Agenda of Māngere-ŌtāhuhuLocal Board

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

17 June 2015

ITEM TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE

1 Welcome 5

2 Apologies 5

3 Declaration of Interest 5

4 Confirmation of Minutes 5

5 Leave of Absence 5

6 Acknowledgements 5

7 Petitions 5

8 Deputations 5

9 Public Forum 5

10 Extraordinary Business 5

11 Notices of Motion 6

12 Manukau Ward Councillors Update 7

13 Auckland Transport Monthly Update Report - June 2015 9

14 Auckland Transport's proposed variation to Auckland's Regional Public Transport Plan:Local Board view 33

15 Proposal to defer operational expenditure from 2014/15 to 2015/16 39

16 Mangere-Otahuhu SLIPs Funding 2015 Programme 41

17 Pools and Leisure Facilities Proposed Property Renewals 57

18 Proposed Funding for Projects in Mangere East Village 61

19 Manukau Heritage Item Assistance Fund Allocation 2014-2015 Round 2 67

20 Community Facilities Network Plan 79

21 Community-led response to alcohol licensing and advertising 85

22 Local Board Feedback on amending the licence to occupy remission scheme to include proposed the Transport Levy 87

23 Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board - Alcohol Ban Review Hearing and Deliberation Dates 95

24 For Information: Reports referred to the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board 97

25 Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board Action/Reports Pending 99

26 Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board Workshop Notes 109

27 Chairpersons Announcements 117

28 Consideration of Extraordinary Items

1 Welcome

2 Apologies

At the close of the agenda no apologies had been received.

3 Declaration of Interest

Members are reminded of the need to be vigilant to stand aside from decision making when a conflict arises between their role as a member and any private or other external interest they might have.

4 Confirmation of Minutes

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Wednesday, 10 June 2015, including the confidential section, as a true and correct record.

5 Leave of Absence

At the close of the agenda no requests for leave of absence had been received.

6 Acknowledgements

At the close of the agenda no requests for acknowledgements had been received.

7 Petitions

At the close of the agenda no requests to present petitions had been received.

8 Deputations

Standing Order 3.20 provides for deputations. Those applying for deputations are required to give seven working days notice of subject matter and applications are approved by the Chairperson of the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board. This means that details relating to deputations can be included in the published agenda. Total speaking time per deputation is ten minutes or as resolved by the meeting.

At the close of the agenda no requests for deputations had been received.

9 Public Forum

A period of time (approximately 30 minutes) is set aside for members of the public to address the meeting on matters within its delegated authority. A maximum of 3 minutes per item is allowed, following which there may be questions from members.

At the close of the agenda no requests for public forum had been received.

10 Extraordinary Business

Section 46A(7) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:

“An item that is not on the agenda for a meeting may be dealt with at that meeting if-

(a) The local authority by resolution so decides; and

(b) The presiding member explains at the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public,-

(i) The reason why the item is not on the agenda; and

(ii) The reason why the discussion of the item cannot be delayed until a subsequent meeting.”

Section 46A(7A) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:

“Where an item is not on the agenda for a meeting,-

(a) That item may be discussed at that meeting if-

(i) That item is a minor matter relating to the general business of the local authority; and

(ii) the presiding member explains at the beginning of the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public, that the item will be discussed at the meeting; but

(b) no resolution, decision or recommendation may be made in respect of that item except to refer that item to a subsequent meeting of the local authority for further discussion.”

11 Notices of Motion

At the close of the agenda no requests for notices of motion had been received.

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

17 June 2015

Auckland Transport Monthly Update Report - June 2015

File No.: CP2015/11375

Purpose

1. This report provides an update on local transport matters over the last month for the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board (MOLB).

Executive Summary

2. This report contains a general monthly update on transport matters both locally and from across Auckland and a list of issues currently being addressed by Auckland Transport for the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board.

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) Receive the Auckland Transport Monthly Update Report – June 2015.

Reporting Back on Resolutions

Resolution Number: MO/2014/176

a) Requests that the removal of the fencing in the Mangere Town Centre car park, near the Citizen’s Advice Bureau is resolved.

3. Last month it was reported, verbally, that discussions with the ‘owner’ of the fence are now complete. The result is that that the fence can now be removed. Getting the fence removed requires contractors to be assigned and will take a little while but is now underway.

Discussion

Parking Strategy

4. On 27 May 2015 Auckland Transport launched the new Auckland wide ‘Parking Strategy’. The strategy includes twelve parking policies that state Auckland Transport’s position with regards to all aspects of parking in the city including:

· The triggers for establishing resident’s parking zones;

· How pricing for parking on-street and off-street is established;

· How parking in town centres will be managed; and

· The way parking on arterial routes will be managed.

5. In summary the release of the Parking Strategy and its supporting policies is a very important step both for Auckland Transport and for local communities. The document provides a transparent statement of Auckland Transport’s position with regards to parking and therefore is helps to inform communities about how parking will be managed.

6. People looking for more information are encouraged to visit the Auckland Transport website and the following links are recommended:

· Information about the Parking Strategy https://at.govt.nz/about-us/transport-plans-strategies/parking-strategy/

· A summary of the feedback received on the original ‘Parking Discussion Document’ from which the Parking Strategy was developed https://at.govt.nz/media/1119139/Parking-Discussion-Document-Submission-Report.pdf

· A list of the twelve policies within the strategy https://at.govt.nz/about-us/transport-plans-strategies/parking-strategy/parking-strategy-policies/

7. All elected members were invited to a briefing on the launch of the strategy and the policies and hard copies will be posted to Local Board Offices. The information contained in the links is considerable, so rather than include attachments it is therefore more efficient to direct people to the website.

Regional Land Transport Plan (RLTP)

8. The RLTP contains the combined intentions of Auckland Transport, New Zealand Transport Agency, and Kiwi Rail in terms of forward planning and Auckland Transport has worked closely with these other agencies in the development of this document.

9. Public consultation on the draft RLTP finished at the end of March 2015 and is now complete.

10. The RLTP has been re-drafted taking into account public submissions and is currently being debated by Auckland Council’s Governing Body.

11. The final version will be released when the Long Term Plan has been finalised.

SMART Study

12. During this reporting period the SMART Study has progressed. The possibility of utilising light rail instead of heavy rail to provide a link from the city to the airport is being investigated. Light rail is considerably less expensive and has a range of other benefits that may make it a better option.

13. Auckland Transport conducted two briefings for the Transport Portfolio Leaders during March 2015.

East - West Study

14. The East - West Study is a project to analyse transport routes between SH20 and SH1 and develop solutions for managing an anticipated increase in road freight of 60% through that corridor in the next 30 years. In particular, the objective will be to permit better connectivity for the industrial areas of Onehunga-Southdown, East Tamaki-Highbrook, the Airport, Wiri and southern Mt Wellington.

15. A meeting has been scheduled for 9 June 2015 so that the project team can brief the Transport Portfolio Leader about Route 32 which from the MOLB area’s perspective is the most important part of the East-West project.

16. Route 32 is the new public transport corridor that will link Sylvia Park, Otahuhu, Mangere and the Airport. The corridor is being funded mostly by the New Zealand Transport Agency although Auckland Transport is contributing to the project.

17. The project will include identifying the route, upgrading existing roads and intersections to make them easier for buses to use and upgrading key interchanges so that people are able to connect easily with other buses or trains at key locations like Otahuhu, Mangere and Sylvia Park. Figure 1 provides a rough indication of the area of interest and the potential route.

Figure 1 – Route 32

Otahuhu Bus and Rail Interchange Upgrade

18. The Otahuhu Bus and Rail Interchange is being re-developed and upgraded. The project is moving forwards and ‘enabling works’ continue. The Titi Street Bridge has been removed and ‘pre-loading’ (piling spoil on the work site to compress the ground and force water out of the substrate) is currently taking place.

