Elected Member Relationship Manager
Authorisers	Jonathan Anyon – Auckland Transport Elected Member Team Leader

Waitematā Local Board

12 May 2015

Fukuoka Friendship Garden concept design

File No.: CP2015/07473

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to seek the Waitemata Local Board’s endorsement of the concept design for the re-establishment of the Fukuoka Friendship Garden.

Executive Summary

2. Following the removal of the Fukuoka Friendship Garden from the Auckland Zoo and the endorsement of the new site in Western Springs Lakeside Park, landscape designers from Fukuoka City have been working on preparing concept designs for the new garden.

3. In January, during the visit of delegates from Fukuoka City, an initial concept design was developed. Over the last few months two detailed concept design options were provided with Fukuoka City noting their preference for Plan A; the more traditional of the two options. Refer to attachment A.

4. In late March, the Fukuoka Friendship Garden Advisory Group met to review these options and also expressed a definite preference for Plan A. The local board were provided a presentation of the two plans at their workshop on 7 April 2015 and members present also expressed their preference for Plan A and formal endorsement of this is now required.

5. The local board has additionally sought information on future maintenance costs for the garden and how this will be funded.

Recommendations

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a) Endorse Plan A, as shown in Attachment A, as the concept design for the re-establishment of the Fukuoka Friendship Garden to be sited in Western Springs Lakeside Park.

Comments

6. ZEN Environmental Design Ltd., based in Fukuoka, has been commissioned to prepare the concept design for the new garden and has recently provided two options for consideration. Plan A is based on the initial concept plan developed during the visit from the Fukuoka City delegates. This is a more traditional Japanese garden in comparison to Plan B which reflects a more modern style.

7. The Fukuoka Friendship Garden Advisory Group noted a number of reasons for their support for Plan A, including the fact that it provided a more traditional garden, it was more like the old garden, it has more vegetation and less hard surfaces, it creates imagination and a sense of mystic and it appeared to be the more affordable.

8. Very preliminary figures on the expected cost of delivering the garden were provided to the local board at their workshop on 7 April 2015. These indicated that construction cost exceeds the budget proposed within the Draft Long Term Plan (LTP) for the project. Since this time, Amy Wright, Senior Landscape Architect has discussed this with ZEN Environmental Design and they are currently working on the design to reduce construction costs. Options currently being explored include: reducing the overall size of the garden; reducing specification of some elements within the garden, such as the pond and the decorative fences; and substituting materials where possible.

9. Council received twenty submissions about the Fukuoka Friendship Garden in the LTP process. All but one piece of feedback supports the garden proposal. Eight pieces of feedback were received from individuals and twelve pieces of feedback came from key stakeholders. The key stakeholders include: The Auckland Bonsai Society, NZ Japan Society of Auckland Inc., School of cultures at The University of Auckland, Garden Design Society of NZ, Friends of Fukuoka Friendship Garden, the Japanese Society of Auckland, Sister Cities NZ, NZ Institute of International Understanding, Auckland Japanese Supplementary School, Auckland Bonsai Study Group and JET Alumni Association.

10. The key points raised through the feedback include:

a) that the budget allocated of $1,065,000 in the draft LTP is confirmed to ensure that the Friendship Garden can be rebuilt in its new location before the 30^th Anniversary of the Auckland-Fukuoka sister-city relationship in 2016.

b) that operational budget is specifically allocated within the Waitemata Local Board for the next 10 years to adequately maintain the garden going forward.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

11. The Local Board at their workshop on 7 April 2015 reviewed the two options provided by the landscape designer from Fukuoka City. Both the Fukuoka Greenery Department and the Fukuoka Friendship Garden Advisory Group had advised they preferred Plan A and members of the local board also supported this choice.

12. Members of the local board also requested confirmation about how the operational costs for the ongoing maintenance and security of the garden would be funded. Initial information on this is covered in the Implementation section below and will be further clarified at the meeting.

Māori impact statement

13. Consultation with Māori that are likely to have an interest in Western Springs Lakeside Park has been undertaken. Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara, Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei, Te Kawerau a Maki, Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki, Ngāti Tamaoho, Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua, Te Akitai Waiohua, Ngāti Paoa, Ngāti Whanaunga, Ngāti Maru, Ngāti Tamaterā and Te Patukirikiri have been advised about the proposed re-establishment of the garden in the park.

14. The fact that Western Springs is a place of significance to Mana Whenua was taken into account in the site selection process, with the site set back in the corner abutting the car park and the zoo minimising the potential impact on the cultural footprint of the park.

15. Ngāti Whatua Ōrākei and Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki have expressed a specific interest in this project and their feedback has been that Western Springs is a culturally significant site and if there was to be a Japanese garden placed in the corner then there should be some recognition of the park’s Māori values. Discussion with them has included the potential for a cultural design element to be included the exterior path or for provision of a feature at the entrance to the park that would cover the ethos of the Māori and Japanese views of the landscape and the environment. A further site visit is scheduled next week to progress these discussions.

Implementation

16. This report is seeking the local board’s endorsement of Plan A. A communications plan is being developed to ensure the public are advised about milestones in this project, this will include a media release following the board’s endorsement of the concept design. Following this endorsement work will be progressed on the detailed design for the garden.

17. Budget for the implementation of the garden has been included in the draft LTP, with the expectation the garden would be delivered in FY15/16. This budget will be confirmed over the coming weeks.

18. The future operational costs of the garden were assessed when seeking council and local board support for the new garden site. It was estimated these would be in the order of $75,000 per annum, based on vegetation and pond management (including the bonsai), rubbish collection and security costs. When the garden was located within the zoo it required an average of 20 hours work per week, involving both regular weekly maintenance and more intensive programmed seasonal work. It is suggested if the garden is free and more accessible to the public it will likely experience greater use, harder wear and tear and possible higher incidences of vandalism that will result in higher maintenance costs.

19. It is acknowledged that the garden will require a higher than normal level of service and a more rigorous assessment will need to be made based on the assets that will be included as part of the Plan A design. It is anticipated that the current consequential opex provided for in the LTP would not be sufficient to meet the service levels for some of the garden’s components. There may, therefore, be a need to look at rationalisation and small changes in the wider operational budget to meet this shortfall. Further clarification on this will be provided at the meeting.

20. The Fukuoka Friendship Garden Advisory Group has been seeking to secure the future involvement from the Auckland Zoo staff in the maintenance and security of the garden given the zoo still retains the expertise to undertake this. Regional Facilities Auckland has been approached by the Advisory Group to confirm the zoo’s role going forward. It is also apparent that the zoo’s imminent development plans for the Pridelands area present some real opportunities to work collaboratively for the mutual benefit of both projects.

21. The garden project also presents an opportunity for a community partnership to be developed that may contribute to the running costs of the garden along with promoting events, such as tea ceremonies, and general community appreciation for the garden and the sister-city relationship with Fukuoka.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Fukuoka Friendship Garden concept design - Plan A	87

Signatories

Authors

Annette Campion - Project Coordinator

Authorisers

Jane Aickin - Manager Local and Sports Parks Central

Mace Ward - Group Manager Regional and Specialist Parks

Judith Webster - Relationship Manager

Waitematā Local Board

12 May 2015

Review of Alcohol Bans 2015

File No.: CP2015/04466

Purpose

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

Executive Summary

2. The Waitematā Local Board has the delegated responsibility to review all 99 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 46 existing alcohol bans

· propose to lapse 53 existing alcohol bans unless sufficient evidence is provided through the public submission process.

7. Staff will update the proposal as necessary to reflect the decisions by the local board.

Recommendations

That the Waitematā Local Board:

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

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

c) 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.

d) 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.

e) 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.

f) Appoints a Local Board Member (as chair), and two more Local Board members, as a panel to receive, hear and deliberate on submissions and other relevant information and recommend changes to the Board.

g) Delegates to the Chairperson the ability to make changes to the panel appointed under (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 99 alcohol bans in the Waitematā 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
Central Business District (1)	24 hours a day 7 days a week
Town centre (4)	24 hours a day 7 days a week
Park, beach and foreshore reserve (92)	Daylight saving 10pm – 8am Non-daylight savings 8pm – 8am
Event (1)	The Pasifika Event held at Western Springs in March annually
Cemetery (1)	Daylight saving 10pm – 8am Non-daylight savings 8pm – 8am

Evidence

20. Evidence of alcohol-related crime or disorder has been obtained from legacy council files, and data from the New Zealand Police for the period 1 September 2013 – 30 September 2014 has also been supplied.

