Agenda of Waiheke Local Board

Waiheke Local Board

25 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 6

9.1 Kai Conscious Project - Susan Barker 6

10 Extraordinary Business 6

11 Notices of Motion 6

12 Waiheke Local Board Discretionary Community Funding: Round Three 2014 - 2015 7

13 Community Facilities Network Plan 11

14 Auckland Transport Report - June 2015 75

15 Wild Things Conference Attendance for Chairperson Paul Walden 79

16 Local Board feedback on amending the licence to occupy remission scheme to include the proposed Transport Levey 85

17 Review of Essentially Waiheke 93

18 List of resource consents 97

19 Reports requested/pending 105

20 Consideration of Extraordinary Items

1 Welcome

Kua uru mai a hau kaha, a hau maia, a hau ora, a hau nui,

Ki runga, ki raro, ki roto, ki waho

Rire, rire hau…pai marire

Translation (non-literal) - Rama Ormsby

Let the winds bring us inspiration from beyond,

Invigorate us with determination and courage to achieve our aspirations for abundance and sustainability

Bring the calm, bring all things good, bring peace….good peace.

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 Waiheke Local Board:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Thursday, 11 June 2015, as a true and correct record.

5 Leave of Absence

That an apology from Member SD Brown for leave of absence, 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 Waiheke 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.

9.1 Kai Conscious Project - Susan Barker

Purpose

1. Susan Barker was in attendance to speak to the board about the Kai Conscious Event that took place on Oneroa. The (KCW) Kai Conscious Project is an initiative of the Waiheke Resources Trust and the project is now drawing to its conclusion in Oneroa.

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.

Waiheke Local Board

25 June 2015

Waiheke Local Board Discretionary Community Funding: Round Three 2014 - 2015

File No.: CP2015/08863

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to present applications received for round three of the Waiheke Local Board Community Funding Programme 2014-2015. The local board is required to fund, part-fund or decline these applications.

Executive Summary

2. For the 2014-2015 financial year, the Waiheke Local Board set a total community funding budget of $46,377. $10,275 was allocated in round one and $15,443 in round two.

3. The local board also resolved to incorporate its remaining $11,480 Community Group Assistance Fund budget and $9,850 from their SLIPs operational budget into its community grants programme. Therefore the total funding available for round three of the community grants programme is $41,989.

4. Twenty two applications were received in this round, with a total requested of $105,784.

Recommendation/s

That the Waiheke Local Board:

a) consider the applications listed in Table One and agree to fund, part-fund or decline each application in this round.

Table One: Waiheke Local Board Community Funding Applications

Organisation Name	Project	Total Requested
Waiheke Island SPCA	Free dog de-sexing project	$2,750
Waiheke Book Festival Charitable Trust	Waiheke Island literary festival 2015	$4,136
Waiheke Community Art Gallery	‘Occasion' - exhibition of fashion from the mid 1960s -1970s	$4,910
Once Upon An Island Trust	Once upon an island' story trail	$5,000
Grow Your Own Productions	The fourth Waiheke playwrights festival	$1,500
Waiheke Island Playgroup	Waiheke playgroup - operating costs	$4,000
Waiheke Waka Ama Club Incorporated	Purchase of new equipment for Waiheke waka ama club development project	$5,358
Waiheke Island Playcentre	Refurbish and resources for quiet play area	$2,630
Omiha Welfare and Recreation Society Inc	Rates assistance 2015/2016 financial year	$1,000
1st Waiheke Sea Scouts	First Waiheke sea scouts - running/up-keep and renewal	$25,000
Piritahi Marae Trust	Te Tau Hou o Matariki 2015 celebration	$3,756
The Waiheke Recreation Centre Trust	Waiheke recreation centre floor resurfacing and line marking	$5,000
Waiheke United AFC	First aid kits for individual teams	$ 900
Show Me Shorts Film Festival Trust	Show Me Shorts film festival 2015	$1,076
Waiheke Boating Club Inc	Safety boat trailer replacement for the ‘learn to sail’ and ‘dinghy racing’ program	$1,800
Waiheke Hockey	Team uniforms and travel assistance	$5,480
Jassy Dean Trust	Marketing costs for Waiheke Island garden safari 2015	$6,230
OUTLine New Zealand Incorporated	Operation costs for the 0800 help line	$2,003
Waiheke Junior Cricket	Expansion of Waiheke junior cricket to allow participation for children in school years five to eight.	$5,563
Waiheke Livingwaters A.O.G.	LEAP - increase existing emergency accommodation services from eight residents to 12 residents	$5,000
Connected Media Charitable Trust	The ‘Outlook for Someday' free one-day film-making workshop on Waiheke Island	$4,192
Waiheke Waka Ama Club Incorporated	Purchase of specialised trailor for transporting waka ama	$8,500
	TOTAL	$105,784