19. The main part of the station upgrade is planned to start by the middle of 2015 and providing the project retains it high priority and that the Long Term Plan delivers sufficient budget it is planned to be completed by the end of 2015.

20. This project is currently funded for approximately $18,000,000 in the RLTP.

21. Details of engagement with the MOLB over this project are included in Attachment B.

Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board Transport Capital Fund

22. Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board has a total pool of approx. $1,971,770 available in this electoral term to spend on transport projects.

23. In its first electoral term the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board requested a number of projects and the progress of these projects is summarised in Attachment C.

24. So far in this electoral term the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board has identified six projects and these are also identified in Attachment C.

25. Last month it was reported that the ‘Future Streets’ project in Mangere Town Centre has encountered some difficulties and progress has been slowed down. Auckland Transport was expecting the first parts of this project to start being built in May 2015.

26. Unfortunately this is not now the case and the timeline for construction is currently October 2015 – March 2016. Full details of the situation were reported to the MOLB in May 2015.

27. Auckland Transport’s commitment to the Future Streets project which had not been confirmed at the May 2015 MOLB meeting is currently set at approximately $1,700,000.

28. Construction of the walking route in the car park linking Mason and Station Roads in Otahuhu has started.

29. The MOLB has requested that the Bader Drive / Idlewild Intersection be re-investigated because there are concerns in the community about safety at this intersection. The MOLB is concerned that the layout delivered by Auckland Transport is contributing to poor driver behaviour and a drop in safety at this intersection. This matter has been discussed with the Manager Road Corridor Operations Central and South and the intersection is being re-investigated by a senior engineer.

30. At the May 2015 MOLB meeting the Auckland Transport was asked to follow-up progress on this investigation. The Relationship Manager has met with the people conducting the investigation and they stated that the investigation is taking a little while because they are keen to make sure that it is thorough study. As soon as the results are ready a report will be made to the MOLB.

31. At the May 2015 MOLB meeting it was reported that although the Auckland Transport’s records state that the traffic calming road surface has been completed in Mangere-East nothing has been done. This matter is currently being chased up with the contractors.

Issues

32. A list of specific transport issues that the MOLB has asked Auckland Transport to investigate is included as Attachment D.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Summary of Information sent to the board May/June 2015	15
b View	Summary of Engagement	17
c View	Summary of Transport Capital Fund Projects	23
d View	Issues Register	31

Signatories

Authors

Ben Stallworthy, Elected Member Relationship Manager, Auckland Transport

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon, Elected Member Relationship Team Manager, Auckland Transport

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

17 June 2015

Auckland Transport's proposed variation to Auckland's Regional Public Transport Plan:Local Board view

File No.: CP2015/10269

Purpose

1. To seek the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Local Board’s feedback (Attachment A) to Auckland Transport’s (AT) proposed variation to Auckland’s Regional Public Transport Plan (RPTP).

Executive Summary

2. The RPTP is a statutory document that describes the services that are integral to Auckland’s public transport network and the policies and procedures that apply to those services; the current RPTP was completed in 2013.

3. There is now the need to update references to some public transport initiatives within the RPTP and to incorporate some new initiatives, in particular:

· simplified zone fares

· light rail

· ferry development plan

· new Network service description.

4. AT held workshops with individual local boards in May 2015 to discuss the proposed variations to the RPTP and consulted on these. Submissions closed on Friday 5 June. AT also held hearings for key stakeholders on the 10 and 12 June 2015.

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board approve the board’s written feedback (Attachment A) to Auckland Transport on the proposed variation to Auckland’s Regional Public Transport Plan.

Comments

Proposed variation to the Auckland Regional Public Transport Plan

5. The RPTP is a statutory document that describes the services that are integral to Auckland’s public transport network and the policies and procedures that apply to those services; the current RPTP was completed in 2013.

6. There is now the need to update references to some public transport initiatives within the RPTP and to incorporate some new initiatives. These include:

· simplified zone fares

· light rail

· ferry development plan

· new Network service description.

7. The ‘Variation to the Auckland Regional Public Transport Plan – Statement of Proposal’ sets out the proposed changes to the RPTP to reflect new policies and procedures that would apply to services relating to these initiatives. AT is now seeking feedback on these changes, which are summarised below. Further details are outlined in the attached Statement of Proposal.

8. AT is not revising other parts of the RPTP at this time, and is not seeking feedback on matters that are not covered in the Statement of Proposal. AT is planning a more comprehensive review of the RPTP in 2016, which will address these other matters.

Consultation process

9. AT held workshops with individual local boards in May 2015 to discuss the proposed variations to the RPTP and consulting on these. Submissions closed on Friday 5 June 2015. AT also held hearings for key stakeholders on the 10 and 12 June 2015.

Simplified zone fares

10. To support the new, connected public transport network being rolled out across Auckland, AT is proposing the introduction of simplified zone fares across the Auckland public transport network. The new system takes account of public feedback received during preparation of the current RPTP, which showed strong support for a zone-based fare system, but asked AT to review the zone boundaries.

11. The new simplified zone fares system will allow customers using AT HOP cards to pay one fare for their entire journey on bus or rail, regardless of whether or not they need to transfer between services to complete the journey.

12. AT is seeking feedback on RPTP changes that establish the policy framework for the new fares system. AT is also carrying out a more in-depth public consultation on simplified fare zones during May. This in-depth consultation is focused on the local implementation of the policy, and will enable people to understand how the changes will affect the cost of their travel.

Light rail transit

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

14. Subject to the outcome of further investigations, and approval to proceed (including funding), AT is proposing a staged implementation of light rail. The initial stages, which may be implemented during the 10 year planning period of the RPTP would be likely to include Queen Street and Dominion Road – potentially including a link to Wynyard Quarter. A route extension to the Airport is also possible, subject to investigation of light rail and metro rail options. Other corridors (Sandringham Road, Manukau Road and Mt Eden Road) could be implemented at a later stage, subject to feasibility and funding. If implemented, light rail would replace the existing bus services on these routes.

15. AT is seeking feedback on the policy changes that would be needed to the RPTP to facilitate light rail on these routes.

Ferry Development Plan

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

17. AT is seeking feedback on proposed RPTP amendments that would give effect to the Ferry Development Plan.

New Network Service Descriptions

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

19. Amendments are proposed to the service descriptions in Appendix 1 of the RPTP and consequential amendments to include indicative start dates and route maps are also proposed.

20. This part of the variation has already been the subject of extensive public consultations during 2013 and 2014.

Next steps

21. Following the consultation AT will consider the feedback received in order to make final decisions on the variations and adopt these. A report which summarises the feedback received during the consultation will be made available to all submitters and the public.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

22. This report seeks the view of the local boards. The proposed changes for the simplified fares will have implications for communities in all local board areas.

Maori impact statement

23. Māori groups, including mana whenua, mataawaka and iwi, are invited to provide their views as part of any public consultation.

Implementation

24. There are no implementation issues arising from this report

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board Submission on the Auckland's Regional Public Transport Plan	37

Signatories

Authors	Janette McKain - Local Board Democracy Advisor
Authorisers	Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

17 June 2015

Proposal to defer operational expenditure from 2014/15 to 2015/16

File No.: CP2015/11337

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to ask approval from Auckland Council governing body to defer the remaining operational expenditure budget of $493,532 for the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Mangrove Management project from 2014/15 to 2015/16.

Executive Summary

2. The project consisted of managing mangroves within the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board area of interest in the Manukau harbour.

3. A coastal permit was granted to remove approx 23 hectares of mature mangroves growing at various sites adjacent to, and east of, the Onehunga harbour bridge.

4. A total budget of $525,000 was provided to undertake this work in the 2014/15 financial year with approx $31,500 being spent in obtaining the necessary coastal permit which was issued in late April. A residue of funds of approx $493,500 remains to undertake physical work.

