Agenda of Waitematā Local Board

1 Welcome

2 Apologies

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

3 Declaration of Interest

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

4 Confirmation of Minutes

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Tuesday, 14 July 2015, including the confidential section, as a true and correct record.

5 Leave of Absence

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

6 Acknowledgements

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

7 Petitions

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

8 Deputations

Standing Order 3.20 provides for deputations. Those applying for deputations are required to give seven working days notice of subject matter and applications are approved by the Chairperson of the Waitematā 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 - Paul Wacker, Grey Lynn Pump Track

Purpose

Paul Wacker will give a brief presentation to the Waitemata Local Board on the Grey Lynn Pump Track.

Recommendation

That Paul Wacker be thanked for his presentation and attendance.

9.2 Public Forum - Debbie Haysom, Parnell Lane Marking

Purpose

Debbie Haysom, will speak to the Board on an issue which has occurred since the lane marking had been changed to a single lane from St Stephens Avenue to Ayr Street, Parnell. This now means that at peak traffic times, residents from Birdwood Crescent cannot get out of Birdwood Crescent. It can take up to three changes of lights and the courtesy of drivers on Parnell Road to let traffic in. The bus timetable has altered dramatically and it is now taking up to 45 minutes from CBD to Newmarket. Requests that Auckland Transport revert to the double lane that it was previously but also to put signs saying that at peak times, that section of Parnell Road is a clear way.

Recommendation

That Debbie Haysom be thanked for her presentation and attendance.

9.3 Public Forum - Artists, Hauora Garden Presentation

Purpose

The Hauora Garden artists will present the concept of the garden outlining the key ideas that underpin it as an artwork. They will present a series of images that outline how the garden has progressed and outlining where they are up to, showing the outcomes of these ideas. They will also present a proposal for stage two, with drawings and a forecasted budget for seating.

Recommendation

That the Hauora Garden artists be thanked for their presentation and 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.

Waitematā Local Board

11 August 2015

Auckland Transport Quarterly Update to Local Boards

File No.: CP2015/16041

Executive Summary

1. The purpose of this report is to inform local boards about progress on activities undertaken by Auckland Transport (AT) in the three months April – June 2015 and planned activities anticipated to be undertaken in the next three months.

Attachments include:

A. Auckland Transport activities

B. Travelwise Schools activities

C. Decisions of the Traffic Control Committee

D. Report against local board advocacy issues

E. Report on the status of the local board’s projects under the Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF).

Recommendation

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a) Receive the Auckland Transport Quarterly update to Local Boards report.

Comments

Significant activities during the period under review

Strategy and Planning

2. Corridor Management Plans (CMPs) – seven new CMP studies and one CMP review were completed this quarter. These are (1) Gillies Avenue CMP, (2) Henderson Metropolitan Centre Transport Study, (3) Glenfield Road-Birkenhead Avenue CMP, (4) Remuera Road-St Johns Road CMP, (5) Parnell Road-Parnell Rise CMP, (6) Hillsborough Road-Kinross Street CMP, (7) Rosebank Road-Patiki Road CMP and (8) Great South Road Stage 1 (Manukau to Drury) CMP Review.

3. AT Parking Strategy 2015 – The Strategy was approved in April and successfully launched at the end of May.

4. RPTP Variation – Public consultations and hearing deliberations on the Regional Public Transport Plan were completed this quarter.

Investment and Development

5. SMART (Southwest Multi-modal Airport Rapid Transit)

Investigation to identify the best public transport mode (heavy or light rail) to support the employment and passenger growth at the Airport. It also includes the identification of a preferred corridor for protection. Construction has started on the Kirkbride interchange which includes widening for SMART.

PT Development

6. Otahuhu Bus Rail Interchange

Detailed design is complete and NZTA funding has been approved for construction. The Signal Box was removed and the overhead live line lowered over Queens Birthday weekend. Enabling works are on schedule, with the main works tender deferred until all funding is approved (now approved) and planned for July release. It is expected that main works will begin in October 2015 and be completed in early June 2016.

7. Half Moon Bay New Ferry Facility

This project includes the design and development of a new passenger ferry facility at Half Moon Bay, including integration with Public Transport, and accessibility and passenger amenity improvements. A site inspection of the pontoon and gangway units was completed in early July prior to placing these units into storage in readiness for the Stage 2 physical works completion. The wharf design is progressing with the submission of the building consent to Auckland Council expected in July/August 2015 .

8. City Rail Link

Enabling Works Package: Phase 1 ECI design service contracts 1 and 2 have been awarded. Construction is to commence November 2015 with services relocation.

Main Works: Construction to start in 2018/19, subject to a funding agreement with Government.

9. EMU Procurement

54 units have been provisionally accepted and the final three are in transit and due in Auckland in early August. Peak period EMU services began on 8 June from Papakura, and on 20 July the network became fully electric with Papakura and Swanson to Britomart service introduction.

PT Operations

10. Public Transport overall

For the 12 months to the end of June, patronage was 79.25 million trips which is up 9.5% on the 2014 result. This is an increase of almost 7 million trips over the course of a year and, given the strong weekday growth, likely represents around an extra 30,000 trips being taken each working day. The changes for individual modes were:

· Bus (excluding Northern Express) – 57 million trips, up 6.6%

· Northern Express – 2.8 million trips, up 17.2%

· Rail – 13.9 million trips, up 21.7%

· Ferry – 5.5 million trips, up 8.3%

11. Rail Improvements

The big performer was rail which reached 13.9 million passenger trips for the year, representing an annual increase of 21.7%. The growth is put down to the enhanced travel experience and additional capacity provided by the new electric trains and greater service frequency introduced over recent years.

The AT network became fully electric on 20 July, except for the link between Papakura and Pukekohe which will continue to use diesel trains. These will be refurbished over time to provide an enhanced experience. The electric trains will provide improved travel experience and more capacity on all lines.

12. Bus & Ferry Improvements

June was also a record-breaking month on the Northern Express, with patronage up 17% on the same month last year. The 12 month total patronage reached 2.8 million. It was also a record for other bus services as patronage rose 6.6% to 57 million trips. Ferry numbers for the year totalled 5.5 million trips, up 8.3% on an annual basis.

Growth on bus services is attributed to increased services and frequency, improving travel times from new bus priority lanes and a significant improvement in service punctuality being achieved by bus operators through new timetables. Further service level increases and punctuality improvements are planned for later this year along with the introduction of double decker buses on a number of routes. New network routes will also be introduced from later this year.

Road Design and Development

13. Te Atatu Road Improvements

Road Corridor Improvement project on Te Atatu Rd from School Road/Edmonton Road intersection to SH16. The evaluation of the construction tenders is now completed, with the award of the contract being imminent. Construction is targeted to start in August 2015 with completion expected around February 2017. A public open day will be arranged prior to the starting of physical works.

14. Albany Highway

The Albany Highway North Upgrade project involves widening of Albany Highway between Schnapper Rock Road and the Albany Expressway. Construction is approximately 40% complete. Disruption to land owners and road users due to construction is being well managed, with any issues being quickly resolved. The Rosedale Road intersection signalisation has been brought forward to July to assist with traffic management and pedestrian safety.

15. Lincoln Road Improvements

The project involves widening Lincoln Road between Te Pai Place and the motorway interchange to accommodate additional transit/bus lanes on both sides. Stakeholder feedback has been received for the 2-D layout plan, and the NZTA funding application for the detailed design is progressing. The designation process is expected to start in late November 2015.

16. Mill Road Improvements

The Redoubt Road - Mill Road corridor project will provide an arterial road connection east of State Highway 1 between Manukau, Papakura and Drury and includes Murphys Road improvements from Redoubt Road to Flatbush School Road. Submissions to the NOR have closed and AT is now preparing evidence for the formal hearing due at the end of August.

Services

17. Road Safety Highlights

Over 4,000 young people and their parents have participated in the Crossroads young driver programme.

The Oi! Mind on the road, not on the phone driver distraction campaign in May targeted 20-29yr old drivers.

The Love Being a Local road safety campaign enabled rural communities to take a lead role in raising awareness of local speed issues.

18. Schools Travelwise Programme Highlights

The United Nations Global Road Safety Week took place from 4 to 10 May. 146 teachers registered for Road Safety Week information and resources and 27 schools entered the competition.

On 25 June 2015, 400 volunteers attended the Walking School Bus (WSB) megastars event to recognize the efforts of WSB volunteers.

Recently completed research has found that crash rates involving children walking and cycling at schools with Safe School Travel Plans (SSTPs) and Active School Signage were significantly reduced by 37% after the implementation of these measures.

19. Road Safety Education in Schools: (2014/15 Year)

79 new Walking School Buses were established, bringing the regional total to 369 and exceeding the target of 347

23 schools and 1,683 students received cycle training against a target of 1500

4 new schools joined the Travelwise programme, creating a total of 408 schools

2 regional ‘Slow Down Around Schools’ campaigns were delivered

536 students and 77 teachers attended Travelwise Primary and Secondary school workshops

4 high risk schools received rail fare evasion prevention campaigns.

20. Road Safety Promotion and Training: (2014/15 Year)

A number of Local campaigns were delivered including: 5,275 drivers through local Drink/Drive operations with NZ Police.

The #Drunksense radio advertisement won the Outstanding Radio Creativity Award and Driver Distractions won the Social and Community Platinum Award.

21. Travel Demand (2014/15 Year)

The ‘Commute’ programme promotes behavioural change to reduce the reliance on and impact of Single Occupancy Vehicle (SOV) trips. Focused on the morning peak period of congestion, the programme works with businesses to support public transport, carpooling and active modes of getting to work. Seventeen new organisations joined the ‘Commute’ programme, and 23 organisations progressed or launched their travel plan activities.

2014/15 Performance Outcomes

22. School Travel Trips Avoided

The 2015 Community and Road Safety Team target of 16,700 morning car trips avoided through school travel planning activities was exceeded with 17,164 trips avoided.

The total number of deaths and serious injuries (DSI) on Auckland Local Roads in the 2014 calendar year was 398, representing a 7.4% reduction from 2013. For the 2014 calendar year, the Auckland region had the lowest rate of road deaths and serious injuries (DSI) per capita in New Zealand – 31 DSI per 100,000 population.

Road Corridor Delivery

23. The Asset and Maintenance Group is tasked with the responsibility for a wide range of activities within the Road Corridor. These include but are not limited to:

· The Delivery of roading and streetlight maintenance and renewal programmes.

· Managing the access, co-ordination and traffic management impacts of activities taking place within the road corridor

· Promoting design innovation and efficiency around how work is carried out on the network

· The development of long term asset management plans and modelling which support the decision making process around the management of AT’s roading assets.

April – June Quarter key highlights

24. The Road Corridor Delivery Team have a year to date target (YTD) to deliver 581km of resurfacing (asphalt or chipseals), pavement renewals and footpath renewals. As outlined in figure 1, for 2014/2015 the group delivered 568km, or 98% of the planned programme.

Figure 1: Actual vs planned lengths (km) for June YTD

	YTD Planned Targets (KM)	Actuals (KM)	%
Resurfacing	427.4	418.9
Pavement Renewals	37.4	40
Footpath Renewals	116.7	110
Total	581.5	568.9	98%

25. The new Streetlighting contracts have been awarded to Downer (for Central and Southern areas) and Electrix (for North and West areas). The four new contracts align with the road maintenance contracts and replace the nine legacy contracts which have been in place until now. The new contracts are for a four year term with an additional 1+1 year right of renewal at AT’s discretion.

26. AT’s second asset management plan (AMP) covering the period 2015-2018 will be published in August 2015. This document details the strategies and management systems deployed by AT and sets out the future renewals and maintenance investment required to continue building the assets, infrastructure and delivery systems of a world-leading, transformational, sustainable and affordable urban transport service. The AMP also addresses the shortfalls that will begin to accrue if current budget levels continue over the medium to long term. Electronic copies will be available for download on the AT website and a hard copy will be sent to each Local Board.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Schedule of activities undertaken for the fourth quarter (2014/15) ending 30 June 2015	21
b View	Travelwise Schools activities broken down by local board	37
c View	Traffic Control Committee Decisions broken down by local board	39
d View	Local Board Advocacy Report	41
e View	Local Board Transport Capital Fund Report	43

Signatories

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

Waitematā Local Board

11 August 2015

Western Park Tuna Mau Development Plan 2015

File No.: CP2015/14991

Purpose

1. To provide a summary of the public consultation process and seek formal approval of the Western Park Tuna Mau Development Plan August 2015.