21. Evidence from local community groups and organisations was obtained through a written request from the board. Evidence provided through this process supported the retention and amendment to area or times of an additional six alcohol ban areas.

This included support to extend the CBD alcohol ban area to include the Westhaven Marina and streets and parks within the Eden Terrace/Newton area and an extension of the hours of operation of a parks adjoining the Ponsonby and Parnell town centres.

22. 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.

23. 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

24. 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.

25. 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).

26. 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

27. Staff recommend:

· the use of a public submission process to complete the review and to adopt the “Proposal Review of Alcohol Bans – Waitematā Local Board May 2015” to facilitate this (Attachment C)

· retain the following 46 existing alcohol bans (Attachment A):

o Central Business District

o Grey Lynn Town Centre

o Newmarket Town Centre

o Parnell Town Centre

o Ponsonby Town Centre

o Bayfield Park (including associated car park)

o Costley Reserve

o Coxs Bay Esplanade

o Coxs Bay Reserve (including associated car park)

o Cremorne Road Reserve

o Dove Myer Robinson Park (including associated car park)

o England Reserve

o Fraser Park

o Freemans Bay Community Centre (including associated car park)

o Grey Lynn Park (including associated car park)

o Grey Lynn Park 2 (including associated car park)

o Gwilliam Place Reserve

o Harry Dansey Park

o Home Bay Beach Reserve

o Ireland Reserve

o Jacobs Ladder and St Marys Bay Walkway

o Judges Bay Reserve

o Leys Institute, Community Library and Hall

o Lumsden Green

o Middle Reserve

o Newmarket Park (including associated car park)

o Norfolk Reserve

o Old Mill Reserve

o Outhwaite Park (including associated car park)

o Point Erin Park (including associated car park)

o Renall Reserve

o Reserve area outside Olympic pool on the corner of Davis and Broadway Streets

o Ryle Reserve

o Salisbury Reserve

o Selby Square

o Sentinel Road Reserve

o St Marys Reserve

o St Stephens & Cemetery

o Streetscape gardens on Wellington Street

o Te Uringutu Reserve

o Teal Park (including associated car park)

o Tole Reserve

o Wairangi Road Reserve

o Wellington Street Reserve

o Western Park

o Western Springs Lakeside (including associated car park)

· allow the remaining 53 alcohol bans to lapse unless sufficient evidence is provided through a public submission process to justify their retention (Attachment B).

28. The reasons for this recommendation are:

· there is sufficient evidence of a high level of alcohol-related crime or disorder to retain 46 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

29. The proposal (together with proposals from other local boards) will be publicly notified in June 2015.

30. Staff will update the proposal as necessary to reflect the decisions by the local board.

31.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

32. 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

33. 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.

34. 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

35. There are no implementation issues associated with this decision to adopt a proposal.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Alcohol bans proposed to retain	95
b View	Alcohol bans proposed to lapse	113
c View	Proposal – Review of Alcohol Bans Waitemata Local Board	117

Signatories

Authors

Daniel Pouwels - Principal Policy Analyst

Kylie Hill - Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Kataraina Maki - GM - Community & Social Policy

Judith Webster - Relationship Manager

Waitematā Local Board

12 May 2015

Review of local dog access rules in Waitemata local board area

File No.: CP2014/29605

Purpose

1. To seek approval to options to be included in a statement of proposal containing changes to local dog access rules for the Waitematā local board area.

Executive Summary

2. The board resolved at its 14 October 2014 business meeting to undertake a review of local dog access rules on beach, foreshore and selected park areas in 2015.

3. As part of the review process, the local board must adopt a statement of proposal of any proposed changes to local dog access rules for public consultation, and consider submissions to the proposal before making a final decision.

4. To assist the local board decision on proposed changes to include in the statement of proposal, staff have identified a range of options that the local board may select from.

5. Staff recommend adopting options that would:

· apply an under control off-leash rule west of Meola Reef Reserve and east of Garnet Road up to the western headland of Marine Parade Beach

· apply an amended time and season rule from the western headland of Marine Parade Beach to the eastern headland of Sentinel Beach and Judges Bay.

Summer (Labour Weekend until 31 March)
10am to 7pm	Before 10am and after 7pm
Sand and Water Prohibited	Sand and Water Under control on-leash
Winter (1 April until Friday before Labour Weekend)
10am to 4pm	Before 10am and after 4pm
Sand and Water Under control on-leash	Sand and Water Under control off-leash

· apply an under control on-leash to all areas east of Sentinel Beach, excluding Judges Bay

· replace general wildlife rule with a specific rule on the Meola Reef Reserve foreshore

· align the summer season for parks with the proposed beach summer season

· allow dogs under control on leash on Cox’s Bay Reserve, Seddon Fields and Victoria Park outside of the sports fields, playgrounds and courts

· enlarge the northern under control off-leash area on Grey Lynn Park to north of the pathway running from Dryden Street to Arnold Street

· reclassify dog exercise areas as under control off-leash areas

· replace the general rules for picnic and fitness areas with specific rules.

6. Staff will update the statement of proposal to reflect the decisions made by the local board.

Recommendations

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a) Adopt the following options in relation to the dog access rules reviewed:

Topic	Option
Dog access on current time and season beaches	EITHER Option 1: retain the existing time and season rules for beaches (including foreshore), OR Option 2: apply an amended time and season rule between Marine Parade Beach and Sentinel Beach and at Judges Bay with summer on-leash dog access in the morning and evening, and allow dogs under control off-leash west of Marine Parade excluding on the foreshore north of Meola Reef (staff recommended option), OR Option 3: apply an amended time and season rule between Marine Parade Beach and Sentinel Beach and at Judges Bay with summer off-leash dog access in the morning and evening, and allow dogs under control off-leash west of Marine Parade, excluding the foreshore north of Meola Reef.
Wildlife and habitat protection	EITHER Option 1: retain the current general wildlife rule, OR Option 2: replace the current general wildlife rule with a specific rule on the Meola Reef Reserve foreshore (staff recommendation).
Cox’s Bay Reserve, Seddon Fields, Victoria Park, Tole Reserve, Arch Hill Reserve, Costley Reserve, Francis Reserve, Lemington Reserve, Vermont Reserve and Grey Lynn Park	EITHER Option 1: retain current rules, OR Option 2 amend the summer season for parks to align with the proposed beach summer season, and remove the current under control off-leash rules from Cox’s Bay Reserve, Seddon Fields and Victoria Park (staff recommended option).
Picnic areas and fitness apparatus areas	EITHER Option 1: retain current general under control on-leash rule, OR Option 2: replace current general rule with a specific rule for high use area of parks (staff recommended option).
Dog exercise areas	EITHER Option 1: retain current use of the term dog exercise area to describe off-leash areas, OR Option 2: reclassify dog exercise areas as under control off-leash areas (staff recommended option).

b) Confirm its intention to amend the Auckland Council Policy on Dogs 2012 pursuant to section 10(8) of the Dog Control Act 1996.

c) Subject to any amendments to reflect the local board decision in (a):

i) adopt the statement of proposal titled ‘Statement of Proposal Amendments to Auckland Council Policy on Dogs 2012 – Waitematā Local Board Area May 2015’ in Attachment A for public consultation using the special consultative procedure.

ii) Confirm that the proposed amendments contained in the Statement of Proposal:

· are consistent with the policy, principles and criteria for making dog access rules contained in the Auckland Council Policy on Dogs 2012

· are not inconsistent with any decision in relation to region-wide dog access rules contained in the Auckland Council Policy on Dogs 2012

· are in accordance with relevant legislative requirements in particular the Local Government Act 2002 and Dog Control Act 1996.

iii) Authorise the Manager Social Policy and Bylaws to make any minor edits or amendments to the Statement of Proposal to correct any identified errors or typographical edits.

iv) Authorise the Manager Social Policy and Bylaws, in consultation with the local board chair, to make any amendments to the Statement of Proposal to reflect decisions made by the local board.

v) The board appoints the Waitemata Local Board Hearings Committee to receive, hear and deliberate on submissions and other relevant information and recommend changes to the Board.