5. The procurement process was undertaken in May with council receiving two tender bids to do the work. Negotiations have resulted in a figure being recommended for supplier signoff which is within the budget provided.

6. Delays with the project occurred in gaining the coastal consent as extensive consultation was required particularly with iwi who supported the proposal but raised concerns about several other issues such as stormwater and pollution mitigation. This required several hui to be held which resolved those issues to the satisfaction of iwi.

7. The work involved will be tide dependent, with consent conditions restricting work to core hours each working day. This will likely take three to four months to complete the work. ie end of August mid-September.

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board requests the Auckland Council governing body to defer the operational expenditure of $493,532 for the mangrove management project from 2014/15 to 2015/16.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

8. The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board has identified mangrove management in the harbour as a priority in their local board plan and has identified areas where removal of mangroves is to be undertaken to achieve this goal.

9. The implication of not carrying this budget forward is that the project will be in jeopardy unless alternative funding can be found.

Māori impact statement

10. Iwi have been consulted on this project and support the management of mangroves to retain and enhance the coastal area, with particular focus on areas of cultural significance and use.

Implementation

11. This resolution will be reported to the governing body Finance and Performance committee in July 2015.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Faithe Smith - Lead Financial Advisor

Authorisers

Christine Watson - Manager Financial Advisory Services - Local Boards

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

17 June 2015

Mangere-Otahuhu SLIPs Funding 2015 Programme

File No.: CP2015/10054

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to recommend projects for budget approval from the Small Local Improvement Projects (SLIPs) fund for the 2015 financial year

Executive Summary

2. For this 2014/15 financial year, the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board had $420,400 capital expenditure (Capex), including deferrals from the 2013, 2014 financial years, and $134,499 operational expenditure (Opex) available as SLIPs funding.

3. To date, the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board has allocated $420,400 Capex, so this leaves a balance of $0 to be allocated. In addition, the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board has allocated $110,010 Opex, so this leaves a balance of $24,489 to be allocated (see Appendix A).

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) Considers the allocation of funds for the following SLIPs projects and nominates a local board representative to act as spokesperson for the proposals that are approved:

Project Title	Financial Year	Operational Expenditure (OPEX)
Mangere East Rugby League Club: Supply and installation of speaker	2015	$7,500
Mangere Rovers Rugby Club: Supply and installation of speaker	2015	$7,500
Vaka Manu’kau Niue Community Trust Purchase coffee cart (see paragraph 7 below)	2015	$25,000
Total		$40,000

b) Delegates authority to the nominated Local Board Member to provide guidance and advice to the Asset Development (South) for their allocated proposals, and enables the local board member and the Chair (jointly) to make minor amendments to funding allocations where a variation to the project scope is needed due to unforeseen circumstances.

Comments

4. Small Local Improvement Project (SLIPs) are a legacy activity of the Auckland City. The funding is for projects that deliver local community benefits. SLIPs funding provides an opportunity for the community to engage with their elected representatives and see the outcome of their funding decisions in a relatively short timeframe. Anyone can submit a SLIPs proposal – a Local Board Member, member of the public and council staff. The main criteria are that the proposal must provide a benefit to the local community and the Local Board will make the decision on whether or not to proceed with a project proposal.

5. SLIPs provide the Local Board with an opportunity to fund and provide solutions to their local communities, which align with Local Board plan aspirations.

6. SLIPs need to comply with all relevant legislation, including the Resource Management Act 1991, the Local Government Act and Auckland Council policies.

7. Council officers agree that SLIPs Funding should not be approved for Vaka Manu’kau Niue Community Trust to purchase a coffee cart. The process of running a coffee cart is prohibited as it is deemed commercial activity on a reserve and it also outside the footprint of their approved community lease. There are certain restrictions to commercial activity on reserves and this would also become an issue with open and public parks space. The group would need to also apply to resource consent to allow for such activity otherwise it can be deemed as illegal activity. Walter Massey Homestead is equipped with a kitchenette facility to allow for tea and coffee to be consumed on site with no commercial activity costs to the public and for the groups own use.

Consideration

Māori impact statement

8. Iwi will be advised of any projects that may have significance to them and will be consulted with accordingly

Implementation

9. Communities are impacted by SLIPs projects and the projects often provide an opportunity for staff and elected representatives to engage with the communities on their specific needs.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	SLIPs Budget Overview	43
b View	SLIPs Proposal Form	45

Signatories

Authors

Banita Wallabh - Project Coordinator

Authorisers

Ian Maxwell - General Manager Parks, Sports and Recreation

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

17 June 2015

Pools and Leisure Facilities Proposed Property Renewals

File No.: CP2015/10245

Purpose

1. This report seeks approval from the Mangere - Otahuhu Local Board for proposed 2015/16 property renewal capital works for Pools and Leisure Facilities.

Executive Summary

2. The property renewals programme is an annual capital works programme. The programme ensures that each Council facility can operate to the current level of service articulated in the relevant asset management plan.

3. The Mangere - Otahuhu Local Board proposed property renewals programme for 2015/16 is detailed in this report under point 14.

4. In the 2015/16 financial year, the Mangere - Otahuhu Local Board’s Pools and Leisure Facilities budget is $138,500.00.

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) Receive the 2015/2016 Pools and Leisure Facilities Proposed Property Renewals report.

b) Approves the property renewals programme for 2015/2016 as listed in the table under point 14.

c) Delegates responsibility to specified member/s (refer to table under point 14) to approve any moderate changes to the budget or project scope, in the event that there is a variation to identified costs or facility needs for its property renewals programme.

Comments

5. Community facilities are an important part of realising the vision of Auckland to become the world’s most liveable city. They contribute to building strong, healthy and vibrant communities by providing spaces where Aucklanders can connect, socialise, learn and participate in a wide range of social, cultural, art and recreational activities. These activities foster improved lifestyles and a sense of belonging and pride among residents.

6. Investment in this property renewals programme will ensure that Council facilities remain valuable, well-maintained community assets that continue to meet user expectations. Not undertaking timely property renewals will have an undesirable impact on the customer experience and put asset performance at risk, and ultimately increase the cost to maintain the facility.

7. The property renewals programme, being led by the Property Department, is a planned and documented process comprising of seven project management framework phases. These phases are: data collection, feasibility, initiation, planning, execution & transition, closure, and benefits realisation. Local Board sign-off is within the third phase (initiation) of the property renewals programme process.

8. The property renewals programme process ensures that the proposed work-lists (Attachment 1) have received extensive input and assessment from both property and activity officers. The proposed property renewals programme (Attachment 1) includes the name of the Pools and Leisure Facilities Representative for each of the proposed work-lists.

9. Through the development of the Long Term Plan 2015-2025 (LTP) current business activities within Auckland Council were divided into seven broad activity segments to ensure alignment with the Auckland Plan. One of these activity areas is Parks, Community and Lifestyle.

10. The Parks, Community and Lifestyle theme includes community services, libraries, parks, recreation, and pools and leisure activities.

11. The Pools and Leisure team have developed a property renewals strategy that aims to:

a) prioritise work across the region to facilities most in need of renewal, do it once and do it right, with only one closure, minimising any disruption to operations; and

b) review works across the pools and leisure portfolio and programme to identify opportunities to maximise Council’s purchasing power.

12. Over the course of the LTP it is proposed each facility will receive comprehensive and focused work to brign them up to the agreed level of service. In order to achieve the proposed benefits in the renewals strategy, a regional approach must be taken to ensure:

· Funding is based on need
With limited resources every dollar needs to be invested wisely to ensure an effective renewals programme. A needs based approach ensures funding is allocated in the right areas at the right time.