Executive Summary

2. The Waitematā Local Board recognises the significance of Western Park Tuna Mau, in terms of its cultural, heritage, ecological and recreational importance.

3. In order to allow informed decision-making in the future, and assist with programmed renewals, a development plan was commissioned in late 2013.

4. Iwi engagement, council stakeholder and public consultation has now occurred.

5. The local board has been updated on iwi, stakeholder and council feedback throughout the development of the plan.

6. On 30 June 2015, a summary of the public consultation feedback was presented to the board and final amendments were discussed.

7. A final draft development plan has been produced for the local board to formally adopt.

8. The development plan is circulated separately under separate cover.

Recommendation

That the Waitematā Local Board:

Formally adopt the Western Park Tuna Mau Development Plan August 2015.

Discussion

9. Western Park is one of Auckland’s oldest public parks and has significant cultural, heritage, ecological and recreational value.

10. The Waitematā Local Board recognises the significance of Western Park, and commissioned a development plan in 2014.

11. The draft plan identifies five design principles to assist with decision making and implementation of future projects, including renewals:

· Design in accordance with Te Aranga Maori Design Principles;

· Improve the safety, accessibility and perception of the park;

· Maintain and enhance the natural environment including the Tunamau stream;

· Conserve the historic park layout and features; and

· Facilitate passive and active recreational opportunities through design.

Summary of key elements discussed in the draft development plan

12. The draft development plan identifies a number of key asset groups within the park and proposes design considerations and improvements as appropriate.

13. Full details can be found in the development plan, but the key topics considered are:

· Pathway and circulation network;

· Lighting;

· Vegetation;

· Signage and interpretation;

· Buildings, playground, artwork, courts and playing field;

· Park furniture and fitness equipment; and

· Boundary treatments.

Stakeholder engagement

14. During the development of the plan, several council departments were consulted including Biodiversity, Heritage and Stormwater.

15. The local board identified in early discussions that external stakeholder groups would be consulted at the same time as the general public

16. Stakeholder groups that were consulted as part of the wider consultation included:

· Freemans Bay Residents Association;

· Ponsonby Business Association;

· Freemans Bay Bodycorp;

· Auckland Girls’ Grammar School; and

· Auckland Unitarian Church.

17. Separate meetings and correspondence occurred between the Freemans Bay Residents Association, Freemans Bay Bodycorp, the local board and council’s Stormwater Unit, specifically to discuss concerns about flooding and management of stormwater

Community Consultation

18. Public consultation occurred from early April until mid-May 2015

19. Key elements were:

· copies of the development plan, consultation material and feedback forms online at Auckland Councils Have Your Say website;

· static display and feedback forms at Studio One, Ponsonby Road, in April/May 2015;

· a Saturday drop-in session in April 2015;

· development plan and feedback forms available at local community centres and libraries;

· on-site posters, a flyer drop to neighbouring properties and the local board Facebook page and Twitter were all used to advertise the consultation process and website address; and

· copies of the plan and feedback forms were sent to all stakeholder groups identified above.

20. Following the public consultation period, a workshop was held on 16 June 2015 to present the results to the key stakeholder groups and local board members, discuss public feedback and recommend any final amendments to the draft plan.

21. The public consultation feedback analysis document is attached to this report.

Key amendments to the plan

22. Several amendments and refinements were made after the public consultation results were analysed and discussed with key stakeholders and the local board. These are summarised below.

23. Lighting

· Three lighting options were included in the draft pan for consultation; and

· Based on the results and analysis of the feedback, the final plan includes recommendations to light one path through the park; this being the western ridge path from Ponsonby Road to Beresford Street West.

24. Stormwater/Biodiversity

· Although stormwater proposals were originally included in the draft plan that was consulted on, stormwater and flood alleviation have subsequently been removed from the final draft plan as a result of detailed discussions, a report and feedback from council’s Stormwater Unit.

· A proposed stormwater detention area to the north of the tennis courts was also removed from the final plan, following confirmation from council’s Stormwater Unit that it would not serve any significant impact on flood alleviation or be required for stormwater management.

· The Stormwater Unit has identified short and longer-term improvements to deal with flooding and stormwater management, most of which are off-park solutions.

· The proposal to include a wetland area to the south of the new public toilets has been retained in the plan, but it should be noted that public feedback did identify the loss of usable flat ground.

Further investigation is required to establish if this wetland element is an integral part of the proposed stream rehabilitation and if removal would affect the ecological viability of the wider proposal.

25. Fitness Equipment

· The final plan recommends removing the old fitness stations, located throughout the park and relocating a smaller number of new fitness stations around the sportsfield area of the park; and

· The rationale for this relocation is to group all active recreation elements (sports, play, fitness) in the same area at the north of the park, allowing the remainder of the park to be enjoyed for passive recreation and its heritage and ecological values.

Consideration

Local Board Views and Implications

26. Several discussions about individual components of the draft development plan have been held with the parks portfolio holders at their monthly meetings.

27. Three local board workshops were held to present the draft development plan and ongoing updates. These were on 25 February 2014, 15 July 2014 and 17 February 2015.

28. Public feedback and analysis was presented to the local board (and stakeholder groups) on 16 June 2015.

29. The amendments made to the plan as a result of the consultation process were presented to the board on 30 June 2015 and to the parks portfolio holders on 23 July 2015.

Maori Impact Statement

30. Western Park is a place of significant cultural heritage value to Mana Whenua, being the site of the Tuna Mau stream, an autumn eeling camp and close to Te Rimu Tahi.

31. In 2014, the project leader sent out an email to all iwi with a potential interest in Western Park, to establish which were interested in contributing to the development plan.

32. On 29 August 2014, a meeting was held between iwi and the local board to discuss the development plan and next steps.

33. A hui and site walkover was then arranged for 24 October 2014.

34. Representatives from the following iwi attended (along with local board member Pippa Coom)

· Ngāti Whātua Orakei;

· Ngai Tai ki Tāmaki; and

· Ngāti Maru.

35. Notes were taken from this meeting and incorporated into the draft plan. In addition, those present at the meeting agreed that a representative from Ngai Tai ki Tamaki should work with council’s Design Team to identify how to incorporate Te Aranga Maori Design Principles into the development plan.

36. The amended plan was then circulated to all iwi that had attended the meeting. No further feedback was received from Iwi.

Implementation Issues

Funding

37. The plan is aspirational and as such, many of the new development proposals are not currently funded.

38. However, the local board’s renewal budgets are available for asset renewals that arise, and implementation of these renewals should align with the development plan.

39. Where the plan identifies improvements to existing assets, additional capital expenditure will be required to augment the renewal budget and allow alignment with the plan.

40. Additional budget could be sourced through future Annual Plans or from the local board’s discretionary capital expenditure budget, which has not yet been allocated.

41. The final plan will include a summary of all proposals, identify the nature of the work (renewal or development), the type of funding required (capital or operational expenditure) and indicative timeframes (short, medium or long-term).

Consenting

42. Many of the planned renewals will be complex, requiring resource consents and careful consideration of heritage and arboricultural constraints.

43. It is proposed that renewals are planned to coincide (e.g. paths and lighting) but the complexity may mean that the projects span more than one financial year from initial design through to completion.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a	Western Park Tuna Mau Development Plan 2015 (Under Separate Cover)

Signatories

Authors

Mark Miller - Acting Manager, Local and Sports Parks Central

Authorisers

Mark Bowater - Manager Local and Sports Parks

Judith Webster - Relationship Manager

Waitematā Local Board

11 August 2015

Myers Park Development Stage II Concept Designs

File No.: CP2015/15436

Purpose

1. To update the Waitematā Local Board on project progress and seek approval of the draft Stage II concept designs.

Executive Summary

2. Following on for the successful completion of Stage I of the Myers Park Development, the Waitematā Local Board and Auckland City Centre Advisory Board (ACCAB) were keen to continue to implement the remaining items identified in the original development plan for the park.

3. The ACCAB have allocated a total of $4.55 million Targeted Rates for the implementation of Stage II development.

4. The scope for Stage II includes:

· improvements to the Mayoral Drive underpass and associate steps on either side;

· safety and landscape improvements to the parking area in front of the Myers Kindergarten building;

· completing outstanding, planned improvements at the Queen Street entrance;

· installation of a new water play area; and

· investigation into repurposing the two derelict buildings on the park.

5. The original scope has been discussed with both the local board and ACCAB over several months as the concepts have been developed.

6. The project team are now at a point when the final draft concept plans for Stage II can be presented for approval by the Waitematā Local Board.

Recommendation

That the Waitematā Local Board:

Approve the draft concept designs for the Myers Park Development Stage II.

Background

7. At their November 2014 meeting, the Auckland City Centre Advisory Board (ACCAB) passed a resolution approving the allocation of $3.3million Targeted Rates for the continued development of Myers Park. The original scope for Stage II included:

a) Greys Avenue and Mayoral Drive Stairs

b) Mayoral Drive underpass

c) stormwater detention dam and bio-filtration area

d) pedestrian link from Pitt St via Poynton Terrace to Myers Park

e) Queen Street entrance and kindergarten parking

f) investigate restoration options for changing shed and caretakers cottage

g) design and consent for restoration of heritage buildings.

8. At that time, the project team were not in a position to confirm a detailed project budget breakdown and were asked to update the board in due course.

9. On 27 May 2015 a further project design update was provided with costings and the ACCAB allocated an additional $1.25 million Targeted Rates to the project, noting that the scope had changed as follows:

a) Poynton Terrace works removed from scope.

b) Water play feature (designed and consented during Stage I works) added to scope.

Project update

Mayoral Drive Underpass, Greys Avenue and Mayoral Drive stairs

10. The design process for the Mayoral Drive underpass has included site investigations, including stormwater and engineering constraints, preparation of basic concepts, with indicative 3D model views.

11. In addition to the design elements, work has progressed on stormwater retention, capacity and relocation and Mayoral Drive east and west stair/entrance design.

12. A Request for proposal (RFP) process was undertaken inviting four iwi proposed artists to complete their proposals and present to an evaluation team (comprising project team members and iwi reps) on 29 May 2015

13. The assessment panel selected a preferred artist who was appointed and has been working collegially with the project team and engineers to develop the proposal suitable for consenting/tendering/construction.

14. A financial contribution of $350,000 from council’s Public Arts team budget in their Long-term Plan will be used for the artistic elements of the underpass design.

15. The latest concept designs for the underpass and steps are included in Attachment A

Poynton Terrace improvements – removal from scope

16. The concept designs were presented to the City Centre Advisory Board at their April 2015 meeting, and feedback was noted.

17. The construction works for the new apartment block at 26 Poynton Terrace are forecast to start in 2015 and expected to continue to mid/end 2016.

18. These works will include frequent, heavy construction machinery movement within Poynton Terrace

19. There is also a high likelihood of a resource consent condition being imposed on any Poynton Terrace upgrade works, restricting works until the new apartment block is completed.

20. Given the above points and project timeline for Stage II completion, the project team recommended to the ACCAB that this element be removed from the scope of Stage II and that no further work on the Poynton Terrace designs occur.

21. It was further recommended to the ACCAB that the existing budget of $800,000 allocated to this element of Stage II, be reallocated towards the overall budget shortfall of the remaining Stage II works.

22. The Poynton Terrace improvements could be considered by the ACCAB as a future project to be funded by Targeted Rates, once the private development has been completed.

23. This approach was endorsed by the local board parks portfolio holders and approved by the ACCAB in their resolution of 27 May 2015.

Queen Street entrance and kindergarten parking

24. Concept designs for the kindergarten car parking were presented to the Waitematā Local Board and parks portfolio holders earlier in 2015 and a preferred option was identified by the local board parks portfolio holders.

25. The preferred concept design was then presented to the City Centre Advisory Board at their April 2015 meeting

26. Minor improvements to the Queen Street entrance, including threshold improvements to improve the legibility of the park entrance were fully designed and consented as part of the Stage I upgrade project, but couldn’t be implemented due to overall project budget constraints, so have been included in the Stage II project.

Caretakers Cottage and Changing Shed

27. Consideration of the future use for these two park building, and subsequent design and consenting work, is included in the Stage II scope.

28. Work will begin on this later in 2015, starting with a Waitematā Local Board workshop to discuss possible community uses.

29. Stage II does not include implementing any physical works to these buildings, which would need future funding.

Water play area

30. This element was fully designed and consented as part of the Stage I project but implementation was deferred for budgetary reasons.

31. The Waitematā Local Board and project team are keen to see this important element of the overall development plan implemented, and the local board chair recommended adding this to the revised scope of the Stage II project.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

32. The Stage II development has been workshopped with the Waitematā Local Board on 3 March 2015 and on 16 July 2015, when the attached concept plans were presented and feedback sought.

