Agenda of Puketāpapa Local Board

1 Welcome

2 Apologies

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

3 Declaration of Interest

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

4 Confirmation of Minutes

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting,held on Thursday 28 May 2015, including the confidential section and

b) the LTP minutes of its meeting, held on Wednesday, 10 June 2015, as a true and correct record.

5 Leave of Absence

That a Request for Leave of Absence from Chairperson JM Fairey be received.

6 Acknowledgements

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

7 Petitions

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

8 Deputations

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

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

9 Public Forum

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

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

10 Extraordinary Business

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

11 Notices of Motion

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

Puketāpapa Local Board

25 June 2015

Local and Sports Parks Annual Work Programme

File No.: CP2015/08580

Purpose

1. To seek approval of the draft Local and Sports Parks annual work programme 2015-2016 for the Puketāpapa Local Board.

Executive Summary

2. The final draft of the Local and Sports Parks annual work programme for the 2015-2016 financial year includes park asset renewals, capital works, locally driven initiatives (LDI), and parks maintenance programmes.

3. The work programme excludes any projects that have not been fully funded. Additional projects may be prioritised for funding from the discretionary CAPEX budget, which has yet to be agreed and will be discussed with the local boards in the next two months.

4. If unforeseen works are needed or work priorities change from the approved annual Local and Sports Parks work programme the parks advisor will discuss this with the local board park portfolio holder.

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) approve the final draft Local and Sports Parks annual work programme 2015-2016;

b) delegate approval for changes to work programme to the park advisor, Local and Sports Parks, in consultation with the parks portfolio holder of the Puketāpapa Local Board, except where the parks portfolio holder refers any changes to the full board.

Comments

Background

5. This report presents the final draft of the Local and Sports Parks annual work programme for the 2015-2016 financial year (Attachment A). The work programme includes park asset renewals, capital works, locally driven initiatives (LDIs) and the parks maintenance programme.

6. Officers discussed the first draft of the annual work programme with the local board on 15 April and the draft LDI programme on 20 May 2015.

7. In the LTP 2015-2025, the sportsfield and local park development (growth) programme caters for the development of parks and open space in greenfield and urban areas in anticipation of future population growth. The growth proportion of the budget is funded by development contributions. Projects that are fully funded from this programme have been included. Projects that have been identified for partial funding have not been included but may be added if Local Board agrees to top up with funds from their discretionary CAPEX budget.

8. Officers will have ongoing discussions with the board on the priority for other projects that may be eligible for other sources of funding once there is more clarity around how these will be allocated across the region.

Financial implications

9. The annual work programme is not a budget report and therefore budget figures are indicative only.

10. The final draft Local and Sports Parks annual work programme 2015-2016 includes some projects that will be delivered over a number of financial years. Some flexibility is needed in the delivery of long term complex parks projects to adapt to changing situations. These include external factors beyond council control such as weather, or issues that may arise during the detailed design, community engagement and consenting stages. Any of these factors may affect project delivery outcomes singly or in combination.

11. In particular, staff may need to adjust asset renewal priorities if unforeseen renewals or complexities in delivering planned renewals arise.

12. Given the scale of the work programme, the limited amount of time to get the work done, and the dynamic nature of the parks asset base, it is recommended that delegation for changes to the parks work programme be given to the park advisor (particularly urgent or unforeseen works) subject to consultation with the parks portfolio holder of the Puketāpapa Local Board, on the proviso that the portfolio holder can ask for any item to be reported to the local board if deemed appropriate.

Alignment with strategies and policies

13. The draft annual work programme fits with the following Auckland Council guiding documents:

· Auckland Plan – the world's most liveable city

· Puketāpapa Local Board Plan - vibrant, popular parks and treasured natural environments

· Sport & Recreation Strategic Action Plan - Aucklanders: more active more often.

· Parks and Open Spaces Strategic Plan - quality open spaces that meet community needs

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

14. The local board provided feedback on the draft of the Local and Sports Parks work programme 2015-2016 workshops on 15 April and 20 May 2015. Feedback from this workshop has informed this final draft annual work programme for approval.

15. Completion of the annual work programme 2015-2016 as approved by the Local Board will result in projects that will contribute to the local board objectives for parks such as vibrant, popular parks, a treasured natural environment and connected neighbourhoods.

Māori impact statement

16. Parks and open spaces contribute to Maori well-being, values, culture and traditions. Where any aspects of the work programme are anticipated to have an impact on tangata whenua, appropriate engagement and involvement in decision making will follow.

17. It is the aspiration of the park officers to share the long term Local and Sports Parks development plans with mana whenua for comment. Following board approval, officers will engage with iwi to discuss the programme and understand interest in future development. Further engagement will follow these initial meetings as the projects within the programme progress.