· More thorough and comprehensive scoping of works
Less likelihood of cost overruns and unforeseen project risks

· Delivery of Levels of Service (LoS)
Focused and consistent delivery on agreed levels of service across the region

Renewals programmes will be based on the following categories:

· Comprehensive Upgrades
Over the course of the LTP each facility receives a comprehensive upgrade therefore moving away from ad hoc component level renewals planning to a systematic programme of comprehensive upgrades across the leisure portfolio

· Strategic Renewals
Strategic replacement of key assets to bring long term energy and maintenance savings combined with strategic procurement. For example, procuring a single provider of pool pumps and systematically replacing these creating the ability to share across the network or systematically replacing boilers with more energy efficient models to reduce energy costs

· Return on Investments initiatives
Specific funding for projects that have a strong return on investment such as the expansion of a group fitness area enabling additional membership capacity and growth.

Leisure Prioritisation Famework

13. Although the renewals planning process, specifically for Pools and Leisure for FY15/16 (Year 1) of the LTP, has remained somewhat the same as previous years, funding has however been prioritised in part using the renewals strategy and leisure prioritisation framework as a guide for prudent asset planning and financial decision making.

14. Projects have been categorised using the prioritisation criteria outlined below, with the focus on addressing all major Health and Safety related issues first and then addressing any infrastructural risk or high operational risk projects. Next year we will concentrate more on asset preservation and lower operational risk projects.

Priority Ranking	Type	Criteria
1	Health & Safety	A project that if not completed will result in a breach of health & safety regulations, or present risk to people
2	High Operational/Infrastructural risk	A project that if not complete will result in a major failure or breach of compliance needs that prevents the facility operating or a facility programme from operating
3	Asset Preservation	A project that if not complete will result in an unacceptable deterioration of the facility assets/building
4	Low Operational Risk	A project if not complete could result in a minor disruption to the operation of the facility/customer experience
5	Life-Cycle Replacement	A project that is not a 1 to 4 but is required to ensure the ongoing functionality of the asset or building

Mangere-Otahuhu Proposed Renewals Programme Pools & Leisure - 2015/16
BUDGET		$138,500
Facility / Site	Project name
Moana-Nui-A-Kiwa Leisure Centre	Outdoor pool upgrade	50,000
Moana-Nui-A-Kiwa Leisure Centre	CCTV install outside pool	31,250
Moana-Nui-A-Kiwa Leisure Centre	Minor Renewal projects under $25k	57,250
		$138,500

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

15. Council officers are seeking Local Board approval for the proposed Mangere - Otahuhu Local Board property renewals programme for 2015/16. Council officers will report quarterly to the Local Board, including any reduction in project costs, to enable a review of budget options.

Māori impact statement

16. The Mangere - Otahuhu Local Board 2015/2016 proposed property renewals programme will ensure that all facilities continue to be well-maintained community assets benefiting the local community, including Māori.

Implementation

17. This work will be implemented as part of Council’s Property Department’s usual business practice and delivered in partnership with the Pools and Leisure team.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Michael Groom - Manager Aquatics & Recreation Facilities

Authorisers

Rob McGee - Manager Leisure – Parks, Sports and Recreation

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

17 June 2015

Proposed Funding for Projects in Mangere East Village

File No.: CP2015/05745

Purpose

1. This report sets out the projects for the Mangere East Village to be funded from the $30,000 local board subsidy for this area and seeks approval for the funding of these projects.

Executive Summary

2. A number of projects have been identified as suitable for the Mangere East Village. They have been discussed with the Mangere East Village Business Association and community groups in the area.

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) Approve the allocation of funds for the following projects:

(i) A paper based notice board to be sited on the village green adjacent to the Mangere East Library at a cost of $7,500.

(ii) Two murals to be located in the Mangere East Village shopping area at a cost of $12,500.

(iii) A power conduit to be located on the Mangere East library wall facing the Mangere East village green at a cost of $930.00.

(iv) A streetscaping planting project inclusive of the street frontage and village green to the value of $5,570.

(v) A Matariki event at a cost of $3,500.

Comments

3. At the August 2014 meeting of the Mangere Otahuhu Local Board the board resolved:

Resolution number MO/2014/175

MOVED by Deputy Chairperson CM Elliott, seconded by Member TW Togiamua:

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) Approves three subsidy payments of $30,000 each to be made to the three Business Improvement Districts listed below for the 2014/15 financial year:

· South Harbour Business Association Incorporated BID

· Mangere Bridge Progressive Business Association BID

· Mangere Town Centre Business Association BID Incorporated

b) Requests officers to prepare a proposed work programme and report back to the local board utilising the $60,000 balance from the Local Economic Development BID subsidy budget to progress initiatives in Mangere East Business District and the Local Economic Development Action Plan.

This report responds to the part of the resolution to identify options for the $30,000 subsidy in the 2014/15 Local Economic Development Budget.

4. Following the August 2014 meeting of the board, consultation on the above projects was undertaken with the Mangere East Village Business Association (MEVBA) Executive Committee in accordance with the board’s wishes. Consultation took place at a workshop in March 2015.

The committee agreed that all the projects had merit:

(i) The noticeboard would serve to advise the local residents of coming events in the BID area and would also be able to be used by the community to communicate a variety of subjects of interest. The noticeboard has been costed (inclusive of installation) at $7,500.

(ii) The murals would be on two of the identified sites in the village area. The murals would be undertaken by “painting for the people” a group which has been established to enable recent graduates in the arts to obtain work in the community. The group has been involved with the artist Emory Douglas who recently visited the Mangere Arts Centre – Nga Tohu o Uenuku. Participation with the community would be encouraged by the group in the production of the mural. Three sites have been identified in the village and the business association has granted funding for the first of these murals. The cost of two murals including graffiti guard is $12,500.

(iii) A power conduit would provide a power source for equipment such as generators, sound and visual apparatus required for events. The conduit would be located in a secure container attached to the Mangere East Library at a cost of $930.00

(iv) The Mangere Village street frontage and village green could benefit from some fresh planting. A beautification project to upgrade the planting in these areas could be carried out to the value of $5,570.

(v) The business association and the Mangere East Community Centre would like to combine together with the Mangere East Library and provide a Matariki event at the Mangere East Village during June 2015 at a cost of $3,500.

(vi) It is anticipated that funding will be allocated and projects commenced by 30 June 2015.

(vii) A report will be prepared on the completion of these projects to update the Local Board.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

5. The Local Board indicated at the August 2014 meeting that consultation was to be undertaken with the MEVBA regarding possible projects to be funded from the $30,000 grant. The executive of the association was consulted at a workshop on 16 March 2015 and again at their meeting on 20 April 2015. The Mangere East Community Centre and the Mangere East Family Service Centre were also included in the consultation.

Māori impact statement

6. Census statistics New Zealand state that 10,335 Maori reside in the Mangere Otahuhu Local Board area. A Matariki event celebrating the Maori New Year would have significant relevance to Maori in the Mangere East area.

Implementation

7. These projects will be funded from the Local Economic Development discretionary fund of $30,000 allocated to Mangere East and identified in the Mangere Otahuhu 2014/15 annual plan financials.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Mangere East Village Proposed Mural Sites	65

Signatories

Authors

Shirley Samuels - BID Partnership Advisor

Gillian Plume - Team Leader BID Partnership

Authorisers

Penny Pirrit - GM - Plans & Places

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

17 June 2015

Manukau Heritage Item Assistance Fund Allocation 2014-2015 Round 2

File No.: CP2015/09127

Purpose

1. This report presents the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board (the board) with application summaries for the two applications received during the second round of the Manukau Heritage Item Assistance Fund (MHIAF) for the 2014/2015 financial year.

Executive Summary

2. Auckland Council considers that there is a net public benefit derived from providing individuals and community groups caring for privately owned heritage features with financial support. Contestable heritage funding schemes are one mechanism through which owners of heritage items are encouraged to take action to protect these community assets.

3. For the 2014/15 financial year, contestable heritage funding is delivered through legacy council funding schemes and by applying legacy council funding policies. In the area covered by the former Manukau City, Franklin and Papakura councils, heritage funding is delivered through the MHIAF.