33. Progress updates have been provided to the parks portfolio holders on 2 April and 7 May 2015.

34. At their last meeting on 7 May 2015, the parks portfolio holders confirmed that they supported the proposed change in scope, the request to the ACCAB for additional funding and returning the splash pad to the scope of works.

Māori impact statement

35. Myers Park is an area of significance to several iwi, and in particular the Wai Horotiu stream that now runs under the park.

36. The project team continue to work with the original three iwi that expressed an interest in the Myers Park development; Ngāti Whātua, Ngai Tai ki Tāmaki and Ngāti te Ata.

37. In addition, when iwi expressions of interest were sought for design input into the Mayoral Drive underpass treatment, Ngāti Maru also indicated their interest.

38. Workshops were held on 16 March 2015 and 8 April 2015, when the concept designs for the various elements of Stage II were discussed with iwi.

39. Individual meetings with each iwi-nominated artists then occurred through early to mid-May 2015.

40. Each of the four iwi nominated an artist to submit a proposal and the assessment panel for the underpass Request for Proposal included representatives from each interested iwi.

41. The final design, by a Ngāti Whātua artist, reflects the Wai Horotiu stream and the associated Taniwha, and has been recognised as a bold and positive Māori design and this has been welcomed in such a prominent city centre location

42. Further site visits have been held to discuss other opportunities to incorporate Māori cultural identity into the Stage II designs and the possibility of using other iwi nominated artists is being explored.

Implementation

43. Experience from Stage I has shown that Myers Park is a challenging site to develop, given the archaeological, heritage and arboricultural constraints.

44. However, Stage I has allowed the project team to develop good working relationships and protocols with the key internal council stakeholders and regulatory teams.

45. The project team will continue to report back to the Waitematā Local Board and ACCAB at key project milestones or if any key decisions are required.

46. A communications and engagement plan will be created for this stage of the development, and the normal channels of media will be utilised to update the public on progress, along with specific updates for key stakeholders and immediate neighbours of the park.

47. At the time of writing, a risk to the project has been identified. A large-scale temporary event that may be located at the Greys Avenue car park, adjacent to the Mayoral Drive underpass, is currently being considered by council and the local board.

48. If the event goes ahead in this location, it will require a four month delay in delivery of the underpass work, as the construction traffic and noise would adversely affect the event.

49. Such a delay has been estimated to increase the overall project costs by a minimum of $100,000.

50. Council officers from Parks and ATEED are working with the local board and the event organiser to consider alternative locations.

51. Whilst a solution has not yet been found, the project team for the Myers Park upgrade are continuing with their preparation for resource and building consent applications.

52. Physical works on the underpass and steps is anticipated to begin in February 2016, unless the delay above is required.

53. The water play and Queen Street entrance works can be completed separately, as they will not be affected by the proposed event.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Myers Park Underpass Concept Designs	67

Signatories

Authors

Mark Miller - Acting Manager, Local and Sports Parks Central

Authorisers

Mark Bowater - Manager Local and Sports Parks

Judith Webster - Relationship Manager

Waitematā Local Board

11 August 2015

Allocation of Discretionary Capital Budget to Local Boards

File No.: CP2015/16049

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

That the Waitematā Local Board:

Provide 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 below 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.

Signatories

Authors

Beth Sullivan - Principal Advisor Policy

Authorisers

Matthew Walker - General Manager Financial Plan Policy & Budgeting

Karen Lyons – Manager Local Board Services

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Beth Sullivan - Pricipal Advisor Policy

Authorisers

Matthew Walker - General Manager Financial Plan Policy & Budgeting

Judith Webster - Relationship Manager

Waitematā Local Board

11 August 2015

Draft Auckland Stormwater Network Discharge Consent Application

File No.: CP2015/15321

Purpose

1. To request formal feedback from the Waitematā Local Board on the stormwater management priorities as a part of the consultation to inform the development of an Auckland wide stormwater network discharge consent for the operation of stormwater infrastructure, with specific reference to the local board area.

Executive Summary

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

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

Recommendations

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a) Receive the ‘Draft Auckland stormwater Network Discharge Consent application’ report

b) Provide feedback on the draft stormwater Network Discharge Consent application, with particular reference to local priorities for stormwater management.

Comments

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

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

6. This report provides an opportunity for the board to provide input into the consent application, with particular reference to local priorities for stormwater management. Three questions which may guide how the board frames its feedback are suggested for consideration alongside comments received from portfolio holders on this topic at a workshop on 6 May 2015.

7. Once submitted, the application will be reviewed by the Auckland Council regulating arm and then submitted to independent commissioner(s) for decision. Comments received from the Waitematā Local Board as part of this process will form part of the application.

8. Feedback is therefore being sought from the local board on any or all of the following three questions, related to the stormwater management as well as the NDC.

1) Does the Waitematā Local Board have any comments on the proposed framework of the Auckland-wide Stormwater Network Discharge Consent?

2) Is there any feedback the Local Board would like to provide relating to the management of the public stormwater network?

3) Are there any initiatives relating to stormwater management that the Local Board is investigating, in addition to those identified in the Waitematā Local Board Plan?

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

10. As a reminder it is proposed that the consent be processed based, with the following key elements to address the seven stormwater issues (flooding, coastal health, stream health; growth, wastewater, asset management; groundwater health:

· Identification of regional priority areas;

· “Business as usual” processes; and

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

11. Attachment B summaries what the above elements will mean for the management of stormwater infrastructure within the Waitematā Local Board area. This table identifies how the stream sub-catchments within the local board area have been ranked within the regional prioritisation for each stormwater issue. Identified high priority areas will be the focus of further investigation and assessment for future infrastructure upgrades and projects. Information on stream health in the Waitematā Local Board area was collected during stream walks and is appended as Attachment C. Sub-catchment and the Waitematā Consolidated Receiving Environment map is appended in Attachment D for the board’s information.

12. A 35 year consent is being sought (which reflects the longest timeframe available for a consent) and the board may wish to comment on this duration in their formal feedback.

13. During an environmental portfolio workshop with the local board portfolio holders on 6 May 2015, the members present were generally supportive of the NDC framework, though raised some points for further consideration as discussed below.

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

15. The following comments and questions were raised by local board members during the 6 May 2015 presentation

· Please replace the “CBD” stream sub-catchment name with “City Centre”. The stormwater unit will consider this request.

· The portfolio holders asked where stormwater unit is currently working to replace critical infrastructure in the city centre. The stormwater unit has active projects in the following areas:

o Napier Street Stormwater Project (near completion)

o Ports of Auckland Outfall Upgrade

o Beresford St Stormwater Renewal (near completion)

o Broadway Road Drainage Upgrade

o 1-25 Dorset Street

o 1-27 Picton Street

o Lighter Quay Basin outfall

o Carlton Gore Rd Newmarket (near completion)

o Morgan St, Alba St , Clayton St - Stormwater Upgrade/Separation, Newmarket

o Judges Bay Stormwater Renewal

o Ports of Auckland – Stormwater Culvert Asset Condition Monitoring

o Marine Parade Stage 1 of 2

o Freemans Bay Stormwater Pipeline & Outfall

o Wynyard Quarter Local Stormwater Reticulation Upgrades

o Stanmore Rd to Fife St

· The portfolio holders wanted improved monitoring of discharges as they believe that the current monitoring is not adequate. It is recommended that this point to be noted in the board’s formal feedback on this process.

· The portfolio holders wanted to know when the Whau water quality study would be complete. The scoping of this study is due to be completed, with some initial water quality monitoring started, by the end of the 2015 calendar year. The scale and extent of this quality monitoring will be dependent on the results of the scoping study and funding availability. The project is estimated to take 2-3 years.

· The portfolio holders asked, as a baseline, what contaminants are currently being captured in our business as usual operations. The stormwater unit is currently gathering this data and this will be presented to the board when complete.

· The portfolio holders asked for an update on tetratraps. The future installation of additional tetrataps is being considered.

· The portfolio holders recommended the water sensitive design as undertaken in Melbourne be incorporated in new development.

· Portfolio holders also asked staff about the Karangahape Road aquifer. Staff are following up on this query.

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

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

· Identify, restore and partly daylight one stream in Waitematā;

· Deliver local restoration projects to restore the urban forest;

· Implement the Greenways Plan in Waitematā parks;

· Develop a local plan for the area that includes MOTAT, Western Springs, Auckland Zoo and Seddon Fields;

· Develop and implement a plan for Pt Resolution/ Taurarua, connecting to Hobson Bay walkway;

· Complete a development plan for Meola Reef; and

· Complete the Weona section of the coastal walkway in stages.

18. In addition, the portfolio holders during the 6 May 2015 workshop identified that the local board currently has an interest in daylighting a stream in Western Park, Waipapa stream restoration, cleaning-up Cox’s Creek.

19. A clean-up of Cox’s creek requires a significant upgrade to Watercare’s combined network and the construction of the Central and Waterfront Interceptor. However, this feedback will be passed to Watercare for their information.

20. The feedback the Waitematā Local Board gave on a similar NDC process for the Waitematā NDC in 2013 is appended as Attachment E to this report. It is suggested that the board may want to consider whether some of this feedback is applicable to this Auckland wide consent process.

Next steps

21. Once consultation on this consent has been completed it will then be finalised and presented to the Regulatory Officers in late 2015.

22. If approved, the consent is likely to become active by mid-2016 and will help to guide stormwater management going forward.

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

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

24. This report asks for feedback from the Waitematā Local Board on stormwater management for their local area.

Māori impact statement

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

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

Implementation

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

28. If approved, the implementation of this Network Discharge Consent can be carried out within existing council budgets and resources.

Hello Desiree,

Can you please add Janet Kidd – Senior Stormwater Specialist as an author of this report?

Thanks &Regards

Varsha

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Further information on the proposed NDC	189
b View	What the network discharge consent means for Waitemata	193
c View	Stream Issues in the Waitemata Local Board area	199
d View	Stream Sub-catchments and Consolidated Receiving Environment	201
e View	Waitemata NDC discussion Notes	203

Signatories

Authors

Varsha Belwalkar - Relationship Advisor

Janet Kidd – Senior Stormwater Specialist

Authorisers

John Dragicevich - Manager Infrastructure and Environmental Services

Judith Webster - Relationship Manager

Waitematā Local Board

11 August 2015

Pioneer Women's and Ellen Melville Hall and Freyberg Square Upgrade

File No.: CP2015/15618

Purpose

1. To provide Waitematā Local Board an update on the Concept designs for the Pioneer Women’s and Ellen Melville Hall and Freyberg Square upgrade, in order to seek support from the Board to engage with key stakeholders and the public from mid-August 2015.

Executive Summary

2. The Pioneer Women’s and Ellen Melville Hall is the only Council owned community facility in the city centre and is currently managed as a community venue for hire experiencing moderate use only. The building is listed Category B which includes the Ellen Melville Hall and abuts Freyberg Square on its northern boundary.

3. Pioneer Women’s and Ellen Melville Hall and Freyberg Square are in a ‘tired’ state and feedback from those who use it enjoy its central location but feel it could be improved through refurbishment. The integration and improved connection between the two projects (as championed by the Waitematā Local Board) ensures the coordinated creation of a significant community hub for residents and city workers. This will necessitate careful design co-ordination, stakeholder engagement and construction in order to fulfil the functional potential of the site.

4. The Pioneer Women’s and Ellen Melville Hall works are to be funded through Council’s Long Term Plan ($4 million) and Freyberg Square through the Targeted Rate ($4.7million). Completion of the project is currently scheduled for autumn 2017.

5. Key stakeholder and public engagement is scheduled to begin in mid-August 2015. A draft Communications and Engagement Plan for the project has been developed by Council proposing to use public consultation tools including;

· On site pop up stands to present information and seek feedback;

· Online consultation feedback via Shape Auckland; and

· Individual 1:1 meetings with key stakeholders, resident groups and directly impacted local businesses.

6. Feedback from public engagement and consultation with key stakeholders will be reported back to the Waitematā Local Board in September 2015 for endorsement of the developed concept design.

Recommendations

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a) Endorse the Concept designs for the Pioneer Women’s and Ellen Melville Hall and Freyberg Square upgrade.

b) Support that the project seek further engagement with the Auckland public, notably with residents, local businesses and property owners, city centre employees and youth.