Background

7. Local boards have the delegated responsibility to review dog access rules for local park, beach and foreshore areas.

8. The governing body has established a standard annual process to assist local boards with the review of local dog access rules as follows:

· the local board will need to adopt a statement of proposal by May of proposed changes to local dog access rules (the topic of this report). It is noted here that where no changes are proposed, the review process for that location ends at this point

· the proposal (together with proposals from other local boards) will be publicly notified for submissions as part of the dog registration process in June

· the local board will hold hearings, deliberations and make decisions on submissions by August

· the governing body will review a report to update the bylaw on dogs in September

· changes to dog access rules commence in October.

9. The board resolved at its 14 October 2014 business meeting (WTM/2014/191) to undertake a review of local dog access rules on beach, foreshore and selected park areas in 2015 using this process.

10. To assist with developing this proposal, the Waitematā Local Board obtained views from:

· council staff involved in parks, animal management, biodiversity and biosecurity

· selected resident, environmental, and dog groups at meetings and workshops

· maori through hui in March 2015

· residents and visitors through an on-line survey in March 2015

There were 375 respondents to this survey (60 per cent non-dog owners and 40 per cent dog owners)

· survey of 98 children under 14 attending a children’s event at Silo Park on 22 March.

11. The decision required of the board is to decide whether or not to propose any changes, and where necessary to adopt a statement of proposal for public consultation and to appoint a hearing panel.

Decision-making requirements

12. In making a decision on the statement of proposal, the local board must be satisfied that any proposed changes comply with a range of statutory, policy and delegated authority requirements.

13. The most important statutory requirement is to ensure decisions on dog access provide for public safety and comfort and the needs of dogs and their owners. This means having regard to:

· the need to minimise danger, distress, and nuisance to the community generally; and

· the need to avoid the inherent danger in allowing dogs to have uncontrolled access to public places that are frequented by children, whether or not the children are accompanied by adults; and

· the importance of enabling, to the extent that is practicable, the public (including families) to use streets and public amenities without fear of attack or intimidation by dogs; and

· the exercise and recreational needs of dogs and their owners.

Section 10(4) Dog Control Act 1996

14. The most important practical requirement is to make dog access rules easy to understand ‘on the ground’.

15. Further detail of the decision-making requirements is provided in Attachment B.

Comments

16. Dog access rules are an effective way to provide for public safety and comfort, protection of animals, property and habitat, and the needs of dogs and their owners.

17. How this is to be achieved is guided by the Auckland Council Policy on Dogs 2012. The policy seeks to manage requests for changes to dog access rules by ensuring all (and often polarised) views are considered in a way to achieve a fair and reasonable decision. The following is an analysis to assist the local board in determining whether or not to propose any changes.

Dog access on current time and season beaches

18. All beach and foreshore areas within Waitematā local board area are subject to time and season dog access rules, unless specifically stated as a prohibited or off-leash area. The current time and season rule is:

Summer (Labour Weekend until Easter Monday)
9am to 7pm	Before 9am and after 7pm
Sand Prohibited Water Prohibited	Sand Under control on-leash Water Under control off-leash
Winter (Tuesday after Easter Monday until Friday before Labour Weekend)
10am to 4pm		Before 10am and after 4pm
Sand Under control on-leash Water Under control off-leash		Sand Under control off-leash Water Under control off-leash

19. The Auckland Council Policy on Dogs 2012 introduced a region-wide standard summer beach time and season of 10am and 5pm, Labour Weekend to 1 March.

20. The local board must decide whether or not using the standard times and season is appropriate on local beaches as part of its review.

21. Where using the standard times and season would contravene the local board’s statutory obligation to provide for public safety and comfort, the local board must decide on an alternative. For instance, if there are continued high levels of use of beaches beyond the times and dates specified in the standard, local boards should extend the summer times and dates to reflect this.

22. Where an alternative time and season is adopted, approval is required from the Auckland Council Governing Body. In 2014, approval was provided to the Orakei and Kaipatiki local board areas to use different times and dates to ensure public safety and comfort.

23. It is important to note that the standard only provides a definition of daytime hours and a summer season. Local boards determine where the rule applies, the type of dog access (off-leash, on-leash or prohibited) and any rule outside of the summer seasons (e.g. winter).

Summer (Labour Weekend to 1 March)
10am to 5pm	Before 10am and after 5pm
Local board to decide appropriate level of access	Local board to decide appropriate level of access
Other seasons (Local board to determine)
Local board to decide times	Local board to decide times
Local board to decide appropriate level of access	Local board to decide appropriate level of access

Community views

24. Of the 375 respondents to the on-line survey:

· the majority of local non-dog owner respondents indicated that by November they were undertaking ‘summer activities’^{^[1]}

· the majority of local dog owner respondents indicated that by December they were undertaking ‘summer activities’

· the majority of respondents indicated that they ceased ‘summer activities’ in April

· local non-dog owners preferred the summer time and season rules to be aligned with daylight savings^{^[2]} (39 per cent) with 20 per cent preferring Labour Weekend

· local dog owners preferred summer time and season rules to start on the 1 December (46 per cent) and end at the beginning of April which is similar to the end of daylight savings^{^[3]}

· local non-dog owners generally do not want unknown dogs approaching them while at the beach (47 per cent) with 18 per cent being nervous around dogs and 19 per cent stating that they avoid beaches if there are likely to be dogs there

· local dog owners generally do not mind being approached by dogs (71 per cent), this drops to 38 per cent for non-dog owners

· 39 per cent of local dog owners like being approached by dogs while only 15 per cent for non-dog owners like being approached by dogs.

25. The table below shows a summary of the preferred dog access rules for the respondents to the online survey.

Dog owners		Non-dog owners
Summer		Summer
10am to 6pm	Before 10am and after 6pm	10am to 7pm	Before 10am and after 7pm
Under control on-leash	Under control off-leash	Prohibited	Under control on-leash
Winter		Winter
10am to 4pm	Before 10am and after 4pm	10am to 4pm	Before 10am and after 4pm
Under control off-leash	Under control off-leash	Under control on-leash	Under control on-leash

26. Of the 98 children surveyed at a children’s event at Silo Park:

· 79 per cent of respondents either liked or did not mind dog on beaches and parks while 18 per cent didn’t like it or were nervous

· just over half of the respondents had had an issue with a dog in the past

· for those that had had concerns, common concerns included being jumped on, scratched or bitten.

Options in relation to dog access on current time and season beaches

Option

Advantages and Disadvantages

Option 1 retain the time and season rules on all beach and foreshore areas

Effect of change

No change to rules.

Advantages

· provides some opportunity for dog access (but not to the level sought by dog owners)

· provides for the level of public safety and comfort sought by non-dog owners in summer (but not winter).

Disadvantages

· does not provide for the needs of dogs and their owners to the level sought by dog owners in summer or winter

· does not provide the level of public safety and comfort sought by non-dog owners in winter before 10am and after 4pm.

Option 2 (Staff recommendation) apply an amended time and season rule between Marine Parade Beach and Sentinel Beach and at Judges Bay with summer on-leash dog access in the morning and evening, and allow dogs under control off-leash west of Marine Parade excluding on the foreshore north of Meola Reef.

Effect of change

Would replace the current time and season rule with an under control off-leash rule west of Meola Reef Reserve and east of Garnet Road up to the western headland of Marine Parade Beach.

Would apply an amended time and season rule from the western headland of Marine Parade Beach to the eastern headland of Sentinel Beach and at Judges Bay.

