Agenda of Franklin Local Board

1 Welcome

The Chairman will open the meeting and welcome everyone present.

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 Franklin Local Board confirms the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Tuesday, 16 June 2015, including the confidential section, as a true and correct record.

5 Leave of Absence

Requests of leaves of absence have been received from Members Cole and Crompton.

6 Acknowledgements

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

7 Petitions

7.1 Waiuku Sports Park Adjacent Neighbours

Purpose

1. To inform the Board of a petition signed by 31 adjacent neighbours of the Waiuku Sports Park.

Executive Summary

2. The Parks Advisor has received a petition from adjacent neighbours to the Waiuku Sports Park, for which the prayer reads:

· We ask that we be included in the planning process

· We would support a washed concrete walkway from the Rugby Carpark to the College with up lights.

· We ask that Waiuku College complies with Resource Consent File L01017 which was signed on 3 July 2001.

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board receives the petition regarding the Waiuku Sports Park project.

Attachments

a Petition re Waiuku Sports Park project................................................ 167

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 Franklin 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 Public Forum : Clevedon Conversations

Purpose

1. Providing the Local Board with information on the Clevedon Conversations group.

Executive summary

2. As per standing orders the Chairman has approved the request from the Clevedon Conversations group to update the Board on their plans.

3. The group have been advised of the rules and timing for each public forum item and will be discussing the attached presentation.

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board thanks Nicola Henshaw and Jane Masters from Clevedon Conversations for their attendance.

Attachments

a Presentation re Clevedon Conversations............................................ 169

9.2 Public Forum : Beachlands Log Cabin Trust Update

Purpose

1. Updating the Local Board on the Beachlands Log Cabin activities.

Executive summary

2. As per standing orders the Chairman has approved the request from the Beachlands Log Cabin Trust to update the Board regarding their progress, a summary of the last financial year, and plans for the future, as a measure of their respect and appreciation for the Local Board partnering with them.

3. The trust have been advised of the rules and timing for each public forum item and will be discussing their activities.

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board thanks Jenny Carter and Trustee(s) from the Beachlands Log Cabin Trust for their attendance.

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.

Franklin Local Board

28 July 2015

Franklin Local Event Support Fund – Round 1 2015/2016

File No.: CP2015/13804

Purpose

1. To present a summary of applications received in round one of the local event support fund for 2015/2016 for the Franklin Local Board. The Franklin Local Board is requested to either fund, partially fund or decline the applications.

Executive Summary

2. A local events support fund of $186,000 is available to the Franklin Local Board for distribution to events within the following budget lines:

i) Community Development Arts and Culture Work Programme 2015/2016 Event Line items

ii) Event Support Funding rounds 2015/2016

iii) Quick response rounds 2015/2016.

3. The Franklin Local Board adopted the 2015/2016 Community Development Arts and Culture work programme at the business meeting on 16 June 2015 (FR/2015/96). This included the allocation of $93,500 to eleven events.

4. A balance of $92,500 remains available for contestable event funding in 2015/2016.

5. Fifteen applications totalling $62,028.51 have been received for round one. Summary coversheets of these applications were provided to the local board at a workshop.

6. A workshop was held with the Franklin Local Board on 14 July 2015 to consider the applications for round one. Indicative levels of funding were proposed, to be formally agreed via this report.

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board agree to either fund, partially fund or decline the applications for round one 2015/2016 Local Event Support Fund as follows:

Applicant	Event	Venue	Date	Amount Requested
Kawakawa Bay Community Association Inc.	Kawakawa Bay Christmas in the Park	Kawakawa Bay Village Green	13 December 2015	$3,120
Waiuku Business & Development Association Inc.	Waiuku Blast to the Past	Tamakae Reserve / Town Centre Waiuku	24 October 2015	$11,408.51
Beachlands Community Trust	Trolley Derby 2016	Beachlands and Omana Regional Park	01 October 2015	$6,000
Business and Professional Women Franklin Inc.	BPW Franklin – Young Women’s Career Ready Workshop	Franklin: The Centre	31 October 2015	$1,000
Franklin Primary Schools Triathlon Committee	Franklin Primary Schools Triathlon	Clarks Beach	21 March 2016	$5,000
Te Hihi School Friends of Our School (Foths/PTA)	Christmas in Karaka	Homes around Karaka	21 November 2015	$2,500
Counties Manukau Sports Foundation	2015 Counties Manukau Sporting Excellence Awards	Vodafone Events Centre Manukau	28 November 2015	$4,000
Show me Shorts Film Festival Trust	Show me Shorts Film Festival 2015	Pukekohe Cinema 3, Capitol Cinema, Civic Theatre, The Vic, Matakana Cinemas, Waiheke Island Community Cinemas and Great Barrier Social Club	5-18 November 2015	$1,000
Manukau Beautification Charitable Trust	Eye On Nature	Auckland Botanic Gardens	5-9 April 2016	$10,000
BSG Events	Beachlands Kids Triathlon	Te Puru Park, Beachlands	25 March 2016	$2,000
Head2Head Charity	2015 Hubbards Head2Head Walk	Start - Awhitu, Finish- Hui, 125km around the Manukau Harbour	14-15 November 2015	$4,000
NZ Women Limited	Elvis in the Gardens	Auckland Botanic Gardens	13 March 2016	$2,000
BSG Events	Manukau Kids Obstacle Duathlon	Barry Curtis Park, Manukau	14 April 2016	$2,000
New Foundation Trust	Mini Bridge Mentor Costs for Pukekohe Schools	Pukekohe Schools	1 June 2015 – 30 June 2016	$3,000
NZ Offshore Powerboat Association Inc.	NZ Offshore Powerboat Championship Series 2016	Sunkist Bay, Beachlands	13 February 2016	$5,000
			TOTAL	$62,028.51

Comments

7. A local events support fund of $186,000 is available to the Franklin Local Board for distribution to events within the following lines:

i) CDAC Work Programme 2015/2016 Event Line items

ii) Event Support Funding rounds 2015/2016

iii) Quick response rounds 2015/2016.

8. The local event support fund provides the opportunity for Franklin Local Board to work in partnership with local event organisers to develop an events programme that reflects the aspirations of the community and supports the local board plan.

9. The Franklin Local Board adopted the 2015/2016 Community Development Arts and Culture work programme, at the business meeting on 16 June 2015 (FR/2015/96). This included the allocation of $93,600 to eleven events, tabled below:

Clevedon A&P Show	$20,000
Franklin A&P Show	$20,000
Youth Forum FYAB	$3,500
Children’s Day & Youth Forum Week FYAB	$5,000
Franklin Primary Schools Triathlon	$2,000
Movies in Parks (x2)	$16,000
Franklin Positive Ageing Expo	$7,000
Waiuku Blast to the Past	$5,000
Waiuku Steel n Wheels	$10,000
Beachlands Trolley Derby	$5,000
Franklin Children’s Art Festival	$0 (Biannual event)
Total	$93,500

10. Round one of the 2015/2016 local event support fund received 15 applications totalling $62,028.51. Summary coversheets of these applications were provided to the Board at a workshop on 14 July 2015.

11. A balance of $92,500 remains available to Franklin Local Board for contestable event funding in 2015/2016.

Consideration

12. Local boards are responsible for the decision-making and allocation of local board event funding including the local event support fund.

13. The Franklin Local Board seeks to provide and support local arts; culture and event experiences that connect people with each other, celebrate the unique identity of an area and are environmentally responsible. The board has identified key priorities for the local area within its local board plan, some of which could be achieved through events.

Local Board views and implications

14. A local board workshop was held on 14 July 2015 to consider the applications to the local event support fund round one. This report reflects the views of local board members expressed at the workshop.

Māori impact statement

15. This fund does not specifically target Māori groups; however Māori communities are likely to benefit from the events supported by the local board, alongside other groups in the community.

16. The decisions sought within this report fall within the local board delegations.

17. The decisions sought do not invoke the Auckland Council Significance Policy.

Implementation

18. Once the Franklin Local Board has resolved the funding applications, staff will contact all applicants to notify them of the outcome, and commence contracting and payment.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Sharon McGinity - Team Leader, Event Facilitation South

Authorisers

Graham Bodman - Manager - Community Development, Arts and Culture

Teresa Turner - Relationship Manager

Franklin Local Board

28 July 2015

Landowner approval for the installation of a sculpture on recreation reserve at 11 Kitchener Road, Waiuku

File No.: CP2015/13897

Purpose

1. To provide landowner approval for the installation of a sculpture on the Franklin Local Board (FLB) recreation reserve located at 11 Kitchener Rd, Waiuku (Lot 3 DP20681) Recreation Reserve.