Discussion

7. The Pioneer Women’s and Ellen Melville Hall and Freyberg Square sit in the heart of Auckland’s city centre in the bustling High Street precinct. The Pioneer Women’s and Ellen Melville Hall is situated adjacent to Freyberg Square, bounded by High Street to the west and by the junction of Courthouse Lane / Chancery Lane and O’Connell Street on its eastern boundary. The Metropolis building is located to the south.The Hall was built in 1962 by Auckland City Council and is the only community facility within the City Centre.

8. Freyberg Square is a functional, well-used open space and a popular relaxation spot for city workers and residents. Even though Freyberg Square is designated road reserve and is currently dissected by Freyberg Place (a short one way lane connecting High Street with O’Connell Street) it was redeveloped in 1996 as a public open space. Since then it has been subject to criticism, particularly around material choice, maintenance costs, poor pedestrian access and deterioration of the assets within the square.

9. The integration and connection between the two projects (as championed by the Waitematā Local Board) ensures the coordinated creation of a significant community hub for residents and city workers. This will necessitate careful design co-ordination, stakeholder consultation and construction. Completion of the project is currently scheduled for autumn 2017.

10. A design team comprising of Isthmus Group and Stevens Lawson Architects was appointed in May 2015 to advance the combined projects. It is proposed that, subject to the support of the Auckland City Centre Advisory Board and the Waitematā Local Board, consultation with key stakeholders on the designs will occur during August 2015. This consultation process will need to build positively on dialogue that occurred over the O’Connell Street project and to recognise sensitivities that may relate to future investment in High Street – in particular incorporating the findings of the recent High Street Precinct survey carried out by Heart of the City.

11. The Pioneer Women’s and Ellen Melville Hall works are to be funded through Council’s Long Term Plan ($4 million) and Freyberg Square through the Targeted Rate ($4.7million).

12. The Auckland City Centre Advisory Board received a presentation of the Concept designs for the Pioneer Women’s and Ellen Melville Hall and Freyberg Square upgrade on 22July 2015 and supported that the project is ready to progress for further engagement with the Auckland public.

Local board views and implications

13. The Waitematā Local Board at the 11 February 2014 meeting resolved to support the option of a fully staffed and programmed community facility at Pioneer Women’s and Ellen Melville Hall. In addition, they resolved that officers complete detailed design plans for the Hall to meet the requirements of the community centre operation. This will include seismic and accessibility improvements and the removal of the ground floor tenancies.

14. The Local Board suggested that the project look to incorporate the principles of a ‘child-friendly city’, ensuring that children have an input in the planning of the public realm. In June 2015 the design team engaged a group of 7-13 year old children to undertake a comprehensive ‘child friendly audit’ of the existing site, with additional engagement in July. Further consultation with the children about the proposed redevelopment will take place in August 2015, once Concept plans have been completed. The feedback sort from the audit has helped shape the designs.

15. The initial design thinking from the design team has received a favourable response from the Waitematā Local Board, and a further workshop with the Board was held on 21 July 2015 to discuss the Concept designs for the Pioneer Women’s and Ellen Melville Hall. This will be followed up with a formal Local Board meeting on 11 August to seek support to go out for public engagement.

Maori impact statement

16. Mana whenua have been engaged at the earliest possible stage of the design process since the decision was made to amalgamate both the Square and the building aspects of the project. A hui was held on 10^th July 2015 whereby the Concept designs of the Pioneer Women’s and Ellen Melville Hall were presented and the Developed Design drawings of Freyberg Square were reviewed by iwi representatives. There was general support for the project subject to the application of Te Aranga Maori design principles. Specific feedback from iwi is currently being sought in relation to the ‘story’ behind the positioning of the Tuku Tuku panels held within the Hall. Another hui is planned in August 2015 to specifically discuss how the project can further respond to the principles presented.

Implementation

18. The project is proposed to be delivered by Auckland Council’s Auckland Design Office using one design team and one Main Services Contractor. The Project Sponsor is Tim Watts (City Centre Design and Delivery Manager) and the Council Senior Project Leader is Lisa Spasić from the Auckland Design Office.

19. The current programme plans for all design stages to be completed by the end of 2015 with construction commencing in June 2016 for approximately 9-12 months.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Attachment 1 - Freyberg Square Concept Design	211
b View	Attachment 2 - Proposed Ground Floor Plan	213
c View	Attachment 3 - Urban Living Room Mode	215
d View	Attachment 4 - Market Mode	217
e View	Attachment 5 - Exhibition Mode	219
f View	Attachment 6 - Consultation Mode	221
g View	Attachment 7 - Proposed Upper Floor Plan	223
h View	Attachment 8 - High Street Floor Plan	225

Signatories

Authors

Lisa Spasic - Senior Project Leader

Authorisers

Tim Watts - Manager Built Environment

Ludo Campbell-Reid - GM - Auckland Design Office

Judith Webster - Relationship Manager

Waitematā Local Board

11 August 2015

Endorsement of Earthquake Prone Buildings Guidance and Approaches Document

File No.: CP2015/15360

Purpose

1. To seek endorsement from the Waitematā Local Board for the ‘Earthquake Prone Buildings Guidance and Approaches document.

Executive Summary

2. This report presents the ‘Earthquake Prone Buildings Guidance and Approaches document to the Waitematā Local Board for their consideration and endorsement (Attachment A), phase 1 of a wider Earthquake Prone Buildings project.

3. The guidebook is a helpful tool to guide building owners, tenants and building managers through the requirements and process for seismic strengthening and illustrates techniques that respect and protect heritage.

4. The guidebook provides a high level overview of the earthquake assessment process, an understanding of the common earthquake vulnerabilities of historical buildings, the retrofit process, and an outline of the potential costs associated with this process.

5. The guidebook aims to be as accessible and easy to read as possible while retaining the necessary technical detail.

6. Once the guidance document has been approved by the Waitematā Local Board it will be professionally designed by the Councils communications department and uploaded to the local board website. The guidance document will also be promoted through appropriate channels such as the Our Place publication and the Heritage and Local Board webpage on the Council’s website.

7. Phase 2 of the Earthquake Prone Buildings project began in the last financial year and involves completion of a design and specification for an identified exemplar retrofit.

Recommendation

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a) Approve the Earthquake Prone Buildings Guidance and Approaches document for publication.

b) Delegate to the Heritage, Urban Design and Planning Portfolio holders to approve any minor wording changes and document presentation that may be necessary.

Comments

8. Waitematā Local Board’s vision is to create the world’s most liveable city at the local level. The protection and promotion of heritage and preserving historic character is vital to achieving this vision.

9. Waitematā is blessed with many of Auckland’s historical buildings. Commonly built of brick with decorative facades, these buildings have a noticeable presence throughout the inner city and contribute enormously to its character. Although Auckland has a low likelihood of a damaging earthquake, there is a critical mass of heritage buildings that fall short of seismic performance standards and are considered earthquake prone. The process of seismic retrofit can be confusing and costly, causing some owners to consider demolition.

10. Recent earthquakes in other parts of the country and their aftermath have brought into focus both the importance of seismic resilience and the centrality of heritage to a city’s identity. Auckland Council has adopted a staged approach to the identification of earthquake prone buildings with all potential earthquake prone buildings required to be assessed by December 2015.

11. Waitematā Local Board agreed to fund an Earthquake Prone Buildings project, which was broken into two phases and paid for over the two financial years, 2013-14 and 2014-15.

12. Phase 1 included developing a general guidance document to help owners of buildings and their engineers to assess the relative risk of particular building features and develop priorities which are consistent with best practice and latest knowledge.

13. Phase 2 was to identify a site to undertake an exemplar retrofit that would serve as an excellent first step in the collection of design and knowledge by the industry, who can then make submissions to add/improve on the example details and specifications as part of the continuous improvement and learning process.

14. EQ Struc was commissioned in August 2014 to develop both the guidance document for phase 1 and to develop the design and specifications for the exemplar project (phase 2) on completion of the guidance document.

15. Phase 1 has now been completed and work on phase 2 has commenced. 27 Princes Street has been identified by ACPL and the Council’s heritage team for the exemplar retrofit project. This building is similar to most Council owned service buildings and has some of the typical seismic vulnerabilities of older unreinforced masonry buildings. An additional Council asset has been put forward with funding from the Property Department that is even more typical of unreinforced masonry buildings in Auckland i.e. two storey row buildings immediately adjacent to neighbours and typically with large parapets. Therefore Phase 2 will include two exemplars and provide more opportunities for developing retrofit strategies.

16. No further budget is required from the local board to complete phase 2.

Local Board views and implications

17. This guidance document delivers on the Waitemata Local Board’s 2014 vision in regards to achieving a distinctive, high-quality urban environment that embraces our heritage.

18. A key initiative identified by the Board in the Waitematā Local Board Plan 2014 included developing a guidebook on how to strengthen an earthquake prone building to Building Code standards.

19. The portfolio leads for Heritage, Urban Design and Planning have been extensively consulted throughout the development of the guidance document.

Māori impact statement

20. There are no particular impacts on Maori which are different from general building owners, tenants and building managers. As such, the content of this document has no particular benefit to, or adverse effect on Maori.

Implementation

21. Once the guidance document has been endorsed the document will be professionally designed and branded.

22. The document will also be promoted through the appropriate channels such as the Our Place publication and the Heritage and local board webpages on the Council’s website.

23. The document will remain as an online tool in the short to medium term. This will allow flexibility to make any minor technical amendments if the respective legislation changes.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Attachment 1 - Earthquake Prone Buildings Guidance and Approaches	231

Signatories

Authors

Tanya Sorrell - Team Leader Built & Cultural Heritage Policy

Trina Thompson - Senior Local Board Advisor - Waitemata

Authorisers

Penny Pirrit - GM - Plans & Places

Judith Webster - Relationship Manager

Waitematā Local Board

11 August 2015

Waitematā Local Board Contestable Events Funding 2015/2016

File No.: CP2015/16034

Purpose

1. To present a summary of applications received for the local events development fund and the Community Christmas Event fund for 2015/2016 to the Waitematā Local Board. The Waitematā Local Board is requested to either fund, part-fund or decline the applications.

Executive Summary

2. Contestable local events funding of $50,000 is available to the Waitemata Local Board for distribution as follows:

Fund	Amount available
Local Event Development	$43,000
Community Christmas Event Fund	$7,000
Total	$50,000

3. Fifteen applications have been received seeking $147,621.26. The applications were discussed at a local board workshop on 16 June 2015 and 21 July 2015.

4. The local board is now being requested to allocate event funding for 2015/2016 from the local event development fund and the Community Christmas Event fund.

Recommendations

That the Waitematā Local Board:

i) Approve funding for the following event for the 2015/2016 financial year from the Community Christmas events fund ($7,000)

Applicant	Event	Amount Requested	Recommended Allocation
Franklin Road Christmas Lights	Franklin Road Christmas Lights	$8,696.26	$7,000

ii) Agree to fund, partially fund or decline applications from the following events for the 2015/2016 financial year from the Local Events Development fund ($43,000)

Applicant	Event	Amount Requested	Recommended Allocation
Franklin Road Christmas Lights	Franklin Road Christmas Lights	$8,696.26	$1,696.26
Full Moon Kingdom	Kathrin Simon Photography	$10,000.00	$0.00
Auckland International Buskers	Crackerjack Promotions Limited	$30,000.00	$15,000.00
The Great Auckland Bed Race	The Great Auckland Bed Race Charitable Trust Board	$10,000.00	$0.00
Victoria Park Annual Skateboarding contest	Sk8boarders United Voice Trust	$3,815.00	$3,815.00
The Splice Co-op	Methodist Mission Northern (Splice)	$12,500.00	$0.00
Image Nation 2015 - Photography Centre	Advertising & Illustrative Photographers Association	$5,400.00	$0.00
Art in the Day	Parnell Community Trust	$13,710.00	$7,500.00
At the Beach	New Zealand Fashion Museum	$5,000.00	$0.00
Pipikids International Film and Media festival for Children	Pipikids International Film and Media festival Trust	$5,000.00	$5,000.00
Wild Streets - A festival of Plan	Wild Streets Collective - Bronwyn Bent	$6,000.00	$0.00
Chinese Festival of the Zodiac Parnell	Parnell Inc - The Parnell Business Association	$20,000.00	$0.00
The Auckland Highland Games & Gathering	David Harvey	$3,500.00	$0.00
Auckland Symphony	Auckland Symphony Inc	$5,000.00	$0.00
West End Lawn Tennis Club Inc.	West End Cup	$9,000.00	$9,000.00
Societa Dante Alighieri	Festival Italiano	$5,000	$0 – this application has been funded via the events partnership fund
NZ Contemporary Art Trust	Art Week Auckland	$25,000	$0 – this application has been funded via the events partnership fund
		$147,621.26	$42,011.26

Comments

5. Local boards are responsible for the decision making and allocation of local board events funding. The Waitematā Local Board has identified key priorities for the local area within its local board plan, some of which can be achieved through events. The Waitematā Local Board requires event experiences that:

· connect people with each other

· celebrate the unique identity of the area

· are environmentally responsible.