Would replace the current time and season rule with an under control on-leash rule to all areas east of Sentinel Beach, excluding Judges Bay.

Summer (Labour Weekend until 31 March)
10am to 7pm	Before 10am and after 7pm
Sand and Water Prohibited	Sand and Water Under control on-leash
Winter (1 April until Friday before Labour Weekend)
10am to 4pm	Before 10am and after 4pm
Sand and Water Under control on-leash	Sand and Water Under control off-leash

This option would result in an increase in dog access to beach and foreshore areas west of Marine Parade beach, provide more dog access with a shorter summer season and an extra hour on summer mornings, but would reduce access to the water on time and season beaches.

Advantages

· provides a balance between the needs of dog owners and public safety and comfort

· better provides for dog owners needs by providing 24/7 off-leash dog access west of Marine Parade, excluding the wildlife protection areas

· better provides for dog owners needs on time and season beaches by providing a shorter summer season, and an extra hour of dog access on summer mornings

· public safety and comfort can be maintained while allowing for the integration of dogs under control on-leash in the morning and evenings during summer

· provides for the level of public safety and comfort sought by non-dog owners in summer (but not winter)

· removing the ‘in water’ rule makes the beach rules easier to understand and enforce.

Disadvantages

· does not provide for the needs of dogs and their owners to the level sought by dog owners in summer or winter

· does not provide for the levels of public safety and comfort sought by non-dog owners in winter before 10am and after 4pm.

Option

Advantages and Disadvantages

Option 3 apply an amended time and season rule between Marine Parade Beach and Sentinel Beach and at Judges Bay with summer off-leash dog access in the morning and evening, and allow dogs under control off-leash west of Marine Parade, excluding the foreshore north of Meola Reef.

Effect of Change

Would replace the current time and season rule with an under control off-leash rule west of Meola Reef Reserve and east of Garnet Road up to the western headland of Marine Parade Beach.

Would apply an amended time and season rule from the western headland of Marine Parade Beach to the eastern headland of Sentinel Beach and at Judges Bay.

Would replace the current time and season rule with an under control on-leash to all areas east of Sentinel Beach, excluding Judges Bay.

Summer (Labour Weekend until the 31 March)
10am to7pm	Before 10am and after 7pm
Sand and Water Prohibited	Sand and Water Under control off-leash
Winter (1 April until Friday before Labour Weekend)
10am to 4pm	Before 10am and after 4pm
Sand and Water Under control on-leash	Sand and Water Under control off-leash

This option would result in an increase in dog access as per Option 1 except that it would also provide additional under control off-leash access in the morning and later evening during summer on time and season beaches.

Advantages

· provides a balance between the needs of dog owners and public safety and comfort

· better provides for dog owners needs by providing 24/7 off-leash dog access west of Marine Parade, excluding the wildlife protection areas

· better provides for dog owners needs on time and season beaches by providing a shorter summer season, an extra hour of dog access on summer mornings, and off-leash dog access in in the morning and later evening during summer

· removes the ‘in water’ rule makes the beach rules easier to understand and enforce.

Disadvantages

· does not provide for the level of public safety and comfort sought by non-dog owners in summer and is accentuated by the smaller nature of the affected beaches

· does not provide for the levels of public safety and comfort sought by non-dog owners in winter before 10am and after 4pm.

27. The use of the region-wide standard summer beach time and season was not considered to be a reasonably practicable option as the adoption of the standard would either be too restrictive on dog owners or not provide for public safety and comfort.

Staff recommendation

28. Staff recommend that an amended time and season rule be applied between Marine Parade Beach to Sentinel Beach and at Judges Bay with summer on-leash dog access in the morning and evening, and that an under control off-leash rule be applied west of Marine Parade excluding the foreshore north of Meola Reef (Option 2).

29. The reasons for this recommendation is that:

· it provides a balance between the needs of dog owners, the protection of public safety and comfort, and protection of widlife

· public safety and comfort can be maintained while allowing for the integration of dogs under control on-leash in the mornings and evenings during summer on the time and season beaches

· the needs of dog owners are better provided for by allowing dogs under control off-leash at all times west of Marine Parade (excluding the wildlife protection areas), and on time and season beaches by providing a shorter summer season and an extra hour of dog access on summer mornings.

Wildlife and habitat protection

30. Currently dogs are allowed under control on-leash in park, beach or foreshore areas identified as a significant ecological area (unless the area is specifically identified as a prohibited area or a dog exercise area).

Staff and community views

31. Auckland Council biodiversity staff and community care and environmentally focused groups were asked to identify which areas required restrictions on dog access in order to protect wildlife.

32. Feedback received from both Council biodiversity staff and the community groups was that the foreshore on the northern end of Meola Reef as important for the protection of shorebirds (identified as SEA-M2-55w4 in the Auckland Unitary Plan). This area was recommended to be under control on-leash.

Options in relation to wildlife and habitat protection

Option

Advantages and Disadvantages

Option 1 retain the current general wildlife rule

Effect of change

No change to rule.

Advantages

· none, all areas requiring restrictions on dogs for the protection of wildlife can be specifically identified with appropriate controls being imposed.

Disadvantages

· rule unnecessary because the default rule for parks is under control on-leash

· it is not easy to understand where the rule applies

· changes to significant ecological areas may decrease the ability of dog owners to meet their needs.

Option 2 (staff recommendation) replace the current general wildlife rule with a specific rule on the Meola Reef Reserve foreshore.

Effect of change

Replace the current general under control on-leash wildlife rule with a specific on-leash rule for dogs on the foreshore area north of Meola Reef Reserve (SEA-M2-55w4).

Advantages

· specific rule easier to understand

· all wildlife and habitat areas requiring protection from dogs have been identified.

Disadvantages

· none, all areas requiring restrictions on dogs for the protection of wildlife can be specifically identified with appropriate controls being imposed.

Recommendation

33. Staff recommend to replace the general wildlife rule with a specific rule on the Meola Reef Reserve foreshore (Option 2).

34. The reasons for this recommendation are that:

· specific rules are easier to understand than a general rule

· all wildlife and habitat areas requiring protection from dogs have been identified.

Cox’s Bay Reserve, Seddon Fields, Victoria Park, Tole Reserve, Arch Hill Reserve, Costley Reserve, Francis Reserve, Lemington Reserve, Vermont Reserve and Grey Lynn Park

35. During the review of beaches and parks within the original scope of the review, staff raised the following additional issues for the board to consider:

· the alignment of the summer season for parks and beaches

· the practically useable off-leash areas on Cox’s Bay Reserve, Seddon Fields and Victoria Park

· the alignment of the dog access rule with the adopted Grey Lynn Park Development Plan

· public safety and comfort on Tole Reserve and Victoria Park.

36. Arch Hill Reserve, Costley Reserve, Cox’s Bay Reserve, Francis Reserve, Lemington Reserve and Vermont Reserve have time and season rules with a summer season from Labour weekend to Easter Monday which align with the current time and season summer season for beaches and foreshore.

37. Cox’s Bay Reserve, Seddon Fields and Victoria Park have substantial areas covered by sports fields, playgrounds, courts and parking areas which have regional rules that are either under control on-leash^{^[4]} or prohibited^{^[5]}. As a result the actual size of the under control off-leash areas is significantly restricted.

38. The existing rule for Tole Reserve is under control off-leash north of the path which runs from Tole to Clarence Streets. South of the path is a substantive playground area with half-courts on which dogs are prohibited. The remainder of the park is under control on-leash.

39. The existing dog access rules for Grey Lynn Park is under control off-leash on the two triangular areas between Baildon and Dryden Streets and east of the lower path by Farrar and Arnold Streets. All sports fields, courts and playgrounds are prohibited to dogs while the remainder of the park is under control on-leash.

40. On 14 April 2014 the board adopted the Grey Lynn Park Development Plan (WTM/2015/51). The plan indicates an intention to enlarge the northern under control off-leash area to north of the existing pathway running from Dryden Street to Arnold Street.