Implementation

18. Following approval of the Local and Sports Parks annual work programme staff will begin planning the implementation of projects, ensuring the work programme is completed on time and to budget for the 2015/16 financial year. Monthly updates to the parks portfolio holder will continue and quarterly reports will be sent to the Local Board.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Puketapapa Local Board Local and Sports Parks Annual Work Programme FY16 draft	21

Signatories

Authors

Jacki Byrd - Parks Advisor - Puketapapa

Authorisers

Ian Maxwell - General Manager Parks, Sports and Recreation

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

25 June 2015

CDAC Work Programme 2015/2016

File No.: CP2015/05670

Purpose

1. This report presents the Community Development, Arts and Culture (CDAC) 2015/2016 Puketāpapa Local Board work programme for approval.

Executive Summary

2. This report provides information to support local boards to make decisions required to approve the CDAC 2015/2016 work programme.

3. The draft CDAC work programme aims to provide a defined work programme for the 2015/2016 financial year. The work programme covers the following areas:

· community development and safety

· arts and culture

· events

· community facilities.

4. The CDAC work programme for the Puketāpapa Local Board has been aligned to the following 2014-2017 Puketāpapa Local Board Plan priorities:

· a strong sense of belonging and local identity

· healthy, safe people and places

· people with a voice who can make a contribution

5. Local boards are being requested to approve the CDAC work programme for FY 2015/2016. Local boards are requested to note that delivery of Community Development and Safety (CDS) work streams described in Attachment A is subject to the outcome of the current Empowered Communities Approach.

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) approve the 2015/2016 Community Development, Arts and Culture work programme (Attachment A), noting that the Community Development and Safety component is dependant upon the outcome of the Empowered Communities Approach.

b) approve the community lease work plan for 2015/2016 (Attachment B)

c) approve funding of $350,000 for the James Wallace Arts Trust at Pah Homestead.

Comments

6. The CDAC work programme for 2015/2016 has been developed using a co-ordinated departmental approach. Each CDAC unit has aligned their projects and initiatives to the Auckland Plan directives and the Puketāpapa Local Board plan 2014-2017.

7. The CDAC work programmes align to the following 2014-2017 Puketāpapa Local Board Plan priorities:

· a strong sense of belonging and local identity

· healthy, safe people and places

· people with a voice who can make a contribution

8. The CDAC work programme 2015/2016 for the Puketāpapa Local Board includes the following areas of activity:

· Community Development and Safety: These projects and programmes aim to deliver a range of social outcomes for local residents. This includes supporting community groups to deliver events, capacity building support to local community groups, safety initiatives regarding alcohol and graffiti prevention, implementing a ‘five ways of wellbeing approach’ to activities such as the stormwater project, youth-focussed initiatives such as the Youth Caucus and Youth Connections, and older persons’ welfare initiatives

· Arts and Culture: This includes administering the funding agreement with the Pah Homestead – TSB James Wallace Arts Centre, developing programmes for the Matariki Festival, running the New Kiwi Women Write Their Stories programme, and collaborating with facilities on strategic asset management planning.

· Events: This work programme includes a range of community events such as ANZAC day, Christmas events, local civic functions, and citizenship ceremonies as well as administering funding rounds for local event support funding.

· Community Facilities: This includes the provision of community facilities and their promotion, community leasing, providing an integrated booking system, strengthening community led centres including the Wesley Community Centre and Roskill Youth Zone, and delivering the Puketāpapa capex and renewals level of service work programme.

9. The work programme includes scoped initiatives, the allocation of budgets and established timelines. A workshop was held with the local board and CDAC staff on 13 May, to ensure activities align with the local board priorities and meet the needs of the Puketāpapa community.

10. CDAC’s Community Development and Safety (CDS) unit will operationalise the Empowered Communities Approach, which is part of the 2015/2016 Long-Term Plan approved on 8 May 2015 (GB/2015/31). Broadly speaking, the changes proposed to the community development function are:

· 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

· transition delivery to a more empowered communities approach.

11. The Empowered Communities Approach model was considered by the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee at its meeting on 4 June. This report recommends that the work programme be adopted based on current arrangements, noting that FY 2015/2016 will be a transition year for CDS.

12. Local Boards are requested to approve the CDAC work programme for 2015/2016. CDAC staff will continue to work with relevant portfolio holders and the local board to ensure these projects are delivered and evaluated. Portfolio holders and the local board will also be consulted on the prioritisation of the community facilities renewal projects and community leases.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

13. The draft 2015/2016 work programme was considered by the local board at a workshop on 13 May 2015. The views expressed by local board members are reflected in Attachment A.

Maori impact statement

14. Improving Maori outcomes is a priority for the region. One of the Auckland Plan targets is to increase targeted support to Maori community development projects. The CDAC work programme aims to improve well-being among Maori living in the local board area. The focus of this CDAC work programme is to support Maori targeted initiatives.