6. The local events support fund provides the opportunity for Waitematā 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.

7. Contestable local events funding of $50,000 is available to the Waitematā Local Board for distribution as follows:

Fund	Amount available
Local Event Development	$43,000
Christmas Event Fund	$7,000
Total	$50,000

8. 15 applications totaling 147,621 have been received for consideration for contestable events funding. A summary of those applications is below.

Applicant	Event	Amount Requested	Recommended Allocation
Franklin Road Christmas Lights	Franklin Road Christmas Lights	$8,696.26	$1,696.26
Full Moon Kingdom	Kathrin Simon Photography	$10,000.00	$0.00
Auckland International Buskers	Crackerjack Promotions Limited	$30,000.00	$15,000.00
The Great Auckland Bed Race	The Great Auckland Bed Race Charitable Trust Board	$10,000.00	$0.00
Victoria Park Annual Skateboarding contest	Sk8boarders United Voice Trust	$3,815.00	$3,815.00
The Splice Co-op	Methodist Mission Northern (Splice)	$12,500.00	$0.00
Image Nation 2015 - Photography Centre	Advertising & Illustrative Photographers Association	$5,400.00	$0.00
Art in the Day	Parnell Community Trust	$13,710.00	$7,500.00
At the Beach	New Zealand Fashion Museum	$5,000.00	$0.00
Pipikids International Film and Media festival for Children	Pipikids International Film and Media festival Trust	$5,000.00	$5,000.00
Wild Streets - A festival of Plan	Wild Streets Collective - Bronwyn Bent	$6,000.00	$0.00
Chinese Festival of the Zodiac Parnell	Parnell Inc - The Parnell Business Association	$20,000.00	$0.00
The Auckland Highland Games & Gathering	David Harvey	$3,500.00	$0.00
Auckland Symphony	Auckland Symphony Inc	$5,000.00	$0.00
West End Lawn Tennis Club Inc.	West End Cup	$9,000.00	$9,000.00
Societa Dante Alighieri	Festival Italiano	$5,000	$0 – this application has been funded via the events partnership fund
NZ Contemporary Art Trust	Art Week Auckland	$25,000	$0 – this application has been funded via the events partnership fund
		$147,621.26	$42,011.26

9. The proposed allocation will result in a remaining balance of $988.74. The purpose of this grant is to be a substantial contributor which enables an event to take place. Therefore the remaining $988.74 will be redistributed for use by other Local Board projects.

10. The Waitematā Local Board also supports a programme of events through the Events Partnership Fund which has a budget of $83,000 for the 2015/2016 financial year. These events are currently in the second year of a three year partnership agreement.

Event	2014/2015	2015/2016	2016/2017
Festival Italiano	$15,000	$20,000	$20,000
Art Week Auckland	$10,000	$20,000	$18,000
Art in the Dark	$30,000	~~$25,000~~	$20,000
Grey Lynn Park Festival	$25,000	$25,000	$25,000
Total	$80,000	$65,000	$83,000

11. Art in the Dark organisers have confirmed with the Council Events unit that they are not in a position to deliver the event in 2015. Through discussions with staff, the board have expressed an intention that if the event does take place in FY 2016/2017, the third year of the funding allocated to Art in the Dark will still be available to the event.

12. On the 14 July 2015 the Waitemata Local Board resolved to transfer the balance of $18,000 remaining in the event partnership fund for 2015/2016 to the Local Event Development fund. This increased the Local Event Development Fund from $25,000 to $43,000.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

13. The local board have discussed the applications at their workshop on 16 June 2015 and 21 July 2015.

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

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

Māori impact statement

16. This fund does not specifically target Maori groups. However Maori communities are likely to benefit from the events supported by the local board, alongside other groups in the community.

Implementation

17. Organisations who receive funding received through the events partnership fund will be required to account for funds annually.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Carrie Doust - Team Leader Event Facilitation Central

Authorisers

Graham Bodman - Manager - Community Development, Arts and Culture

Judith Webster - Relationship Manager

Waitematā Local Board

11 August 2015

Auckland Regional Amenities Funding Act (ARAFA) Funding Model Review - Local Board Input

File No.: CP2015/15855

Purpose

1. Auckland Council is undertaking a review of the funding model under the Auckland Regional Amenities Funding Act 2008 (ARAFA Funding Model Review). Feedback from the local boards is sought on the level of change proposed in the options and the impacts on local boards and local communities (if any).

Executive Summary

1. The Auckland Regional Amenities Funding Act 2008 (the Act) established a distinct model for contributing funds to specified regional amenities (regional amenities). This funding model is now under review to consider whether it remains fit for purpose and to identify how it might be improved. The Governing Body adopted Terms of Reference for the review on 26 February 2015.

2. Working closely with representatives of the regional amenities, seven funding model options were generated along a spectrum, ranging from:

· retaining the status quo

· seeking improvements within the existing ARAFA legislative framework

· modifying the existing ARAFA framework by amending legislation, to

· repealing the existing ARAFA framework and replacing it with an Auckland Council policy framework. (The options are discussed in paragraphs 15 - 32)

3. The Finance and Performance Committee endorsed the seven options for evaluation on 18 June 2015. The options will be evaluated against criteria previously endorsed by Finance and Performance on 21 May 2015. (The criteria is discussed in paragraph 14)

4. When viewed across the spectrum, the options shift the role of Auckland Council from influencing decision-making under the Act (by a Funding Board) to becoming the decision-maker itself. The closer Auckland Council becomes to being the decision-maker the more opportunities there are to align the council’s strategic outcomes with those of the regional amenities. The options also incorporate improvements relating to information flows, longer term planning, communications and relationship building.

5. The options are also associated with a progressively increasing volume of further work that would be required to implement them. The implementation of options requiring legislative change is particularly complex. The necessary trade-offs involved will be teased out and considered through the evaluation of the options.

6. The evaluation is to be completed and will be reported to the Finance and Performance Committee on 17 September 2015. The evaluation will identify the preferred option/s which may be a refined version, comprising different elements of the options proposed.

7. Local board feedback is sought on the level of change proposed in the options as set out in this report and the impacts on local boards and local communities (if any).

Recommendations

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a) Provide feedback on the level of change proposed in the options and the impacts on local boards and local communities (if any) as an input into the evaluation of options under the Auckland Regional Funding Amenities Act Funding Model Review.

Comments

The Funding Model under the Auckland Regional Amenities Funding Act 2008

2. The Auckland Regional Amenities Funding Act 2008 (the Act) has two purposes; to provide adequate, sustainable and secure funding for specified regional amenities, and to ensure that local government in Auckland contributes funding.

3. The Act came into force prior to amalgamation of Auckland’s former councils. It was designed to ensure that all councils in the region contributed fairly to funding the regional amenities given the amenities operated across and benefited the whole of the Auckland region. It also sought to ensure that qualifying regional amenities remained financially viable.

4. The regional amenities apply each year to a Funding Board for next year’s funding. The Funding Board confers with Auckland Council and prepares and consults on a funding plan, before recommending a levy to Auckland Council for the next financial year. Auckland Council approves the recommended levy and if not, arbitration takes place. The Funding Board subsequently receives the levy and allocates funding to the regional amenities.

5. Auckland Council appoints six of the Funding Board’s 10 members with four members appointed by an Amenities Board, also created by the Act.

6. Only the regional amenities specified under the Act may apply for funding and funding is not available for any part of services or facilities provided outside of the Auckland region. Funding is to contribute towards the operational expenditure that regional amenities must incur and is not available for capital expenditure.

7. The regional amenities must make all reasonable endeavours to maximise funding from other sources. The regional amenities are prohibited from receiving operating funding form Auckland Council, other than via the Funding Board. However, staff are aware that local boards may receive funding requests from groups affiliated with the amenities.

8. The Funding Board and Auckland Council must have regard to the funding principles prescribed in the Act. The Act makes provision for additional funding principles to be adopted.

Regional Amenities

8. The purpose of the Act is to ensure the regional amenities are funded to provide services or facilities that contribute to “the well-being of the whole region” and “towards making Auckland an attractive place to live in and visit”. Organisations that wish to become regional amenities must possess these qualities to satisfy criteria for admission. The Act as enacted specified 10 regional amenities in Schedule 1:

· Auckland Observatory and Planetarium Trust Board

· Auckland Philharmonia

· Auckland Regional Rescue Helicopter Trust

· Auckland Theatre Company

· Coast Guard Northern Region Incorporated

· New Zealand National Maritime Museum

· New Zealand Opera Limited

· Surf Life Saving Northern Region Incorporated

· Auckland Festival Trust

· Watersafe Auckland Incorporated

9. The following examples illustrate the way the regional amenities serve the Auckland region:

· The Auckland Philharmonia (APO) was accorded the status of Metropolitan Orchestra as part of the Ministry of Culture and Heritage’s Orchestra Review in 2012. In that year the APO presented 31 performances in the Auckland Town Hall and performed in the Bruce Mason Centre (Takapuna) Telstra Events Centre (Manukau), Massey High Schools and Trusts Stadium (West Auckland) and the Holy Trinity Cathedral (Parnell). It also presented chamber concerts in Takapuna, Remuera and Howick and five free community performances and events in west, central, north and south Auckland.

· Coast Guard Northern Region Incorporated has 14 units located across the Auckland region at Waiuku, Papakura, Titirangi, Kaipara, Kawau, Great Barrier, Hibiscus, North Shore, Auckland, Waiheke, Howick and Maraetei, with the Operations Centre and the Auckland Air Patrol operating centrally.

· Similarly, there are 10 clubs in the Auckland Region under the umbrella of Surf Life Saving Northern Region Incorporated, located at Karioitahi Beach, Karekare, Piha (2), Bethels Beach, Murawai, Omaha, Red Beach, Orewa and Mairangi Bay.

The ARAFA Funding Model Review

10. Auckland Council’s establishment and issues arising out of the Act’s operation have raised the question of ‘whether the funding model remains fit for purpose’. Auckland Council agreed to review the ARAFA Funding Model through its deliberations on the Mayor’s proposal for the 2014 Annual Plan. The Governing Body endorsed Terms of Reference (Attachment A) for this review on 26 February 2015. It records stakeholder issues and objectives (Schedule 2) and sets the overarching objective to:

“achieve long term sustainable, affordable and predictable funding of the existing amenities while recognising the Council’s purpose and responsibilities under the Local Government Act 2002 and other legislation.” (paragraph 12):

11. The ARAFA funding model and changes to enhance its effectiveness are the focus of the review:

· The review will not consider whether to add or remove any of the regional amenities from the funding mechanism. That would be a separate piece of work.

· The review will also not consider how much funding each regional amenity currently receives but rather look at the process that determines the amount of funding provided.

12. The Terms of Reference set out the basic process for the review with the identification of criteria for the evaluation of options, identification of options and their subsequent evaluation. In undertaking this review we are working closely with representatives of the amenities and engaging with the Funding Board.

Criteria for the Evaluation of Options

13. The following criteria for evaluating options were endorsed by the Finance and Performance Committee on 21 May 2015:

i. Financial sustainability and certainty

- Addresses the ‘sufficiency’ of the contribution provided by the funding model in terms of “adequate, sustainable and secure funding for specified amenities.” It includes the predictability of that funding over the short to medium terms in support of financial planning.

ii. Affordability

- Addresses the affordability of the sum of the contributions allocated under the funding model including the impact on rates.

iii. Independence and continuity

- Considers the extent to which the option provides for objective decision making and the extent it provides for continuity of decision-making over time. These considerations go to the stability of the funding model over time.

iv. Accountability and transparency

- Considers the information and the processes to support decision-making required by an option to ensure there is a clear chain of accountability from the recipient through to the funder. Transparency supports accountability, providing clarity around decision-making processes. Public sector responsibility requires accountability and transparency generally, and particularly in respect of public funds.

v. Administrative efficiency

- Considers the efficiency of the funding model, with regard to the costs associated with the information and processes required by an option. Funding arrangements should have regard to the costs of implementation, and how effective they will be in achieving their objectives.

vi. Alignment of outcomes and goals

- Considers the extent to which the option allows for alignment between the outcomes and goals sought and achieved by the regional amenities and those of the Auckland Council on behalf of Auckland’s ratepayers.

vii. Fairness

- Considers the extent to which the funding model provides for fairness.

viii. Flexibility

- Requires consideration of the extent to which the option provides a funding model with sufficient flexibility to take account of changing circumstances.