Staff views

41. The views of Auckland Council parks and animal management staff are that:

· an under control on-leash rule at Cox’s Bay Reserve and Seddon Fields would integrate more effectively with existing region-wide rules and reduce conflict with the use of the sports fields

· Victoria Park is a high use area and under control off-leash is not considered to be appropriate given the intensity and nature of the use park

· parks staff consider the existing off-leash area on the northern side of Tole Reserve conflicts with the playground on the southern side of the reserve.

Options in relation to Cox’s Bay Reserve, Seddon Fields, Victoria Park, Tole Reserve, Arch Hill Reserve, Costley Reserve, Francis Reserve, Lemington Reserve, Vermont Reserve and Grey Lynn Park

Option

Advantages and Disadvantages

Option 1 retain current rules

Effect of change

No change. The current time and season rules would continue to apply on Arch Hill Reserve, Costley Reserve, Cox’s Bay Reserve, Francis Reserve, Lemington Reserve and Vermont Reserve.

The current under control off-leash rule would continue to apply on parts of Cox’s Bay Reserve, Seddon Fields, Victoria Park, Tole Reserve and Grey Lynn Park.

Advantages

· provides for needs of dogs and their owners to current levels.

Disadvantages

· on Arch Hill Reserve, Costley Reserve, Cox’s Bay Reserve, Francis Reserve, Lemington Reserve and Vermont Reserve having a different summer season to beaches make the rules more difficult to understand

· on Victoria Park, under control off-leash dogs do not provide for the safety and comfort of users of the park given the nature and intensity of its use

· on Cox’s Bay Reserve, Seddon Fields and Victoria Park, the region-wide dog access rules on sports fields, playgrounds and car parks leaves little usable under control off-leash space and the mix of rules is complicated to understand

· on Tole Reserve, none

· on Grey Lynn Park, does not implement the recently approved development plan.

Option 2 (Staff recommendation) amend the summer season for parks, remove under control off-leash rule from Cox’s Bay Reserve, Seddon Fields and Victoria Park, retain current off-leash rule on Tole Park, and enlarge off-leash area on Grey Lynn Park.

Effect of change

The summer season for Arch Hill, Costley, Francis Lemington and Vermont Reserves would be aligned with the beach summer season.

The current under control off-leash rule that applies outside of the sports fields, playgrounds and courts on Cox’s Bay Reserve, Seddon Fields and Victoria Park would be replaced with an under control on-leash rule.

The current under control off-leash rule on the northern side of Tole Reserve would continue to apply.

The current northern under control off-leash area on Grey Lynn Park would be enlarged to north of the pathway running from Dryden Street to Arnold Street.

Advantages

· retains alignment of the summer season for both parks and beaches to make the rules easier to understand

· on Victoria Park, better provides for public safety and comfort while still maintaining the integration of dogs with under control on-leash access

· on Cox’s Bay Reserve and Seddon Fields, simplifies and integrates the dog rules with the region-wide rules for sports fields and playgrounds

· on Cox’s Bay Reserve and Seddon Fields, the needs of dog owners are not significantly impacted on given the small size of the under control off-leash areas and the alternative under control off-leash areas available at Meola Reef Reserve and Cox’s Bay foreshore

· on Tole Reserve, dog owners would continue to be able to provide for their needs as the northern portion of Tole reserve isan ideal area for under control off-leash activities and is well delineated from the on-leash areas on the remainder of the park

· on Grey Lynn Park, dog owners will better be able to meet their needs with the increase of the northern under control off-leash area while still maintaining the public safety and comfort of other users of the park.

Disadvantages

· on Victoria Park, dog owners will be less able to be able to meet their needs for under control off-leash access, however this will be partially mitigated by the under control off-leash access available on Pt Erin Park adjacent to the motorway

· on all other areas, none.

Staff recommendation

42. Staff recommend to amend the summer season for parks to align with the beach summer season, remove the under control off-leash controls from Cox’s Bay Reserve, Seddon Fields and Victoria Park, retain current under control off-leash dog access on Tole Reserve, and enlarge the off-leash area on Grey Lynn Park (Option 2).

43. The reasons for this recommendation are that:

· it retains the alignment of the summer season for time and season rules on parks and beaches

· better provides for public safety and comfort on Victoria park while still maintaining the integration of dogs with under control on-leash access

· the removal of under control off-leash rules on Cox’s Bay Reserve and Seddon Fields simplifies and integrates the dog rules with the region-wide rules for sports fields and playgrounds and alternative under control off-leash areas are available at nearby Meola Reef Reserve dog park and foreshore at Cox’s Bay

· the under control off-leash area on Tole Reserve is appropriate and has easily identifiable boundaries

· enlarging the under control off-leash area on Grey Lynn Park better provides for dogs and their owners while still maintaining public safety and comfort.

Picnic areas and fitness apparatus areas

44. Currently the Waitematā local board area has general rules that require dogs to be under control on-leash in ‘picnic areas’ and ‘fitness apparatus areas’. None of these terms are defined.

Staff views

45. Feedback received from Auckland Council parks and animal management staff was that:

· there are no local picnic areas that have easily identified boundaries or are of a meaningful size that justify a specific dog access rule

· the existence of picnic areas should inform decisions on dog access on the whole or more meaningful part of a park

· no other specific parks were considered to warrant further restrictions due to the existence of picnic facilities

· there are no fitness apparatus areas that warrant dog access rules that are different from the surrounding park rules.

Options in relation to picnic and fitness apparatus areas

Option

Advantages and Disadvantages

Option 1 retain general under control on-leash rule

Effect of change

No change. Dogs allowed under control on-leash in designated picnic and fitness apparatus areas.

Advantages

· none.

Disadvantages

· unnecessary. The default rule for parks is already under control on-leash

· it is not easy to know where picnic and fitness areas are

· there are no local picnic areas or fitness apparatus that have easily identifiable boundaries or are of a size to justify a specific rule

· the rules are not well known, not widely communicated, not easily communicated, and not easily enforced.

Option 2 (Staff recommendation) replace current general rule with a specific rule for high use area of parks

Effect of change

This option would remove the existing under control on-leash rule on picnic and fitness apparatus areas.

This option will have little effect on the ground as the default rule for parks in the Waitematā Local Board Area is under control on-leash.

Advantages

· removes confusing and ambiguous rules.

Disadvantages

· none.

Recommendation

46. Staff recommend that the existing under control on-leash rule on picnic and fitness apparatus areas be removed (Option 2).

47. The reasons for this recommendation are that:

· specific rules are easier to understand

· no other specific parks were considered to warrant further restrictions due to the existence of picnic facilities

· there are no fitness apparatus areas that warrant dog access rules that are different from the surrounding park rules.

Dog exercise areas

48. The term ‘dog exercise area’ is used to describe 23 parks where dogs can be taken under control off-leash.

49. The policy on dogs provides an Auckland-wide definition for ‘under control off-leash areas’ which refer to a place shared with other users. ‘Designated dog exercise areas’ refer to a place where dog owners are the priority user (e.g. what is often also referred to as a ‘dog park’).

50. The policy on dogs provides criteria for assessing the suitability of a location as a designated dog exercise area.

51. It is important to note that regardless of the name, dog owners will still be able to take their dogs to these places under control off a leash, unless a dog has been classified by council as a ‘dangerous dog’.

52. A dangerous dog is an individual dog known to be a threat to the safety of people or animals. Classified dangerous dogs must be muzzled in public at all times and under control on-leash in any public place that is not a designated dog exercise area.

Staff views

53. Feedback received from Auckland Council parks and animal management staff is that only the fenced area on Meola Reef Reserve is a dog priority area with all other 22 parks being shared spaces where dog owners are ‘shared user’ and should be called ‘under control off-leash areas’.

Options in relation to dog exercise areas

Option

Advantages and Disadvantages

Option 1 retain current use of the term dog exercise area to describe off-leash areas

Effect of change

No change.

Advantages

· none.

Disadvantages

· inconsistent with policy on dogs

· 22 of the 23 parks are used as shared spaces.