Executive Summary

2. New Zealand Steel is celebrating 50 years of operation at their Glenbrook location in 2015. To celebrate this association with Franklin the company would like to gift to the community a sculpture by the local artist Fred Graham.

3. New Zealand Steel has been working to find a suitable location for the sculpture and this has also involved discussions with Franklin Local Board members and mana whenua.

4. The recreation reserve at 11 Kitchener Rd, Waiuku (Lot 3 DP20681) has been identified as the preferred site for this sculpture.

5. A concept of the sculpture proposal was presented to the local board by New Zealand Steel on 16 June 2015.

6. The Franklin Local Board supported the proposal to grant landowner approval in principle for the sculpture to be located on the recreation reserve at 11 Kitchener Rd, Waiuku.

7. Landowner approval now requires formalising by the local board.

8. The gifting of the sculpture to the community will require further discussion between the local board and New Zealand Steel as ownership and ongoing maintenance detail has yet to be clarified. It is intended that ownership would be to council.

Recommendation/s

a) That the Franklin Local Board grants landowner approval to New Zealand Steel to install a sculpture by the artist Fred Graham on the recreation reserve at 11 Kitchener Rd, Waiuku with the following conditions:

i) a maximum period of two years from 1 August 2015 to allow the necessary planning, building consent and right of entry processes to be worked through by New Zealand Steel;

ii) All costs associated with the installation of the sculpture will be paid for by New Zealand Steel;

iii) Construction works and reinstatement of the reserve are subject to conditions to be supplied by the Manager Local and Sports Parks South.

b) That the Franklin Local Board considers acceptance of the ownership and ongoing maintenance costs of the Fred Graham sculpture at a subsequent meeting of the board.

Comments

9. The concept in Attachment A for the installation of the proposed sculpture can be separated in to two distinct phases.

· Phase 1 – installation of the sculpture and immediate landscaping.

· Phase 2 – renewal of the landscaped planted area adjacent to Kitchener Rd

10. New Zealand Steel would ideally like to have this sculpture installed later in 2015, to time with their celebrations of 50 years of manufacturing steel in Franklin.

11. Requesting the Franklin Local Board grant landowner approval now allows time for New Zealand Steel to embark on the necessary design, engineering and consent phases.

12. All costs associated with the installation of the sculpture as per concept plan are to be paid by New Zealand Steel.

13. New Zealand Steel is working with local service organisations/community and businesses to develop an implementation plan. The intention is that the landscaped area adjacent to the reserve boundary with Kitchener Rd be renewed and all work completed by volunteers.

14. Auckland Transport (AT) will be undertaking some minor repair work in the immediate road frontage adjacent to the reserve in early 2015. New Zealand Steel has obtained an understanding in principle with AT to co-ordinate this work at the same time as the proposed landscape renewal is undertaken.

15. It is noted that a proposal to gift a piece of art to the community has a process to work through. The process and ongoing costs will be considered by the local board at a later date. The local board will decide at this stage whether to accept the gifting of the sculpture.

16. Council’s public art team has endorsed at this point the artistic merit of this proposal which provides the impetus to continue the gifting process which will involve ongoing consultation with the local board.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

17. At the local board workshop of 16 June 2015 the board endorsed, in principle, the request by New Zealand Steel to place a sculpture to commemorate 50 years of manufacturing within Franklin.

Māori impact statement

18. New Zealand Steel has a strong relationship with mana whenua and has been consulting with mana whenua on this project for some time. The proposed site for the sculpture is supported by mana whenua.

Implementation

19. This is a project being developed that will be implemented by New Zealand Steel and the community.

20. Landowner approval will enable New Zealand Steel to progress the necessary consents along with the development of an implementation plan. Once the detail of how the proposal is to be implemented then the New Zealand Steel team will work through the right of entry process with local and sports parks.

21. The gifting of the sculpture to the community is a process yet to be completed.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Concept	83

Signatories

Authors

Greg Lowe - Team Leader – Local and Sports Parks South

Authorisers

Mark Bowater - Manager Local and Sports Parks

Teresa Turner - Relationship Manager

Franklin Local Board

28 July 2015

Auckland Transport Update – July 2015

File No.: CP2015/13476

Purpose

1. Providing an update on transport matters for the information of the Franklin Local Board and a register of transport issues in the Franklin Local Board area currently being addressed by Auckland Transport’s Elected Member Relationship Manager (South).

Executive Summary

2. This report covers matters of specific application and interest to the Franklin 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 information on:

· The Franklin Local Board’s transport capital fund

· Pukekohe station update

· Crown Road level crossing update

· Planned flag lighting installations

· Mill Road update

· McKenzie Road/Seagrove Road intersection improvements update

· Installation of speed indicator device sign outside Ardmore School

· Travelwise update and school awards.

Recommendation/s

a) That the report entitled ‘Auckland Transport Update – July 2015’ and the attached issues register from Auckland Transport’s Elected Member Relationship Manager (South) be received.

b) That the Franklin Local Board considers whether to re-activate Local Board Transport Capital Fund projects #249 (Pukekohe North streetlighting LED improvements) and #250 (Waiuku South streetlighting LED improvements) in light of the advice that no areas within the Franklin Local Board area are likely to be upgraded to LED lighting under the regional Light Switch Project in the current financial year.

Discussion

Franklin Items

A1. Local board transport capital fund (LBTCF)

4. The Franklin Local Board’s funding allocation under the LBTCF is currently $434,966 per annum.

5. The Board’s current LBTCF projects are included in the table below (in which ROC = rough order of costs, and FEC = firm estimate of cost):

ID#

Project Description

Progress/Current Status

083

Pukekohe East Road-Mill Road/Harrisville Road intersection, Bombay/Pukekohe – installation of variable 70 km/h rural intersection activated warning signage (RIAWS)

· FEC estimate of $67,000

· On 26-Nov-13, the Board gave construction approval for the project based on the FEC of $67,000.

· The nation-wide trial sites for RIAWS were only for the period from Jul-12 to Jul-14.

· Waikato District Council has formalised the variable speed limit on the southern side of Pukekohe East Road-Mill Road. AT approved the variable speed limit on the northern side of the road in Jun-14.

· The NZTA is currently evaluating the results of the other sites around the country and will determine criteria and standards for the permanent approval of such sites around the middle of this year. At this time, RIAWS signs could be installed to the new standard at this site as a permanent facility.

074

Third View Avenue, Beachlands – install 300m of new kerb and channel between Sunkist Bay Road and Cherrie Road (both sides)

· FEC estimate of $230,000

· On 15-Apr-14, the Board gave approval to proceed with construction.

· Construction is completed except for final chipsealing, which needs to wait for more favourable weather.

254

Tobin Street carpark lighting improvements

· ROC estimate of $35,000

· On 10-Mar-15, the Board’s transport portfolio gave construction approval under delegated authority.

· Construction completed in early May-15.

· Final costs to be reported.

249

Pukekohe North streetlighting LED improvements

· ROC estimate of $201,000

· Project currently on hold

· On 26-Aug-14, the Board gave approval to proceed with construction in 18 streets.

· On 24-Mar-15, the Board resolved to put this project on hold pending further advice from AT on when its regional streetlighting upgrade project may be implemented in the Pukekohe and Waiuku urban areas.

· With this year’s lighting budgets now available, AT can advise that no areas within Franklin are likely to be upgraded to LED lighting under the regional Light Switch Project in the current financial year. Given this advice, the Board may wish to consider whether to re-activate this project to ensure that the LED improvements are implemented in a more timely manner.

250

Waiuku South streetlighting LED improvements

· ROC estimate of $70,000

· Project currently on hold

· On 26-Aug-14, the Board gave approval to proceed with construction in three streets.

· As per the above, this project is currently on hold but the Board may wish to consider resuming the project.

348

Kaiwaka Road new footpath, Waiuku

· ROC estimate of $50,000

· On 26-Aug-14, the Board gave approval to proceed with construction.

· Design is complete and construction is expected to begin in mid Aug-15.