Implementation

15. CDAC staff will continue to meet with portfolio holders to provide updates on the work programme and ensure it is progressed in a timely way. The CDAC work programme will be implemented within the annual plan 2015/2016 budget and reported on through the quarterly reporting process.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Puketapapa Local Board Work Programme	27
b View	Puketapapa Community Leasing Workplan 2015/2016	31

Signatories

Authors

Yvette Asthana - Administrator

Authorisers

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Graham Bodman - Manager - Community Development, Arts and Culture

Puketāpapa Local Board

25 June 2015

Auckland Transport Report for June 2015

File No.: CP2015/10098

Purpose

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

Monthly Overview

2. The Transport Portfolio Lead briefing on transport matters in the Puketapapa area was scheduled for 22 June 2015. Matters on the agenda for discussion included:

· An update on capital projects

· Update on issues raised

3. A briefing workshop was held for Local Boards on the Parking Strategy document.

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board receive the report.

Reporting Back

Consultation Report

4. A request for an extension of broken yellow lines in Iberia Place was received by Auckland Transport and sent to the Puketapapa Local Board for any comment. Details are attached on Attachment A.

Local Board Capital Projects

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

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

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

Mt Albert Road Pedestrian Crossing Facility

8. The long-awaited safety project to convert the existing pedestrian refuge on Mt Albert Road by Three Kings Plaza to a zebra crossing began in the second week of June. It is expected to be completed by the end of this month.

Local Board Capital Projects approved:

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

Mt Roskill Safe Routes Scheme

9. Detailed design draft has been completed. A safety audit, internal review and internal consultation is being carried out. The project had construction funding from Auckland Transport confirmed recently and the application to NZTA for funding is now being prepared.

10. If NZTA funding is confirmed, the project will be tendered out and a construction programme set.

11. Mana Whenua have asked to meet with Local Board members to discuss opportunities for cultural elements to be incorporated into the design route. A date for this meeting is being sought.

East West Connections

12. This project aims to provide road connections between SH20 and SH1 to improve traffic flow, particularly for heavy trucks. The southern component of the project seeks to provide improved bus travel and cycling connections between Mangere and Otahuhu Town Centres and Sylvia Park. The project team, led by NZ Transport Agency (NZTA), have been considering six different options for the improvements.

13. NZTA and Auckland Transport will seek community feedback in June and July on the preferred approaches for two priority East West Connections projects, to be announced in June.

New Footpath Programme

14. Auckland Transport has a budget in the new financial year for the construction of new footpaths in Auckland Region. Local Boards have been approached to identify any gaps in their footpath network for evaluation and possible inclusion in this programme.

15. In the Puketapapa Local Board area, two areas of missing footpath were identified in Goodall Road and Gilletta Road and are on Auckland Transport list for prioritization.

16. The Puketapapa Local Board has also identified Plaza Drive and Graeme Breed Drive as an area where new footpath could be considered.

Auckland Transport News

New-Look Auckland Bus Shelters

17. Auckland bus shelters are set for a new design following public feedback. During July and August 2014 Auckland Transport asked for public feedback on three new bus shelter designs that were being trialed on Symonds Street in the city.

18. The level of interest in the trial shelters was very encouraging with 856 feedback responses received. Public feedback has helped Auckland Transport to gauge how the community felt about the trial designs and produced some ideas on how to make Auckland’s new bus shelter even more appealing to bus users.

19. The designs were assessed against a range of criteria, such as public feedback, value for money, customer comfort, durability, and ease of construction. Shelter A was the final choice (see below). The new shelter will help to create a more recognisable bus network and it will make life much more pleasant for everyone who uses the buses.

20. The shelter is a modular system so it can be configured to reflect local settings by using different sizes and layouts, building the shelter out of materials that reflect local character and attaching or inscribing art work on the shelter.

21. The new shelter design will gradually be rolled out across Auckland from the middle of the year.

Auckland Transport’s Parking Strategy

22. Auckland Transport has adopted a parking strategy which will mean a consistent approach for the first time for parking across the region.

23. The document allows for a case by case approach to parking taking into account local issues and the views of local boards and the community. Consultation with the community will continue as parking measures are introduced.

24. In May 2014, Auckland Transport released the Parking Discussion Document for public consultation. The Discussion Document set out key parking issues in Auckland, provided suggested approaches to meet these issues and sought community feedback to guide the development of the AT Parking Strategy. As part of the consultation process, there were 22 workshops with local boards, industry groups, business associations, and Auckland Council.

25. More than 5,500 submissions were received, a quarter were about the overall management of demand parking, 18% were about parking on residential streets and on park and rides and 11% were about parking on arterial roads. Half the submissions came from central Auckland or from CBD fringe suburbs such as Parnell, Ponsonby and Newton.

26. There has been pressure to find a solution to commuter parking issues in residential streets. The problem involves commuters and service vehicles parking long term and taking parking from local residents. Auckland Transport has been talking with residential groups and will, in conjunction with local boards and the community develop a consultation programme.

27. In addition there is the issue of managing space on arterial roads and traffic conflicting with kerbside parking. In Auckland, 60% of bus trips, 40% of car journeys and 35% of trips by goods vehicles are on arterials.

28. Auckland Transport believes there is a need to manage parking on arterial roads to optimise the number of people, services and goods moving on those roads. However Auckland Transport recognises that a measured approach to parking in town centres needs to be taken to take into account local characteristics and develop solutions that meet local needs. AT will do this in consultation with local boards, business associations and the local community.

