Date: Time: Meeting Room: Venue:
|
Thursday 2 July 2015 9.30am Level 2 Reception
Lounge |
Regional Strategy and Policy Committee
OPEN ATTACHMENTS Attachments Under Separate Cover
|
9 Registration of Interest for the Expansion of Rural Broadband
Regional Strategy and Policy Committee 02 July 2015 |
|
Registration Response Form
In response to the Registrations of Interest – Support
Seeking information and commitments from local authorities in support of:
· Ultra-Fast Broadband 2
· Rural Broadband Initiative 2
· Mobile Black Spot Fund
Date of this Registration: 10 July 2015
Mihi
He mihi ki te kaahui tūpuna,
te taura-here mō tātou te muka tāngata,
ki ngā mana ātua, kia tau te mauri.
He kura tangihia, he maimai aroha,
rātou kua whetūrangitia ki a rātou
tātou te hunga mata-rerehua ki a tātou
E ngā mana, e ngā reo, e ngā karangatanga maha,
tēnā rā koutou katoa.
Our profile
This is a Registration of interest by Auckland Council (the Respondent) alone to supply the Requirements.
Item |
Detail |
Local authority name: |
Auckland Council |
Physical address: |
135 Albert Street, Auckland Central, Auckland 1010 |
Postal address: |
Auckland Council Private Bag 92300 Victoria Street West Auckland 1142 |
Website: |
Our Point of Contact
Item |
Detail |
Contact person: |
Jim Quinn |
Position: |
Chief of Strategy |
Phone number: |
n/a |
Mobile number: |
027 592 6002 |
Email address: |
2. Response to the Requirements
Questions relating to the ROI Requirements
1. Programme(s) you are interested/able to support |
|
· Ultrafast Broadband 2 (UFB2) · Rural Broadband Initiative 2 (RBI2) · Mobile Black Spot Fund (MBSF) |
UFB2
Through engagement with communities outside of the UFB1 footprint, and with support from geospatial analysis, Auckland Council has identified:
· 11 major gaps in UFB1 coverage within the Metropolitan Urban Limit
· 17 rural towns outside of the Metropolitan Urban Limit and not included in UFB1
These have been grouped into candidate areas that would benefit from an upgrade under UFB2. These candidate areas include (in prioritised order):
1. Gaps in UFB1 coverage within the Metropolitan Urban Limit:
o Laingholm
o Ormiston
o Hingaia
o Whenuapai West
o Long Bay
o Orewa West
o Mangere South
o Hobsonville East
o Otara West
o Birdwood
o Swanson
1. Warkworth
2. Helensville
3. Wellsford
4. Huia / Cornwallis
5. Clevedon
6. Snells Beach / Algies Bay
7. Matakana
8. Stillwater
9. Piha
10. Point Wells
11. Kawakawa Bay / Orere Point
12. Patumahoe
13. Waiheke Island
14. Leigh / Matheson Bay
15. Omaha
16. Parau (Armour Bay)
17. Whitford
Candidate areas for UFB2 were prioritised based on:
· Number of businesses, the usually resident population, and population density
· Qualitative assessment of the extent of upgrade benefits
· Qualitative assessment of demand and likely uptake of UFB2 services
Included with this ROI Support document in Appendix 1 is a profile for each of the above candidate areas. Each profile indicates the area that would benefit from an upgrade, and provides key information as requested in the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment’s Registrations of Interest – Support document released 12 March 2015. Also provided electronically is the data used to develop these profiles.
Auckland Council encourages the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment and telecommunications network operators to use the information provided as a starting point for more detailed investigation of the needs of each community. Auckland Council is available to support this investigation, and is also available to support infrastructure deployment planning once the allocation of funding has been decided.
1 Areas of Local authority Assistance
a) Consents
i) Auckland Council Resource Consents
The Major Infrastructure Projects Team (MIPT), Resource Consents Department, is able to make a tangible and constructive contribution to the on-going success of the further rollout of Ultrafast Broadband 2 (UFB2), the Rural Broadband Initiative 2 (RBI2), and the deployment of cellphone infrastructure under the Mobile Black Spot Fund (MBSF). The MIPT have extensive experience in managing and delivering consents for telecommunications infrastructure projects across the Auckland region and, therefore, can deliver consistent and integrated consenting outcomes.
On receipt of an application or a pre-application request a dedicated resource consent planner (or planners, as circumstances dictate) will be allocated from the MIPT to take ownership of, and be accountable for, the necessary resource consenting process that surrounds the deployment of either UFB or RBI. We encourage early and frequent engagement on the project to ensure the resource consent process can be delivered to secure the aspirations and imperatives of the broadband proponents. This ensures a consistent, timely and cost-effective approach to the consent process. Depending on the circumstances of the applications, we are keen to work with the applicant’s planning team to explore flexible and innovative approaches to delivering these consents which could include identifying activities and or specific sections that could be covered by global consents or work methodologies.
Regarding the activity status of, in particular Aerial deployment of telecommunications infrastructure, the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan (PAUP) is reasonably permissive. Under the PAUP, new overhead telecommunication lines and new support structures are generally permitted in the rural, future urban, quarry and marinas zones. These are Discretionary in the residential, centres and open space zones. It is Restricted Discretionary in the industrial zones and general business zones, but a Permitted activity in the Heavy Industry zone.
The PAUP also recognises the need to provide for the continued operation of the network utilities. Therefore, as a Permitted activity, a number of standards have been developed to enable the minor upgrading of the existing infrastructure. This includes alterations and additions to telecommunication lines, including the placement of new lines on existing poles, as well as providing for modifications of existing poles.
ii) Works in the Road Corridor
At present Auckland Transport have a dedicated team of 4 site auditors/advisors, 1 Corridor Access Request (CAR) coordinator and 1 relationship manager, that manage the UFB rollout from preliminary design application through to final walkover and putting the work into warranty, for the entire Auckland region.
Having a dedicated team allows for a consistent view of the overall project, approach to management of work sites and when setting conditions for things such as reinstatement requirements. It has also helped build strong working relationships with the key stakeholders.
The team has a consistent approach and work collaboratively to problem-solve and agree conditions to better manage the project that produces a better outcome for all involved. Weekly meetings are used to work through any ongoing issues, better coordinate with other works such as footpath renewals, and discuss things such as new methods of deployment.
Each cabinet/FFP area can also be covered by one CAR and an agreed set of fees which includes a set number of site audits. Non-compliance notices and other performance-related charges sit outside of this fee structure.
With an understanding of scope and expectations around the next stage of the RBI rollout, Auckland Transport could explore a similar approach to that initiative, and for works under the Mobile Black Spot Fund.
b) Identification of infrastructure
Relevant infrastructure has been identified in each community profile (see Appendix 1). The data used to develop each profile is also provided electronically.
2 Uptake and awareness assistance
Based on community engagement undertaken as part of the development of this registration of interest, Auckland Council understands that demand for improved broadband is consistently high across rural Auckland and that the factor limiting the uptake of broadband services in rural areas is an undersupply of quality and affordable broadband services, and where services are available, a limited awareness that those services are available.