Option 2 (Staff recommendation) reclassify the fenced area on Meola Reef Reserve as a designated dog exercise area and reclassify all other dog exercise areas as under control off-leash areas

Effect of change

No change for the majority of dog owners. Dog owners will still be able to take their dogs to these places under control off-leash, unless a dog has been classified by council as a ‘dangerous dog’.

Advantages

· implements the policy on dogs

· 22 of the 23 parks are shared spaces

· only the fenced area on Meola Reef Reserve meets the criteria for a designated dog exercise area in the policy on dogs

· no change in dog access for the majority of dog owners

· provides greater protection for other park users as will prohibit dangerous dogs from being allowed off-leash in these areas.

Disadvantages

· none.

Recommendation

54. Staff recommend to reclassify the fenced area on Meola Reef Reserve as a designated dog exercise area and reclassify all other dog exercise areas as under control off-leash areas (Option 2).

55. The reasons for this recommendation are that:

· 22 of the 23 parks are shared spaces

· only the fenced area on Meola Reef Reserve meets the criteria for a designated dog exercise area in the policy on dogs

· the majority of dog owner will continue to be able to take their dog under control off-leash in these spaces.

Next steps

56. Following the decision on proposed changes, staff will update the statement of proposal to reflect the option selected by the local board.

57. The statement of proposal (together with proposals from other local boards) will be publicly notified for submissions as part of the dog registration process in June 2015.

Consideration

Local Board Views and Implications

58. The views of other local boards have not been sought.

Maori Impact Statement

59. Managing dog access in areas of significance to Maori can help achieve outcomes of the Māori Plan for Tāmaki Makaurau. In this instance, no impacts have been identified.

60. Feedback from Mana Whenua representatives at a Hui held in March 2015 related to the ability of iwi to determine dog access on Marae, a focus on control, responsible dog ownership, and ensuring the protection of sensitive ecological areas.

Implementation Issues

61. There are no implementation issues associated with this decision to adopt a statement of proposal.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Statement of Proposal	141
b View	Decision Making	161

Signatories

Authors

Justin Walters - Policy Analyst

Paul Wilson - Team Leader Bylaws

Authorisers

Kataraina Maki - GM - Community & Social Policy

Judith Webster - Relationship Manager

Waitematā Local Board

12 May 2015

Developing the Empowered Communities Approach - Next Steps

File No.: CP2015/07525

Purpose

1. This report provides an update on the Empowered Communities Approach (ECA), and enables the Waitemata 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 2014. Feedback from that meeting is either attached to this report, or where local board meetings are alry 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 Waitemata Local Board to make resolutions on the ECA. These resolutions will be reported to the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee on 4 June 2015.

Recommendations

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a) Make resolutions on the proposed Empowered Communities Approach, for consideration as part of the report to the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee in June.

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 2015 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 2015 forms Attachment B to this report.

ECA timeline

42. The remaining key milestones are shown in the table below.

Stage

Date

Purpose

Budget Committee

7-8 May

LTP budget decisions including CDS budget for 2015/2016

Regional Strategy and Policy Committee

4 June

Endorse ECA and the CDS operational model

Consultation and engagement

43. The community was consulted through a limited number of community-led, and staff run, workshops around the region. Staff were also consulted.

44. The key points from the consultation were:

· use a high trust model that is values based

· value what communities bring to the table

· one size does not fit all

· capacity building is critical and a fresh approach is required

· a whole of council approach

· respond to the diversity of Auckland’s communities.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

45. The ECA aims to provide a much more active role for local boards in community development.

46. ECA builds on the strong focus on community led planning and development in the local board plans 2014.

47. Local board chairs met to consider ECA on 30 March. The following four principles arose from this meeting:

· local boards need to be empowered themselves so that they can in turn empower their communities in a way that suits the area

· local board outcomes are community outcomes and need to be central to and drive the community empowerment approach and focus under the direction of the local board.

· community empowerment is not as simple as channelling funds through community groups, which has risks. Community empowerment is an approach and any change to the current needs to be carefully staged and made appropriate for each local board.

· within change there are always opportunities but they carry risks which can be minimised through careful planning, full engagement of the main parties and undertaken within a timeframe that is feasible for significant change to take place.

48. Local boards’ formal views are sought through this paper. This builds on earlier opportunities to provide informal feedback at local board workshops during April and at two workshops for local board chairs and portfolio holders.

49. The summary feedback from the chairs and portfolio holders meeting on 20 April was:

· the budget approach and costs associated with the proposed model are required to be able to make an informed response. There was also desire for better utilisation of the budget to achieve improved outcomes. Additionally, it was unclear how the model will deliver more resources to local boards

· the broker role needs to operate on a continuum that is tailored to local boards and can deliver across the continuum from those with contracted out services to communities with less capacity to take on additional services

· the broker role bests sits in local board services but the overlap with local board advisor roles needs to be explored

· the community practice hub services are valuable but local boards do not want to have to pitch for resources. A bottom up approach is preferred and the hub should also use resources from other areas of council and the community. It was also unclear where the expertise exists to deliver the hub services

· uncertainty over what the Auckland wide response team will deliver and concern that it will not deliver local board priorities. Local boards could be supported to work collaboratively on common issues as community development is delegated to local boards. The community brokers can collaborate to tackle the systemic issues. Regional issues should be funded by the governing body and Community and Social Policy can cover these Auckland wide issues

· the need to respond to diverse and disempowered communities

· the transition process was unclear and raised concerns over delivery in coming months.

There were also recurring themes from early discussions:

· one size does not fit all

· the model needs to focus on delivering local board priorities, which are the same as the communities’ priorities.

Māori impact statement

50. The ECA has a direct relationship with the Māori Responsiveness Framework, which sets out two key areas of activity; the first being understanding the rights and interests of Māori. The second, and closely intertwined, is acting on the needs and aspirations of Māori.

51. To be a High Performing Organisation a key component is engaging with and enabling communities, which means considering and understanding Māori needs and issues and having the capability and capacity to improve process and systems to enhance involvement. The approach described in this report sets out a shift in the way the organisation delivers services, which includes improving outcomes for Māori. The Council Māori Responsiveness Leadership Group has been established to enable better outcomes with Māori in the areas of cultural, social, economic effectiveness for Māori and treaty settlements and moving to a more empowered community way of working will help make progress in all these areas.

52. There are a number of initiatives underway which can help inform the Empowered Community Approach such the Māori Input to Decision Making project in the south of Auckland. This, and other activities being undertaken in partnership with Mana Whenau around the environment, provide strong examples of how Māori can be engaged with and participate to embed the proposed approach to communities.

53. Engagement with mataawaka and mana whenua is ongoing to enable staff to understand potential impacts.

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

Implementation

55. The transition timeline is for work to be done on models and roles from now until the end of June. From July to December the approach will be implemented to meet local board needs and in 2016 as the approach matures and evolves it will be extended across the council family.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Empowered Communities: Enabling Council	171
b View	PAG Feedback 4 May 2015	173

Signatories

Author

Helen Dodd - Strategic Advisor, Local Board Services

Authoriser

Karen Lyons - Manager, Local Board Services

Waitematā Local Board

12 May 2015

Auckland Council Property Limited Local Board Six-Monthly Update 1 July to 31 December 2014

File No.: CP2015/08230

Purpose

To give the Waitematā Local Board an overview of Auckland Council Property Limited’s (ACPL) activities for the six months 1 July to 31 December 2014.

Executive Summary

1. ACPL’s vision centres on “creating value from property assets” by providing commercial expertise and value for money to Auckland Council in managing its property portfolio, and acquisition and disposal activities. The concept of “value” includes but is not limited to financial value. In addition to financial value, a growing aspect of ACPL’s work has been to use surplus council property to help achieve the council’s housing supply and urban regeneration objectives. We will also identify opportunities to add value by improving the use of council service property such as redevelopment of under-utilised sites.