4. Two applications from the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board area were received during the second funding round. These applications have been assessed against fund criteria and funding recommendations are presented to the committee for their consideration.

Recommendations

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) Approve the following grant allocations from the Manukau Heritage Item Assistance Fund:

i) Allocation of $2,006.75 to application MHIA14_150011 from Hendl-Smith Family Trust as a contribution towards scaffolding, remove, clean and refurbish bricks and re-mortar bricks.

ii) Decline application MHIA14_150010 from Bobbie Hannaway and Steven Osborn as a contribution towards roof replacement, gutter replacement and insulation.

Comments

5. The MHIAF is a legacy Manukau City Council fund that provides funding for projects involving:

· A site or building listed in the Heritage Appendix of the Auckland Council District Plan (Manukau City, Franklin or Papakura) or a site that is known to contain an archaeological site recorded on the Auckland Council Cultural Heritage Inventory.

· A property that has a heritage tree listed in the Heritage Appendix of the Auckland Council District Plan (Manukau City, Franklin or Papakura).

· A heritage building or tree not currently listed, but is of sufficient merit to warrant listing.

Applications to the MHIAF are assessed by Council subject matter experts against the fund criteria stated in the MHIAF guidelines (appended as Attachment A). These include:

i. Significance: The project needs to have high heritage significance and regard will be given to whether the resource is scheduled for protection in the Auckland Council District Plan (Manukau City, Franklin or Papakura Section). The project needs to enhance the qualities for which the heritage item is valued.

ii. Funding Necessity: Whether funding is important to securing the future of an at risk item/place.

iii. Compliance with Best Practice: The extent to which the project reflects best practice as outlined in the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICMOS) New Zealand Charter.

iv. Public Access and Educational Value: The degree of physical access, visual access or educational value.

v. Extent to which projects recognise Maori perspectives.

This assessment forms the basis of funding recommendations that are presented to the board for their consideration.

The current interim approach to community funding, endorsed by the Regional Development and Operations Committee (RDOC) in May 2011, allocated decision-making responsibility over the MHIAF to the Southern local boards. In March 2014, the RDOC endorsed the extension of this interim approach to community funding for the 2014/15 financial year.

6. At the 27 May 2014 meeting of the Southern Joint Funding Committee, it was resolved that the MHIAF will be allocated across the six southern local boards on an equivalent basis to the 2014/2015 financial year as follows:

Table One. Summary of MHIAF allocation split by local board

Franklin Local Board	Howick Local Board	Mangere-Otahahu Local Board	Manurewa Local Board	Otara-Papatoetoe Local Board	Papakura Local Board
$7,344	$30,000	$13,185	$14,000	$13,971	$5,000

7. The Southern Joint Funding Committee agreed that the MHIAF would have two funding rounds, closing August 2014 and March 2015, application dates are provided below.. MHIAF grant allocation recommendations on eligible applications are presented to the board twice a year. No eligible applications from within the Mangere-Otahahu local board area were received during the first funding round. .

Table Two. Summary of MHIAF application closing dates.

Application cut-off date

Funding decisions expected

Funding meeting 1

Friday 22 August 2014

October- November 2014

Funding meeting 2

Friday 13 March 2015

May-June 2015

8. The availability of heritage funding and information on the 2014/2015 funding rounds has been promoted through the Auckland Council website, through Auckland Council publications, press advertisements in local print media and email notification to heritage stakeholders.

9. Finance and resourcing requirements for the delivery of the MHIAF are within current heritage incentive budgets provided in the 2014/2015 annual plan.

10. On 4 December 2014, the council’s Regional Strategy and Policy Committee adopted a new Community Grants Policy. The new policy comes into effect on 1 July 2015. The majority of Auckland Council’s current funding schemes, including the Manukau Heritage Item Assistance Fund, will cease to operate from that date and be replaced by the new Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board ‘Local Grants Program’ and the new Regional Environmental Grant Scheme.

Consideration

11. Two applications from within the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board area were received during funding round two that closed on 13 March 2015.

12. Application assessment for the eligible applications has been completed by an Auckland Council Heritage advisor. Grant allocation recommendations are made in line with MHIAF assessment criteria and funding policy, and in accordance with the priorities identified when allocating additional budget to this fund. An application assessment summary for the applications is attached to this report and funding recommendations are presented for the board’s consideration.

13. As no applications were received during the first funding round the Mangere-Otahuhu local board has $13,185 available to allocate towards heritage applications. Following the application assessment, it is recommended that one application be supported with a grant totalling $2,006.75 and that one application not be supported for funding.

14. It is recommended that application MHIA14_150011 from the Hendl-Smith Family Trust be granted $2,006.75 towards scaffolding, remove, clean and refurbish bricks and re-mortar bricks, with a total project cost of $4,013.50. Support of this application will ensure that the historical heritage of the building is preserved.

15. It is also recommended that the application MHIA14_150010 from Bobbi Hannaway & Steven Osborn not be supported as the house has been relocated from another area and has no local significance.

Local Board views and implications

16. This report is prepared specifically for the Mangere-Otahuhu local board.

Māori impact statement

17. The provision of community funding to support historic heritage initiatives provides opportunities for all Aucklanders to undertake projects, programmes and activities that benefit Maori. The significance of sites to Maori and the extent to which applications recognise Maori perspectives are considered as part of the application assessment process.

Implementation

18. No legal and implementation issues have been identified. The fund will be allocated in accordance with the decision of the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	MHIA Applicant Report Round 2 - Mangere-Otahuhu	71
b View	Manukau Heritage Item Assistance Fund Guidelines	75

Signatories

Authors

Jennifer Sampson - Environmental Funding Coordinator

Authorisers

John Dragicevich - Manager Infrastructure and Environmental Services

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

17 June 2015

MANUKAU HERITAGE ITEM ASSISTANCE FUND Applicant Assessments for Funding Round 2 Financial Year 2014/2015
APPLICANT	Bobbi Hannaway & Steven Osborn			APPLICATION NO.	MHIA14_150010
PROJECT BACKGROUND
TITLE	Re-sited and restoration of a 1920 Californian Character Bungalow
LOCATION	13 Ashcroft Avenue, Mangere Bridge 2022			LOCAL BOARD	Mangere-Otahuhu
PROJECT DESCRIPTION	The project aims to re-sit a circa 100 year old house with the intent of re-establishing residential occupation of the property of 13 Ashcroft Avenue. The house, originally from Mt. Albert, requires careful restoration throughout to restore character features and align to modern building standards for energy efficiency. The goal is to revive the house so it can be enjoyed by families for another 100 years and beyond.
BACKGROUND	Ashcroft Avenue and the surrounding suburban environment and was developed from the 1960s onwards with little in the way of older character buildings. The land is located in Heritage Zone 6 and the house is a pre-war building with almost all timber being of native woods such as Kauri, Matai and Rimu.
COUNCIL FUNDING (LAST TWO YEARS)	None
RISK TO COUNCIL	No risks to Council have been identified.
FINANCIAL INFORMATION
TOTAL COST	$316,000.00 overall project cost; $20,465.00 total cost of project tasks applied for
APPLICANT/ OTHER PARTY’S CONTRIBUTION	$11,133.00	DETAIL OF CONTRIBUTION	As a contribution towards roof replacement, gutter replacement and insulation.
AMOUNT REQUESTED	$9,331.00	DETAIL OF FUNDING REQUESTED	As a contribution towards roof replacement, gutter replacement and insulation.
APPLICATION ASSESSMENT
SCORING	SIGNIFICANCE			0/35
	FUNDING NECESSITY			18/25
	COMPLIANCE WITH GOOD PRACTICE			12/20
	PUBLIC ACCESS			5/15
	RECOGNISING MAORI PERSPECTIVES			0/5
	TOTAL SCORE			45/100
ASSESSMENT SUMMARY	It is recommended that this application be declined. The house is not scheduled in the operative district plan or the unitary plan. The house has been relocated from another area and therefore has no local significance.
FUNDING RECOMMENDED		FUNDING RECOMMENDED FOR
SPECIAL CONDITIONS