29. Park and rides in the right places have proven to effectively extend the potential number of users for public transport and get people out of their cars. There are currently around 5,500 park and ride spots and 80% are full by 8am with parking overflowing into local streets. Further opportunities for park and rides will be reviewed taking into consideration appropriate land use in a rapidly growing city.

30. The AT Parking Strategy contributes to the achievement of Auckland Transport’s strategic themes and Auckland Plan outcomes. It also outlines the guiding principles and policies for the management and supply of on-street and AT-controlled off-street parking in Auckland.

31. The AT Parking Strategy and the submissions document can be found here: www.at.govt.nz/about-us/transport-plans-strategies/parking-strategy.

Winter Cycling Campaigns

32. Auckland Transport is running two separate winter cycling marketing campaigns.

Winter Cycling Bike Bright Campaign

33. Targeting primarily commuter cyclists, the objective is to encourage cyclists to continue riding throughout winter to “Beat the Dark” and by highlighting the significance of being visible to other road users by having the right bike lights, equipment and clothing – “Bike Bright”.

34. Auckland Transport is promoting safety tips for riding in winter conditions as well as the free cycle skills training, courses and events including Bike Care and Maintenance and Beginner on Bike sessions for adults. The call to action is for people to visit www.AT.govt.nz/bikebright for more information and/or to register for the events and training courses.

Winter Cycling Motorists Focused Campaign

35. Targeting all Auckland motorists, the objective is to remind motorists that people are still cycling in winter and now that mornings and evenings are getting darker, it’s important to watch out and look harder for cyclists “Look Twice, See the Bike”.

36. Targeting all Auckland motorists, the objective is to remind motorists that people are still cycling in winter and now that mornings and evenings are getting darker, it’s important to watch out and look harder for cyclists “Look Twice, See the Bike”.

37. These campaigns are live from 1 June to 5 July 2015.

Issues Raised through/ by Board Members

Location or Name of Issue	Description	AT Response
Goodall Street	A request has been received for traffic calming in Goodall Street.	There has been only one reported crash relating to speed at this location in the past five years. (This crash may not have been avoided by the addition of speed calming measures). Overall, the crash record for Goodall Street does not suggest there is a significant issue with excessive speeds on the road. As this street does not rank highly on the list for LATM (local area traffic management), “SLOW” road markings were implemented in 2014 to raise driver awareness. Comparing the available speed counts from 2007 and the latest data from 2015, AT has found that the speed on Goodall Street has reduced. The 85th percentile speed is now 55.6km/h (2015) compared with 59km/h in 2007.This has been attributed to the new road markings.
Denny Avenue	A request for an investigation of vehicle speeds on Denny Avenue.	This has been logged for investigation.
Marydale Drive	A request to assess this street for additional parking restrictions as residents have complained about inconsiderate parking of vehicles causing safety concerns.	May 2015 Enforcement history - two tickets were issued last December for illegal parking. When it was visited recently, two further tickets were issued to vehicles parking illegally on the bend (half on footpath). This street does not have occupancy issues in relation to parking spaces available. The question is around whether AT continues to enforce illegal parking behaviour or install yellow lines to stop this behaviour from occurring. When considering the installation of broken yellow lines, other factors also need to be considered. As Marydale Drive is approximately 9m wide, if AT installed broken yellow lines on the bend to formally restrict parking, it might encourage vehicles to increase their speeds as they travel around the bend. The traffic engineer’s recommendation is therefore to continue to request parking enforcement officers to attend in order to educate residents to park more considerately. June 2015 The transport portfolio lead has requested that AT review the decision not to put broken yellow lines at the bend in Marydale Drive. AT traffic engineer visited the street in the evening to review the situation and didn’t identify any safety issues. All the vehicles were parked legally and not impeding the carriageway.
May Road Crossing	A request from Roskill Together has been received asking for a pedestrian facility on May Road in the vicinity of War Memorial Park.	The pedestrian refuge here is expected to be upgraded to a signalised crossing point as part of the Mt Roskill Safe Routes project. If the construction money for the project is confirmed, the project can go ahead and be completed in the next financial year (2015/16)
Mt Eden Road/Duke Street and Landscape Road corner	Recently the Herald reported a spate of loss of control crashes at this bend on Mt Eden Road.	Auckland Transport completed a site visit as soon as the matter came to notice. It has been decided that the best fix for this location is to apply some high friction surfacing to this location. This work has been added to the minor safety programme and be applied as soon as possible. Recently high friction surfacing was applied to the bend in Hillsborough Road by the Cape Horn intersection at an approximate cost of $80,000. Traffic management costs while work is being completed are often just as expensive as the work being completed.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Consultation	41

Signatories

Authors	Lorna Stewart, Elected Member Relationship Manager, Auckland Transport
Authorisers	Jonathan Anyon, Elected Member Relationship Team Manager, Auckland Transport

Puketāpapa Local Board

25 June 2015

Puketāpapa Local Board Community Fees and Charges - July to December 2014

File No.: CP2015/10639

Purpose

1. To present the usage and revenue data from council-managed community facilities within the local board area for the period 1 July to 31 December 2014 and to highlight any significant impact of the new fees and charges that were introduced on 1 July 2014.