Comments

5. In March 2014, the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee resolved to continue the interim community funding approach for the 2014/2015 financial year (REG/2014/36).This interim community funding approach remains in place until the implementation of the new Community Grants Policy on 1 July 215.

6. Through community grants, the Waiheke Local Board aims to build social capital within the local community by supporting projects that provide a community benefit, are equitable and inclusive and result in an ongoing gain to the local area.

7. Online funding criteria state that the Waiheke Local Board will generally give grants of between $200 and $5,000 due to the local board’s desire to distribute these funds widely in the community.

8. The local board, in coming to its decision, has advertised the following consideration online:

· the proposal’s benefit to the local area

· the applicant group’s role in the local area

· the proposal’s alignment with the priorities of the local board, such as:

o young people

o the environment

o culture and arts

o social cohesion

o recreation and sport

o heritage

· Whether the applicant group applies to receive the proceeds of gaming machines.

9. Further to these criteria, the guidelines also contain some exclusions:

· grants cannot be for something which has already happened or something that has been purchased

· grants will not fund catering, salaries, vehicles, legal costs, debt repayments or groups that will further redistribute the funds

· grants will not fund activities promoting particular political goals or religious ministry

· groups that have failed to meet accountability obligations from previous Council grants (within the last five years) will not be funded except in exceptional mitigating circumstances.

10. This fund is allocated at the local board’s discretion. In accordance with its fiduciary duties, the local board is to act honestly, avoid conflicts of interest and act in what the local board believes to be the best interests of the community.

11. Round three of the Waiheke Local Board Community Funding closed on 15 May 2015. The fund was advertised through local papers, community networks, social media and on the Auckland Council website.

12. For the 2014-2015 financial year, the Waiheke Local Board set a total community funding budget of $46,377. $10,275 was allocated in round one and $14,043 in round two. (For round two, a late application was submitted by the Waiheke United AFC and awarded $1,400 by the Waiheke Local Board at the 26 February 2015 meeting (WHK/2015/30)).

13. The local board also resolved to incorporate its remaining $11,480 Community Group Assistance Fund budget and $9,850 from their SLIPs operational budget into its community grants programme. Therefore there is $41, 989 total funding available for the third and final round for the 2014-2015 financial year.

14. Twenty two applications were received in this round, with a total requested of $105,784.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

15. Applications were circulated to the local board for consideration prior to this meeting.

Māori impact statement

16. Community funding is a general programme of interest and accessible to a wide range of groups, including Maori. Maori are therefore likely to benefit alongside other groups in the community.

Implementation

17. The allocation of grants to community groups is within the adopted annual plan.

18. Following the Waiheke Local Board allocating funding for round two, Community Development, Arts and Culture will notify the applicants of the local board decision.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Danielle Hibson - Community Funding Advisor - Central

Authorisers

Graham Bodman - Manager - Community Development, Arts and Culture

Judith Webster - Relationship Manager

Waiheke Local Board

25 June 2015

Community Facilities Network Plan

File No.: CP2015/11296

Purpose

1. Seek the Waiheke 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 Waiheke 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.

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	17
b View	Community Facilities Network Action Plan	65

Signatories

Authors

Anita Coy-Macken - Principal Policy Analyst

David Shamy - Principal Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Kataraina Maki - GM - Community & Social Policy

Judith Webster - Relationship Manager

Waiheke Local Board

25 June 2015

Auckland Transport Report - June 2015

File No.: CP2015/11856

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 activities in the local board area.