MANUKAU HERITAGE ITEM ASSISTANCE FUND Applicant Assessments for Funding Round 2 Financial Year 2014/2015
APPLICANT	Hendl-Smith Family Trust			APPLICATION NO.	MHIA14_150011
PROJECT BACKGROUND
TITLE	Repair and Re-mortar Original Chimney
LOCATION	64 Coronation Road, Mangere Bridge 2022			LOCAL BOARD	Mangere-Otahuhu
PROJECT DESCRIPTION	The project aims to repair and re-mortar the chimney on one of Mangere Bridge’s original homestead villas. The mortar connecting the bricks on the Chimney has deteriorated to such an extent that in some areas it has completely crumbled away and is no longer holding the bricks in place. Urgent repair is required to avoid loose bricks being blown off and damaging the roof or becoming a potential hazard for anyone standing outside.
BACKGROUND	The house at 64 Coronation Road is one of Mangere Bridge's original homesteads and an example of original villa architecture from early 1900s.
COUNCIL FUNDING (LAST TWO YEARS)	None
RISK TO COUNCIL	No risks to Council have been identified.
FINANCIAL INFORMATION
TOTAL COST	$4,014.75
APPLICANT/ OTHER PARTY’S CONTRIBUTION	$2,008.00	DETAIL OF CONTRIBUTION	As a contribution towards chimney repair.
AMOUNT REQUESTED	$2,006.75	DETAIL OF FUNDING REQUESTED	As a contribution towards chimney repair.
APPLICATION ASSESSMENT
SCORING	SIGNIFICANCE			21/35
	FUNDING NECESSITY			24/25
	COMPLIANCE WITH GOOD PRACTICE			20/20
	PUBLIC ACCESS			5/15
	RECOGNISING MAORI PERSPECTIVES			0/5
	TOTAL SCORE			70/100
ASSESSMENT SUMMARY	It is recommended that this application be supported. The house 64 Coronation Road is one of Mangere Bridge’s original homestead villas and is scheduled for significance in the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan across two or more local values of significance. The work outlined in this application is urgent as the chimney is vulnerable in its current state of loose bricks and lack of mortar and repair methods proposed are in line with accepted best practice. As the building is a private heritage building there is limited public access however the building is visually accessible from Coronation Road.
FUNDING RECOMMENDED	$2,006.75	FUNDING RECOMMENDED FOR	As a contribution towards scaffolding, remove, clean and refurbish bricks and re-mortar bricks.
SPECIAL CONDITIONS

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

17 June 2015

Community Facilities Network Plan

File No.: CP2015/11304

Purpose

1. Seek the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board’s support for the draft Community Facilities Network Plan (Attachment A) and associated draft Action Plan (Attachment B).

Executive Summary

2. Community facilities are vital to local communities as they provide space where people can connect, socialise, learn and participate, and contribute to improved lifestyles and sense of belonging, identity and pride among residents.

3. The draft Community Facilities Network Plan (the network plan) is a long-term aspirational plan to guide council’s investment in the provision of community facilities over the next 20 years. It introduces a more holistic approach to the planning and provision of community facilities to keep pace with Auckland’s growing and diverse population, fill gaps in provision and ensure existing facilities are fit for purpose. The aspiration is to deliver strategically placed and integrated community facilities.

4. The scope includes arts and culture facilities, community centres, libraries, pools and leisure centres and venues for hire (community and rural halls). The network plan provides direction on optimisation, major upgrades of existing facilities, development of new facilities and potential divestment of facilities no longer meeting community needs.

5. The strategic direction articulated in the network plan will be implemented by a comprehensive set of actions in the long-term draft Action Plan. To focus resource in the short term (1-3 years), actions have been prioritised. Actions with funding in the first five years of the Long-term Plan 2015-2025 will be progressed first, along with network priority actions in spatial priority areas and actions with opportunities for optimisation. For each action local boards will be closely involved in determining the best response to meet community need and aspirations.

6. The network plan has been developed through an extensive process involving several rounds of engagement and input from local boards. Most recently a revised draft network plan was discussed with local boards through workshops in March and April 2015. The majority of local boards were supportive. Discussions with local boards at the workshops have resulted in some changes to the network plan as outlined in this report.

7. After reporting to local boards, the next step is to seek the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee’s approval of the network plan and draft Action Plan in August 2015.

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) support the draft Community Facilities Network Plan and associated draft Action Plan to guide council’s investment in the provision of community facilities

b) note that local board views will be reported to the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee in August 2015.

Background

8. The network plan has been developed with cross departmental collaboration. The plan is informed by a review of current state and research from New Zealand and comparative international cities. Key milestones in the development of the network plan have been:

February 2014	Completion of current state review and research.
March 2014	Regional Strategy and Policy Committee (REG/2014/37) Approval of timeframes to develop the Community Facilities Network Plan and presentation of current state and research findings.
March 2014	Local board cluster workshops; Presentation on current state and research findings and discussion of key issues.
June 2014	Local board briefing on the first draft network plan.
August 2014	Regional Strategy and Policy Committee (REG/2014/98) Endorse draft Community Facilities Network Plan for engagement with local boards and key stakeholders.
August – Sept 2014	Workshops with local boards and key stakeholders on the draft network plan.
October - Nov 2014	Report to all local boards seeking formal feedback on the draft network plan and providing a summary of key stakeholder feedback.
December 2014	Decision to incorporate libraries into the scope of the network plan; Local Board briefing on libraries research.
February - Mar 2015	Workshops with local boards on revised draft network plan.

Comment

9. Aligned with the Auckland Plan, local board plans and relevant strategic action plans, the network plan articulates why council provides community facilities.

10. Community facilities contribute to building strong, healthy and vibrant communities by providing space where people can connect, socialise, learn and participate in a range of social, cultural, art and recreational activities. Community facilities contribute to improved lifestyles and a sense of belonging, identity and pride among residents.

11. The network plan identifies the challenges and opportunities for future community facility provision. Challenges include gaps and duplication in current provision, fit for purpose issues, increasing costs of maintaining the network and a growing and diversifying population. Opportunities include greater integration in the planning and delivery of community facilities, partnership opportunities and optimisation opportunities.

12. Four objectives articulate a new approach for the provision of community facilities which respond to these challenges and opportunities:

· work across all types of community facilities in integrated and coordinated planning and ensure future decisions are based on clear and robust evidence;

· maintain, improve and make the best use of our existing network of community facilities where these continue to meet community needs;

· focus investment on developing fit for purpose, integrated and connected community facilities; and

· explore opportunities to leverage and support partnerships with other providers.

13. The provision frameworks in the network plan outline the objectives, functions and provision approach for each type of community facility. This will guide the identification of gaps in the network and the types of spaces required to deliver fit for purpose facilities and respond to growth.

14. The long-term draft Action Plan lists actions to investigate potential gaps in the network and existing facilities with performance issues. A fundamental component for implementation is integrated and holistic planning across all types of community facilities, including those facilities outside council’s network. Each action will require detailed investigation, involving the local board and the community, to determine the appropriate response. The network plan includes detailed guidelines which can be adapted to guide the investigation process.

15. Local boards will play a significant role in determining the appropriate response for facilities or needs in their area. The governing body will make final decisions on the acquisition, divestment or major upgrades of community and allocation of funding over $1 million.