2. This report sets out a summary of ACPL activities for the past six months that contribute to our seven key outcomes as outlined in our Statement of Intent (SOI) 2014 to 2017 and noted below. Activity detail is broken down by business unit or work-stream, with a focus on local board specific activities where applicable.

3. ACPL’s seven key outcomes:

§ Properties managed for the council and Auckland Transport (AT) are maintained to be fit for purpose and achieve optimum net returns.

§ Redevelopment/regeneration projects involving other sector partners are efficiently planned and managed to help achieve a quality compact Auckland.

§ ACPL contributes exemplar housing developments to increase the supply of housing in Auckland, particularly in the more affordable spectrum of the market, working with partners.

§ Council business interests are managed to protect long term value and achieve budgeted net income.

§ Property acquisitions are undertaken in a commercially robust manner and in accordance with the council and AT agreed requirements and relevant legislation.

§ Properties are disposed of for the council in a commercially robust manner once declared surplus.

§ The council is provided with a commercial perspective on planning and development initiatives to support effective implementation of those initiatives.

4. Local board specific supporting detail is included in Attachments A, B, and C.

Recommendations

That the Waitematā Local Board accepts the Auckland Council Property Limited Local Board Six-Monthly update 1 July to 31 December 2014.

Comments

Workshops and Meetings

5. A schedule of Waitematā Local Board workshops and meetings attended by ACPL representatives from July to December is included as Attachment A. The list includes property specific meetings and workshops relating to general property management and the ongoing portfolio Rationalisation Process.

Property Portfolio Management

6. ACPL manages property owned by the council and AT that are not currently required for service or infrastructure purposes. These are properties that are not immediately required for service delivery or infrastructure development but are being held for use in a planned future project such as road construction/widening or the expansion of parks.

7. The property portfolio continued to grow during the last six months and now totals 1306 properties, an increase of 121 since our January-June 2014 update. The current property portfolio includes industrial sites and buildings, retail tenancies, cafés, restaurants, offices and a substantial portfolio of residential properties.

8. ACPL’s specialist property knowledge and understanding enables us to optimise revenue streams and identify future opportunities. ACPL’s return on the property portfolio for the six months ending 31 December 2014 provides the shareholder a net surplus of $2.9m ahead of budget, with an actual surplus of $11.8m against budget of $23m. The average monthly vacancy rate for the period is 1.68% which is under the SOI targets of 5%.

9. A Properties Managed schedule is included as Attachment B of this report. The schedule details:

§ Current ACPL-managed commercial and residential property within the Waitematā Local Board

§ Each property’s classification or reason for retention

§ The nature of the property, such as a café within a library, or a residential property with a tenancy in place

§ The budget under which operating expenditure and lease revenue for the property is reported eg regional or local board.

10. A report indicating portfolio movement in the local board area is attached as Attachment C. The report details all new acquisitions including the reason for acquisition, any transfers and the reason for transfer, and any disposals.

Portfolio Review and Rationalisation

Overview

11. ACPL is required to undertake ongoing rationalisation of the council’s non-service assets. This includes identifying properties from within council’s portfolio that may be suitable for potential sale and development if appropriate. ACPL has a particular focus on achieving housing outcomes. Identifying potential sale properties contributes to the Auckland Plan focus of accommodating the significant growth projected for the region over the coming decades, by providing the council with an efficient use of capital and prioritisation of funds to achieve its activities and projects.

Performance

July 2014 to June 2015 Target

UNIT

TARGET

ACHIEVED

COMMENTS

Portfolio Review

$30m disposal recommendations

$36.4m

These recommendations include $33.2m of sites that are identified for development projects.

12. In setting future disposal targets ACPL is working closely with the council and AT to identify potentially surplus properties.

2014/2015 Targets

UNIT	TARGET	COMMENTS
Portfolio Review	$30m gross value recommended for sale	These targets include disposal recommendations and sales for sites that are identified for place-shaping and housing development projects
Development & Disposals	$30 net value of unconditional sales

Process

13. Once identified as a potential sale candidate a property is taken through a multi-stage Rationalisation Process. The agreed process includes engagement with: the council, CCOs, local board and mana whenua. This is followed by ACPL Board approval, engagement with local ward and the Independent Māori Statutory Board and finally a governing body decision.

Under review

14. Properties currently under review for future use opportunities via the Rationalisation Process in the Waitematā area are listed below. The list includes any properties that may have recently been approved for sale or development and sale by the governing body. Further details are included in Attachment B.

PROPERTY	DETAILS
3 Ponsonby Road, Ponsonby	Non-service property under review with CDAC and local board for future use options.

Redevelopment/Regeneration and Housing Supply Initiatives

Overview

15. ACPL is contributing commercial input into approximately 54 region wide council-driven regeneration and housing supply initiatives. Involvement extends from provision of initial feasibility advice through to implementation, with projects ranging in size from $415k to in excess of $100million. ACPL works closely with the local boards on ACPL-led developments to ensure we give effect to the local boards’ place-shaping role.

16. ACPL is working with the wider council group to formulate a process or approach for identifying and realising optimisation opportunities that exist for service assets. This will provide opportunities to work with local boards on development opportunities that deliver wider strategic benefit consistent with the Auckland plan such as intensification, town centre regeneration and affordable housing. It will also improve service outcomes through obtaining more effective use of property assets.

17. ACPL is also actively contributing to the Housing Strategy Action Plan, which is a council initiative focusing on non-regulatory efforts to encourage and increase affordable residential development. We have an SOI target to undertake five housing development projects over three years that will improve housing affordability and the supply of affordable housing encompassing CHO involvement. We are currently actively working on 13 such projects. A high level update on place-shaping and housing initiative and proposal activities in the Waitematā area is outlined in points below.

Local Activities

18. Aotea Precinct: ACPL is actively involved in the business case determining the future of the Civic Building. This work will feed into the wider precinct plan.

19. A mid-year workshop is scheduled to take place with the Auckland Development Committee. This will allow other work streams involved in the project to progress including; Regional Facilities Auckland’s master plan; the consent order for heritage scheduling; and the Aotea Quarter Framework Plan.

Acquisitions

Overview

20. ACPL continues to support council and AT programmes and projects by negotiating required property acquisitions. All such acquisitions are funded through approved council or AT budgets. We also provide advice to assist with budgets, business cases and strategy to support an acquisition.

21. From the commencement of the 2015 financial year, 1 July 2014 to 31 January 2015, 73 property purchases were completed for the council and AT to the value of $56m. All of the property acquisitions met independent valuation thresholds agreed with AT, the council and Public Works Act 1981 requirements.

Council Acquisitions

22. Over the past six months 15 properties were acquired to meet council legal, open space and storm water requirements and to contribute to City Transformation projects. This included the following acquisition in or neighbouring the Waitematā Local Board area.

PROPERTY	STAKEHOLDER	PURPOSE	LOCAL BOARD
Waitematā	Stormwater	Stormwater	Waitematā

Auckland Transport Acquisitions

23. 58 properties were also acquired over the past six months on behalf of AT. The focus was on acquisitions to support major transport projects including AMETI (17 acquisitions) City Rail Link Property Acquisition (23 acquisitions) and Northern Strategic Growth Area (4 acquisitions). Full details of relevant AT projects and associated acquisitions will come to the local board directly from AT.

Business Interests

24. ACPL also optimises the commercial return from assets it manages on council’s behalf. This comprises two forestry enterprises, two landfills and four quarries. There are currently no managed business interests in the Waitematā Local Board area.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

25. This report is for the Waitematā Local Board’s information.

Māori impact statement

26. Whatungarongaro te tangata, toitū te whenua. The importance of effective communication and engagement with Māori on the subject of land is understood. ACPL has accordingly developed robust engagement with the 19 mana whenua groups for our core business activities.

27. Key engagement activities include: identifying cultural significance concerns regarding disposal properties, flagging commercial interests, development partnering discussions and issues relating to property management such as protection of wāhi tapu or joint management arising from the resolution of Treaty Settlements. ACPL also engages with relevant mana whenua in respect of development outcomes for ACPL lead projects where appropriate. ACPL will advise the Waitematā Local Board as appropriate of any discussions that arise in the local board’s area. Along with the Built Environment Unit, engagement was undertaken with mana whenua in relation to Queen Elizabeth Square and the evaluation of alternative open space.