Options to Enhance Effectiveness

14. Working closely with representatives of the amenities, seven options along a spectrum have been generated, ranging from:

· retaining the status quo

· seeking improvements within the existing ARAFA legislative framework

· modifying the existing ARAFA framework by amending the legislation, to

· repealing the existing ARAFA legislative framework and replacing it with an Auckland Council policy framework.

15. The options were endorsed for evaluation by the Finance and Performance Committee on 18 June 2015.

16. Figure 1 illustrates the options and where they are located on the spectrum. Viewed across the spectrum, the options shift the role of Auckland Council from influencing the Funding Board’s decision-making to becoming the decision-maker itself. Similarly, there are increasing opportunities along the spectrum to align Auckland Council’s strategic outcomes with those of the amenities.

17. The review to date has identified that processes relating to funding bids and reporting have evolved under the existing arrangements. There appear to be further opportunities to pursue improvements through a focus on, information, communication, developing relationships and longer term planning which are being investigated through the final evaluation.

18. Implementation of the options will require further work, some of which is significant. The implementation of options requiring legislative change is particularly complex.

19. Options 1 to 4 are based on current arrangements which provide the pathway for regional amenities to seek operational funding from Auckland Council. Improvements under these options would be available for the 2016/2017 funding year.

20. Option 5 limits opportunities for Auckland Council to scrutinise the funding sought by the regional amenities, whereas Options 6 and 7 increase Auckland Council’s role in decision-making. The level of funding provided under Option 7 would be dependent on the policy and decisions of the governing body. There may therefore be a greater level of uncertainty for the regional amenities which may hold implications for the level of services and facilities they provide.

21. Options 5 to 7 require legislative change through the parliamentary process and it is not possible to indicate when they might become available for implementation.

22. The necessary trade-offs in relation to implementation will be considered through the evaluation of the options.

Figure 1.

23. Option 1 – Status Quo

The existing funding model prescribed by the Act is the benchmark against which the other options will be compared. It is described in paragraphs 1 to 7.

Seeking Improvements from within the existing ARAFA legislative framework

24. The following three options seek to introduce changes to enhance the legislative framework and the sharing of information between the regional amenities, the Funding Board and Auckland Council.

25. Option 2 – Enhanced Status Quo – ‘Clear Pathway to Capital Funding’

This option provides a ‘clear pathway for capital funding’ to augment the status quo.

While the amenities can currently apply for capital funding from Auckland Council via the Long Term Plan process, the granting of such funding is considered to be by exception. Under this option, applications for capital could be anticipated from any of the regional amenities. Potential applications would need to be signaled well ahead of time to assist financial planning and to enable the provision of funding.

26. Option 3 - Enhanced Status Quo – ‘Sustainable Funding’

This option introduces financial planning over a longer time frame with a 3 year rolling funding cycle and supporting information, and establishes how the sustainable level of funding for each regional amenity might be determined:

Introduction of a three year ‘rolling’ funding cycle

This cycle would align with Auckland Council’s Long Term Plan/Annual Plan cycle. Applications for the first year of funding (the year of application) would seek that year’s funding and identify anticipated funding for the next two years. Annual applications made in the second and third year would be considered in the light of all the relevant information then provided.

Information supporting ‘rolling’ applications

The clarity and timeframe of information accompanying applications would be reviewed to ensure it supports the rolling funding cycle.

‘Sustainability’

A definition of the sustainable level of funding would be developed for application in the context of each of the regional amenities. This would also establish appropriate levels of reserves amenities would be able to build-up and maintain to help manage the peaks and troughs of the funding requirements.

27. Option 4 – Enhanced Status Quo – ‘Alignment/Groupings’

This option similarly proposes the three year rolling review, maximises opportunities to improve strategic alignment between the regional amenities and Auckland Council and addresses the diverse range of regional amenities.

The three year ‘rolling’ funding cycle / Information supporting applications becomes available as set out in the previous option.

Auckland Council and the Funding Board confer

Auckland Council would be more explicit in clarifying its expectations, its funding constraints and its intentions when conferring with the Funding Board on the draft Funding Plan. The purpose would be to ensure transparency about the Auckland Council context and any funding constraints the council might face.

Auckland Council supports public notification

Auckland Council supports public notification of the Draft Funding Plan. The council could support the notification of the Draft Funding Plan on the council’s web site, through the media centre and/or in publications. This would help rate payers provide feedback and make submissions.

More particular consideration relevant to the type of amenity

This could include:

· Criteria and considerations as relevant to different types of amenities – e.g. safety, arts & culture, and facilities

· Clarification and guidance around what might be meant by ‘sustainability’ and the sustainable contribution required could be developed with reference to the activities undertaken by the particular regional amenities.

Modifying the existing ARAFA framework by amending legislation

28. The two following options amend the ARAFA legislative framework, proposing specific amendments to the way funding is determined or the roles of institutions and the processes through which they work.

29.
Option 5 – Baseline Plus CPI

Under this option the specified amenities would determine the ‘sustainable’ level of funding required for year 1, which would be CPI adjusted for the next two years. The level of sustainable funding would then be reset for the next (4^th) year and CPI adjusted in each of the next two years.

The basis for determining the sustainable level of funding would need to be developed and the implications for the Funding Board explored.

30. Option 6 - Strong Funder

This option remaps the relationship between the regional amenities and the Auckland Council with Auckland Council providing funds directly. Under this option the ARAFA legislative framework would be amended so that:

· the regional amenities apply to Auckland Council directly for funding

· three year rolling funding cycle / supporting information applies

· Auckland Council sets the funding envelope

· Auckland Council prepares and adopts the Funding Plan

· the role of the Funding Board becomes one of providing expert advice to Auckland Council

· the regional amenities report annually to the Auckland Council.

Auckland Council sets the funding envelope

The funding envelope from which contributions to the regional amenities would be drawn would be set for the 10 year period though the Council’s Long Term Plan process. This longer term approach to funding would likely require a review of the information required in support of setting the envelope.

Auckland Council prepares and adopts the Funding Plan

The Funding Plan mechanism could be similar to the status quo or be modified in terms of the process and matters to be taken into consideration.

The role of the Funding Board

The Funding Board’s role would change to one of providing expert advice to assist Auckland Council. Appointments may still be made by Auckland Council and by the regional amenities.

Repeal of the existing ARAFA framework and replacement with an Auckland Council policy framework

31. Under this model the existing ARAFA legislative framework would be repealed and replaced with a policy framework established and maintained by Auckland Council.

32. Option 7 - Auckland Council Dedicated Fund

The repealed ARAFA legislative framework would be replaced by a specific policy of Auckland Council where:

· Auckland Council sets the funding envelope

· there is no Funding Board and the regional amenities apply to Auckland Council for funding

· Auckland Council considers applications and determines the funding allocated following public consultation

· there is separate policy and consideration for different types of amenity – for example, safety, arts & culture and facilities for example.

· a three year rolling funding cycle with supporting information would apply

· the amenities annually report to the Auckland Council.

This option replicates many of the policy intentions of the Strong Funder option within Auckland Council formulated policy, though without the legislation or the Funding Board. As Council policy, the funding model/policy framework would be amenable to any amendment subsequent Councils may require.

Evaluation

33. The evaluation involves considering the performance of each option against the criteria, relative to the performance of the status quo. Working closely with the amenities representatives, this process is currently underway and the results will be reported to the Finance and Performance Committee on 17 September 2015. The evaluation will identify the preferred option/s which may be a refined version, comprising different elements of the options proposed.

34. Local board feedback on the level of changes proposed in the options and the impacts on local boards and local communities (if any) is sought and will be an input into the evaluation along-side feedback received from the Funding Board and Regional Facilities Auckland.

35. From the work completed to date it is clear that Option 4- ‘Alignment/Groupings’ is compromised. The idea of grouping amenities by the nature of their operations is unworkable due to the extent of the difference between each of the regional amenities. The other features of this option continue to offer merit however and will be included in the evaluation.

36. Implementation is a particular consideration in addition to the identified criteria. With the exception of the status quo, each option will require further work to become operational. The amount of work required and the level of complexity is likely to:

· be less from options seeking improvement within existing frameworks (options 2, 3 and 4)

· increase where improvements are sought through amendments to the Act (options 5 and 6)

· further increase with the repeal of the Act and its replacement by an alternative regime (option 7).

37. Seeking amendments to or the repeal of the Act would require sponsorship by a Member of Parliament to drive it through the Parliamentary processes. These include three readings in Parliament and the Select Committee Hearings process. The Act is a private Act. A private bill seeking changes would be subject to parliamentary processes required and it is not possible to indicate the time it might take for it to be enacted.

Next Steps

38. Local Board feedback will be collated and incorporated into the final report to the Finance and Performance Committee on 17 September 2015.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

39. The ARAFA funding model review considers the funding model established under the ARAFA legislation and will not directly impact on local board funding or decision-making. However, communities across all of Auckland are able to benefit from the services and facilities provided by the amenities funded through the Act.

40. Local board views on the level of change proposed in the options and their impacts on local boards (if any) are being sought via this report. This report follows a memo circulated to Local Board Chairs in February 2015 and a briefing to Local Board Chairs and members on 22 June 2015. This report follows the structure of that briefing while elaborating on the information provided.

Māori impact statement

41. The ARAFA funding model review focuses on how Auckland Council’s funding contribution to the specified amenities is determined. Using Whiria Te Muka Tangata: The Māori Responsiveness Framework as a lens there do not appear to be any statutory or treaty obligations, direct Māori or value Te Ao Māori outcomes affected by this review. Enquiries were made of mana whenua in March 2015 to ascertain whether the ARAFA funding model review held any interest. No interests were identified.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Auckland Regional Amenities Funding Act Review	301

Signatories

Authors

Alastair Cameron - Principal Advisor CCO Governance and External Partnerships

Wayne Brown - Lead Strategic Advisor Strategic Scanning

Authorisers

John Bishop - Treasurer and Manager CCO Governance & External Partnerships

Judith Webster - Relationship Manager

Jacques Victor - GM Auckland Plan Strategy and Research

Waitematā Local Board

11 August 2015

Chairperson's Report

File No.: CP2015/15453

Executive Summary

Providing the Chair with an opportunity to update the local board and community on the projects and issues he and the Waitemata Local Board have been involved with since the last meeting.

Portfolios

Board Chair: Governance, Local and Civic Leadership, Board Strategy, Policy and Planning Leadership

Portfolios: Arts, Culture & Events (lead), Parks & Open Spaces

Positions: Heart of the City, Auckland City Centre Advisory Board, Waterfront Auckland Liaison

Committees: Finance and Grants, Central Facility Partnerships (chair)

Recommendations

(a) That the Chair’s Report be received.

(b) That the Waitemata Local Board consider its position on any matter raised within this report.

Activities undertaken from 1 June to 2 August 2015

This report covers activities undertaken during the period from Monday 1 June to Sunday 2 August 2015.

Highlighted activities, projects and issues

There are some specific activities, projects and issues that I wish to highlight; some for board members’ interest and as appropriate, some for decision.

1 Introduction

The Board has experienced another busy 2 months, with conclusion of the Long Term Plan (10-Year Budget) and Local Board Agreement debate dominating, During this period, Board members also continued to progress Local Board Plan priorities and current and proposed Local Board Agreement local projects and community concerns in their respective portfolio areas, LIPs proposals, residents, business association and community advocacy, providing input to regional policies, plans and strategies in workshops and briefings, providing input into resource and landowner consent matters, and responding to constituent and media enquiries.

2 Shared Governance Engagement

2.1 Engagement with Mayor/Governing Body

· Auckland Development Committee, 11 June 2015 – Member Vernon Tava gave local board input on the Queen Elizabeth Square private plan change issue. Much publicity of the board’s position resulted.

3 Board Strategies, Policy and Planning Update

3.1 Local Board Chairs’ Forum

The regular Local Board Chairs’ Forum is held on the third Monday of every month. All Board members receive the agenda and the action points from the previous meeting when Chairs receive this information.

4 Project Updates

4.1 Good Citizens Awards

The Board hosted a highly successful Waitematā Good Citizens’ Award ceremony on 17 June to recognise and celebrate the contributions that volunteers have made to the betterment of Waitematā. 24 awards were allocated across the three categories.