2. To recommend community facilities fees and charges for the 2015/2016 year.

Executive Summary

3. On 1 April 2015, members of the Puketāpapa Local Board met at a workshop to consider the impact of the new fees and charges introduced on 1 July 2014. Please refer to Attachment A for the fee schedule for 2014/2015.

4. The council’s ‘Hire Fee Framework – For Hire of Auckland Council’s Community Facilities’ (the framework) was developed over a two-year period from 2012-2014 and was based on good practice principles. New fees and charges, which would help ensure fairness and transparency for all users, were to be introduced for all council facilities across the region on 1 July 2014.

5. All local boards initially adopted the framework although six local boards, including Puketāpapa, chose to vary from the recommended fees and charges. Puketāpapa later rescinded its resolution to adopt the local fees and charges schedule and requested further information from council staff. Please refer to Attachment A for the original proposed fee schedule for 2014/2015.

6. There are five council-managed community facilities in the Puketāpapa Local Board area. These are the Wesley Community Centre, Fickling Convention Centre, Mt Roskill War Memorial Hall, Roskill Youth Zone and Three Kings Tennis Pavilion. After 1 July, the council received enquiries from nine of the 40 regular hirers of the four latter venues. Eight accepted a transition arrangement until the end of September 2014 and the ninth, the Three Kings Tennis Club, accepted a transition arrangement while its previous arrangement with the legacy council could be checked.

7. There were no cancellations at these four venues, although a number of smaller groups affected by the changed fees and charges at the Wesley Community Centre found alternative premises that better suited their requirements. For the full list of regular hirers, please refer to Attachment B.

8. For a table of fees and charges per venue for the July to December period, please refer to the summary in Attachment C. Attachment D shows the number of sessions booked by activity type.

9. Of the local boards that accepted the recommended the fees and charges, 12 per cent (on average) of the regular hirers enquired about the new fees and charges structure. Less than one per cent of these regular hirers (on average) cancelled their bookings

10. The table below summarises the combined activity of the council-managed facilities in the Puketāpapa Local Board area for the July to December 2014 period. Please note that some figures are reported as percentage points (pp), while others are shown as a percentage (%). Please refer to the glossary of terms (Attachment E) for more information on percentage points.

Utilisation	Visitors	Revenue
-8% (pp)	-21,314 (-11%)	+$48,493 (+41%)

11. Over the six-month period, utilisation (booked hours divided by 10 available hours per day) decreased by eight percentage points (pp). Over the same period, visitor numbers decreased from 185,890 to 164,576 (-11 per cent) and revenue increased $48,493 (+41 per cent). Most of the revenue increase is attributable to Wellesley Community Centre, which had lower utilisation.

12. Mitigating factors: The increase in revenue is in contrast to the utilisation and visitor decrease and is possible by a change in customer types to those paying a higher fee or an increase in the fees paid by customers. In July 2014, a new process was introduced to book the available spaces in most of the council-managed community facilities across the region and to ensure the cancellation charge was applied where appropriate. This has greatly helped to record more accurate utilisation and visitor numbers than in previous years.

13. For the 2014/2015 financial year, revenue from community facilities is expected to increase for the Puketāpapa Local Board. This could help contribute to the maintenance of these facilities, which reflects the good public management principles imbedded in the framework.

14. The framework includes other good practice principles including accountability and fairness. A number of hirers in the Puketāpapa Local Board area are currently on reduced rates, some of which have been in place for several years due to legacy hire arrangements. These special, non-standard rates are not available to other hirers. Exacerbating this inequality is the cost of administering small monetary transactions. As such, council staff recommend that these non-standard rates be raised to the same level as those paid by all other hirers. A transition time of 9-12 months would provide a sufficient adjustment period for the hirers involved. For the full list of these hirers, please refer to Attachment F.

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) agree that the 2014/2015 community facilities hire fees will remain, uninflated, for the 2015/2016 year, as per Attachment A, which will apply to all new and existing hirers using the facilities with the exception of the groups listed in Attachment F which will benefit from transitional rates.

b) approve a transitional arrangement for the groups listed in Attachment F of a 10 per cent increase on their specific 2014/2015 fee.

c) request council staff communicate with the groups in transition (as listed in Attachment F) to confirm the new rates and that the 2015/2016 year will be the final year of transitional arrangements.

d) request council staff to provide regular updates on the impact of the hire fees and the performance of council-managed community facilities as part of the quarterly reports.

Comments

15. The council’s ‘Hire Fee Framework – For Hire of Auckland Council’s Community Facilities’ (the framework) was developed over a two-year period from 2012-2014. It took account of the wide range of legacy hire arrangements that were recorded or published and acknowledged that ‘access to safe, affordable places for people to pursue their interests provides many benefits to the wider community…’ The framework included these good practice principles: good public management, lawfulness, accountable, transparent (openness), value for money, integrity and fairness.