349

Pacific Street new footpath, Waiuku

· Revised ROC of $147,500

· On 26-Aug-14, the Board gave approval to proceed with construction.

· On 16-Jun-15, the Board approved the expansion of the project to further include road stormwater work, new kerb and channel, and land purchase at the bend on Pacific Street to ease the corner radius, and approved construction on the expanded project for the revised estimate of $147,500 subject to consultation with the affected landowner.

· AT has completed survey work and is currently doing the design work prior to consultation with the affected landowner.

371

Whitford bus interchange

· FEC estimate of $200,000

· On 23-Sep-14, the Board gave approval to proceed with construction, based on the FEC of $200,000.

· Construction is completed with the exception of streetlighting installation awaiting Vector work running a low voltage cable for the new lights. An agreement has been signed for the Vector power supply and AT awaits confirmation of timing for the works to be undertaken. It is hoped that the works can be completed by the end of July.

· Final costs to be reported but are expected to be in the order of $160-165,000.

248

Hunua pedestrian facility

· FEC estimate of $54,000

· On 9-Dec-14, the Board gave approval to proceed with construction, based on the FEC of $54,000.

· Opus will progress with the detailed design, consultation and TCC approval. It is expected this will be completed by the end of Aug-15.

· AT will develop the contract and call tenders in parallel with the TCC process so that the contract is ready to award as soon as TCC approval is received.

443

Upgrade of Beachlands town centre gardens

· The Board’s transport portfolio has requested AT to provide a ROC for upgrading the existing town centre gardens in Beachlands.

6. The Franklin Local Board’s transport capital fund to date is summarised below.

Franklin Local Board transport capital fund summary:

*Total funding available (across 5 FYs – 2012/12 to 2016/17)*	$2,174,830
Completed projects reporting actual costs (Second View Ave kerb and channel; Patumahoe/Waiuku/Attewell investigation; Pukekohe station overbridge; Ardmore School footpath; Harris St bench; Pukeoware School signs; Waiuku pavers upgrade; Third View Ave kerb and channel projects x1; Awhitu flag lighting)	-$564,692
Projects approved for construction based on rough or firm estimates (Mill/Harrisville electronic signage; Third View Ave kerb and channel projects x1; Kaiwaka Rd footpath; Pacific St footpath; Whitford bus interchange; Hunua pedestrian facility; Tobin St car park lighting)	-$974,500
Projects approved for construction but currently placed on hold (Pukekohe North x18 & Waiuku South x3 streetlighting improvements)	+$271,000
*Funding still available to allocate*	$906,638

A2. Pukekohe station update

7. The scope of works for the project is a bus interchange, park and ride, new station overbridge (noting there is no specific station upgrade scope included in this project) and improvements to the Custom Street, Harris Street and Manukau Road intersections to cater for the new bus network

8. The budget for the project is $13.7m across the 2015/16 and 2016/17 financial years.

9. The current project status is as follows:

· NZTA funding requests are being prepared and are anticipated to progress over the next two to three months.

· Investigation and concept design will be completed late 2015

· Detailed design will be completed in the first quarter of early 2016, subject to approval of scope for the road intersection scope of works. Agreement of the road intersection selected option is anticipated to be progressed concurrently with the bus interchange to enable Auckland Transport to apply for NZTA funding for the construction at the earliest opportunity

· Discussions with Auckland Council on the Customs Street bus stops are ongoing. Auckland Transport has lodged a formal comment to Council regarding the sale of the service centre land in reference to temporary requirements for the partial interchange (bus shelters and vehicle access closures) and the potential requirement for land to cater for road intersection improvements

· There may be a requirement for a Christmas 2016 rail block of line to install the permanent overbridge and preparatory works for the proposed lifts. Plans for the project are still being worked through and any such requests for rail closures will be progressed in accordance with the agreed process, noting that customer information is prioritised. This will be reviewed in more detail as the project develops

· Completion of the overall scope of works is anticipated for mid-2017.

10. The priority for the overall scope is to construct the bus interchange as a top priority to ensure the new bus network rollout can be accommodated.

A3. Update on Crown Road level rail crossing, Paerata (as provided by NZTA)

11. Below is an update on the progress of the project and constructing the new ‘hook turn’ intersection for heavy vehicles exiting Crown Road onto SH22 at Paerata:

· All earthworks and drainage are complete

· The final asphalt surfacing is expected to be completed by 17 July (weather permitting)

· Once the asphalt and road markings are in place, the Auckland Motorway Alliance will install the lighting poles

· Before the lane is opened to traffic, an NZTA safety engineer will conduct a ‘fit for purpose’ inspection

· It is anticipated that the project will be completed early in the week beginning 20 July.

A4. Planned flag lighting installations

12. Auckland Transport plans to install flag lighting at a further 10 rural intersections in the current financial year on Waiuku Road and Kingseat Road. One of these installations will be solar lighting as there is no available power nearby. The 10 locations are:

Waiuku Road intersection with:

· Domain and Rowles Roads

· Hill Top and Douglas Roads

· Rogers Road

· Waller Road

· Baldhill Road

· Barriball and Pukeoware Roads.

Kingseat Road intersection with:

· Sydney Owen Road

· Waiau Pa Road

· Irwin Road

· Pearson Road.

A5. Mill Road update

13. The notification period for the Notice of Requirement for the proposed Mill Road-Redoubt Road corridor upgrade closed on 26 May.

14. In total, 286 submissions were received, with 20 of the 300 directly affected properties along the corridor entering a submission. Of the submissions received, 216 were pro-forma submissions in opposition.

15. The submissions will now be assessed and considered prior to a hearing anticipated later this year.

A6. McKenzie Road/Seagrove Road intersection improvements update

16. Further to previous reporting, Auckland Transport has undertaken further site observations and traffic counts in order to assess concerns raised during consultation on the proposed intersection improvements undertaken earlier this year.

17. As a result of those further investigations, a revised plan has been developed to provide further clarity of the intersection layout and to safely cater for all movements and vehicles types, as shown at Attachment A.

18. The revised plan proposes a more conventional 90 degree 'T' intersection by further reducing the traffic island size, hence creating a more compacted intersection with entry and exit lane clearly marked. The pavement will also be reconstructed to achieve the correct camber to assist with the turning movement.

19. Some consultation responses suggested that a right turn bay from McKenzie Road into Seagrove Road should be installed or the power pole should be removed and a roundabout installed. However, traffic count data suggests that a right turn bay is not warranted due to the relatively light traffic on both McKenzie and Seagrove Roads. A maximum of 2-3 right turning vehicles were observed to wait on McKenzie Road during peak times, and they could find gaps to make the right turning movement very quickly. Roundabouts are normally used on high volume roads where traffic volumes are similar on all approaches. A roundabout would not be an appropriate or warranted solution at the intersection due to the light traffic volumes overall and the significant difference in traffic volumes on McKenzie Road compared to Seagrove Road.

20. The revised plan has been notified to previous submitters from the earlier consultation round. Auckland Transport began detailed design of the revised scheme in June 2015. Subject to funding availability, construction is likely to occur within the 2015/16 financial year.

A7. Installation of speed indicator device sign outside Ardmore School

21. A school speed zone has previously been established on Papakura-Clevedon Road outside Ardmore Primary School. The school currently operates electronic signs to implement a reduced 40 km/h speed limit at school peak times and the electronic signs display the reduced speed limit to approaching drivers.

22. There have been reports of speeding traffic outside Ardmore Primary School and concerns raised regarding safety during times of school activity. This is a particular concern for traffic approaching the school from the north-east due to the school related activity occurring at the car park opposite the school.

23. Auckland Transport has therefore introduced an electronic Speed Indicator Device (SID) sign on Papakura-Clevedon Road facing vehicles approaching the school from the north-east. A suitable location was identified outside the entrance to the school as shown on the plan at Attachment B. The SID will measure vehicle speeds and display this to raise driver awareness of their actual speed within the school speed zone.

A8. Consultation documents on proposed improvements

24. Consultation documents for the following proposals have been provided to the Franklin Local Board for its feedback. As the Board’s transport portfolio holders provide feedback on the Board’s behalf, the material below is included for general information purposes only.