To that end Auckland Council commits to working with the successful network operator(s) to raise awareness of residents and businesses with a focus on:
· The services that are available
· Where those services are available
· The timing of infrastructure deployment under UFB2, RBI2, and the MBSF
· Minimising disruption associated with infrastructure deployment under those three programmes
This approach is consistent with Auckland Council’s commitment to UFB1 and RBI1.
Uptake and awareness assistance will be further detailed in the Digital Enablement Plan that is due to be submitted in September 2015.
3 Investment options
Auckland Council is investing significant resource in support of the deployment of better broadband infrastructure under UFB2, RBI2, and the MBSF. This includes the investigation and planning of infrastructure deployment, resource consenting, corridor access, and communications and community engagement.
RBI2
Through engagement with communities outside of the UFB1 footprint, and with support from geospatial analysis, Auckland Council has identified 24 communities that fall outside of current plans for ultrafast broadband, that would benefit from an upgrade under the RBI2 programme. These have been grouped into the candidate areas listed below in prioritised order:
1. Bethells Beach / Te Henga
2. Waiwera Valley
3. Makarau
4. Taupaki
5. Opanuku Road
6. Kingseat / Clarks Beach
7. Karekare
8. Ara-Kotinga
9. Anawhata
10. Waitoki
11. Wainui
12. Hunua
13. Glenbrook
14. Waimauku
15. Kaukapakapa
16. Great Barrier Island
17. Awhitu
18. South Head
19. Rodney North
20. Muriwai
21. Coatesville
22. Riverhead / Paremoremo
23. Tapora
24. Rakino Island
Candidate areas for RBI2 were prioritised based on:
· Number of businesses, the usually resident population, and population density
· Qualitative assessment of the extent and severity of connectivity issues
· Qualitative assessment of demand and likely uptake of RBI2 services
Included with this ROI Support document in Appendix 2 is a profile for each of the above candidate areas. Each profile indicates the area that would benefit from an upgrade, and provides key information as requested in the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment’s Registrations of Interest – Support document released 12 March 2015. Also provided electronically is the data used to develop these profiles.
Auckland Council encourages the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment and telecommunications network operators to use the information provided as a starting point for more detailed investigation of the needs of each community. Auckland Council is available to support this investigation, and is also available to support infrastructure deployment planning once the allocation of funding has been decided.
1 Areas of Local authority Assistance
a) Consents
i) Auckland Council Resource Consents
The Major Infrastructure Projects Team (MIPT), Resource Consents Department, is able to make a tangible and constructive contribution to the on-going success of the further rollout of Ultrafast Broadband 2 (UFB2), the Rural Broadband Initiative 2 (RBI2), and the deployment of cellphone infrastructure under the Mobile Black Spot Fund (MBSF). The MIPT have extensive experience in managing and delivering consents for telecommunications infrastructure projects across the Auckland region and, therefore, can deliver consistent and integrated consenting outcomes.
On receipt of an application or a pre-application request a dedicated resource consent planner (or planners, as circumstances dictate) will be allocated from the MIPT to take ownership of, and be accountable for, the necessary resource consenting process that surrounds the deployment of either UFB or RBI. We encourage early and frequent engagement on the project to ensure the resource consent process can be delivered to secure the aspirations and imperatives of the broadband proponents. This ensures a consistent, timely and cost-effective approach to the consent process. Depending on the circumstances of the applications, we are keen to work with the applicant’s planning team to explore flexible and innovative approaches to delivering these consents which could include identifying activities and or specific sections that could be covered by global consents or work methodologies.
Regarding the activity status of, in particular Aerial deployment of telecommunications infrastructure, the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan (PAUP) is reasonably permissive. Under the PAUP, new overhead telecommunication lines and new support structures are generally permitted in the rural, future urban, quarry and marinas zones. These are Discretionary in the residential, centres and open space zones. It is Restricted Discretionary in the industrial zones and general business zones, but a Permitted activity in the Heavy Industry zone.
The PAUP also
recognises the need to provide for the continued operation of the network
utilities. Therefore, as a Permitted activity, a number of standards have been
developed to enable the minor upgrading of the existing infrastructure. This
includes alterations and additions to telecommunication lines, including the
placement of new lines on existing poles, as well as providing for
modifications of existing poles.
ii) Works in the Road Corridor
At present Auckland Transport have a dedicated team of 4 site auditors/advisors, 1 Corridor Access Request (CAR) coordinator and 1 relationship manager, that manage the UFB rollout from preliminary design application through to final walkover and putting the work into warranty, for the entire Auckland region.
Having a dedicated team allows for a consistent view of the overall project, approach to management of work sites and when setting conditions for things such as reinstatement requirements. It has also helped build strong working relationships with the key stakeholders.
The team has a consistent approach and work collaboratively to problem-solve and agree conditions to better manage the project that produces a better outcome for all involved. Weekly meetings are used to work through any ongoing issues, better coordinate with other works such as footpath renewals, and discuss things such as new methods of deployment.
Each cabinet/FFP area can also be covered by one CAR and an agreed set of fees which includes a set number of site audits. Things like non-compliance notices and other performance related charges sit outside of this fee structure.
With an understanding of scope and expectations around the next stage of the RBI rollout Auckland Transport could explore a similar approach to that initiative, and for works under the Mobile Black Spot Fund.
a) Identification of infrastructure
Relevant infrastructure has been identified in each community profile (see Appendix 2). The data used to develop each profile is also provided electronically.
2 Uptake and Awareness Assistance
Based on community engagement undertaken as part of the development of this registration of interest Auckland Council understands that demand for improved broadband is consistently high across rural Auckland and that the factor limiting the uptake of broadband services in rural areas is an undersupply of quality and affordable broadband services, and where services are available, a limited awareness that those services are available.
To that end Auckland Council commits to working with the successful network operator(s) to raise awareness of residents and businesses with a focus on:
· The services that are available
· Where those services are available
· The timing of infrastructure deployment under UFB2, RBI2, and the MBSF
· Minimising disruption associated with infrastructure deployment under those three programmes
This approach is consistent with Auckland Council’s commitment to UFB1 and RBI1.
Uptake and awareness assistance will be further detailed in the Digital Enablement Plan that is due to be submitted in September 2015.
3 Investment options
Auckland Council is investing significant resource in support of the deployment of better broadband infrastructure under UFB2, RBI2, and the MBSF. This includes the investigation and planning of infrastructure deployment, resource consenting, corridor access, and communications and community engagement.