16. All local boards initially adopted the framework (resolution number PKTPP/2014/61 in April 2014) although six local boards, including Puketāpapa, chose to vary from the recommended fees and charges (Resolution number PKTPP/2014/58). Puketāpapa later rescinded its resolution to adopt the local fees and charges schedule and requested further information from council staff. (Resolution number PKTPP/2014/171 in August 2014.)

17. When the new framework was implemented, it became clear that across some local boards there were a large number of exceptions to the published hire rates that had not been recorded in the past or visible to the organisation. The experience of the local boards that accepted the recommended fees and charges is averaged as follows:

· 12 per cent of regular hirers enquired about the new fees and charges

· Those facing significant price increases were allowed transition rates until the end of September 2014.

· Less than one per cent of these regular hirers cancelled their bookings.

18. Members of the Puketāpapa Local Board met for a workshop on 1 April 2015 to consider the impact of the new fees and charges introduced on 1 July 2014. Please refer to Attachment A for the original fee schedule for 2014/2015.

19. It was the view of some local board members that the current legacy hire and special hire arrangements for the groups listed in Attachment F be continued and, if raised, be capped at a 10% increase.

20. These special, non-standard rates are not available to other hirers. Exacerbating this inequality is the cost of administering small monetary transactions. In terms of fairness and good public management, council staff recommend that these non-standard rates be raised to the same level that other hirers are required to pay. A transition time of 9-12 months would provide a sufficient adjustment period for the hirers involved. For the list of hirers on special or legacy rates, please refer to Attachment F

21. Impact of implementing new fees and charges: In the July to December 2014 period, the council received enquiries from nine of the 40 regular hirers across four venues: Fickling Convention Centre, Mt Roskill War Memorial Hall, Roskill Youth Zone and Three Kings Tennis Pavilion. Eight accepted a transition arrangement until the end of September 2014 and the ninth, the Three Kings Tennis Club, accepted a transition arrangement while its previous arrangement with the legacy council could be checked. There were no cancellations at these four venues, although a number of smaller groups affected by the changed fees and charges at the fifth venue, the Wesley Community Centre, found alternative premises that better suited their requirements. For the full list of regular hirers, please refer to Attachment B.

22. Summary of utilisation, visits and revenue by local board area

Please note that some figures in the following graphs are reported as percentage points (pp), while others are shown as a percentage (%). For a table of fees and charges per venue for the July to December period, please refer to the summary in Attachment C. Attachment D shows the number of sessions booked by activity type.

23. Puketāpapa Local Board – Utilisation hours booked

24. Utilisation for the five local board council-managed community facilities decreased an average by eight percentage points when compared with the same period last year. The range in performance of the five facilities was a decrease of 10 per cent to an increase of 15 per cent.

25. Puketāpapa Local Board – Visits

26. Visitors to the local board’s five council-managed community facilities decreased on average by 11 per cent compared with the same period last year, with three out of five facilities reporting increases. This is in-line with the lower utilisation of the facilities.

Highlights/exceptions/mitigating factors

27. The facilities Fickling Convention Centre, Roskill Youth Zone and Wesley Community Centre have marked changes in performance. Utilisation and visits at a facility level are shown on the two graphs below.

28. Fickling Convention Centre: Compared with the same period last year Fickling Convention Centre reported a 10 percentage point decrease in utilisation, whilst visits to the facility fell by almost a third from 15,827 per month to 10,495 per month.

29. Roskill Youth Zone: Utility and visit numbers are significantly higher than the same period last year. This is a result of the Off the Couch Trust using the facility for regular fitness classes.

30. Wesley Community Centre: Utility and visits have decreased at Wesley Community Centre as some smaller groups affected by the changed fees and charges have found alternative premises that better suit their requirements. However, revenue for this facility as significantly increased. (Please refer to graphs on the next page.)

31. In July 2014, a new process was introduced to book the available spaces in most of the council-managed community facilities across the region and to ensure the cancellation charge was applied where appropriate. This has greatly helped to record more accurate utilisation and visitor numbers, particularly with last-minute cancellations or ‘no shows’ for bookings. Back in 2013, the figures may not have reflected these actions by the users.

32. Revenue

33. The local board earned significantly more revenue than the same period last year. Wesley Community Centre contributed to most of this increase. The other four facilities had only slightly higher revenue which is in contrast to their lower utilisation. This is likely due to a change in customer types to those paying a higher fee or an increase in the fees paid by customers, as well as a tighter charging of cancellation fees. The revenue per facility can be seen on the graph below.

34. Over the period 1 July to 31 December 2014, utilisation of the Puketāpapa Local Board community facilities has decreased eight percentage points (pp). Over the same period, visitor numbers decreased from 185,890 to 164,576 (-11 per cent) and revenue increased $48,493 (+41 per cent) over the six months. Most of the revenue increase is attributable to Wellesley Community Centre.