16. There are over 100 actions in the long-term draft Action Plan, and these will be implemented over time within the available resource and financial constraints. Actions have been assessed to determine those that are network priorities (highlighted in blue in the draft Action Plan). In the short-term, actions with capital funding in the first five years of the Long-term Plan 2015-2025 will be progressed first, along with network priority actions in spatial priority areas and actions with opportunities for optimisation.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

17. There have been several rounds of engagement with local boards during the development of the network plan. Most recently a revised draft network plan (with libraries included) was discussed with local boards through workshops in March and April 2015. The majority of local boards were supportive of the revised network plan, in particular the:

· vision, outcomes and objectives for community facilities;

· move towards integrated and holistic planning and the evidence based approach to community facility development;

· aspiration to develop more connected and integrated facilities and opportunities to pilot this approach at existing facilities; and

· strategic improvements outlined in the Action Plan.

18. The following table outlines key themes from local board feedback and the associated response or amendments to the network plan.

Local Board Feedback

Response OR Amendments

Scope

· Scope of the network plan does not include all community leases, sports clubs and non-council facilities that perform similar functions as council-owned community facilities.

· The network plan acknowledges the importance of all community facilities in meeting community needs. Section 1.2 explains not all leased and non-council facilities are listed in the plan as they are bound by lease terms or they are not in council’s jurisdiction.

· Section 1.2 of the network plan has been amended to clarify what it means for facilities to be included in scope.

· Section 1.3 outlines the approach to consider all community facilities in the implementation of the network plan.

· New action added to investigate and plan for the provision of leased facilities.

Prioritisation weightings

· Some boards felt the actions relating to gaps are given advantageous weighting over actions for existing facilities.

· Some boards felt established areas of the region are disadvantaged against new growth areas.

· Some boards felt spatial priorities are given too much weighting when not all boards support the concept.

· Boards felt weighting for local board priority was too low.

· Section 5.2 (prioritisation) has been amended so the purpose is to determine which actions are network priorities.

· The criteria and weighting now focus on three components: network importance (40%), community importance (40%) and building condition (20%).

· Local board priority has the highest weighting within community importance.

Implementation approach

· Clarity on local board and community involvement in the implementation process.

· Investigation process needs to be adaptable for different communities.

· Clarity on the application of the new empowered communities approach to community facilities.

· Section 5.1 articulates how the Network Plan and Action Plan will be implemented, including emphasis on local board and community involvement in this process.

· Strategic improvement action will develop tools to implement the new empowered community approach to community facilities planning and development.

Wording and action amendments

· Number of requests to amend wording of specific sections and actions.

· Minor wording amendments have been made to the network plan and Action Plan to address feedback and improve clarity.

· Action Plan has been updated to reflect any recent progress.

Māori impact statement

19. Section 2.2 of the network plan outlines how council will implement the Maori Responsiveness Framework in relation to the planning and development of community facilities.

20. The provision of community facilities contributes to improving wellbeing among Maori communities by providing spaces to connect, socialise, learn skills and participate. Maori are users of all types of council’s community facilities. At aquatic facilities Maori make up 14% of users (compared to 9% of the population), 11% of leisure facility users and 9% of community centre users. Maori are under-represented as users at arts and culture facilities compared to the Auckland population.

21. The implementation of the network plan should improve provision and accessibility for the benefit of all Aucklanders, including Maori. The strategic improvement action to undertake research on non-users will help understand why some sectors of the population are under-represented as users of community facilities. This research should also provide useful information on improving accessibility and addressing barriers for non-users and under-represented sectors of the population.

22. The broader picture of community facility provision recognises that marae and kohanga reo are important social infrastructure for Maori and the community. Officers from Te Waka Angamua are scoping a project to address the future provision and development of marae facilities. Opportunities for aligned provision and/or partnerships with marae facilities will be considered in the implementation of the Community Facilities Network Plan.

Implementation

23. The Community Facilities Network Plan is aspirational and provides a road-map for council’s investment in community facilities over the next 20 years. The ability and timeframe to implement the network plan and associated actions is dependent on the level of budget allocated for community facility planning and development through future LTP and Annual Plan processes. The current tight fiscal environment means council needs to focus its attention on the greatest need. This plan provides direction for council to ensure the city gets the right facility in the right place at the right time.

24. A detailed implementation plan is being developed with cross-department collaboration. The implementation plan will address coordinating implementation across the different departments, progressing individual actions and reporting on implementation.

25. The draft Action Plan will be reviewed on an annual basis to reflect progress and re-evaluate priorities where necessary. Local boards have requested annual updates on the implementation progress.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Community Facilities Network Plan (Under Separate Cover)
b View	Community Facilities Network Action Plan (Under Separate Cover)

Signatories

Authors

Anita Coy-Macken - Principal Policy Analyst

David Shamy - Principal Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Kataraina Maki - GM - Community & Social Policy

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

17 June 2015

Community-led response to alcohol licensing and advertising

File No.: CP2015/11324

Purpose

1. To extend for another year, board support for community-led responses to alcohol licensing and advertising.

Executive Summary

Alcohol licence applications

2. In July 2014, the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board considered a report concerning the facilitation of a community-led approach to alcohol licensing. The board resolved (Resolution number MO/2014/155) to:

a) Encourage the direct involvement of local communities in liquor licensing processes, by providing community groups with relevant information about the processes and empowering them to lodge objections and give evidence.

b) Approve the engagement of relevant expertise to facilitate improved and proactive information provision to local communities on liquor licencing processes.

c) Approve the engagement of relevant expertise to facilitate ongoing liquor licence objections (on a case by case basis) made by the local board, members of the local board as individuals or community advocates.

d) Allocate funding from 2014/15 Community Response (opex) budget for this purpose:

Table 1: Cost 2014/15
Informing our community
Communications support for a resource kit for local board members, community advocates, and council staff.	$2,500
Supporting our community
Policy advice and support for liquor licence objections (on a case by case basis), Hearings, negotiations and appeals.	$26,300
Equipping our community
Develop and maintain a calendar of upcoming licence renewals, and design a range of templates for use by community advocates.	$1,200
Total	$30,000

3. The community-led approach to objecting to alcohol licensing would appear to have been successful, in that it has:

a) resulted in one new off-licence application being withdrawn (Vege Oasis) and conditions and undertakings being applied to a number of renewed off-licences

b) empowered members of the community (including local board members) to become confident, skilled and experienced advocates in the alcohol licensing process

c) established regular communications on alcohol licensing matters in the local board area via a dedicated Facebook page

d) developed a calendar of upcoming licence renewals to help inform communities and enable preparation and responsiveness

e) provided policy advice and support for a number of liquor licence objections, including support for negotiations and hearings

4. The local board has not allocated any specific budget towards Liquor licensing objections in its locally driven initiatives budget for 2015/16. However, discretionary funding is available from the Community Response Fund if the board thinks fit.

5. This report seeks board confirmation of the use of Community Response Fund to enable continuation in 2015/16 of the community-led approach to the alcohol licensing project initiated last year, noting that the Local Alcohol Policy (LAP) is some time away from being finalised. Once the LAP is operative, it will input community views into licensing processes, and there may be less need for case by case community involvement.

Alcohol advertising

6. Last year, the local board submitted to the Ministerial Forum on Alcohol Advertising and Sponsorship. The board submitted that advertising of alcohol products, such as Woodstock and Codys, has a negative impact on the amenity of the local community by reducing the pleasantness of neighbourhood shops and also by normalising alcohol in these neighbourhoods, especially for children.

7. In the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board area, there are regulations in place under the district plan that can moderate advertising of alcohol products on business premises, including bottle shops. Community members have been raising this in conjunction with their off-licence objections work, in an ad hoc and uncoordinated approach to date. They have been successful in having some signs removed after sustained community complaints.

8. A proposal could be developed to support community organisations and members of the public to identify and compile non-compliant alcohol advertising and work with council’s regulatory officers to seek consideration and appropriate response.