Executive Summary

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

3. In particular , this report provides an update on;

· Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF)

· Local Consultations

· Media

Recommendation/s

That the Waiheke Local Board:

a) Receives the report.

Discussion

Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF)

4. In September 2014 the Local Board provided a list of potential Local Board Transport

Capital Fund projects.

5. The table below outlines an up-date as to decisions by the Board and on the progress of the projects.

Table 1: Waiheke Local Board project update for Board approval:

Resolution # WHK/2014/209

ID#	Project Description	Progress/Current Status
	Formation of low level multiuse trail, Ostend road verge and/or cycling and walking lane	· Discussed with Board on 8 May Auckland Transport steering group have agreed bridal track below road can be built as part of LBTCF · Report for July 2015 meeting
	O’Brien Road Causeway pedestrian, equestrian and cycle bridge	· Auckland Transport Engineers has assessed what is required, ROC $123,463.15, Board approved construction and ROC May 2015
	Walking trail up Sea View Road	· Seaview Road trail, two sections Erua Road to 36 Seaview Road $594,000 · 36 Seaview Road to 365 Seaview Road $440,000 · Auckland Transport’s decision regarding volunteers communicated to Board, Board to approve current options or reconsider request
	Empire Avenue, Boardwalk and stream rehabilitation	On hold at request of Board
	Causeway reserve retaining wall and boardwalk 65 metres	On hold at request of Board

Note: ROC = rough order of costs; FEC = firm estimate of cost)

LBTCF Ostend Road Update

6. The Waiheke Local Board requested Auckland Transport to;

· Resolution # WHK/2014/209

1) Scopes and provides indicative cost estimates for the following potential Local Board Transport Capital Funds project;

· Formation of low level multiuse trail, Ostend road verge.

7. Full options identified and will be reported on, in the July 2015 board meeting with several other projects the board has asked to be assessed.

Local Consultations

8. Consultation documents and discussion for the following proposals have been provided to the Waiheke Local Board for its feedback. As the Board’s transport portfolio holder and the Local Board Chair provide feedback on the Board’s behalf, the material below is included for general information purposes only.

9. There was no local consultations this month.

Media

Road closures – Wynyard Quarter

10. Street and utility upgrades in Wynyard Quarter will require road closures on sections of Halsey and Gaunt Streets from late May 2015 to mid-2016, and Pakenham and Madden Streets from mid-2015 to mid-2017.

11. These major works are part of the transformation of Wynyard Quarter to create a vibrant and accessible waterfront, as well as to accommodate future growth in the area.

12. They are being undertaken by Auckland Transport, Auckland Council, Waterfront Auckland and Watercare and involve wastewater and stormwater upgrades and street refurbishments.

13. Due to the complexity and scale of the works road closures are necessary on Halsey and Gaunt Streets, and staged road closures on Pakenham and Madden Streets.

14. Motorists are advised to expect delays when travelling through and around Wynyard Quarter and to consider walking, cycling or public transport as an alternative.

15. For more information please go to https://at.govt.nz/projects-roadworks/wynyard-quarter/#works

A Fresh look at parking in Auckland

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

17. 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.

18. 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.

19. 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.

20. Auckland Transport’s has identified there has been pressure to find a solution to commuter parking issues in residential streets, of which involves commuters and service vehicles parking long term and taking parking from local residents.

21. 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.

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

23. Auckland Transport has found that park and rides in the right places have proven to effectively extend the potential number of users for public transport and to get people out of their cars.

24. 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.

25. The Auckland Transport 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 Auckland Transport -controlled off-street parking in Auckland.

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

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

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

Māori impact statement

28. No specific issues with regard to the Maori Impact Statement are triggered by this report.

General

29. The activities detailed in this report do not trigger the Significance Policy. All programmes and activities are within budget/in line with the council’s annual plan and LTP documents and there are no legal or legislative implications arising from the activities detailed in this report.