Mobile Black Spot Fund
Through engagement with communities across rural Auckland, and with support from geospatial analysis, Auckland Council has identified 29 mobile black spots. A list of these black spots is included below and spatially represented in Appendix 3:
· Franklin Local Board |
· Awhitu |
|
· Clevedon |
|
· Hunua |
|
· Kawakawa |
|
· Orere Point |
|
· Pukekohe East |
· Great Barrier Local Board |
· Karaka Bay |
|
· Kawa |
|
· Motairehe |
|
· Okiwi |
|
· Wairahi |
· Rodney Local Board |
· Algies Bay |
|
· Coatesville |
|
· Makarau |
|
· Matakana |
|
· South Head |
|
· Te Arai |
|
· Tomarata |
|
· Wainui |
|
· Wellsford |
|
· Kaukapakapa |
|
· Riverhead |
|
· Tahekeroa |
|
· Warkworth |
· Waiheke Local Board |
· Rakino Island |
· Waitakere Ranges Local Board |
· Bethells Beach |
|
· Henderson Valley |
|
· Huia |
|
· Waitakere |
Auckland Council encourages the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment and telecommunications network operators to use the information provided as a starting point for more detailed investigation of the needs of each community. Auckland Council is available to support this investigation, and is also available to support infrastructure deployment planning once the allocation of funding has been decided.
1 Areas of Local authority Assistance
i) Auckland Council Resource Consents
The Major Infrastructure Projects Team (MIPT), Resource Consents Department, is able to make a tangible and constructive contribution to the on-going success of the further roll-out of Ultrafast Broadband 2 (UFB2), the Rural Broadband Initiative 2 (RBI2), and the deployment of cellphone infrastructure under the Mobile Black Spot Fund (MBSF). The MIPT have extensive experience in managing and delivering consents for telecommunications infrastructure projects across the Auckland region and, therefore, can deliver consistent and integrated consenting outcomes.
On receipt of an application or a pre-application request a dedicated resource consent planner (or planners, as circumstances dictate) will be allocated from the MIPT to take ownership of, and be accountable for, the necessary resource consenting process that surrounds the deployment of either UFB or RBI. We encourage early and frequent engagement on the project to ensure the resource consent process can be delivered to secure the aspirations and imperatives of the broadband proponents. This ensures a consistent, timely and cost-effective approach to the consent process. Depending on the circumstances of the applications, we are keen to work with the applicant’s planning team to explore flexible and innovative approaches to delivering these consents which could include identifying activities and or specific sections that could be covered by global consents or work methodologies.
Regarding the activity status of, in particular, Aerial deployment of telecommunications infrastructure, the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan (PAUP) is reasonably permissive. Under the PAUP new overhead telecommunication lines and new support structures are generally permitted in the rural, future urban, quarry and marinas zones. These are Discretionary in the residential, centres and open space zones. It is Restricted Discretionary in the industrial zones and general business zones, but a Permitted activity in the Heavy Industry zone.
The PAUP also
recognises the need to provide for the continued operation of the network
utilities. Therefore, as a Permitted activity, a number of standards have been
developed to enable the minor upgrading of the existing infrastructure. This
includes alterations and additions to telecommunication lines, including the
placement of new lines on existing poles, as well as providing for
modifications of existing poles.
ii) Works in the Road Corridor
At present, Auckland Transport have a dedicated team of 4 site auditors/advisors, 1 Corridor Access Request (CAR) coordinator and 1 relationship manager, that manage the UFB roll out from preliminary design application through to final walkover and putting the work into warranty, for the entire Auckland region.
Having a dedicated team allows for a consistent view of the overall project, approach to management of work sites and when setting conditions for things such as reinstatement requirements. It has also helped build strong working relationships with the key stakeholders.
The team has a consistent approach and work collaboratively to problem-solve and agree conditions to better manage the project that produces a better outcome for all involved. Weekly meetings are used to work through any ongoing issues, better coordinate with other works such as footpath renewals, and discuss things such as new methods of deployment.
Each cabinet/FFP area can also be covered by one CAR and an agreed set of fees which includes a set number of site audits. Non-compliance notices and other performance-related charges sit outside of this fee structure.
With an understanding of scope and expectations around the next stage of the RBI rollout, Auckland Transport could explore a similar approach to that initiative, and for works under the Mobile Black Spot Fund.
a) Identification of infrastructure, land or land access
Relevant infrastructure has been identified in each community profile (see Appendix 3). The data used to develop each profile is also provided electronically.
2 Investment options
Auckland Council is investing significant resource in support of the deployment of better broadband infrastructure under UFB2, RBI2, and the MBSF. This includes the investigation and planning of infrastructure deployment, resource consenting, corridor access, and communications and community engagement.
3. Our declaration
Respondent’s declaration |
|||
Topic |
Declaration |
Respondent’s declaration |
|
ROI Process, Terms and Conditions: |
I/we have read and fully understand the ROI, including the ROI Process, Terms and Conditions (shortened to ROI-Terms detailed in Section 6, as amended by Section 1, paragraph 1.6. if applicable). I/we confirm that Respondent/s agree to be bound by them. |
Agree |
|
Collection of further information: |
The Respondent/s authorises the Buyer to: a. collect any information about the Respondent, except commercially sensitive pricing information, from any relevant third party, including a referee, or previous or existing client b. use such information in the evaluation of this Registration. The Respondent/s agrees that all such information will be confidential to the Buyer. |