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) Confirm its continued support for the community-led approach to alcohol licensing objections in 2015/16 and allocate $30,000 from its Community Response Fund to this project for a contract to deliver this.

b) Consider whether it wishes to allocate any additional resources to a community-led approach for an alcohol advertising removal project from it’s 2015/16 Community Response Fund.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors	Kenneth Tuai - Local Board Advisor
Authorisers	Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

17 June 2015

Local Board Feedback on amending the licence to occupy remission scheme to include proposed the Transport Levy

File No.: CP2015/11172

Purpose

1. This report seeks feedback from local boards on the proposal to amend the remission scheme for residents of licence to occupy (LTO) retirement villages and/or Papakāinga housing to remit the proposed Interim Transport Levy (targeted rate) in addition to the Uniform Annual General Charge (UAGC).

Executive Summary

2. On 21 May 2015 the Finance and Performance Committee agreed to consult on the proposal to amend the remission scheme for residents of licence to occupy retirement villages and/or Papakāinga housing to remit the proposed Interim Transport Levy in addition to the UAGC.

3. This amendment was proposed to address concerns regarding the affordability of the Interim Transport Levy for residents of licence to occupy retirement villages.

4. Attached to this report is the Proposal to amend Auckland Council’s Rates remission and postponement policy (remission scheme for residents of licence to occupy retirement villages and/or Papakāinga housing). This document forms the basis for consultation with the public. It includes the proposed text for the amended rates remission scheme.

5. Staff will report back to the Governing Body on the results of consultation and the proposed changes to the Rates remission and postponement policy on 25 June 2015.

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) Provides feedback on the proposal to amend the remission scheme in the Rates remission and postponement policy for residents of licence to occupy retirement villages and/or Papakāinga housing to remit the proposed Interim Transport Levy (targeted rate) in addition to the Uniform Annual General Charge.

Comments

Background

6. Residents of licence to occupy villages are usually responsible for paying the rates associated with their unit. However, they are unable to apply for assistance under the central government’s rates rebate scheme as they are not the ratepayer.

7. The Auckland Council offers a rates remissions for residents of licence to occupy retirement villages and papakainga. The current scheme remits the UAGC for those residents who would otherwise qualify for a rate rebate based on their level of household income and amount of rates. The value of this remission is just over 60 per cent of the maximum rebate available under the government’s scheme.

8. The remission applies to the rates of the retirement village in which the applicant resides. It is a requirement of the remission scheme that an agreement exists between the village operator/papakainga and Auckland Council. This agreement requires that the benefit of the rates remission be passed to the resident.

9. There are more than 6500 units across 67 retirement villages that use license to occupy agreements. Of these, 60 villages have an agreement with Auckland Council that enables their residents to apply for the rates remission scheme for licence to occupy retirement villages. For the 2013/2014 year, 1,156 applicants qualified for remission, at a total cost of $420,000.

Analysis

10. Amending the LTO remission scheme to remit the Interim Transport Levy in addition to the UAGC will increase the value of the remission per qualifying residence to $500 in 2015/2016. This is equivalent to 83 per cent of the maximum rebate available under the government’s scheme. This compares to Auckland Council applicants for the rates rebate, who on average qualify for 90 per cent of the maximum available rebate.

11. Assuming growth of ten per cent over 2013/2014, the total cost of the LTO remission scheme if the Interim Transport Levy is also remitted will be $635,000 in 2015/2016. This is an increase of $146,000 over the estimated cost of retaining the existing LTO remission scheme. This is 0.01 per cent of the 2015/2016 total rates budget. This cost will be met through the council’s existing allowance for remissions, so will have no impact on other ratepayers.

Consultation

12. Public consultation on the proposal ends 8 June 2015. Consultation has been advertised via public notices and the Shape Auckland website. Details of the proposal have also been sent to all licence to occupy retirement villages, papakainga and marae seeking feedback. To date 25 responses have been received, all supporting the proposal.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

13. This report seeks feedback on the proposal from local boards.

Maori impact statement

14. To date, the council has not identified any papakainga housing developments that are using licence to occupy agreements. The council has not received any applications for remission from such developments.

15. The council has sent consultation material to Mana Whenua contacts, Papakāinga and marae seeking feedback on the proposal.

Implementation

16. There are no implementation costs to amend the LTO remission scheme as proposed in this report. The recommended proposal does not require any changes to application process for the rates remission scheme, and as such it does not place any increased burden either on applicants, or the management of retirement villages who help administer the scheme.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Proposal to amend Auckland Council's Rates remission and postponement policy	91

Signatories

Authors

Beth Sullivan - Principal Advisor, Financial Planning, Policy and Budgeting

Authorisers

Matthew Walker – General Manager, Financial Planning, Policy & Budget

Karen Lyons – Manager, Local Board Services Department

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

17 June 2015

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board - Alcohol Ban Review Hearing and Deliberation Dates

File No.: CP2015/11328

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to obtain the local board’s approval for the hearing and deliberation dates for the Alcohol Ban Review Hearing.

2. The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board appointed an Alcohol Ban Review Hearings Panel on 20 May 2015 (MO/2015/68):

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

f) Appoints Member Christine O’Brien (as chair), and Members Carrol Elliott and Nick Bakulich as a panel to receive, hear and deliberate on submissions and other relevant information and recommend changes to the Board.

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

a) Approves the following hearing dates for the Alcohol Ban Review:

i) Thursday 6 August 2015 commencing at 9.30am in the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board Office, 93 Bader Drive Mangere.

ii) An overflow day of Friday 7 August 2015 commencing at 9.30am in the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board Office, 93 Bader Drive Mangere.

b) Approves the deliberations panel workshop will be held on Thursday 20 August 2015 commencing at 1.00pm in the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board Office.

c) Approves the formal deliberations panel meeting will be held on Wednesday 26 August 2015 commencing at 1.00pm in the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board Office.

Background

The key dates for the Alcohol Ban Review consultation timeline:

*Alcohol Ban Review – consultation timeline*
May	Report to those local boards who have indicated they are comfortable with the level of additional evidence obtained to make a decision without further engagement with the community	Statement of Proposals reported to local board business meetings (to be completed before 30 May)
June		19 June Consultation opens
July		17 July Final day of consultation
August	MO/2015/68 That the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board appoints Member Christine O’Brien (as Chair) and Members Carrol Elliott and Nick Bakulich as a panel to receive, hear and deliberate on submissions and other relevant information and recommend changes to the board.	Local Board Alcohol Bans Review Panel hearings (from 3 August) Informal Panel workshop-deliberations Local Board Alcohol Panel formal deliberations
October		Reports to full local boards (all decisions to be made BEFORE 31 October 2015 otherwise alcohol bans lapse)
November		1 November Changes take effect Note: there will be a delay

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors	Janette McKain - Local Board Democracy Advisor
Authorisers	Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

Chairperson	Lemauga Lydia Sosene
Deputy Chairperson	Carrol Elliott, JP
Members	Nick Bakulich
	Tafafuna'i Tasi Lauese, JP
	Christine O'Brien
	Leau Peter Skelton
	Walter Togiamua

Timeslot	Topic	Presenter	Purpose
12.45 - 1.30pm	Portfolio Update	Board Members	Board members discussed their portfolios meetings.
1.30 - 2.00pm	SLIPs	Banita Wallabh	To Board discussed the SLIPs projects. A report will be coming to the June business meeting.
2.00 - 3.00pm	LB Performance Report to March 2015	Faithe Smith, Sonia Munro, Greg Lowe, Emma Joyce, Waitangi Mika, Jeremy Pellow, Mark Evans, Biddy Soutar	To Board discussed the Quarterly LB Finance Performance Report. A report is on the May 2015 Agenda.
3.00 - 4.00pm	Tranche 7 SHA CONFIDENTIAL	Karen Foster, David Clelland	To Board discussed the Tranche 7 SHA proposed sites for the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board Area. The report is on the May 2015 Agenda.