Utilisation	Visitors	Revenue
-8% (pp)	-21,314 (-11%)	+$48,493 (+41%)

35. For the 2014/2015 financial year, revenue from community facilities is expected to increase for the Puketāpapa Local Board. This could help contribute to the maintenance of these facilities and reflects the good practice principles imbedded in the framework, including fairness to all users

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

36. The impact of the new community facilities fees and charges introduced on 1 July 2014 were work shopped with members of the Puketāpapa Local Board on 1 April 2015.

37. It was the view of some members at this workshop that the current legacy hire or special hire arrangements for the groups listed in Attachment F be continued and, if raised, be capped.

38. These special, non-standard rates are not available to other hirers. Exacerbating this inequality is the cost of administering small monetary transactions. In terms of fairness and good public management, council staff recommend that these non-standard rates be raised to the same level as those paid by all other hirers. A transition time of 9-12 months would provide a sufficient adjustment period for the hirers involved.

39. The recommendations within this report fall within the Puketāpapa Local Board’s authority relating to local recreation, sport and community facilities.

Māori impact statement

40. The fees and charges framework is not specifically targeted for Maori populations. However, it aims to be clear and transparent to all users, including Maori.

Implementation

41. The information included in this report will inform the fees and charges to be adopted for the 2015/2016 Annual Plan, in April this year.

42. The recommendations in this report do not trigger the Auckland Council Significance Policy.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Fee Schedule 2014 2015 Puketāpapa	51
b View	List of regular hirers Puketāpapa	53
c View	Summary of fees and charges data July - December 2014	55
d View	Session booked by activity type	57
e View	Glossary of terms Puketāpapa fees and charges	59
f View	List of hirers on special or legacy rates Puketāpapa	61

Signatories

Authors

Shruti Jani - Team Administrator

Kat Teirney - Team Leader – Community Facilities, South

Authorisers

Graham Bodman - Manager - Community Development, Arts and Culture

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

25 June 2015

Puketāpapa Local Board 2015/2016 Pools and Leisure Facilities Proposed Property Renewals

File No.: CP2015/11580

Purpose

1. This report seeks approval from the Puketāpapa 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.

The Puketāpapa Local Board proposed property renewals programme for 2015/16 is detailed in this report as Attachment A.

In the 2015/16 financial year, the Puketāpapa Local Board’s Pools and Leisure Facilities budget is $1,268,980.00.

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

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

b) approve the property renewals programme for 2015/2016 as listed in Attachment A.

c) delegate responsibility to specified member/s (refer Attachment A) 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

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

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

The property renewals programme, 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.

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

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

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

Māori impact statement

5. The Puketāpapa 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.

6. General

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.

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

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.

Over the course of the LTP it is proposed each facility will receive comprehensive and focussed work to bring 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 to 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 Investment 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 Framework

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.

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

Implementation

7. 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

No.	Title	Page
a View	2015/6 Prioritisation of Proposed Renewals Programme Pools & Leisure	67

Signatories

Authors

Jane Franich - Contract Relationship Advisor

Authorisers

Ian Maxwell - General Manager Parks, Sports and Recreation

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

25 June 2015

Draft Auckland Stormwater Network Discharge Consent application

File No.: CP2015/10996

Purpose

1. To request formal feedback from the Puketapapa Local Board (the board) on stormwater management priorities as part of consultation on the development of an Auckland wide stormwater network discharge consent, with particular reference to the board area.

Executive Summary

2. Auckland Council is seeking formal feedback from the board on Council’s application for consent to allow the diversion and discharge of water from the urban public stormwater network (the Network Discharge Consent). Council is seeking a 35 year, process based, consent as it allows for greater flexibility in managing stormwater issues, such as flooding, stream health and asset maintenance and renewal. The consent will support the implementation of a water sensitive design approach to infrastructure development in Auckland.

3. This report provides an opportunity for the board to provide input into the consent application, with particular reference to what they see as local priorities for stormwater management.

Recommendations

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) receives the Draft Auckland Stormwater Network Discharge Consent application report.

b) provides feedback on the draft stormwater network discharge consent application, with particular reference to local priorities for stormwater management.

Comments

4. Auckland Council is developing an application for a network discharge consent (NDC) to allow for the diversion and discharge of stormwater from the urban public stormwater infrastructure. The consent will be valid for 35 years with a requirement that it will be reviewed on a six yearly basis. The consent will both guide council’s management of stormwater infrastructure, and address priority issues such as reducing the risk of flooding, improving freshwater quality and managing the stormwater impacts of growth and development. Further information on the NDC is appended as Attachment A.

5. Through development of the consent a number of stormwater priorities for the local board area have been identified, including potentially critical pipes that require investigation, growth priority areas to be supported to achieve water sensitive design and issues relating to stream and catchment health. These stormwater priorities are described in more detail in the report below and in the table appended at Attachment B. This table also shows the targets for stormwater management and how priorities for action in the local board area relate to these.

6. This report provides an opportunity for the board to provide input into the consent application, with particular reference to what they see as local priorities for stormwater management. Paragraphs 7 to 15 below suggest three questions which may guide how the board frames its feedback alongside comments noted by stormwater, and environment portfolio holders at an earlier meeting.