Agree |
|
Requirements: |
I/we have read and fully understand the nature and extent of the Buyer’s Requirements as described in Section 2. I/we confirm that the Respondent/s has the necessary capacity and capability to fully meet or exceed the Requirements and will be available to deliver throughout the relevant Contract period. |
Agree |
|
Ethics: |
In submitting this Registration the Respondent/s warrants that it: a. has not entered into any improper, illegal, collusive or anti-competitive arrangements with any Competitor b. has not directly or indirectly approached any representative of the Buyer (other than the Point of Contact) to lobby or solicit information in relation to the ROI c. has not attempted to influence, or provide any form of personal inducement, reward or benefit to any representative of the Buyer. |
Agree |
|
Conflict of Interest declaration: |
The Respondent warrants that it has no actual, potential or perceived Conflict of Interest in submitting this Registration, or entering into a Contract to deliver the Requirements. Where a Conflict of Interest arises during the procurement process the Respondent will report it immediately to the Buyer’s Point of Contact. |
Agree |
|
Details of Conflict of Interest: not applicable |
|||
DECLARATION I declare that in submitting the Registration and this declaration: a. the information provided is true, accurate and complete and not misleading in any material respect b. the Registration does not contain Intellectual Property that will breach a third party’s rights c. I/we have secured all appropriate authorisations to submit this Registration, to make the statements and to provide the information in the Registration and I/we am/are not aware of any impediments to enter into a Contract to deliver the Requirements. I understand that the falsification of information, supplying misleading information or the suppression of material information in this declaration and the Registration may result in the Registration being eliminated from further participation in the ROI process and may be grounds for termination of any Contract awarded as a result of the ROI. By signing this declaration the signatory below represents, warrants and agrees that he has been authorised by the Respondent to make this declaration on its behalf. |
|||
Signature: |
|
||
Full name: |
Jim Quinn |
||
Title / position: |
Chief of Strategy |
||
Name of organisation: |
Auckland Council |
||
Date: |
|
||
Appendix 1: UFB2 Candidate Area Profiles
* source: community feedback
** source: Auckland Council and Statistics New Zealand
[Maps are being developed for each candidate area and will be included in the appropriate section when complete. Further supporting material provided by some communities may also be included here]
Gaps in UFB1 coverage within the Metropolitan Urban Limit
Candidate Area |
All UFB Coverage Gaps within MUL |
Laingholm |
Ormiston |
Hingaia |
Whenuapai West |
Long Bay |
Orewa West |
Mangere South |
Hobsonville East |
Otara West |
Birdwood |
Swanson |
Priority |
1 of 17 |
1 of 11 |
2 of 11 |
3 of 11 |
4 of 11 |
5 of 11 |
6 of 11 |
7 of 11 |
8 of 11 |
9 of 11 |
10 of 11 |
11 of 11 |
Rateable Units** |
2165 |
1223 |
93 |
623 |
45 |
87 |
30 |
40 |
10 |
5 |
7 |
2 |
Population (Usually Resident)** |
6776 |
3312 |
1465 |
1309 |
212 |
197 |
115 |
76 |
30 |
30 |
24 |
6 |
Pop Density (SqKm)** |
172 |
705 |
222 |
519 |
130 |
66 |
49 |
8 |
55 |
47 |
53 |
38 |
Total Household (Usually Resident)** |
2223 |
1155 |
409 |
426 |
69 |
64 |
41 |
33 |
10 |
6 |
9 |
1 |
Median Income ($)** |
155856 |
92538 |
937700 |
114150 |
72925 |
102200 |
101100 |
65000 |
85000 |
0 |
81300 |
62500 |
Mobile Access (Household)** |
1848 |
975 |
317 |
378 |
64 |
57 |
25 |
16 |
8 |
0 |
7 |
1 |
Internet Access (Household)** |
1921 |
1020 |
333 |
404 |
58 |
54 |
22 |
14 |
8 |
0 |
7 |
1 |
Number of Businesses** |
36 |
19 |
3 |
4 |
4 |
2 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
Warkworth
Candidate Area |
Warkworth |
Priority |
1 of 17 (1st equal) |
Current Service* |
ADSL, VDSL, RBI Wireless, 3G Modem |
Issues Description* |
Services slow, sercvices unstable, limited access at peak times, wireless services unreliable, connections do not support business activity |
Average Download (Mbps)* |
6.54 |
Average Upload (Mbps)* |
0.66 |
Ping (ms)* |
33 |
Rateable Units** |
1840 |
Population (Usually Resident)** |
3582 |
Pop Density (SqKm)** |
943 |
Total Household (Usually Resident)** |
1325 |
Median Income ($)** |
60540 |
Mobile Phone (Households)** |
1149 |
Internet Access (Households)** |
1043 |
Number of Businesses** |
24 |
Number of Homes with Business Activity* |
5 |
Individuals that Would Work From Home* |
y |
Total Number of Students* |
1 |
Helensville
Candidate Area |
Helensville |
Priority |
2 of 17 |
Current Service* |
ADSL, VDSL, RBI Wireless |
Issues Description* |
Services slow, services unstable, inconsistent coverage, quality varied by time of day, cabinet upgrade required |
Average Download (Mbps)* |
5.44 |
Average Upload (Mbps)* |
0.69 |
Ping (ms)* |
369 |
Rateable Units** |
1121 |
Population (Usually Resident)** |
2535 |
Pop Density (SqKm)** |
1348 |
Total Household (Usually Resident)** |
957 |
Median Income ($)** |
54918 |
Mobile Phone (Households)** |
772 |
Internet Access (Households)** |
667 |
Number of Businesses** |
11 |
Number of Homes with Business Activity* |
173 |
Individuals that Would Work From Home* |
y |
Total Number of Students* |
1300 |
Wellsford
Candidate Area |
Wellsford |
Priority |
3 of 17 |
Current Service* |
ADSL, WiFi |
Issues Description* |
Services slow, services unstable, require cabinet upgrade |
Average Download (Mbps)* |
n/a |
Average Upload (Mbps)* |
n/a |
Ping (ms)* |
n/a |
Rateable Units** |
796 |
Population (Usually Resident)** |
1587 |
Pop Density (SqKm)** |
810 |
Total Household (Usually Resident)** |
615 |
Median Income ($)** |
40388 |
Mobile Phone (Households)** |
471 |
Internet Access (Households)** |
348 |
Number of Businesses** |
21 |
Number of Homes with Business Activity* |
y |
Individuals that Would Work From Home* |
n/a |
Total Number of Students* |
n/a |
Huia / Cornwallis
Candidate Area |
Huia / Cornwallis |
Priority |
4 of 17 |
Current Service* |
ADSL |
Issues Description* |