25. Proposed intersection improvements, Nelson Street and John Street intersection, Pukekohe – Due to the public concerns and poor crash record, Auckland Transport has recently investigated options to improve the safety and operation of the Nelson Street and John Street intersection. To improve the safety and operation of the intersection, it is proposed to install a roundabout at the junction. A roundabout will provide significant safety benefits for all vehicles, particularly those turning at the intersection, and will also reduce overall vehicle speeds at the junction, which will further improve safety. Pedestrian safety and amenity will also be improved due to the lower vehicle speeds and the provision of pedestrian refuge islands on all approaches to the intersection. A plan of the proposal is shown at Attachment C.

26. Proposed pedestrian refuge island, East Street, Pukekohe – Auckland Transport has recently investigated options to improve pedestrian safety and amenity on East Street. The investigation has determined that installing a central pedestrian refuge island on East Street between Kowhai Place and Cromwell Place is justified. The pedestrian refuge island will assist pedestrians crossing the road by providing a safe location to wait in the centre of the road when crossing. ‘No Stopping At All Times’ (NSAAT) parking restrictions are also proposed to ensure appropriate inter-visibility between pedestrians crossing the road and approaching motorists. It is also proposed to extend the footpath on the eastern side of Kowhai Place along East Street, up to the Cromwell Place intersection. A plan of the proposal is shown at Attachment D.

General Information Items

B1. Travelwise update and school awards

27. The Travelwise programme is an innovative schools-based programme that aims to improve road safety and achieve a reduction in the number of vehicles driving to and from school at peak times. It does this through encouraging and increasing alternative modes of travel, and providing safer facilities for all road users.

28. There are currently 408 schools on the Travelwise programme. At those schools Auckland Transport supports activities and events, helps with policies and systems, promotes road safety for children and drivers, offers scooter and cycle training, and runs Back to School and Slow Down promotions. Most of the schools have student groups who help with running the programme as well as a Lead Teacher who is the central point of contact for Auckland Transport.

29. Since its inception in 2005, Travelwise has achieved the following results:

a. There are approximately 202,000 students involved in the programme

b. 75% of all Auckland school aged students attend a Travelwise School

c. Safe School Travel Plans have helped:

· Reduce car travel by taking 12,736 car trips off the road in the morning peak

· Save 2,596,000 km in car travel, about $20.35m a year on congestion, and about 150,000 litres of fuel

· Reduce CO₂ emissions by 735 tonnes each year

· Improve safety around Auckland schools – crashes involving pedestrians and cyclists aged 5 to 13 have reduced by 58% at schools with Safe School Travel Plans.

30. The schools listed below have been awarded for their outstanding Travelwise achievements in 2014. The awards are based on four criteria:

a. Mode share shift from when the school first starts as a Travelwise School

b. Their inclusion of road safety and active travel in the curriculum

c. The efforts to involve the school community in road safety and mode share

d. The inclusion of these matters in the ethos and organisation of the school.

31. If a school is high achieving in all of these areas they are awarded Gold (e.g. mode shift of more than 4%), medium achievement is awarded Silver, and medium to low achievement is awarded Bronze.

32. Award winners in the Franklin Local Board area are:

Gold award winners

Silver award winners

Bronze award winners

· Beachlands School

· Paerata School.

(Also Drury School in adjacent Papakura Local Board area)

· Buckland School

· Pukekohe Hill School

· Valley School.

· Ardmore School

· Brookby School

· Clevedon School

· KingsGate School

· Maraetai Beach School

· Patumahoe Primary School

· Pukekohe Intermediate

· St Joseph's School.

33. In previous years, a celebration has been planned near the end of the financial year, and the awards given out related to the previous school year. This year Auckland Transport is looking to plan an event for the end of Term 4 to celebrate 2015 Travelwise achievements following feedback from schools that they would prefer to receive their awards in the same school year as the results are achieved.

B2. Rail service performance

34. It was reported to the Auckland Transport Board on 2 July that while rail patronage continues to grow, rail service reliability has been an issue during the transition period while a mixed fleet of diesel and EMU (electric multiple unit) trains have been operating.

35. The high number of root cause faults (train failures, infrastructure problems or emergency services callouts) has also presented resilience and recovery challenges now that high frequency services operate across the Southern and Eastern Lines, and caused a large number of consequential delays and cancellations as the timetable and network offers little opportunity to recover, particularly during peak times.

36. Route cause faults will improve from late July and August as full EMU operations are implemented.

B3. Public transport patronage

37. The summary patronage performance for May 2015 is presented below (NB: SOI = Statement of Intent):

a. AT Metro patronage totalled 78.6M for 12-months to May – growth of +9.5% against an SOI target of 73.7M.

b. Rail patronage totalled 13.7M for the 12-months to May – growth of +21.8% against an SOI target of 12.1M.

c. Northern Express patronage totalled 2.8M for the 12-months to May – growth of +16.8% against an SOI target of 2.5M.

d. Bus patronage totalled 56.6M for the 12-months to May – growth of +6.8% against an SOI target of 53.7M.

e. Ferry patronage totalled 5.5M for the 12-months to May – growth of +7.1% against an SOI target of 5.4M.

B4. Waterview tunnel update

38. The last pre-cast concrete piece in the giant Waterview tunnel puzzle was produced on 26 June at a purpose-built factory in East Tamaki, which has cast the 24,000 segments being used to line the motorway tunnels for the NZTA’s Waterview Connection project.

39. Each segment, weighing up to 10.5 tonne is one of 10 which make up 2,414 rings of concrete lining. Each ring is 2 metres wide and 14 metres in diameter.

40. The segments are delivered to the project site in Owairaka, where the tunnel-boring machine ‘Alice’ has been installing the segments at a rate of six linings every 24 hours that the machine is operating.

41. The Waterview Connection project interchange and tunnels will link the Northwestern and Southwestern Motorways to complete the Western Ring Route. The connection is planned to open to traffic in early 2017.

Media Releases

C1 Auckland’s electrified network going all electric

42. Auckland’s metropolitan rail network will be all-electric from Monday 20 July. New trains will be operating all services on the electrified network from Papakura in the south to Swanson in the west.

43. The roll-out has been completed a few weeks ahead of schedule, going all electric just 15 months after the first electric trains in April 2014.

44. It has been a difficult few months with on-going issues caused by the ageing diesel fleet, and running both electric and diesel trains together has caused a few problems. Auckland Transport is working hard with KiwiRail, CAF and Transdev to improve performance and reliability, and will continue to make improvements when the all-electric fleet is operational.

45. With the increased number of services now operating on the network, schedules are very tight and work is continuing to make sure trains meet their allocated slot into the busy Newmarket and Britomart stations. Customers will see an improvement in punctuality as drivers become more familiar with the new trains.

46. There will be a bedding-in period and it is inevitable that there will be issues. Auckland Transport hopes to keep any disruption to a minimum but overseas experience shows we have to be prepared for the possibility.

47. From 20 July, buses will shuttle passengers between Swanson and the former Waitakere station.

48. On the Southern Line, electric trains will end at Papakura and there will be a shuttle service using diesel trains to and from Pukekohe.

49. The last of Auckland’s 57 electric trains are currently being shipped from Spain and the full fleet will be in service by the end of the year.

50. The new electric trains have been very popular. By the time the new timetable comes into effect, Aucklanders will have taken more than 14 million trips across the Auckland rail network in the past year, a 21% increase.

51. The modern new trains mean extra capacity as well as improved comfort, and trains have wider doors making it easier for passengers. At peak times, six-car trains provide even more room.

52. Auckland’s new electric trains are much quieter than the old diesel trains and accelerate faster, so pedestrians and motorists are warned to be extra cautious when using railway crossings.

53. To see Auckland Transport’s video showing the features of the new trains, visit:
www.at.govt.nz/electrictrains

C2. Touch pads help the blind use AT HOP machines

54. Auckland Transport has worked with the Blind Foundation to make it easier for people who are blind or vision-impaired to use Auckland’s public transport system.

55. Bright yellow raised tactile markers have been installed on 74 AT HOP ticket and top-up machines to help people find their way round the screen.

56. Blind Foundation Environmental Awareness Advisor Chris Orr welcomes the move. “This means anyone who is blind or has low vision can top-up their HOP card or buy a ticket like anyone else.”

57. The AT HOP ticket and top-up machines already have a voice prompt. People can also select a mode which makes the font on the machine larger and increases the colour contrast to make it easier to read.

58. This new function means that people in the blind community can now be more independent and manage their own HOP transactions at their local station, in their own time.