Implementation

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

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors	Ivan Trethowen – Elected Member Relationship Manager, Auckland Transport
Authorisers	Jonathan Anyon - Elected Member Relationship Team Manager, Auckland Transport

Waiheke Local Board

25 June 2015

Wild Things Conference Attendance for Chairperson Paul Walden

File No.: CP2015/11333

Purpose

1. This report informs Local Boards about the Wild Things Conference and workshop in Auckland from Tuesday 11 August to Thursday 13 August 2015 and invites boards to give approval for Chairperson Paul Walden to attend.

Executive Summary

2. The Wild Things Conference and workshop takes place in Auckland from Tuesday 11 August to Thursday 13 August 2015.

Recommendation/s

That the Waiheke Local Board:

a) Approves Chairperson Paul Walden’s attendance at the Wild Things Conference and workshop from Tuesday 11 August to Thursday 13 August 2015 at a cost of $830 (exc. GST) to be funded from the FY15/16 professional development budget, subject to the Governing Body approval of Local Board budgets on 25^th June 2015.

Comments

3. The Wild Things Conference and workshop is being held in Auckland and focuses on the loss of terrestrial, fresh water and marine biodiversity and what can be done to stop it.

4. The pre-conference workshop covers the Resource Management Act and looks at recent developments in RMA case law and RMA reforms.

5. The conference sessions include;

· New Zealand’s Biodiversity Challenge

· Bridging the gap between policy and reality

· What’s need to scale up effort?

· Leader Dialogue

· Addressing biodiversity in development

· How do we engage New Zealanders?

· Treaty settlements and biodiversity

· The way forward

6. Chairperson Walden is the lead of the environment portfolio which covers a wide range of environmental and conservation issues on Waiheke Island involving native flora and fauna. Enhancing Biodiversity is one of the key areas that the environment portfolio has responsibility for and attending the conference will provide a chance to learn more about the challenges facing biodiversity and how they can be overcome.

Costs

7. The Waiheke Local Board Professional development budget for financial year 2015/2016 is $7500.

8. To date $0 has been allocated from this budget.

9. Registration fees for the conference and workshop are $830 (ex. GST) which would leave $6670 remaining in the professional development budget.

10. As the conference is in Auckland there are no additional costs.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

11. The environment is a key area of focus for the Waiheke Local Board and features heavily in their Local Board plan. Specifically one of their key outcomes is to ‘improve our natural areas through ecological restoration projects to enhance biodiversity’.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	WILD Things Conference Programme	81

Signatories

Authors	Sophie McGhee - Democracy Advisor
Authorisers	Judith Webster - Relationship Manager

Waiheke Local Board

25 June 2015

Local Board feedback on amending the licence to occupy remission scheme to include the proposed Transport Levey

File No.: CP2015/12085

Purpose

1. The 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 Waiheke 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.

Māori 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	89

Signatories

Authors

Beth Sullivan - Principal Advisor Policy

Authorisers

Matthew Walker - General Manager Financial Plan Policy & Budgeting

Judith Webster - Relationship Manager

Waiheke Local Board

25 June 2015

Review of Essentially Waiheke

File No.: CP2015/11461

Purpose

1. For the Waiheke Local Board (the local board) to agree the high level brief for the ‘refresh’ of Essentially Waiheke, the Village and Rural Communities Strategy for Waiheke Island, and to approve funding for the project, including engagement of a project manager.

Executive Summary

2. The Review of Essentially Waiheke is a key initiative in the adopted Waiheke Local Board Plan.

3. It is recommended that the review is progressed by the local board in collaboration with community stakeholders and with assistance from Council subject matter experts in three stages. Stage 1 would involve identifying the parts of the plan that need to be reviewed and further work required. Stage 2 would develop the draft revised version for consultation and at Stage 3 the plan would finalised and adopted by the local board based on the outcome of the consultation process.

4. It is recommended that a project manager is contracted to administer and progress the project, with the aim of completing the review by June 2016.

5. This report seeks confirmation of funding of up to $20,000 from next year’s Locally Driven Initiatives (LDI) budget, subject to availability through the 2015/16 Annual Plan.