Services slow, services unstable, cabinet upgrade needed, limited access to RBI wireless, limited access to fixed line |
Average Download (Mbps)* |
0.39 |
Average Upload (Mbps)* |
0.82 |
Ping (ms)* |
98 |
Rateable Units** |
342 |
Population (Usually Resident)** |
652 |
Pop Density (SqKm)** |
80 |
Total Household (Usually Resident)** |
267 |
Median Income ($)** |
65000 |
Mobile Phone (Households)** |
121 |
Internet Access (Households)** |
205 |
Number of Businesses** |
0 |
Number of Homes with Business Activity* |
200 |
Individuals that Would Work From Home* |
y |
Total Number of Students* |
y |
Clevedon
Candidate Area |
Clevedon |
Priority |
5 of 17 |
Current Service* |
ADSL, 3G, Satellite, Vodem |
Issues Description* |
Services slow, services unstable, patchy mobile services, rain fade, does not support video content, does not support business activity |
Average Download (Mbps)* |
4.01 |
Average Upload (Mbps)* |
0.57 |
Ping (ms)* |
47 |
Rateable Units** |
153 |
Population (Usually Resident)** |
361 |
Pop Density (SqKm)** |
1203 |
Total Household (Usually Resident)** |
122 |
Median Income ($)** |
91750 |
Mobile Phone (Households)** |
109 |
Internet Access (Households)** |
100 |
Number of Businesses** |
5 |
Number of Homes with Business Activity* |
4 |
Individuals that Would Work From Home* |
y |
Total Number of Students* |
7 |
Snells Beach / Algies Bay
Candidate Area |
Snells Beach / Algies Bay |
Priority |
6 of 17 |
Current Service* |
ADSL |
Issues Description* |
Slow and variable speeds, unstable connections |
Average Download (Mbps)* |
11.00 |
Average Upload (Mbps)* |
0.95 |
Ping (ms)* |
27 |
Rateable Units** |
2069 |
Population (Usually Resident)** |
3406 |
Pop Density (SqKm)** |
1346 |
Total Household (Usually Resident)** |
1407 |
Median Income ($)** |
52071 |
Mobile Phone (Households)** |
1162 |
Internet Access (Households)** |
1036 |
Number of Businesses** |
21 |
Number of Homes with Business Activity* |
30 |
Individuals that Would Work From Home* |
n/a |
Total Number of Students* |
35 |
Matakana
Candidate Area |
Matakana |
Priority |
7 of 17 |
Current Service* |
ADSL, VDSL, RBI, Satellite, Dial-up |
Issues Description* |
Services slow, services unstable, limited RBI coverage, limited access to fixed-line services, slow speeds at peak times |
Average Download (Mbps)* |
4.87 |
Average Upload (Mbps)* |
0.80 |
Ping (ms)* |
62 |
Rateable Units** |
162 |
Population (Usually Resident)** |
267 |
Pop Density (SqKm)** |
445 |
Total Household (Usually Resident)** |
101 |
Median Income ($)** |
64800 |
Mobile Phone (Households)** |
87 |
Internet Access (Households)** |
84 |
Number of Businesses** |
9 |
Number of Homes with Business Activity* |
5 |
Individuals that Would Work From Home* |
100 |
Total Number of Students* |
n/a |
Stillwater
Candidate Area |
Stillwater |
Priority |
8 of 17 |
Current Service* |
ADSL |
Issues Description* |
Services slow, services unstable |
Average Download (Mbps)* |
n/a |
Average Upload (Mbps)* |
n/a |
Ping (ms)* |
n/a |
Rateable Units** |
326 |
Population (Usually Resident)** |
876 |
Pop Density (SqKm)** |
1564 |
Total Household (Usually Resident)** |
315 |
Median Income ($)** |
100457 |
Mobile Phone (Households)** |
278 |
Internet Access (Households)** |
271 |
Number of Businesses** |
7 |
Number of Homes with Business Activity* |
y |
Individuals that Would Work From Home* |
n/a |
Total Number of Students* |
y |
Piha
Candidate Area |
Piha |
Priority |
9 of 17 |
Current Service* |
ADSL |
Issues Description* |
Services slow, services unstable |
Average Download (Mbps)* |
0.54 |
Average Upload (Mbps)* |
n/a |
Ping (ms)* |
n/a |
Rateable Units** |
704 |
Population (Usually Resident)** |
811 |
Pop Density (SqKm)** |
520 |
Total Household (Usually Resident)** |
336 |
Median Income ($)** |
77688 |
Mobile Phone (Households)** |
266 |
Internet Access (Households)** |
263 |
Number of Businesses** |
7 |
Number of Homes with Business Activity* |
n/a |
Individuals that Would Work From Home* |
n/a |
Total Number of Students* |
y |
Point Wells
Candidate Area |
Point Wells |
Priority |
10 of 17 |
Current Service* |
|
Issues Description* |
Services slow, services unstable, cabinet upgrade required |
Average Download (Mbps)* |
3.65 |
Average Upload (Mbps)* |
0.27 |
Ping (ms)* |
n/a |
Rateable Units** |
252 |
Population (Usually Resident)** |
384 |
Pop Density (SqKm)** |
985 |
Total Household (Usually Resident)** |
171 |
Median Income ($)** |
56100 |
Mobile Phone (Households)** |
141 |
Internet Access (Households)** |
141 |
Number of Businesses** |
2 |
Number of Homes with Business Activity* |
y |
Individuals that Would Work From Home* |
y |
Total Number of Students* |
n/a |
Kawakawa Bay / Orere Point
Candidate Area |
Kawakawa Bay / Orere Point |
Priority |
11 of 17 |
Current Service* |
ADSL, 3G wireless stick |
Issues Description* |
Services slow, services unstable, services unusable, residents forced to commute for internet access, rain fade |
Average Download (Mbps)* |
2.71 |
Average Upload (Mbps)* |
0.55 |
Ping (ms)* |
469 |
Rateable Units** |
259 |
Population (Usually Resident)** |
375 |
Pop Density (SqKm)** |
682 |
Total Household (Usually Resident)** |
152 |
Median Income ($)** |
60900 |
Mobile Phone (Households)** |
106 |
Internet Access (Households)** |
86 |
Number of Businesses** |
5 |
Number of Homes with Business Activity* |
3 |
Individuals that Would Work From Home* |
y |
Total Number of Students* |
56 |
Patumahoe
Candidate Area |
Patumahoe |
Priority |
12 of 17 |
Current Service* |
ADSL |
Issues Description* |
Services slow, limited connectivity, services unstable |
Average Download (Mbps)* |
3.92 |
Average Upload (Mbps)* |
0.77 |
Ping (ms)* |
n/a |
Rateable Units** |
273 |
Population (Usually Resident)** |
114 |
Pop Density (SqKm)** |
161 |
Total Household (Usually Resident)** |
195 |
Median Income ($)** |
78333 |
Mobile Phone (Households)** |
167 |
Internet Access (Households)** |
194 |
Number of Businesses** |
9 |
Number of Homes with Business Activity* |
12 |
Individuals that Would Work From Home* |
n/a |
Total Number of Students* |
11 |
Waiheke Island
Candidate Area |
Waiheke Island |
Priority |
13 of 17 |
Current Service* |
3G Mobile, Satellite, Wireless |
Issues Description* |
Services slow, services unstable, requires cabinet upgrade |
Average Download (Mbps)* |
3.89 |
Average Upload (Mbps)* |
2.94 |
Ping (ms)* |
32 |
Rateable Units** |
433 |
Population (Usually Resident)** |
3222 |
Pop Density (SqKm)** |
315 |