Issues Register

59. The regular monthly issues register is Attachment E to this report.

Consideration

Local Board Views

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

Implementation Issues

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

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Revised design for McKenzie Road/Seagrove Road intersection improvements, Waiau Pa	95
b View	Plan of proposed speed indicator device sign, Papakura-Clevedon Road, Ardmore	97
c View	Plan of proposed roundabout, Nelson Street and John Street intersection, Pukekohe	99
d View	Plan of proposed pedestrian refuge island, East Street, Pukekohe	101
e View	Issues Register – Franklin Local Board – July 2015	103

Signatories

Authors

Jenni Wild – Elected Member Relationship Manager (South); Auckland Transport

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon – Elected Member Relationship Team Manager; AT

Teresa Turner - Relationship Manager

Franklin Local Board

28 July 2015

Manukau Harbour Forum: Legislative Change Requiring Agreement by Resolution

File No.: CP2015/11665

Purpose

1. To request that the Franklin Local Board resolve on recommendations made by the Manukau Harbour Forum regarding membership and delegations to the forum. This is to ensure that the forum has a valid agreement between all nine member boards in place prior to 31 July 2015 to comply with recent changes to the Local Government Act 2002.

Executive Summary

2. In 2014 amendments were made to the Local Government Act 2002 that affect the Manukau Harbour Forum as a joint committee of nine local boards.

3. The forum’s existing terms of reference do not cover all the requirements under the amended legislation, as the resolutions from each member board adopting the terms of reference and establishing the forum need to be the same, i.e. showing agreement between all nine boards.

4. In light of the above, in order for the forum to exist after 31 July 2015 all member boards will need to show agreement by resolution on the following:

i) The number of members each local board may appoint to the joint committee;

ii) How the joint committee chairperson and deputy chairperson are to be appointed;

iii) The terms of reference of the joint committee;

iv) What responsibilities are to be delegated to the joint committee by each appointee local board; and

v) The process for amending the agreement.

5. At its business meeting of 8 June 2015 the forum resolved as follows:

b) Requests that this report be forwarded on to the nine member boards recommending that each board:

i) Appoints one named member and one named alternate member to the Manukau Harbour Forum

ii) Confirms that the chairperson and deputy chairperson of the Manukau Harbour Forum will be elected by a majority of members at the first meeting of each electoral term

iii) Confirms the revised Terms of Reference for the Manukau Harbour Forum as appended to Agenda reports

iv) Delegates authority to the Manukau Harbour Forum to make decision within its terms of reference noting that any significant or controversial decisions will only be made by the forum with the confirmation by resolution of all the member boards that would be affected by the decision.

v) Confirms that any changes to this agreement will be agreed first by the Manukau Harbour Forum then recommended to the nine member boards for their approval, noting that resolutions must be identical

vi) Notes that in order for the nine member boards to agree on this new binding agreement for the Manukau Harbour Forum, the resolutions made in respect of recommendations b) i)-v) above (with the exception of b) i) where appointees must be named) must be identical and that in the absence of identical resolutions by all member boards the Forum will not meet the requirements under clause 30a of Schedule 7 to the Local Government Act 2002.

6. A copy of the revised terms of reference is appended as Attachment A.

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board agrees with the recommendations of the Manukau Harbour Forum and resolves to:

i) appoint one named member and one named alternate member to the Manukau Harbour Forum

ii) confirm that the chairperson and deputy chairperson of the Manukau Harbour Forum will be elected by a majority of members at the first meeting of each electoral term

iii) confirm the revised Terms of Reference for the Manukau Harbour Forum as appended to Agenda reports

iv) delegate authority to the Manukau Harbour Forum to make decisions within its terms of reference, noting that any significant or controversial decisions will only be made by the forum with the confirmation by resolution of all the member boards that would be affected by the decision and that the local board will reserve the right to hold and promote a different view to that of the forum on any issue that may impact the Franklin Local Board area.

v) confirm that any changes to this agreement will be agreed first by the Manukau Harbour Forum then recommended to the nine member boards for their approval, noting that resolutions must be identical

vi) note that in order for the requirements of this new agreement for the Manukau Harbour Forum to be reached, the resolutions of each of the nine member boards made in respect of recommendations a) (i)-(v) above (with the exception of a) (i) where appointees are to be named) must be identical and that in the absence of identical resolutions by all member boards the Forum will not meet the requirements under clause 30a of Schedule 7 to the Local Government Act 2002.

Discussion

7. In 2014 amendments were made to the Local Government Act 2002, in particular Schedule 1AA Clause 5 reads as follows:

Requirement to enter into agreement under clause 30A of Schedule 7

(1) This clause applies to a local authority that appointed a joint committee under clause 30(1)(b) of Schedule 7 before the date of commencement of clause 30A of Schedule 7 if that committee remains in existence after that date.

(2) The local authority must, within 12 months of the date of commencement of clause 30A of Schedule 7, enter into an agreement under that clause with every other local authority or public body that has appointed members to that joint committee.

(3) If an agreement under clause 30A of Schedule 7 is not entered into within the period specified in subclause (2), the joint committee is deemed to be discharged by the local authority.

(4) Nothing in this clause applies if the joint committee referred to in subclause (1) was constituted or continued by, or required to be constituted or continued by, an enactment other than this Act.

8. Each of the Manukau Harbour Forum’s member boards previously resolved varying membership and delegations (Attachment B). The Act requires agreement by resolution which means all resolutions from the boards need to be the same.

9. Analysis has been undertaken by Auckland Council’s legal services team as to whether the boards at the time of establishment covered all the necessary points within the legislation (Attachment C). This analysis shows that the requirements of the legislation for agreements in regard to joint committees have not been met and the member boards will need to pass new resolutions to satisfy all the requirements of the amendments to the Act.

10. The Forum’s resolutions of 8 June 2015, based on advice from staff, were intended to keep these provisions as close as possible to what has been previously agreed by the majority of member boards.

11. At the same meeting, the forum also took the opportunity to make a number of minor revisions to its terms of reference, which staff had been working on in consultation with the forum following a workshop on 13 April, at which this issue was originally raised with the Forum.

12. It is important note that unless this new agreement comes into effect on or before 31 July 2015, the forum will technically cease to exist. In order to achieve this, the recommendations must be resolved, in full and unamended, by all nine member boards.

Consideration

Local Board Views and Implications

13. Local boards have previously agreed, through adoption of the forum’s terms of reference, that the Manukau Harbour is a regional asset and it was appropriate that Local Boards will collectively contribute to strategies and outcomes that enhance the social, economic, environmental and cultural well-being of the harbour. The forum has been seen as an effective mechanism to achieve this.

14. The role of the forum is to champion the sustainable management of the Manukau Harbour and adjacent communities. It developed a vision and strategy in line with this which was adopted in September 2014.

15. The Forum has no budget allocated to projects and relies on the member boards to fund projects for its work programme.

Maori Impact Statement

16. Workshops of the Manukau Harbour Forum were held on 13 April 2015 to discuss the ongoing role of mana whenua in relation to the forum. Some minor changes were made to the forum’s terms of reference as a result of this to reflect the forum’s obligations under Te Tiriti o Waitangi/The Treaty of Waitangi, and its desire to work with mana whenua on an ongoing basis.

17. The forum anticipates receiving further advice and options regarding the formalisation of its relationship with mana whenua.

Implementation Issues

18. The new agreement must be entered into by all member boards prior to 31 July 2015.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Manukau Harbour Forum Revised Terms of Reference	113
b View	Resolutions by member boards	115
c View	Assessment of resolutions by member boards	119

Signatories

Authors

Mary Binney - Local Board Advisor - Maungakiekie-Tamaki

Authorisers

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Teresa Turner - Relationship Manager

Franklin Local Board

28 July 2015

Manukau Harbour Forum Joint Committee –terms of reference

1. Introduction

The formation of a forum to champion the sustainable management of the Manukau

Harbour and adjacent communities has arisen through the collective aspirations of

local boards bordering the harbour itself. Local Boards have a statutory responsibility

and are democratically accountable for identifying and communicating the interests

and preferences of the people in their Local Board area in relation to the content of

the strategies, policies, plans, and bylaws of the Auckland Council.

The Manukau Harbour is a regional taonga/treasure for all the peoples of Auckland. It is therefore appropriate that Local Boards collectively contribute to strategies and

outcomes that restore and enhance the well-being of the harbour itself.