Recommendation/s

That the Waiheke Local Board:

a) Agrees to initiate the review of Essentially Waiheke in accordance with the guidelines and principles set out in paragraphs 14 - 25 of the report

b) Approves operating expenditure of up to $20,000 from the 2015/16 Locally Driven Initiatives (LDI) budget towards the cost of engaging a project manager and associated expenditure required for the review, subject to funding availability through the 2015/16 Annual Plan process.

c) Delegates authority to Members xx and xx to act as local board spokespersons to agree the details of the project plan and any subsequent amendments to it as required.

d) Notes the estimated completed date for the Essentialy Waiheke review of 30 June 2016 is dependent on the, yet to be determined, level of change required and subject mater expert availability.

Comments

6. Background and purpose of Essentially Waiheke: The Waiheke Village and Rural Communities Strategy (‘Essentially Waiheke’) was approved by Auckland City Council in 2000 and reviewed with minor amendments in 2005. Its purpose is “to provide a community-approved framework for Waiheke’s development and to signpost the directions towards a sustainable future, where opportunities for development are facilitated and the Island’s community values and outstanding natural environment are respected and nurtured”.

7. Essentially Waiheke was intended to articulate ‘’in a Waiheke- specific way” the Auckland Vision 2020 and to provide a local response to the Regional Growth Strategy, which had a 50 year horizon.

8. Considerable development and other changes have occurred on the island since 2005 and the Auckland Plan was adopted in 2012 to provide a new strategic direction for the region.

9. The local board identified the review of Essentially Waiheke in collaboration with the Waiheke community as a key initiative in the adopted Local Board Plan (p. 25).

10. Whilst there is some overlap between the Waiheke Local Board Plan itself and Essentially Waiheke, the Local Board Plan is an aspirational document with a life of three years whereas Essentially Waiheke has a more long term strategic policy focus and an emphasis on sustainable management of development.

11. Essentially Waiheke is a statement of community intent for how Waiheke should be managed for future generations. This includes the principles, strategies, required actions and expected outcomes for future development, protection and restoration of the island’s environment and its physical and social infrastructure and transportation network.

12. The ‘refreshed’ plan would be used to inform the load board and wider community’s advocacy position in relation to future development proposals and in the upcoming process for incorporating the Hauraki Gulf Islands District Plan framework into the Auckland Unitary Plan.

13. As an enduring reflection of community aspirations Essentially Waiheke should also provide a local high level vision to help inform future Local Board Plans and other plans and strategies prepared by the local board or wider Auckland Council and CCOs. It will also provide a basis for future local board input to Auckland Council’s Long Tem Plan and the Regional Land Transport Plan.

14. Process for the Essentially Waiheke ‘refresh’: Following preliminary discussions with local board members and council staff it is proposed that the Essentially Waiheke review proceeds through a collaborative process in partnership with the community.

15. It is anticipated that whilst some parts of Essentially Waiheke will require updating, review or additions, much of the plan will remain valid and will simply need to be reaffirmed. Effort will therefore focus effort on a selective review, rather than fundamentally revisiting the entire document.

16. Stage 1: At the initial stage of the review an informal community stakeholders’ group will be formed (with a suggested composition of around 30- 40 members) comprising representatives of local groups and interests, and local experts on topics covered in the plan. The community stakeholders’ group will be drawn from a broad spectrum of community members, including those who have previously been actively involved with the preparation and review of Essentially Waiheke and the Local Board Plan, as contributors or submitters.

17. With assistance from council subject matter experts, the community stakeholders’ group will be asked to identify and recommend to the local board which parts of Essentially Waiheke still hold, which parts require updating or review, and what further work is required.

18. Stage 2: It is expected that a number of smaller working groups (including community stakeholders, council staff and local board members) would then be established to progress the required changes and to report back to the stakeholders’ group and local board prior to preparing a first draft of the amended plan.

19. The first draft will be checked for alignment with existing or emerging Auckland Council or other regional plans and adjusted as necessary. The initial assessment suggests that Essentially Waiheke is already, in general, well aligned with the Auckland Plan.