7. Question 1: Does the Puketāpapa Local Board have any comments on the proposed framework of the Auckland-wide Stormwater Network Discharge Consent?

8. As a reminder it is proposed that the consent be processed based, with the following key elements to address the 7 stormwater issues:

· Identification of regional priority areas

· “Business as usual” processes.

· Setting of objectives, outcomes and targets, as well as associated six yearly reviews

9. Attachment B summarises what the above elements will mean for the management of stormwater infrastructure within the board area. This table identifies how the stream subcatchments within the board area have been ranked within the regional prioritisation for each stormwater issue. Identified high priority areas will be the focus of further investigation and assessment for future infrastructure upgrades and projects.

10. Question 2: Is there any feedback the board would like to provide relating to the management of the public stormwater network?

11. The following comments and questions were raised by the environment portfolio holder in May 2015;

· Areas of interest for the board are the Three Kings quarry development (what stormwater treatments / mitigation is being proposed for this development). The stormwater unit officer stated that the stormwater unit is working with the developers in the Special Housing Area (SHA) to manage flooding and water quality.

· There is also quite a large amount of Housing New Zealand stock in the local board area.

· What interventions are proposed for private land / private stream issues regarding stormwater management, as this is a key issue for Oakley? The stormwater unit officer stated that it would be a combination of mechanisms, including land use requirements through the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan, requirements under the proposed NDC as well as the Code of Practice for stormwater assets that are vested to Auckland Council, the stormwater bylaw, and environmental education.

· Support taking into account climate change in modelling.

· Support reducing impervious areas, for instance through the reduction of concrete paths.

· Support education on stream protection and asked what material is available.

12. Stormwater has undertaken stream walks along local streams and identified where remedial work is required. This is appended as Attachment C.

13. Question 3: Are there any initiatives relating to stormwater management that the board is investigating, in addition to those identified in the Puketāpapa Local Board Plan?

14. For reference, the following initiatives were identified in the Puketāpapa Local Board Plan relating to improving stream and coastal health:

· Continue the expansion of Puketāpapa greenways network;

· Complete an ecological restoration prioritisation report for the board;

· Increase restoration planting and renaturalisation projects along Oakley and Wairaki creeks and other streams;

· Support volunteering – local ‘Friends of’ groups and environmental initiatives on harbour, foreshore, waterways and maunga;

· Complete an ecological restoration prioritisation report for the board;

· Work with the Maunga Authority on maunga restoration, and with mana whēnua on natural and physical resources including waterways, advocacy on harbour quality and indigenous restorative planting;

· Actively participate with landfill remediation to ensure a positive result;

· Work to prevent pollution and spills through community education;

· Support the work of the Manukau Harbour Forum to deliver its vision and strategy to improve the Manukau Harbour;

· Support the development and implementation of 3D hydrodynamic modelling and a marine spatial plan for the Manukau Harbour; and

· Develop long term plan for removal of invasive oyster shells from our shoreline.

15. In addition, the following comments were made by the Chair during the 6 May workshop:

· Oakley Creek upper catchment

16. This information will be passed to waterways planning specialists within the stormwater unit for further assessment, as well as other Council units supporting the delivery of environmental outcomes. It is noted that the Parks and Environmental Services units are actively supporting a number of the above projects, such as the Manukau Harbour Forum work programme, and Oakley Creek restoration.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

17. This report asks for formal feedback from the Puketapapa Local Board on stormwater management priorities for their local area.

18. As described above, this network discharge consent has been shaped by feedback given by the Puketapapa Local Board and others on the Greater Manukau Consolidated Receiving Environment.

Māori impact statement

19. Stormwater and environmental management have integral links with the mauri of the environment and concepts of kaitiakitanga. Council recognises the significance of stormwater management to mana whenua and mataawaka.

20. Consultation on this draft Network Discharge Consent is currently being carried out with all mana whenua who have indicated an interest in being involved in this project. Mana whenua have also been consulted on development of the Waitematā Harbour, Manukau Harbour and Great Tāmaki Consolidated Receiving Environment and their feedback has informed this consent.

Implementation

21. Once consultation on this consent has been completed it will then be finalised and presented to the Regulatory Officers in late 2015. If approved, the consent is likely to become active by mid-2016 and will help to guide stormwater management going forward.

22. While not all stormwater-related issues can be addressed through the network discharge consent process, any additional feedback on stormwater management the board provides will be provided to the relevant council staff to be addressed in the appropriate fashion.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Further information on network discharge consent	73
b View	Table of noted stormwater issues in the Puketapapa Local Board area	77
c View	Local Stream Issues	83

Signatories

Authors

Emma Joyce - Relationship Advisor

Authorisers

John Dragicevich - Manager Infrastructure and Environmental Services

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

25 June 2015

Community Facilities Network Plan

File No.: CP2015/11342

Purpose

1. Seek the Devonport-Takapuna 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 Puketāpapa 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