2. Background / Context

Prior to November 2010, agencies generally approached issues of community

concern in alignment with the previous local authority boundaries, and somewhat

independently in each area. Five legacy territorial authorities and the Auckland

Regional Council had a direct interest in the harbour due to proximity. Under the

Auckland Council, the following local boards^{^[1]} share a boundary with the harbour:

· Waitakere Ranges

· Whau

· Puketapapa

· Maungakiekie-Tamaki

· Otara-Papatoetoe

· Mangere-Otahuhu

· Manurewa

· Papakura

· Franklin

There is sufficient commonality of issues and interests, for synergies to be gained

from a sub-regional approach to advocacy in relation to the management of the

Manukau Harbour. This is also supported by the legislative imperative for local

boards to work together where the interests and preferences of communities within

each local board area will be better served by doing so.

Likely benefits of such an alliance are early identification of and response to

emerging issues, a more cohesive approach to multi-causal problems, and greater

efficiency and effectiveness of planning and interventions. These benefits are

particularly pertinent planning matters relating to:

· Auckland Council’s statutory obligations under Te Tiriti o Waitangi/The Treaty of Waitangi

· The Auckland Plan and the Unitary Plan

· The Annual Plan and the Long-term Plan (LTP)

· The Waitakere Ranges Heritage Area Act 2008

· The 1990 Manukau Harbour Action Plan

· National Policy Statements and National Environmental Standards

· The activities of CCOs in relation to the harbour and the coastal environment

· Other harbour and coastal ownership and management issues

3. Purpose

The purpose of the Manukau Harbour Forum is to provide for a means of collective

Local Board advocacy on issues affecting the Manukau Harbour, and the adjacent

foreshore. Issues to be addressed by the Forum may include:

· Restoration of the health and wellbeing of the Manukau Harbour

· The role of Mana Whenua in relation to the Manukau Harbour

· A unified management-approach to the Manukau Harbour

· Advocacy on issues related to both natural and human activities affecting the harbour foreshore

· Wastewater and stormwater discharges

· The strategic removal of mangroves and Pacific oysters

· Coastal erosion mitigation opportunities

· The enhancement of marine and coastal habitats that assist with increased

Biodiversity

· The preservation of sustainable commercial and recreational fisheries within

the harbour

· The protection of Maui’s Dolphin and other species

· Catchments and tributary streams that flow into the harbour

· Access to the harbour

· The role of the port operation at Onehunga

4. Principles

The Forum is in principle collectively accountable to the wider community for

supporting the development and delivery of the community’s vision in relation to the

Manukau Harbour. In practice, individual members are accountable to their own

boards and to the constituents whose interests they represent.

The Forum:

· Is strategic, not operational

· Deals only with matters where collaboration and synergy add value (it does

not duplicate what already exists, or deal with matters that are better dealt

with more locally, i.e. it does not work at a single board level) though it may deal with issues that impact some but not all member boards.

· Is committed to Te Tiriti o Waitangi/The Treaty of Waitangi, and it will work actively to ensure that it

also acknowledges and recognises the interests of mana whenua through continued development of an open relationship with mana whenua

· Recognises the local, regional, and national significance of the Waitakere Ranges and its foothills and coasts, as set out in the Waitakere Ranges Heritage Area Act 2008, and acknowledges the statutory obligations to protect the Heritage Area.

· Will focus on commonalities rather than differences.

Franklin Local Board

28 July 2015

Pukekohe Town Centre Revitalisation Committee: Future operation

File No.: CP2015/08892

Purpose

1. To approve putting the Pukekohe Town Centre Revitalisation Committee (TCRC) into recess during the 2015/16 financial year.

Executive Summary

2. As delegated by the Board the Pukekohe TCRC oversees the delivery of streetscape improvement projects that improve the amenity of the Pukekohe Town Centre. These streetscape projects seek to make Pukekohe an attractive, safe and enjoyable place in accordance with the objectives of the Auckland Plan and Franklin Local Board Plan.

3. There is no allocated budget within the Auckland Council Long Term Plan (LTP) for streetscape revitalisation projects during the 2015/16 financial year. There is $1,500,000 allocated in the Long Term Plan (LTP) for streetscape revitalisation works in the 2016/17 financial year.

4. This report recommends that the Franklin Local Board puts the TCRC into recess during the 2015/2016 financial year. The TCRC would reconvene 1 June 2016 to oversee the projects and associated expenditure of funds in the 2016/17 financial year.

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board puts the Pukekohe Town Centre Revitalisation Committee into recess during the 2015/2016 financial year from 1 July 2015 until
1 June 2016.

Discussion

Streetscape improvements to date

5. The Pukekohe Town Centre Revitalisation Project (the Project) is a long running programme of works to revitalise the streets of Pukekohe and maintain high amenity standards within the Town Centre. The Project has been on-going since its conception in 2000.

6. The objective of the Project is to improve the Pukekohe Town Centre as an attractive, safe and viable place for people to do business, shop, work and visit, consistent with the vision of the Franklin Local Board Plan and the Auckland Plan. The Project has achieved this objective by primarily delivering streetscape improvements.

7. To date streetscape improvements have been undertaken on Massey Avenue, Stadium Drive and King, Hall, Edinburgh, Seddon, Tobin and West street footpaths. The improvements have included new footpaths, street furniture (including rubbish bins and seating) street lighting and street planting. In addition a revitalised Town Square has been delivered and the Possum Bourne statue relocated to Massey Lane.

The Town Centre Revitalisation Committee

8. The Town Centre Revitalisation Committee (TCRC) oversees the delivery of the Town Centre Revitalisation Project.

9. There is no budget for town centre revitalisation projects identified in the Auckland Council Long Term Plan (LTP) during the 2015/16 financial year.

10. The LTP allocates $1,500,000 to the Town Centre Revitalisation Project over the 2016/17 financial year. This funding has been identified for improving pedestrian connections along Manukau Road between the bus rail interchange (Custom Street) and King Street. There is no further funding allocated in the 2015-2025 LTP.

11. The TCRC has held a number of workshops to consider its role during the 2015/16 financial year. Options considered are summarised in Table 1.

Table 1

Option	Description	Funding source	Membership	FLB role
Option 1: Status quo	For the TCRC to be put into recess during the 2015/16 financial year where there is no allocated budget. The TCRC would reconvene 1 June 2016 to oversee expenditure of 2016/17 financial year LTP budget.	LTP (2016/17)	No change	No change – the Committee would continue to operate under delegation of the FLB
Option 2: Community driven	That the TCRC work with landowners, the Pukekohe Business Association and community or voluntary groups to deliver small scale, low budget initiatives	LTP (2016/17) Donation, voluntary work, pooling of resources and funding	Existing TCRC membership Community/ voluntary groups and organisations (as required)	No change – the Committee would continue to operate under delegation of the FLB
Option 3: Business/ key stakeholder driven	That the TCRC reform as a Committee independent from the Franklin Local Board. The Committee would need to apply for external grants, funding and donations to deliver projects.	Grants, donations and external (to Council) funding	Pukekohe Business Association Businesses/ landowners Community/ voluntary groups and organisations	As there is no FLB (LTP) funding of projects, the Committee would no longer operate under delegation of the FLB. The FLB would be a stakeholder, but not a decision maker.

12. As there is no budget, nor associated projects to oversee during the 2015/16 financial year, the TCRC recommend that the TCRC be put into recess during the 2016/17 financial year (Option 1: Status quo). Options 2 and 3 require the Committee to be self-driven, self-funding and would require reconsideration of the Committee’s Terms of Reference and membership. The TCRC is of the opinion that there is not the appetite for this model of community driven, self-organising, self-funding Committee at this time.

13. The TCRC recommend that the Committee be reconvened 1 June 2016 to oversee the projects and associated expenditure of the LTP funds in the 2016/17 financial year.

14. These Committee models as put forward by Options 2 and 3 should be reconsidered in 2017 once the final allocation of Town Centre Revitalisation Project LTP funding has been expended.

Consideration

Local Board Views

15. The Franklin Local Board is the decision maker in respect to budget and approval of projects to be delivered as part of the Town Centre Revitalisation Project.

16. The role of overseeing the delivery of the projects approved by the Franklin Local Board has been delegated to the Town Centre Revitalisation Committee.

17. As there is no budget to oversee during the 2015/16 financial year the TCRC recommends that the Committee is put into recess until 1 July 2015 until 1 June 2016.