Total Household (Usually Resident)** |
1389 |
Median Income ($)** |
67764 |
Mobile Phone (Households)** |
1096 |
Internet Access (Households)** |
1032 |
Number of Businesses** |
13 |
Number of Homes with Business Activity* |
y |
Individuals that Would Work From Home* |
n/a |
Total Number of Students* |
y |
Leigh / Matheson Bay
Candidate Area |
Leigh / Matheson Bay |
Priority |
14 of 17 |
Current Service* |
|
Issues Description* |
|
Average Download (Mbps)* |
|
Average Upload (Mbps)* |
|
Ping (ms)* |
|
Rateable Units** |
559 |
Population (Usually Resident)** |
598 |
Pop Density (SqKm)** |
433 |
Total Household (Usually Resident)** |
243 |
Median Income ($)** |
59545 |
Mobile Phone (Households)** |
180 |
Internet Access (Households)** |
175 |
Number of Businesses** |
19 |
Number of Homes with Business Activity* |
|
Individuals that Would Work From Home* |
|
Total Number of Students* |
|
Omaha
Candidate Area |
Omaha |
Priority |
15 of 17 |
Current Service* |
|
Issues Description* |
|
Average Download (Mbps)* |
|
Average Upload (Mbps)* |
|
Ping (ms)* |
|
Rateable Units** |
828 |
Population (Usually Resident)** |
428 |
Pop Density (SqKm)** |
594 |
Total Household (Usually Resident)** |
183 |
Median Income ($)** |
632500 |
Mobile Phone (Households)** |
159 |
Internet Access (Households)** |
132 |
Number of Businesses** |
3 |
Number of Homes with Business Activity* |
|
Individuals that Would Work From Home* |
|
Total Number of Students* |
|
Parau (Armour Bay)
Candidate Area |
Parau (Armour Bay) |
Priority |
16 of 17 |
Current Service* |
|
Issues Description* |
|
Average Download (Mbps)* |
|
Average Upload (Mbps)* |
|
Ping (ms)* |
|
Rateable Units** |
148 |
Population (Usually Resident)** |
403 |
Pop Density (SqKm)** |
1343 |
Total Household (Usually Resident)** |
144 |
Median Income ($)** |
85000 |
Mobile Phone (Households)** |
123 |
Internet Access (Households)** |
118 |
Number of Businesses** |
3 |
Number of Homes with Business Activity* |
|
Individuals that Would Work From Home* |
|
Total Number of Students* |
|
Whitford
Candidate Area |
Whitford |
Priority |
17 of 17 |
Current Service* |
|
Issues Description* |
|
Average Download (Mbps)* |
|
Average Upload (Mbps)* |
|
Ping (ms)* |
|
Rateable Units** |
31 |
Population (Usually Resident)** |
87 |
Pop Density (SqKm)** |
964 |
Total Household (Usually Resident)** |
25 |
Median Income ($)** |
121900 |
Mobile Phone (Households)** |
20 |
Internet Access (Households)** |
22 |
Number of Businesses** |
1 |
Number of Homes with Business Activity* |
|
Individuals that Would Work From Home* |
|
Total Number of Students* |
|
Appendix 2: RBI2 Candidate Area Profiles
* source: community feedback
** source: Auckland Council and Statistics New Zealand
[Maps are being developed for each candidate area and will be included in the appropriate section when complete. Further supporting material provided by some communities may also be included here]
Bethells Beach / Te Henga
Candidate Area |
Bethells Beach / Te Henga |
Priority |
1 of 24 |
Current Service* |
ADSL |
Issues Description* |
Services slow, services unstable, services largely unsable, frequent time-outs, waiting list for connections, unable to use connections, quality has deteriorated over time |
Average Download (Mbps)* |
1.86 |
Average Upload (Mbps)* |
0.54 |
Ping (ms)* |
804 |
Rateable Units** |
157 |
Population (Usually Resident)** |
309 |
Pop Density (SqKm)** |
97 |
Total Household (Usually Resident)** |
125 |
Median Income ($)** |
61350 |
Mobile Phone (Household)** |
32 |
Internet Access (Household)** |
93 |
Number of Businesses** |
3 |
Number of Homes with Business Activity* |
307 |
Individuals Would Work From Home* |
83 |
Total Number of Students* |
87 |
Waiwera Valley
Candidate Area |
Waiwera Valley |
Priority |
2 of 24 |
Current Service* |
ADSL, ADSL2+, VDSL, Satellite |
Issues Description* |
Services slow, services unstable, cabinet upgrade required, waiting list to get connected, services unusable at peak times |
Average Download (Mbps)* |
0.82 |
Average Upload (Mbps)* |
0.46 |
Ping (ms)* |
470 |
Rateable Units** |
271 |
Population (Usually Resident)** |
653 |
Pop Density (SqKm)** |
19 |
Total Household (Usually Resident)** |
236 |
Median Income ($)** |
84890 |
Mobile Phone (Household)** |
162 |
Internet Access (Household)** |
185 |
Number of Businesses** |
12 |
Number of Homes with Business Activity* |
0 |
Individuals Would Work From Home* |
y |
Total Number of Students* |
y |
Makarau
Candidate Area |
Makarau |
Priority |
3 of 24 |
Current Service* |
ADSL, Dial-up, Satellite |
Issues Description* |
Limited access to fixed-line services, limited access to wireless RBI services, services slow, services unstable |
Average Download (Mbps)* |
5.98 |
Average Upload (Mbps)* |
2.09 |
Ping (ms)* |
6 |
Rateable Units** |
77 |
Population (Usually Resident)** |
181 |
Pop Density (SqKm)** |
18 |
Total Household (Usually Resident)** |
62 |
Median Income ($)** |
67925 |
Mobile Phone (Household)** |
39 |
Internet Access (Household)** |
48 |
Number of Businesses** |
3 |
Number of Homes with Business Activity* |
1801 |
Individuals Would Work From Home* |
700 |
Total Number of Students* |
y |
Taupaki
Candidate Area |
Taupaki |
Priority |
4 of 24 |
Current Service* |
Dial-up, ADSL, RBI Wireless |
Issues Description* |
Services slow, services unstable, cabinet at capacity |
Average Download (Mbps)* |
1.68 |
Average Upload (Mbps)* |
1.15 |
Ping (ms)* |
292 |
Rateable Units** |
148 |
Population (Usually Resident)** |
483 |
Pop Density (SqKm)** |
54 |
Total Household (Usually Resident)** |
167 |
Median Income ($)** |
83208 |
Mobile Phone (Household)** |
127 |
Internet Access (Household)** |
121 |
Number of Businesses** |
13 |
Number of Homes with Business Activity* |
51 |
Individuals Would Work From Home* |
40 |
Total Number of Students* |
58 |
Opanuku Road
Candidate Area |
Opanuku Road |
Priority |
5 of 24 |
Current Service* |
ADSL |
Issues Description* |
Services slow, services unstable, ADSL unsable, quality has deteriorated over time |
Average Download (Mbps)* |
0.50 |
Average Upload (Mbps)* |
0.30 |
Ping (ms)* |
n/a |
Rateable Units** |
64 |
Population (Usually Resident)** |
260 |
Pop Density (SqKm)** |
130 |
Total Household (Usually Resident)** |
90 |
Median Income ($)** |
73500 |
Mobile Phone (Household)** |
72 |
Internet Access (Household)** |
72 |
Number of Businesses** |
3 |
Number of Homes with Business Activity* |