20. The draft plan will then be submitted for local board approval for consultation and made publicly available for comment and submission.

21. Stage 3: There will be a wide public consultation process, following which a report on submissions will be prepared for the local board along with any recommended changes to the draft prior to adoption by the board.

22. Once approved by the local board, consideration will be given to how best to inform the Governing Body about the revised Essentially Waiheke and how to seek their support of it.

23. Local board decision making: The local board will be requested to agree in broad terms the topics identified for review at the end of Stage 1 and to approve the revised plan for consultation purposes at the end of Stage 2. Adoption of the revised plan by the local board would then follow at the end of Stage 3.

24. There will be monthly report-backs to the local board spokespersons and workshops with the local board as necessary. Local board members may also attend meetings of working groups established to progress individual topics.

25. Approval is now being sought to progress the next steps required to refine the above process and implement the review (see implementation section below).

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

26. This project will be led by the local board in collaboration with community stakeholders. The views of local board members, as expressed at informal meetings and workshops over the past six months, have been taken fully into consideration into this report.

Māori impact statement

27. The Waiheke Local Board Plan describes some of the ways in which the board would like to work in partnership with mana whenua and this project provides the opportunity to give expression to these aspirations. In particular the review of Essentially Waiheke will provide opportunities to recognise and provide for the unique cultural heritage of Waiheke and promote kaitiakitanga, as well as supporting Māori organisations which provide for the social and cultural needs of the Waiheke community.

28. Discussion will take place with mana whenua and other iwi groups represented on the island at an early stage to consider and agree how best to work together on the Essentially Waiheke review.

Implementation

29. Requirement for a dedicated project manager: Commencement of the Essentially Waiheke review has to date been delayed due to competing demands on Council staff resources, particularly with respect to staff with knowledge and awareness of Waiheke, its community, and its issues. In order to overcome this difficulty the intention is for Local Board Services to contract a dedicated project manager with the necessary skills and experience to manage the review in accordance with the above principles and within the required timeframe.

30. Current thinking is that the project manager should be engaged through a publicly advertised Expression of Interest and Request for Proposal process. It is anticipated that a budget of up to $20,000 will be required for the project manager and associated costs to carry out the review, based on an initial assessment. This estimate will need to be clarified once a more detailed project plan has been developed.

31. Involvement of relevant Council and CCO units. A wide range of Council and CCO units will be invited to participate through input from subject matter experts and participation in working groups formed to progress specific topics. These would include (but not be limited to:

· Local Regional Planning

· Infrastructure and Environmental Services

· Local and Sports Parks

· Transport Strategy

· Natural Environment Strategy

· Units involved with Community and Economic Development

· Auckland Transport

· Watercare Services

32. Dependent on the level of review required and availability of community subject matter experts, council staff involvement could range from high level review of the existing or revised draft plan to information gathering, analysis and drafting of recommended changes. The involvement and likely availability of individual council staff will be negotiated with the relevant unit managers before and during the first stage of the review.

33. Consultation will also take place with relevant government departments and NGOs responsible for providing infrastructure and services on the island.

34. Timeframes: The intention is to complete the review, with a revised plan approved by the Waiheke Local Board, by the end of June. In order for this to occur the aim would be to complete Stage 1 by December 2015 and Stage 2 by March 2016. Progress will however be dependent on the range and complexity of changes identified and the further work required to support the review. This will in turn depend on the availability of specialist assistance from council and community subject matter experts to carry this out.

35. Where there is a need for background work which cannot realistically be completed within the timeframes (e.g. major information gathering or research) this will be identified in the plan.

36. In order to take advantage of synergies with other planning work which is already in progress the development of the revised plan will be aligned as far as possible with other Council/CCO work streams, for example the development of a Transport Plan and Solid Waste Management Plan for Waiheke.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors	Julian Watts - Local Board Advisor
Authorisers	Judith Webster - Relationship Manager

Chairperson	Paul Walden
Deputy Chairperson	Beatle Treadwell
Members	Becs Ballard
	Shirin Brown
	John Meeuwsen