Maori Impact Statement

18. The Franklin Local Board and the Pukekohe Town Centre Revitalisation Committee acknowledges the principals of Katiakitanga. Where a particular work or activity is deemed to impact on Maori cultural or spiritual values, consultation with local iwi will be undertaken as a matter of course in accordance with established protocols.

Implementation Issues

19. The activities detailed in this report are within budget. Any decisions arising from discussions and any changes to the work programme will have financial and resourcing implications that will need to be managed.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Anna Wallace - Project Leader

Nicola Mochrie - Senior Project Leader

Authorisers

Penny Pirrit - GM - Plans & Places

Teresa Turner - Relationship Manager

Franklin Local Board

28 July 2015

Allocation of discretionary capital budget to local boards

File No.: CP2015/14213

Purpose

1. This report seeks direction from Local Boards on the proposed discretionary fund for local board capital expenditure (Capex fund) regarding the:

· model for allocating the fund

· criteria for the fund.

Executive Summary

2. The Governing Body has created a discretionary fund for capital expenditure for local boards. Local boards are to work with staff to develop a formula for allocation and criteria for qualifying projects.

3. The Capex fund enables local boards to deliver small local asset based projects, either directly, in partnership with the community, or through joint agreements between boards.

4. The Capex fund will be managed over three years. Local boards can use their entire three year allocation for one project or spread it over the three years for smaller projects.

5. Local boards provided views on how funding should be allocated during the review of the Local Boards Funding Policy (LBFP) in 2014. The resulting funding formula for Locally Driven Initiatives (LDI) allocates 90 per cent based on population, 5 per cent on deprivation and 5 per cent on land area. The same allocation formula can be used for the Capex fund to maintain consistency in the policy. Staff note however that the link between costs and land area is weak and leads to major shifts in the allocation of funding.

6. A formula based approach provides limited funding for the Great Barrier Island and Waiheke boards. Local boards should consider what level of funding over three years is appropriate for these boards. Staff recommend setting funding at one per cent of the fund for Great Barrier and two per cent for Waiheke.

7. Using the Capex fund is preferable to LDI funding as the Governing Body funds the consequential opex. Boards should consider whether they need to continue to use LDI funding for minor (less than $1 million) capital projects. Boards should also consider whether they need to be able to bring forward regionally funded projects using the Capex fund.

8. The proposal to allocate a Capex fund to local boards will require an amendment to the LBFP. This will amend the Long-term Plan and requires the use of the special consultative procedure.

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board provides feedback on the allocation of Capital expenditure (Capex) funding to local boards.

Comments

Background

9. The Governing Body has created a discretionary fund for capital expenditure for local boards. On May 7 the Budget Committee passed the following resolution:

a) Provide a new Local Board discretionary capex fund of $10 million per annum noting that this will incorporate the existing Facilities Partnership Fund.

b) Approve the following parameters for this fund:

i) The fund may be managed as a three year amount

ii) Local Boards may use the fund to build council owned assets, add to an existing council funded renewal or new capital project, work in partnership with an external provider or seed fund a community project.

10. The Budget Committee requested that staff and local boards develop a formula for allocation and criteria for qualifying projects to report to the Finance and Performance Committee.

Purpose of the Capex fund

11. The purpose of the fund is to ensure locally important projects are given appropriate priority. It is envisaged that the fund will be used for projects similar to those historically funded by the local improvement projects (LIP’s) or small local improvement projects (SLIP’s).

Funding Allocation Model

Principles for funding allocations

12. The core principles for allocating funding to local boards are an:

· equitable capacity for each local board to enhance well-being

· administrative effectiveness

· transparency.

Attributes for funding allocation

13. The Local boards funding policy (LBFP) makes allocations on the following basis:

· 90 per cent based on local board population size

· 5 per cent based on the relative level of deprivation of the board

· 5 per cent based on the land area of the board

· Waiheke and Great Barrier Island are funded for a fixed amount set by the Governing Body.

14. The following table shows the level of local board support for the use of the above factors for allocating LDI recorded during the review of the LBFP.

Local Board Attribute	Local Boards that supported use during last review of LBFP	Relationship to need for funding	Staff Comments
Population	21	Strong	Strongly relates to demand for services
Deprivation	17	Weak	Little objective evidence for relationship to demand for services
Geography	16	Weak	High distortion effect on allocation that does not relate to need for services

15. A key decision for the allocation of the Capex fund will be to determine the appropriate level of capital funding for Great Barrier Island and Waiheke. The discussion document considers the two current allocation models used to fund these boards:

· LDI allocation: Great Barrier Island and Waiheke receive the same proportion of the Capex fund as they currently receive of the total funding pool for Locally Driven Initiatives. (This is 2.3% of the total pool for Great Barrier Island and 2.7% for Waiheke)

· Transport Model: Great Barrier Island receives 1 per cent and Waiheke 2 per cent of the total funding pool.

16. Five models have been considered for allocating the Capex fund between all boards based on the population, deprivation and land area attributes of the boards:

· Model A: All boards funded based on 100% population

· Model B: All boards funded based on 95% population and 5% deprivation

· Model C: All boards funded based on 90% population, 5% deprivation and 5% land area

· Model D: Great Barriers receives 2.3% and Waiheke receives 2.7% of total funds, remaining funds allocated to all other boards based on 90% population, 5% deprivation and 5% land area

· Model E: Great Barriers receives 1% and Waiheke receives 2% of total funds, remaining funds allocated to all other boards based on 90% population, 5% deprivation and 5% land area.

17. The following pages present these five models in table and chart form.

18. Other potential funding attributes that have not been included in the modelling are:

· rates paid: there is no relationship with need for services, and support was low for this attribute during the last review, with six boards in favour.

· current levels of capital expenditure: data on regional activities is unavailable at local level. Levels of expenditure on local assets are not relevant to the purpose of the Capex fund. Gaps in the provision of assets will be met through the relevant network facilities plan.

· population growth: growth will be addressed every three years through the proposed allocation formula.

19. The charts show the following:

· Using land area as an allocation factor significantly increases funding to Rodney and Franklin local boards.

· Great Barrier Island receives less than $7,000 under a population based allocation. This rises to $77,000 under the allocation formula that includes deprivation and land area.

· Providing Great Barrier Island and Waiheke with fixed allocations under the LDI allocation and Transport models only has a small impact on the other 19 boards.

20. In determining the appropriate funding levels for Great Barrier Island and Waiheke consideration should be given both to the total value of the funding over three years, and the typical costs of activities likely to undertaken by these boards. The following table shows the level of funding these boards would receive over three years in comparison to the next smallest board, Papakura:

Allocation formula model	Three year capex funding allocation for
Allocation formula model	Great Barrier	Waiheke	Papakura
Board Population size	900	8,400	45,000
A: 100% population	$20,000	$180,000	$970,000
B: 95% population + 5% deprivation	$130,000	$260,000	$1,000,000
C: 90% population + 5% deprivation + 5% land area	$230,000	$290,000	$970,000
D: GBI: 2.3% Waiheke 2.7% (Current LDI allocation)	$690,000	$820,000	$940,000
E: GBI: 1% Waiheke 2% of total fund	$300,000	$600,000	$960,000

21. The average cost for SLIPs projects in the last financial year was $31,000 for Great Barrier Island and $27,000 for Waiheke. Under Model E Waiheke would receive two per cent of the fund, and be able to deliver 20 average cost projects over three years. Great Barrier would receive one per cent of the fund and be able to deliver 10 average cost projects over the same period. They can of course accumulate funds over the three year period to undertake larger projects.

22. Staff consider there is a strong case for using the same formula for LDI and the capex fund to maintain consistency in the allocation. However, there is also a case for excluding land area given its impact on the distribution of funding.

23. Staff consider that allocating Great Barrier and Waiheke the same proportion of funding as they receive from the LDI opex fund would over fund these boards compared to other board areas. Staff recommend an allocation of one per cent of the total fund to Great Barrier, and two per cent to Waiheke would be appropriate.

Decision making process for capex projects

24. The chart on the following page provides an overview of decision making pathways for each type of project.

25. Staff will work with boards to develop guidelines for facilities partnerships (including feasibility studies) and community-led projects.