The worthy recipients this year were:

Individual Award

Dr Gerhard Sunborn – Richmond Rovers Club coach and mentor

Saravanamuthu Subramanian – Auckland Refugee Council volunteer

Andy Smith – volunteer walking activist

Mik Smellie – City Centre community activist

Rachel Morris – City Mission meal volunteer

Rev. Mua Strickson-Pua – Grey Lynn social activist and minister

Peter Klein – Chair of Grey Lynn Community Committee

Jennifer Northover – Grey Lynn business community

Tricia Reade – community activist

Peter McIntrye – sport activities in local schools

Martin Putterill – long-standing member of Parnell Community Committee

Individual Award – Outstanding Contribution

Roger Hames – long-term volunteer at the Maritime Museum

Joan Lardner Rivlin – multiple long-term senior social services volunteer

Children and Young Person Award

Jade Leung – multiple activity young social activist

Dita Donaldson – Maritime Museum sailing crew volunteer

Alex Johnstone – Youth Advisory Panel Representative and youth development activist.

Nurain Janah – social enterprise and Youth Collective volunteer

Community Group Award

The Congregation of Aotea St James and Splice – John McDonald’s City Centre community connections group.

The People of Auckland Community Trust – Cameron Webster’s group working with marginalised groups in Auckland

Auckland Domain and Newmarket Pest Control Volunteers – Tejo van Schie’s 19 volunteers carrying out pest control in our important parks.

The Pohutukawa Savers – Jolisa Gracewoodss citizens group that led the successful charge to save the 6 Great North Road Pohutukawa

Watercare Harbour Cleanup Trust – Haydon Smith’s group that manages removal of litter from our harbour.

Community Group Award – Outstanding Contribution

Cycle Action Auckland – Barbara Cuthbert’s group that has led the transformation of thinking in Auckland to cycling

Generation Zero – the youth-led organisation that has mobilised the community to new thinking.

What an amazing honour it was to acknowledge such a group of volunteers active in our community.

Attached and marked as Attachment A is the Chair and MC for the evening’s event address.

The event is proposed to be bi-annual, with the next Awards scheduled for mid-2017.

4.2 Newmarket Laneways Plan

As part of the Think Big Project, Parnell District School facilitated a child friendly survey for the Newmarket Laneways Plan. This involved reimagining the feedback form into one that is friendlier. 188 submissions were received from Parnell District School and Newmarket School. This feedback was considered as part of the wider consultation undertaken during June. A meeting of the Board working group later in August will discuss the options in light of the feedback with a formal report being presented to the September Board meeting. This will include recommendations on which option(s) to take forward.

4.3 City Fringe Economic Development Action Plan

A follow up workshop was held with the BIDs and Grey Lynn Business Association in July to start turning the ideas raised at a March workshop into actions. The outcomes of the workshop will be formed into a 3 year action plan that will be used to inform the use of the local board budget allocation. Actions identified included:

Utilising an existing event such as Art Week to leverage mutual benefit across all BIDs i.e. an app for the City Fringe, walking tour

An improved system to obtain property information e.g. landlord contact information

Availability of market view data

o Identify a niche for all BIDs to identify collaboration opportunities;

o Behaviours and trends on why people choose the fringe; and

o Data on shared spaces and cycling infrastructure.

Support the expansion of Ponsonby BID and Uptown and the establishment of Grey Lynn Business Association.

The economic development team are transitioning to ATEED at the beginning of August and will be working together to form the 3 year action plan for discussion and agreement by the Board. The actions will also be inputed into the refreshed City Fringe Economic Development Action Plan

Sport and Recreation

4.4 Western Springs sport club lease

The club is currently negotiating a new lease agreement with Council. The Club requested a number of changes to the lease agreement. A meeting with the club was recently held attended by the Board Chair and officers to resolve outstanding lease provisions.

4.5 Richmond Rovers Rugby Club

The club lease has expired; officers have been in contact with the club to renew the lease. Following the final Grey Lynn park development plan, the club proposed shifting the proposed building site to the left. Parks and sport and recreation officers are open to these suggestions when a budget is available to commence the development.

4.6 Newmarket Viaduct

At the May business meeting, the Board requested officers to approach NZTA to negotiate a peppercorn rental of the Clovernook site. ACPL has been requested to undertake the negotiations with NZTA on behalf of the Board. Budget discussions followed. In the meantime, Council community leasing team has agreed to take on the negotiations if ACPL is unable to.

Auckland Transport has also indicated their interest in the site to be used at a bus depot, however, their plans are still at the early stages.

Community

4.7 Ellen Melville Centre

Concept designs for the Ellen Melville Centre were presented to a Board workshop in July and is being presented for endorsement at this August business meeting. Consultation on the concepts will then commence mid to late August. Initial assessments carried out at the centre have identified the need for a complete replacement of the roof structure and a total upgrade of existing utilities. These additional actions required were not identified in the original business case. This places additional pressure on the available budget. Officers are reviewing the ability to utilise available renewal budgets in 2016-17.

The two commercial sites facing High Street will also be required to vacate during the construction process. CDAC have confirmed that the loss of revenue as a result is able to be covered in current budgets during the construction year and the first year of opening.

4.8 Community Empowerment Structure

The Community Development and Safety unit (CDS) of the Community Development, Arts and Culture (CDAC) department will be disestablished effective 30 September and replaced by the new Community Empowerment unit on 1 October 2015. The Community Empowerment Unit will consist of a Practice Hub, 19 Strategic Brokers with 1 of these dedicated to Waitematā. The CDS team have prepared a draft transition plan, which was presented at a recent Chairs and Community Portfolio holders meeting. Further work is planned for outlining a transition process, which will need to include the 254 Ponsonby Road project as well as activities and projects outlined in the CDAC work programme. Key risks include the continuation of support towards the Waitemata Youth Collective, delivery of a refreshed accessibility plan and the application of the Community Gardens funding.

Natural Environment

4.9 Resource Recovery

Chairs and portfolio leads of the three central local boards attended a meeting with ACPL and the Waste Solutions team in July to discuss the current status and next steps for the Resource Recovery Centre. Auckland Transport has identified 27 Normandy Road as a site that is suitable for rehousing Life Church as the existing site is being utilised for the construction of the CRL. This proposal will be presented to the Finance and Performance Committee on the 20^th August. It is proposed that the report will request proceeds from the proposed sale of 27 Normandy Road to be used if required for the purchase of a suitable site or drop off points for a Community Resource Centre.

No other centrally located council owned site has been identified as suitable but other sites that are non-council could be suitable. ACPL has not progressed these as there is no capital funding available to purchase a site.

The Waste Solutions team briefed members on a possible alternate strategy for the central area which would involve locating the main processing functions on to council owned industrial land in Onehunga and establishing two community-run drop-offs in the central area and link these to the processing facility. There is currently budget in the LTP for a processing unit in Maungakiekie-Tamaki. The Waste Solutions team are developing indicative costings for the alternative strategy.

Representatives from the three central boards will be attending the Finance and Performance Committee on the 20^th August to speak to the report.

Heritage, Urban Design and Planning

4.10 Aotea Development Framework

The ‘Towards an Aotea Quarter Framework – Consultation Document’ is being presented to the Auckland Development Committee on 13^th August to seek approval for its release for public and stakeholder engagement, as the next step towards adoption of the Framework in late 2015.

The report includes a section on the boards views, which highlights the specific feedback given on the relationship to Myers Park and related expectations on any future development outcomes for the South Town Hall site i.e. minimisation of shading affects, legibility and visual connection to Myers Park and Aotea Square and promotion of land-uses that activate the area and support the creative cluster.

As well as more generally, the expectation that any development on identified opportunity sites, would support the overall outcomes stated for the area and have a preference for ensuring the Council retain long-term control of the public space and sites i.e. freehold ownership.

4.11 Heritage Foreshore Project

The Resource Consent application for the installation of all the interpretation panel locations, for rules under the PAUP, Auckland Council District Plan (Auckland City Isthmus Section) and Auckland Council District Plan (Auckland City Central Area Section) was lodged on Friday 26th June. At this stage the application is still being processed with the outcome of the application and conditions within the consent unknown. The granting of this consent will be a major milestone for the project as it means that initial statutory requirements have been fulfilled. A pre-application walkover of the route with a Graham Street planning officer did not indicate there to be any concerns with the application.

All thirteen mana whenua groups indicated by Te Waka Angamua as having an interest in the Waitematā Local Board area were contacted during the consenting process. Support was sought for project (and as such for the Resource Consent application) on the basis of the provision of high level support for the concept of the project and that further consultation will occur once the consent has been granted for the content of the interpretation panel. A number of groups attended a walkover of the route.

Once the Resource Consent has been granted (and as such that statutorily the project has an assurance that it can proceed):

1) The first draft of interpretation panel concepts will be presented to the Board for feedback

2) A follow-up letter will be sent to mana whenua to confirm which groups retain an interest in the content of the interpretation panels

3) A Hui is organised for the mana whenua groups interested in the content to discuss the proposed content

It is not known how many rounds of consultation will be required with mana whenua before all parties are supportive of the content of the interpretation panels.

4.12 Seismic Guidelines

The completion of the guidance book was delayed due to a number of required amendments to make it more accessible and user friendly. The document is now at the final stages and will be presented to the Board for endorsement before commencing the design process.

Transport

4.13 Parnell Greenways

Kiwirail have sold the land at Cheshire Street to a developer. Parks and Recreation Policy are briefing ACPL to begin the process of securing an easement to secure the Ngahere Terrace connection. Auckland Transport have concluded that the G2 greenway route along Waipapa Valley is feasible and will be reporting back to the Board on these findings in September. Auckland Transport have indicated to the developer that there are plans in place to develop a greenways route and will undertake negotiations for access once the project is live.

4.14 Greenway Regional Fund

A city centre network package valued at $20.33m was recently announced and will be undertaken over the next 3 years. Construction is anticipated to begin in late 2015. This will include key connections, including Karangahape Road and Upper Queen Street, Quay Street and the Waterfront and a number of east-west connections.

A report is being prepared for the Parks, Sport and Recreation Committee. The report looks at what budgets are available to support Greenways across the region and a proposed structure to support this.

5 Portfolio Updates

Arts, Culture & Events

5.1 Events

· Events sub-Portfolio – Auckland Council monthly meeting last met 15 July 2015.

· Events sub-Portfolio – ATEED bi-monthly meeting last met on 15 July 2015

5.1.1 Events Consultation

The Waitemata Local Board based events that Council Events or ATEED have consulted the local board on, for events occurring since August, are attached and marked as Attachment B.

5.2 Arts & Culture

The Arts & Culture sub-Portfolio monthly meeting last met 20 May 2015.

5.2.1 POP Programme

The 2015 Pop programme concluded successfully in July with POP Ping Pong in Parnell’s Heard Park and POP Plinths relocated to various locations.

5.2.2 Parnell Festival of Roses

The Arts, Culture and Events portfolio discussed the pros and cons of reducing the Parnell Festival of Roses to a one day event. The Parnell Festival of Roses has grown from a grass roots afternoon to a two-day event, anticipated annually by the local community. Historically, the event is held over two days during November at Dove Myer Robinson Park, Parnell, attracting over 8,000 people over the course of the two days. Last year the event saw an attendance reduction by half to 4,000 over the two days. Although weather was a factor the attendance level was noticeable.

The Events Delivery team have looked at the possibility of changing the event from two days back to a one day event. The portfolio agreed that the event should be reduced to a one day due to it being more cost effective and potentially increasing the attendance overall. Parnell Heritage Trust, Parnell Community Committee and Parnell Inc. were approached to receive feedback on the preferred day, Saturday or Sunday. Although not all accepted the reduction in days, the consensus is Sunday as the preferred day for the festival.

5.2.3 Myers Park Event

The events facilitation presented two options for the portfolio leads to consider with the recommended option being a centralised event due to restraints in budget. The event will be a low key local event held at Myers Park on the 28^th February. Possibilities of integrating the event as part of the wider music in parks are being explored as well as holding the event late afternoon early evening.

5.2.4 Queens Wharf Public Artwork

The hearing on the resource consent application “to place a public artwork at the northern end of Queens Wharf” is due to take place in the second week of August. The public were at least given a say.

5.3 Parks & Open Spaces

The Parks & Open Space Portfolio last met 4 June 2015.

5.3.1 Costley Reserve playground opening

On 27 June 2015, the Board celebrated the upgrade of its first local playground at Costley Reserve in a small ceremony involving local residents.