1 |
Individuals Would Work From Home* |
n/a |
Total Number of Students* |
n/a |
Kingseat / Clarks Beach
Candidate Area |
Kingseat / Clarks Beach |
Priority |
6 of 24 |
Current Service* |
RBI wireless |
Issues Description* |
Services slow, services unstable, cabinet upgrade required |
Average Download (Mbps)* |
n/a |
Average Upload (Mbps)* |
n/a |
Ping (ms)* |
n/a |
Rateable Units** |
333 |
Population (Usually Resident)** |
719 |
Pop Density (SqKm)** |
78 |
Total Household (Usually Resident)** |
241 |
Median Income ($)** |
90283 |
Mobile Phone (Household)** |
213 |
Internet Access (Household)** |
195 |
Number of Businesses** |
24 |
Number of Homes with Business Activity* |
0 |
Individuals Would Work From Home* |
y |
Total Number of Students* |
y |
Karekare
Candidate Area |
Karekare |
Priority |
7 of 24 |
Current Service* |
WiFi |
Issues Description* |
Cabinet upgrade required |
Average Download (Mbps)* |
n/a |
Average Upload (Mbps)* |
n/a |
Ping (ms)* |
n/a |
Rateable Units** |
104 |
Population (Usually Resident)** |
144 |
Pop Density (SqKm)** |
25 |
Total Household (Usually Resident)** |
48 |
Median Income ($)** |
83900 |
Mobile Phone (Household)** |
37 |
Internet Access (Household)** |
40 |
Number of Businesses** |
0 |
Number of Homes with Business Activity* |
0 |
Individuals Would Work From Home* |
y |
Total Number of Students* |
y |
Ara-Kotinga
Candidate Area |
Ara-Kotinga |
Priority |
8 of 24 |
Current Service* |
|
Issues Description* |
Slow connections, unstable connections |
Average Download (Mbps)* |
4.43 |
Average Upload (Mbps)* |
0.66 |
Ping (ms)* |
n/a |
Rateable Units** |
33 |
Population (Usually Resident)** |
91 |
Pop Density (SqKm)** |
294 |
Total Household (Usually Resident)** |
33 |
Median Income ($)** |
92500 |
Mobile Phone (Household)** |
24 |
Internet Access (Household)** |
24 |
Number of Businesses** |
0 |
Number of Homes with Business Activity* |
0 |
Individuals Would Work From Home* |
n/a |
Total Number of Students* |
25 |
Anawhata
Candidate Area |
Anawhata |
Priority |
9 of 24 |
Current Service* |
Satellite |
Issues Description* |
Satellite services expensive, slow, and unreliable, Options limited to satellite and very limited mobile |
Average Download (Mbps)* |
0.02 |
Average Upload (Mbps)* |
n/a |
Ping (ms)* |
188 |
Rateable Units** |
36 |
Population (Usually Resident)** |
33 |
Pop Density (SqKm)** |
9 |
Total Household (Usually Resident)** |
14 |
Median Income ($)** |
78900 |
Mobile Phone (Household)** |
8 |
Internet Access (Household)** |
9 |
Number of Businesses** |
1 |
Number of Homes with Business Activity* |
4 |
Individuals Would Work From Home* |
n/a |
Total Number of Students* |
4 |
Waitoki
Candidate Area |
Waitoki |
Priority |
10 of 24 |
Current Service* |
ADSL |
Issues Description* |
Services slow, services unstable, connections unsable at peak times |
Average Download (Mbps)* |
2.09 |
Average Upload (Mbps)* |
0.55 |
Ping (ms)* |
31 |
Rateable Units** |
255 |
Population (Usually Resident)** |
625 |
Pop Density (SqKm)** |
26 |
Total Household (Usually Resident)** |
22 |
Median Income ($)** |
96987 |
Mobile Phone (Household)** |
179 |
Internet Access (Household)** |
176 |
Number of Businesses** |
24 |
Number of Homes with Business Activity* |
7 |
Individuals Would Work From Home* |
n/a |
Total Number of Students* |
y |
Wainui
Candidate Area |
Wainui |
Priority |
11 of 24 |
Current Service* |
ADSL |
Issues Description* |
Services slow, services unstable, require cabinet upgrade, waiting list for connections, no RBI coverage |
Average Download (Mbps)* |
0.70 |
Average Upload (Mbps)* |
0.64 |
Ping (ms)* |
2300 |
Rateable Units** |
142 |
Population (Usually Resident)** |
265 |
Pop Density (SqKm)** |
25 |
Total Household (Usually Resident)** |
88 |
Median Income ($)** |
91012 |
Mobile Phone (Household)** |
63 |
Internet Access (Household)** |
67 |
Number of Businesses** |
9 |
Number of Homes with Business Activity* |
1 |
Individuals Would Work From Home* |
15 |
Total Number of Students* |
n/a |
Hunua
Candidate Area |
Hunua |
Priority |
12 of 24 |
Current Service* |
ADSL, VDSL, RBI Wireless, Satellite, Compass Wireless |
Issues Description* |
Services slow, services unstable, cabinet upgrade required, limited coverage / access, waiting list to connect |
Average Download (Mbps)* |
4.18 |
Average Upload (Mbps)* |
0.82 |
Ping (ms)* |
51 |
Rateable Units** |
306 |
Population (Usually Resident)** |
289 |
Pop Density (SqKm)** |
12 |
Total Household (Usually Resident)** |
260 |
Median Income ($)** |
103824 |
Mobile Phone (Household)** |
221 |
Internet Access (Household)** |
203 |
Number of Businesses** |
5 |
Number of Homes with Business Activity* |
1 |
Individuals Would Work From Home* |
2 |
Total Number of Students* |
8 |
Glenbrook
Candidate Area |
Glenbrook |
Priority |
13 of 24 |
Current Service* |
ADSL, RBI Wireless |
Issues Description* |
Services slow, services unstable |
Average Download (Mbps)* |
0.70 |
Average Upload (Mbps)* |
2.30 |
Ping (ms)* |
n/a |
Rateable Units** |
108 |
Population (Usually Resident)** |
210 |
Pop Density (SqKm)** |
114 |
Total Household (Usually Resident)** |
81 |
Median Income ($)** |
60800 |
Mobile Phone (Household)** |
69 |
Internet Access (Household)** |
48 |
Number of Businesses** |
4 |
Number of Homes with Business Activity* |
0 |
Individuals Would Work From Home* |
y |
Total Number of Students* |
n/a |
Waimauku
Candidate Area |
Waimauku |
Priority |
14 of 24 |
Current Service* |
ADSL, 3G Mobile |
Issues Description* |
Services slow, services unstable, require cabinet upgrade |
Average Download (Mbps)* |
6.93 |
Average Upload (Mbps)* |
0.86 |
Ping (ms)* |
41 |
Rateable Units** |
282 |
Population (Usually Resident)** |
732 |
Pop Density (SqKm)** |
283 |
Total Household (Usually Resident)** |
230 |
Median Income ($)** |
113343 |
Mobile Phone (Household)** |
197 |
Internet Access (Household)** |
205 |
Number of Businesses** |
5 |
Number of Homes with Business Activity* |
18 |
Individuals Would Work From Home* |
y |
Total Number of Students* |
611 |
Kaukapakapa
Candidate Area |
Kaukapakapa |
Priority |
15 of 24 |
Current Service* |
ADSL, 3G mobile |
Issues Description* |
Services slow, services unstable, slow at peak times, limited access to services |
Average Download (Mbps)* |
2.98 |
Average Upload (Mbps)* |
0.77 |
Ping (ms)* |
n/a |
Rateable Units** |
47 |
Population (Usually Resident)** |
141 |
Pop Density (SqKm)** |
49 |