28. ACPL undertook to be part of council’s Māori Responsiveness Plan (MRP) pilot programme. The project’s key output is an operational document outlining ACPL’s contribution to council’s strategic and operational commitments to Māori. The MRP was finalised and approved by the ACPL Board in December 2014 and the focus will move to identifying priority areas for implementation. A copy of this is available on the ACPL website.

Implementation

29. There are no implementation issues.

Signatories

Author

Ebony Duff - Local Board Liaison

Authoriser

David Rankin - Chief Executive

Judith Webster – Relationship Manager

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Local Board Briefing Schedule 1 Jul - 31 Dec 2014	183
b View	Properties Managed 1 Jul - 31 Dec 2014	185
c View	Portfolio Changes 1 Jul - 31 Dec 2014	203

Waitematā Local Board

12 May 2015

Deputy Chairperson's Report

File No.: CP2015/07532

Executive summary

My board report this month is a selection of photos covering April events in the Waitematā Local Board area.

Recommendations

a) That the Deputy Chairperson’s Report be received.

Comments

“We will remember them”

ANZAC day dawn ceremony at the Auckland War Memorial Museum

Shale Chambers and I laid the wreath at the Grey Lynn RSC on behalf of the Waitematā Local Board

The honey from the hives that formed the The Park project (Waitemata Local Board POP project 2014) was harvested and distributed to those who had contributed “pollen hotels” at an event in Victoria Park on 4 April

Photo right: Sarah Smuts Kennedy addresses the honey harvest gathering

The Open Streets event on 12 April opened up Quay street for people to play, socialise, walk and cycle. The Auckland Transport hosted and Waitemata Local Board supported event attracted over 30,000 people.

Photo left with Kathryn King, Auckland Transport’s new walking & cycling manager and Auckland’s bike riding police officers.

The St James lobby opened with a celebration on 10 April hosted by the Auckland Notable Properties Trust. The Trust and the St James Suite development group are working to restore the St James Theatre.

Photo with the Deputy Mayor and Jhun Si, General Manager, St James Suites.

A dawn blessing was held on 23 April to mark the start of work on the Nelson Street cycle route.

Kaumatua from Ngati Whatua o Orakei, Te Aki Tai, Ngati Paoa and Te Kawerau a Maki led the blessing which took place on the disused Nelson Street off-ramp.

The Nelson Street Cycle Route will link Upper Queen Street to Quay Street via the disused off-ramp and connect to the north-western and Grafton Gully cycleways.

Construction has now started on a new bridge (below right) to connect Canada Street (below left) with the Nelson St off ramp.

Construction of the new Parnell Station got underway at Easter

Construction of the Beach Road Stage 2 walking and cycling project got underway during April.

I attended the draft Western Park development plan open day at Studio One.

The consultation deadline has been extended until 14 May.

Photo left: Board member Vernon Tava talks to a Freemans Bay resident

Long Term Plan presentation to the Governing Body by Shale Chambers with Board members in support.

Tour of the refurbished Lysaght building, Wynyard Quarter hosted by Waterfront Auckland (new home of GridAKL)

Auckland Conversations: Charles Montgomery author of Happy City

“A happy city is healthy sustainable, resilient and social”

“Walking is the magic of our cities”

“Nothing matters more to happiness than social ties”

“Socially connected people live, on average, 15 years longer than socially disconnected people”

“Walking saves society $1.08, bus saves $0.16, cars cost society $2.78”

Unveiling of the Art of remembrance memorial project by the Friends of St David on 24 April 2015.

A monumental, site-specific Max Gimblett art installation cloaks the historic St David’s Church – The Soldiers’Memorial– to commemorate the 100,000 New Zealanders who served overseas in WWI.

Recommendation

a) That the report be received.

Gifts:

- 2 Comedy festival tickets to the Big Show on 28 April at the invitation of ATEED

- Spirit of ANZAC concert on 23 April at the invitation of NZSO

Signatories

Author

Pippa Coom, Deputy Chair

[1] Summer activities were described within the online survey as ‘swimming, sunbathing, and playing with the sand’.

[2] Daylight savings starts last Sunday in September.

[3] Daylight savings finishes on the first Sunday in April.

[4] Car parking areas and in the vicinity of playgrounds and sports surfaces when in use.

Chairperson	Shale Chambers
Deputy Chairperson	Pippa Coom
Members	Christopher Dempsey
	Greg Moyle
	Vernon Tava
	Rob Thomas
	Deborah Yates

No.	Title	Page
a View	7 April 2015 Workshop Proceeding Notes	287
b View	14 April 2015 Workshop Proceeding Notes	289
c View	16 April 2015 Workshop Proceeding Notes	291
d View	21 April 2015 Workshop Proceeding Notes	293
e View	30 April 2015 Workshop Proceeding Notes	295

Item	Topic	Lead officer	Notes
1.	Regional Signage Review	Maree Cotter (Custom Design Manager, Auckland Transport) Priscilla Steel	Officers provided the board with an update on the Regional Signage Review and sought the Board’s feedback on current proposals.
2.	Auckland Transport – Residential Parking	Priscilla Steel (Elected Members Relationship Manager) Russell Derrecort Scott Ebbett Jonathan Levell	Officers from Auckland Transport presented to the Board on the Auckland Transport Residential Parking project and advised the Board on schedule of implementation.
3.	Pilot Study Local Board Engagement Plan	Chris Lock (Strategic Advisor – Local Boards, ATEED) Steven Kavana	Officers presented to the Board on: · The Waitemata Local Board-ATEED Engagement Plan Pilot study. · Waitemata LB – city fringe business association collaborative economic development programme.
4.	Community Development, Arts and Culture (CDAC) Work Programme 2015/2016	Robyn McMichael Kat Tierney Kaye Glamuzina Tracey Williams Claire Stewart Lucia Davies Carrie Doulst	Officers presented to the Board Community development work programme for next year 2015/16

Item	Topic	Lead officer	Notes
1.	Advocacy and Budgets	Trina Thompson (Senior Local Board Advisor) Eman Nasser (Local Board Advisor)	Officers discussed with the board the advocacy areas to be presented to the Governing Body based on feedback received through the Long Term Plan.
2.	Empowering Communities Approach	Judith Webster (Relationship Manager)	Officers presented to the board on the proposed empowering communities approach and sought the Board’s views on the proposal.
3.	Aotea Quarter Framework	Gavin Flynn (Senior Project Leader) Nic Williams (Principal Urban Design) Tim Watts (Manager, City Centre Design) Jane Aicken (Manager Local and Sports Parks Central) Oliver Kenzendorf (Senior Project Manager) Monique Jones (Urban Design)	Officers presented to the board on the draft Aotea Quarter Framework and sought the Board’s views. Officers also updated the board on progress on Myer’s Park Development- stage 2

Item	Topic	Lead officer	Notes
1.	Finance committee	Eman Nasser (Local Board Advisor) Judith Webster (Relationship Manager)	Officers discussed with the board the proposed projects for the redistribution of discretionary budgets before the end of this financial year
2.	Local Dog access Rules	Justin Walters (Policy Analyst)	Officers presented the outcomes of the Local Dog Access Rules online survey.
3.	Local Board Agreement Template	Eman Nasser (Local Board Advisor). Judith Webster (Relationship Manager Waitemata and Waiheke)	Officers presented to the board on the draft Aotea Quarter Framework and sought the Board’s views. Officers also updated the board on progress on Myer’s Park Development- stage 2

Authors	Desiree Tukutama - Democracy Advisor
Authorisers	Judith Webster - Relationship Manager

Authors	Judy Lawley - Local Board Engagement Manager, Regional Facilities Auckland
Authorisers	Judith Webster - Relationship Manager

Authors	Trina Thompson - Senior Local Board Advisor - Waitemata
Authorisers	Judith Webster - Relationship Manager