5.3.2 254 Ponsonby Road Development

An interim steering group has been formed and an agreement established to gain a consensus on how the group will work together. An action plan and mandate has also been developed which includes:

- Understand what the consultation told and report that back to the Waitematā Local Board

- Design a process or processes (may include events, a series of engagements, and use of social media) to “warm up” the community around a community led process in the redevelopment of 254 Ponsonby Road

- Create communication networks/paths for taking the messages to the community

- After fuller engagement with the community, design a process to set up a steering group to guide the project

- Engage the process and form the steering group

- Develop a brief for the steering group

ACPL have begun negotiations with Lion Liquor on a new short-term lease term for the premises. This will allow the flexibility to terminate the lease once an agreed solution has been reached and budget is in place for the development of the site.

5.3.3 Myers Park – stage II development

As a result of a worthy Pop-up proposal for the Greys Avenue carpark there may need be a delay to the currently proposed construction works timeframe of the Myers Park underpass and entrance ways works. This is due to conflicts with access and noise implications. It is estimated that as a result of the 4 month delay in construction this may add a further $100,000 to the total project cost. $50,000 from the activation budget funded by the City Centre targeted rate will be utilised to mitigate this increase whilst the remaining $50k will need to be absorbed within the Myers Park current budget. Announcements on the Pop-up project will be made shortly.

5.3.4 Weona-Westmere Coastal Walkway Stage I

This project is progressing. Several different issues have caused project delays and some increased costs: Discovery of old asbestos fencing in the ground, plus other dumped material; several neighbouring trees (on private property) have dropped limbs; inclement weather; deliberate vandalism.

All asbestos has been dealt with on site. Site Safety has been updated to restrict work during high winds and very heavy rain, and Parks is working with landowners to obtain permission for tree removal; incidents of vandalism are being reported to the police.

Detailed designs for stage 2 have been completed and will be out for tender soon. Physical works for stage 2 are due to commence in December 2015.

5.3.5 Cowie Street

There are two streams where Auckland Transport are engaging with the local board for the Cowie Street Bridge project, one is for landowner approval for Newmarket Park and the second is for feedback from a local perspective on the transport outcomes and impacts. Currently AT is seeking landowner approval to advance to lodgement of the NOR, with the second stream being an on-going discussion over the design phase.

The project is seeking approval from the AT Board on 4th August for approval to proceed with lodgement in September.

The Parks Portfolio on recommendation from Parks has agreed to approve Local Board Landowner Approval, subject to the normal conditions around on-going liaison as designs develop. The landowner approval will provide consent for the use of the park for the swale and rain garden.

The Parks Portfolio requested as a condition that the service lane connection to the bridge be the same width as the future greenways route (G2) to ensure its future proofed.

In addition to the landowner consent a divestment of park land process will be required for the footpath and road area which encroaches into the park. This process will be managed by ACPL.

5.4 Auckland City Centre Advisory Board

The Board last met on 22 July 2015.

Attached and marked as Attachment C is the July 2015 Progress Update Report.

6 In the Press Update

Some of the activities from the last report of local Board activities were as follows:

6.1 Community Leadership

· The Hobson, June and July editions – Chair/Board’s monthly report.

Copies are attached and marked as Attachment D.

· Ponsonby News, July and August 2015 editions – “Chair’s Waitemata Local Board Report”. Chair, Board, monthly reports.

Copies are attached and marked as Attachment E.

7 Meetings/Events

In addition to responsibilities in constituency work and community engagement, and any matters noted above, I have undertaken the following Portfolio or Board Chair responsibilities:

7.1 Community & Civic Leadership:

Attended:

· Waitemata Local Board, 2 June 2015

· Meeting with representative of Western Springs Event, 2 June 2015

· Visit to Mahatma Gandhi Centre, Eden Terrace, 3 June 2015

· Meeting with representative of potential new Event, 3 June 2015

· Representation Review Working Party, Albert St, 9 June 2015

· Waitemata Local Board Business Meeting, Parnell Jubilee, 9 June 2015

· Witness for Grey Lynn and Westmere Residents Association in support at Resource Consent Hearing for Little Grocer 311 Richmond Road, 12 June 2015.

Attached and marked as attachment F is the Chair’s presentation on behalf of the Board.

· Community Meeting on Western Park Development Plan, 16 June 2015

· Waitemata Local Board Business Meeting, Grey Lynn, 13 July 2015

· Meeting on Western Springs Football Club, 20 July 2015

· Child Friendly Consultation presentation at Parnell District School, 22 July 2015

· Local Board chairs forum meeting, 27 July 2015

· Youth Advisory Panel Induction Evening, Auckland Town Hall, 27 July 2015

7.2 Board Leadership

Attended:

· Communications catch-up, 3 June 2015

· Media catch-up, 3 June 2015

· Weekly update with Relationship Manager, 3 June 2015

· Engagement catch-up, 3 June 2015

· Parks Portfolio Monthly Meeting, 4 June 2015

· Debrief on Western Park consultation, 4 June 2015

· Weekly update with Relationship Manager, 8 June 2015

· Myers Park underpass project, 10 June 2015

· Photo at Central Library (POP word), 10 June 2015

· Waitemata Local Board workshop, 11 June 2015

· Newmarket Laneways stakeholders workshop, 11 June 2015

· Symonds Street Cemetery Korero, 15 June 2015

· Engagement catch-up, 15 June 2015

· Weekly update with Relationship Manager, 15 June 2015

· Waitemata Local Board Workshop, 16 June 2015

· Updates on ATEED Events, 17 June 2015

· Events Portfolio Monthly Meeting, 17 June 2015

· Achievement Report meeting, 17 June 2015

· Newmarket Laneways Member Working Group Update, 17 June 2015

· Weekly update with Relationship Manager, 13 July 2015

· Korero session on Symonds Street Cemetery, 13 July 2015

· Community Facilities Partnership Committee, 14 July 2015

· Pop Up Globe presentation, 14 July 2015

· Waitemata Local Board Business Meeting, Grey Lynn Community Centre, 14 July 2015

· Events portfolio bi-monthly meeting with ATEED, 15 July 2015

· Events portfolio monthly meeting, 15 July 2015

· Wynyard Quarter redevelopment, 15 July 2015

· Media catch-up, 15 July 2015

· Waitemata Local Board Workshop, 16 July 2015

· Pioneer Women’s project update, 20 July 2015

· Weekly update with Relationship Manager, 20 July 2015

· Local Board briefing on the final Regional Land Transport Plan, 20 July 2015

· Meeting on 27 Normanby Road, 20 July 2015

· Briefing on the BIDs workshop, 20 July 2015

· Waitemata Local Board Workshop, 21 July 2015

· Meeting on Western Springs Association Club new lease, Seddon Fields, 21 July 2015

· Auckland Domain Committee agenda briefing, 22 July 2015

· Finance Committee and LIPs portfolio meeting, 23 July 2015

· Meeting on the final draft of the Western Park development plan, 23 July 2015

· Meeting on Pop-up proposal and Myers Park project, 23 July 2015

· BIDs workshop, 23 July 2015

· Meeting with Cr Mike Lee, 24 July 2015

· Weekly update with Relationship Manager, 27 July 2015

· Waitemata Local Board Workshop, 28 July 2015

· Meeting with Chief of Staff, Barry Ebert, 29 July 2015

· Media catch-up with Cathy McIntosh, 29 July 2015

· Local Board briefing Arts and Culture Strategic Plan, Albert Street, 29 July 2015

· Freemans Bay residential parking zone Public Meeting, 29 July 2015

· Meeting on Land Owner Approval for Newmarket Park (Cowie St), 30 July 2015

7.3 Events, including Civic

Attended:

· Speaker at Parnell Baths Book Launch, ‘Parnell Baths – a Jewel in Auckland’s Crown’, Parnell Library, 4 June 2015.

Attached and marked as attachment G are the Chair’s speaking notes.

· Good Citizens’ Award Ceremony, Town Hall, 17 June 2015.

· NZ International Film Festival – Opening Night, 16 July 2015

· Speaker at the celebration of the completed refurbishment and re-opening of Waitemata Plaza, 28 July 2015

Attached and marked as attachment H is the Chair’s address.

8.4 City Centre Economic Development

(Heart of the City & Auckland City Centre Advisory Board)

Attended:

· Heart of the City Committee Meeting, Lorne St, 10 June 2015

· Auckland City Centre Advisory Board meeting, 22 July 2015

· Catch-up with Viv Beck, Heart of the City CE, 31 July 2015

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Chair's Address tp Good Citizens' Awards	333
b View	Council/ATEED events have consulted on, for events occurring from August 2015	335
c View	Auckland City Centre Advisor Board July Projects Update Report	337
d View	The Hobson, Chair's July 2015 Local Board Columns	343
e View	Ponsonby News, Chair's Waitemata Local Board Report July and August 2015	345
f View	Chair's presentation to Little Grocer Hearing	347
g View	Chair's speaking notes to Parnell Bath's book launch	355
h View	Chair's speech notes to Waitemata Plaza Re-opening	357

Signatories

Authors	Shale Chambers, Chair, Waitemata Local Board
Authorisers	Judith Webster - Relationship Manager

Chairperson	Shale Chambers
Deputy Chairperson	Pippa Coom
Members	Christopher Dempsey
	Greg Moyle
	Vernon Tava
	Rob Thomas
	Deborah Yates

Projects Under Construction (as of August 2015)		Projects Delivered (FY2015-16)
PT Infrastructure	Parnell Station	Walking & Cycling	Carlton Gore Cycle lane
PT Infrastructure	Parnell Road Southbound bus lane	Road Maintenance	Ponsonby Road Resurfacing – Cycling Improvements
PT Network	Double decker bus enabling works
Roading/Public Spaces	Wynyard Quarter Road and Public Space Improvements
Walking & Cycling	Beach Road Walking and Cycling – Stage 2
Walking & Cycling	Wynyard Quarter Interim Cycle Path
Minor Safety Improvements	Parnell Road/Parnell Rise Intersection Upgrade
Major Projects	Nelson Street Cycleway – Phase 1 (Off-ramp)

Item	Topic	Lead officer	Notes
1.	Ponsonby Community Centre	Robert Matamu (Ponsonby Community Centre) John Hill (Chair, Ponsonby Community Centre Board), Julie Ferguson (Head Teacher)	An update on activities undertaken over 2014/15 financial year was provided to the Board.
2.	Greenways Stocktake	Kathryn King (Walking and Cycling Manager), Shyrel Burt (Principle Policy Analyst), Priscilla Steel (Relationship Manager), Mark Miller (Manager Local and Sports Parks Central)	The outcomes of the Urban Cycleway Fund were reported to the Board. Officers discussed the proposed routes and timeframes for completion. The strategy is to focus on building up a connected cycleway network in the centre of Auckland. The coming 3 year programme has identified 3 greenways route; Grey Lynn, Western Bays and Parnell
3	Myers Park Stage 2 Concept	Mark Miller (Manager Local and Sports Parks Central), Oliver Kunzendorff (Senior Project Manager), Dave Little (Team Leader Design)	An update on the developed design for Myers Park Stage 2 was presented. A report for endorsement of the design will be presented at the August business meeting.

Item	Topic	Lead officer	Notes
1.	2017 World Masters Games	Jennah Wootten (World Masters Games), Becs Temple (ATEED)	The Chief Executive at World Masters Games 2017 provided a briefing on the plans for the World Masters Games.
2.	Ellen Melville Centre	Lisa Spasic (Senior Project Leader), Gary McShane (Project Manager), Yvette Overdyck (Stevens Lawson Architects), Nicholas Stevens (Stevens Lawson Architects), Sarah Bishop	The draft concept plans for Freyberg Square and Ellen Melville Centre were presented for discussion with the Board. The concepts will be presented to the Board business meeting in August for endorsement before consultation.
3	Contestable Events Fund	Irene Shepherd (Events Facilitator)	The remaining contestable event fund applications were considered for recommendation to the Board business meeting in August.

Item	Topic	Lead officer	Notes
1.	Newmarket Laneways Consultation Outcomes	Keren Carlyle (Project Leader) Claire Stewart (Community Development Facilitator)	The outcomes of the public consultation on the draft Newmarket Laneways Plan and the 6 options were presented to the Board for consideration. The results presented included the 188 submissions received from Parnell District School and Newmarket School
2.	Local Board Capex Fund	Audrey Gan (Lead Finance Officer)	The Board considered the funding model options and the recommended funding policy amendments for the $10m Local Board Capex Fund.
3	Quarterly Report	Audrey Gan (Lead Financial Advisor)	Officers presented the key messages from the quarterly report covering April – June 2015.

Authors	Desiree Tukutama - Democracy Advisor
Authorisers	Judith Webster - Relationship Manager

Authors	Priscilla Steel – Elected Member Relationship Manager
Authorisers	Roger Wilson – Auckland Transport Council Engagement Manager