Total Household (Usually Resident)** |
54 |
Median Income ($)** |
65000 |
Mobile Phone (Household)** |
42 |
Internet Access (Household)** |
39 |
Number of Businesses** |
0 |
Number of Homes with Business Activity* |
10 |
Individuals Would Work From Home* |
n/a |
Total Number of Students* |
1 |
Great Barrier Island
Candidate Area |
Great Barrier Island |
Priority |
16 of 24 |
Current Service* |
ADSL, Satellite |
Issues Description* |
Services slow, services unstable, limited coverage, patchy service, cabinet upgrade required |
Average Download (Mbps)* |
1.82 |
Average Upload (Mbps)* |
0.68 |
Ping (ms)* |
64 |
Rateable Units** |
732 |
Population (Usually Resident)** |
407 |
Pop Density (SqKm)** |
3 |
Total Household (Usually Resident)** |
210 |
Median Income ($)** |
36761 |
Mobile Phone (Household)** |
110 |
Internet Access (Household)** |
104 |
Number of Businesses** |
2 |
Number of Homes with Business Activity* |
1 |
Individuals Would Work From Home* |
y |
Total Number of Students* |
y |
Awhitu
Candidate Area |
Awhitu |
Priority |
17 of 24 |
Current Service* |
ADSL, Dial-up, 3G mobile, Wireless, Satellite |
Issues Description* |
Services slow, services unstable, limited access to all services, cabinet upgrade required |
Average Download (Mbps)* |
|
Average Upload (Mbps)* |
|
Ping (ms)* |
|
Rateable Units** |
1120 |
Population (Usually Resident)** |
1336 |
Pop Density (SqKm)** |
7 |
Total Household (Usually Resident)** |
552 |
Median Income ($)** |
56166 |
Mobile Phone (Household)** |
422 |
Internet Access (Household)** |
359 |
Number of Businesses** |
88 |
Number of Homes with Business Activity* |
2 |
Individuals Would Work From Home* |
y |
Total Number of Students* |
1 |
South Head
Candidate Area |
South Head |
Priority |
18 of 24 |
Current Service* |
ADSL, RBI Wireless |
Issues Description* |
Services slow, services unstable, frequent drop outs, limited coverage |
Average Download (Mbps)* |
3.93 |
Average Upload (Mbps)* |
0.66 |
Ping (ms)* |
42 |
Rateable Units** |
161 |
Population (Usually Resident)** |
268 |
Pop Density (SqKm)** |
5 |
Total Household (Usually Resident)** |
105 |
Median Income ($)** |
58440 |
Mobile Phone (Household)** |
81 |
Internet Access (Household)** |
76 |
Number of Businesses** |
6 |
Number of Homes with Business Activity* |
400 |
Individuals Would Work From Home* |
n/a |
Total Number of Students* |
460 |
Rodney North
Candidate Area |
Rodney North |
Priority |
19 of 24 |
Current Service* |
ADSL, Dial-up, 3G mobile |
Issues Description* |
Connection slow, connection unstable, limited fixed-line broadband coverage, limited fixed-wireless broadband coverage, patchy service, extremely variable quality of service |
Average Download (Mbps)* |
1.71 |
Average Upload (Mbps)* |
6.40 |
Ping (ms)* |
48 |
Rateable Units** |
4183 |
Population (Usually Resident)** |
8311 |
Pop Density (SqKm)** |
18 |
Total Household (Usually Resident)** |
3171 |
Median Income ($)** |
66470 |
Mobile Phone (Household)** |
2493 |
Internet Access (Household)** |
2319 |
Number of Businesses** |
171 |
Number of Homes with Business Activity* |
28 |
Individuals Would Work From Home* |
n/a |
Total Number of Students* |
4 |
Muriwai
Candidate Area |
Muriwai |
Priority |
20 of 24 |
Current Service* |
ADSL, VDSL |
Issues Description* |
Services slow, services unstable |
Average Download (Mbps)* |
6.69 |
Average Upload (Mbps)* |
0.80 |
Ping (ms)* |
31 |
Rateable Units** |
245 |
Population (Usually Resident)** |
327 |
Pop Density (SqKm)** |
38 |
Total Household (Usually Resident)** |
112 |
Median Income ($)** |
86750 |
Mobile Phone (Household)** |
93 |
Internet Access (Household)** |
92 |
Number of Businesses** |
4 |
Number of Homes with Business Activity* |
2 |
Individuals Would Work From Home* |
n/a |
Total Number of Students* |
y |
Coatesville
Candidate Area |
Coatesville |
Priority |
21 of 24 |
Current Service* |
ADSL |
Issues Description* |
Services slow, services unstable |
Average Download (Mbps)* |
0.71 |
Average Upload (Mbps)* |
0.60 |
Ping (ms)* |
58 |
Rateable Units** |
162 |
Population (Usually Resident)** |
482 |
Pop Density (SqKm)** |
119 |
Total Household (Usually Resident)** |
143 |
Median Income ($)** |
127442 |
Mobile Phone (Household)** |
129 |
Internet Access (Household)** |
138 |
Number of Businesses** |
1 |
Number of Homes with Business Activity* |
1 |
Individuals Would Work From Home* |
y |
Total Number of Students* |
y |
Riverhead / Paremoremo
Candidate Area |
Riverhead / Paremoremo |
Priority |
22 of 24 |
Current Service* |
ADSL, VDSL |
Issues Description* |
Services slow, services unstable, cabinet upgrade required |
Average Download (Mbps)* |
6.21 |
Average Upload (Mbps)* |
0.53 |
Ping (ms)* |
168 |
Rateable Units** |
54 |
Population (Usually Resident)** |
132 |
Pop Density (SqKm)** |
92 |
Total Household (Usually Resident)** |
45 |
Median Income ($)** |
115000 |
Mobile Phone (Household)** |
42 |
Internet Access (Household)** |
42 |
Number of Businesses** |
2 |
Number of Homes with Business Activity* |
0 |
Individuals Would Work From Home* |
1500 |
Total Number of Students* |
n/a |
Tapora
Candidate Area |
Tapora |
Priority |
23 of 24 |
Current Service* |
Dial-up |
Issues Description* |
Very slow, unstable |
Average Download (Mbps)* |
n/a |
Average Upload (Mbps)* |
n/a |
Ping (ms)* |
n/a |
Rateable Units** |
44 |
Population (Usually Resident)** |
62 |
Pop Density (SqKm)** |
2 |
Total Household (Usually Resident)** |
27 |
Median Income ($)** |
48350 |
Mobile Phone (Household)** |
19 |
Internet Access (Household)** |
17 |
Number of Businesses** |
0 |
Number of Homes with Business Activity* |
0 |
Individuals Would Work From Home* |
n/a |
Total Number of Students* |
n/a |
Rakino Island
Candidate Area |
Rakino Island |
Priority |
24 of 24 |
Current Service* |
|
Issues Description* |
Intermittent access to wireless services |
Average Download (Mbps)* |
n/a |
Average Upload (Mbps)* |
n/a |
Ping (ms)* |
n/a |
Rateable Units** |
192 |
Population (Usually Resident)** |
15 |
Pop Density (SqKm)** |
10 |
Total Household (Usually Resident)** |
9 |
Median Income ($)** |
45000 |
Mobile Phone (Household)** |
0 |
Internet Access (Household)** |
0 |
Number of Businesses** |
0 |
Number of Homes with Business Activity* |
0 |
Individuals Would Work From Home* |
n/a |
Total Number of Students* |
n/a |
Appendix 3: Supporting Information for Mobile Black Spots
[map showing the regional distribution of mobile black spots to be inserted]