Bringing future capex allocation forward

26. The governing body has proposed that the fund be managed over a three year period, aligned with the Long-term Plan planning cycle. Local boards can use their entire three year allocation for one project or spread it over the three years for smaller projects. This provides boards with greater choice in the size and timing of projects they undertake.

27. As a practical consideration, it is unlikely that all 21 local boards would be in a position to bring forward their three years of funding to 2015/16. However, in the event that this was to happen, the projects would need to be assessed against the modified “gateway” process to ensure they were able to be delivered.

28. Budget for the Capex funding is included in the ten year plan. Local boards’ can only bring three years budgets forward however so future decision making is unencumbered.

Role of LDI funding

29. The table on the following page sets out how the Capex Fund and LDI Opex Fund could be used for different types of projects.

Funding Type	Project Type	Capex Fund		LDI Opex fund
Capex	Minor Asset based projects (less than $1M)	ü	GB funds consequential opex	?	LBs fund consequential opex (feedback sought)
	Top-up of regional projects and renewals	ü	GB funds consequential opex	?	LBs fund consequential opex (feedback sought)
	Major Asset based projects (greater than $1M)	ü	GB approval required. GB funds consequential opex.	û	Must use Capex fund for large projects
Opex	Capital grants to community groups	ü	Debt funded opex. Must be included in annual plan	ü	Standard opex expenditure
Opex	Feasibility Studies	ü	Debt funded opex. Must be included in annual plan	ü	Standard opex expenditure

30. Local boards are currently able to fund capital projects using their LDI budget by funding the consequential opex. The capex fund largely does away with the need for this and the Mayor’s report proposed the removal of the ability to fund major new facilities with opex funded by their LDI. This raises the question of whether local boards still need the ability to use LDI to fund minor capital projects. The table sets out the key differences between the Capex fund and the LDI opex fund for capital projects.

Capex fund	LDI opex fund
GB funds consequential opex	LB funds consequential opex
Easier for GB to control and plan for debt (set amount available for three years)	Creates variable unknown capex requirements on an annual basis
Simplified reporting processes	Complex financial reporting required to track LB funding vs regional funding

31. Staff recommend that local boards’ do not fund minor (less than $1 million) capital projects with LDI opex from 1 July 2016. This will not impact projects that boards have already committed to funding.

32. Local boards should provide feedback on whether they see a need to use:

· LDI to fund minor capital projects

· Capex funding to bring regionally funded projects forward.

Transferring LDI to Capex

33. Local boards may transfer their currently approved capex projects paid for by LDI (as outlined in their LB Agreement 2015/16), to the new discretionary fund. This will free up their LDI opex again and remove the need to fund consequential opex.

Deferral of Capex

34. Normal deferral conditions apply to the Capex fund. Projects cannot be planned outside of the three years but funds may be deferred if projects are unable to be completed within this period.

Transition for current Capex allocations

35. There will be no transition mechanism for any existing Capex budgets held by some local boards. The Governing Body has decided that this fund will replace the current Facilities Partnership fund.

36. Projects that have already been committed to through the Facilities Partnership fund will need to be funded from the relevant boards’ Capex fund allocation.

Local Boards Funding Policy

37. The current Local Boards Funding Policy must be amended to provide for the allocation of capex funding. This is an amendment to the Long-term Plan requiring use of the Special Consultative Procedure with a public consultation period of one month.

38. Staff propose to amend the LBFP to provide a general formula for allocating any non LDI funding. This will avoid the need to amend the LBFP every time the Governing Body decides to give local boards funding that is not for Locally Driven Initiatives.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

39. The proposal does not impact the allocation of decision making.

Significance and Engagement

40. The proposed Capex fund is a minor change in the scale of the Council’s budget and funding for Local Activities. As such it is not a significant change. However, creating a new funding allocation for local boards requires an amendment to the Local Board Funding Policy, and consequently the Long-term Plan.

41. The Council is required to undertake a special consultative process for any amendment to the Long-term Plan.

Implementation

42. The proposed amendment to the Local Board Funding Policy is not significant. As such, the amendment to the Long-term Plan will not need to be audited.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Beth Sullivan - Principal Advisor Policy

Authorisers

Matthew Walker - General Manager Financial Plan Policy & Budgeting

Karen Lyons - Manager Local Board Services

Teresa Turner - Relationship Manager

Franklin Local Board

28 July 2015

Review of Franklin Local Board Representation on External Organisations

File No.: CP2015/14480

Purpose

1. To consider one amendment to the appointment of Franklin local board members as representatives on external organisations.

Executive Summary

2. Franklin Local Board members appointed representatives to number of external organisations at their meeting 10 December 2013, and changes were approved at their meeting on 9 December 2014.

3. Local Board members have asked for a change to the appointment to the Auckland Airport Noise Community Consultative Committee as member Murphy is not able to attend meetings.

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board appoints local board member Malcolm Bell as the lead appointment to the Auckland Airport Noise Community Consultative Committee effective from 28 July 2015.

Discussion

4. A number of external organisations provide for the formal participation of elected members in their affairs. Elected member appointees will have a variety of duties and liabilities depending on the individual organisation. Board members may provide updates of their activities with their allocated organisations at local board meetings.

5. The reasons for participation in external organisations can be described in a number of ways:

· a trust deed of an organisation providing for the council to appoint a trustee

· an organisation of interest to the council simply inviting representation at its meetings

· associations entered into by the council which provide for representation - such as Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ)

· organisation governance, or project or programme oversight, such as regional or local parks management groups

· a statutory or regulatory provision (for example a regulation providing for a community liaison committee)

· a resource consent requiring the formation of a representative committee

6. At the commencement of each triennium, committees and local boards recommend appointments to outside organisations as appropriate. The governing body reviews and makes the appointments it sees fit and delegates the remaining appointments to local boards. At the end of each triennium, appointments to outside organisations must be reviewed by the appropriate officers as to current relevance, and a recommendation made to the appointing body as to whether or not representation should be continued.

7. At a business meeting held on 10 December 2013, representatives were appointed by the Franklin Local Board on external organisations FR2013/269.

8. The board reviewed these appointments at the end of 2014 and made some changes FR/2014/106. The current list of appointments to external organisations is in the table below.

Organisation	Lead	Alternate
Auckland Airport Noise Community Consultative Group (ANCCG)	Lyn Murphy	Alan Cole
Ardmore Airport Noise Committee	Angela Fulljames	Malcolm Bell
Auckland Equine (Industry) Group	Jill Naysmith	Alan Cole
Forestry Liaison Group	Alan Cole	Jill Naysmith
Franklin Localities Leadership Group	Chair
Franklin Health Forum	Chair	Alan Cole
Hunua Quarry Ecological Trust	Malcolm Bell
New Zealand Steel Environment Committee	Jill Naysmith	Alan Cole
Waiomanu Pa Kainga Reserve Committee	Malcolm Bell
Waiuku Waterfront and Reserves Committee	Jill Naysmith and Brendon Crompton
Pukekohe Town Centre Revitalisation Committee	4 Pukekohe Subdivision members
Whitford Landfill Committee	Malcolm Bell	Angela Fulljames
Whitford Quarry Community Committee	Malcolm Bell	Angela Fulljames
Mainstreet or Business Improvement District
Pukekohe	Alan Cole	Murray Kay
Waiuku	Brendon Crompton	Jill Naysmith
Local Government New Zealand Zone 1	Chair

9. Local Board members have asked for a change to the appointment to the Auckland Airport Noise Community Consultative Committee as member Lyn Murphy is not able to attend meetings. Member Malcolm Bell has requested he be appointed as the local board representative to this group.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors	Debra Langton - Senior Local Board Advisor
Authorisers	Teresa Turner - Relationship Manager

[1] Member boards listed in geographical order from north to south

No.	Title	Page
a View	Franklin Local Board Workshop Notes : 9 June 2015	153
b View	Franklin Local Board Workshop Notes : 16 June 2015	157
c View	Franklin Local Board Workshop Notes : 30 June 2015	159
d View	Franklin Local Board Workshop Notes : 14 July 2015	161

Chairperson	Andrew Baker
Deputy Chairperson	Jill Naysmith
Members	Malcolm Bell
	Alan Cole
	Brendon Crompton
	Angela Fulljames
	Sarah Higgins
	Murray Kay
	Dr Lyn Murphy

Authors	Gaylene Harvey - Democracy Advisor
Authorisers	Teresa Turner - Relationship Manager