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, 11 August 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 - Smokefree in Auckland, Natalie Gill

Purpose

Natalie Gill will speak to the Waitemata Local Board about Smokefree in Auckland.

Recommendation

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a) Thank Natalie Gill for her 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

11.1 Notice of Motion - Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement

In accordance with Standing Order 3.11.1, the following Notice of Motion has been received from Member Vernon Tava for inclusion on the agenda for the Waitematā Local Board meeting being held on day, Tuesday, 8 September 2015:

Recommendations

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a) That the Waitematā Local Board notes that:

(i) While the proposed Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA) will hopefully generate economic benefits to New Zealand through increased trading opportunities for exporters, there are also significant potential risks to our sovereignty, environment and way of life;

(ii) The TPPA negotiations have been conducted over the last eight years without any public disclosure of the contents let alone consultation or adequate debate about its principles or provisions;

(iii) The only publicly available information about the detail of the proposed treaty has come about through partial leaks and overseas sources;

(iv) Much of this agreement goes well beyond its ostensible purpose of free-trade and consists of provisions to protect the interests of multi-national corporations, including investor-state rules that would allow multi-national companies to sue our government for damages in secret tribunals if laws or regulations or policies of either local or central government affected their ability to trade or make a profit within New Zealand;

(v) A resolution was passed by Auckland Council on 20^th December 2012, particularly clause (xii) which calls for TPPA negotiations to be conducted with “real public consultation including regular public releases of the text of the agreement and ratification being conditional on a full social, environmental and economic assessment including public submissions;”

(vi) The Government has apparently ignored the Council resolution, and similar resolutions from other Councils and numerous other public interest organisations and refuses to release any meaningful information about the contents of the treaty.

b) That the Waitematā Local Board requests Auckland Council to:

(i) Seek clarification from the Minister of Trade on how their recommendations are being addressed in current negotiations; and

(ii) Make available to Local Boards and Auckland Citizens the government’s response as well as an analysis of the adequacy of undertakings to address Council’s concerns.

c) Requests that this resolution and background information be circulated to the Mayor and Governing Body, and all other Local Boards.

Background

1. The Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA) is being negotiated between the New Zealand Government and 11 other trading partners making up a significant share of world trade.

2. In pursuit of improved markets for our export goods the New Zealand Government is a very enthusiastic advocate for the TPPA but has consistently down-played or ignored potential risks in the long-term to the health and welfare of New Zealanders or the ability of future governments to legislate or regulate in their interests or on their behalf.

3. Apart from frequent statements about the supposed trading benefits of the TPPA, the government has been very reluctant to discuss any of the potential down sides, and has provided no substantive information to facilitate informed debate on them. Official consultation has been primarily with those who stand to benefit – leaders of the primary industries and export manufacturers. But there has been no corresponding conversation with the general public or groups who perceive potential risks (such as educational, medical, environmental, and legal bodies, trade unions and local government).

4. Although frequently described as a free-trade agreement, this proposed treaty has become much broader since the United States of America became a party, containing numerous arcane chapters that provide protection for investors against domestic laws and policies (including those of local government) that may in any way limit or affect their ability to make a profit.

5. In the absence of a government-led debate there has been widespread public discussion centred on partial leaks of draft chapters, or analysis of similar agreements containing investor-state rules, notably the North America Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) which has covered Canada, Mexico and the U.S.A. since 1994. NAFTA is the model for the TPPA.

6. Auckland Council passed a resolution on the TPPA in 2012 [attached below].

Resolution RDO/2012/266 passed at:

Regional Development and Operations Committee meeting of 6/12/2012

Moved Cr M. A. Hartley, seconded Cr W. Walker

“That the Regional Development and Operations Committee encourages the government to conclude negotiations on the Trans-Pacific Partnership and Free Trade Agreements in a way that provides net positive benefits for Auckland and New Zealand, that is provided the Partnership and Agreements achieve the following objectives:

(i) Continues to allow the Auckland Council and other councils, if they so choose, to adopt procurement policies that provide for a degree of local preference; to choose whether particular services or facilities are provided in house, by council-controlled organizations (CC0s) or by contracting out; or to require health and safety, environmental protection, employment rights and conditions, community participation, animal protection or human rights standards than national or international minimum standards;

(ii) Maintains good diplomatic and trade relations and partnerships for Auckland and New Zealand with other major trading partners not included in the agreement, including with China;

(iii) Provides substantially increased access for our agricultural exports, particularly those from the Auckland region, into the US Market;

(iv) Does not undermine PHARMAC, raise the cost of medical treatments and medicines or threaten public health measures, such as tobacco control;

(v) Does not give overseas investors or suppliers any greater rights than domestic investors and suppliers, such as through introducing Investor-State Dispute Settlement, or reduce our ability to control overseas investment or finance;

(vi) Does not expand intellectual property rights and enforcement in excess of current law;

(vii) Does not weaken our public services, require privatisation, hinder reversal of privatisations, or increase the commercialisation of government or of Auckland Council or other local government organizations;

(viii) Does not reduce our flexibility to support local economic and industry development and encourage good employment and environmental practices and initiatives like Council Cadetships, COMET, and the Mayors’ Taskforce for Jobs which enable marginalized young people to develop their skills and transition into meaningful employment;

(ix) Contains enforceable labour clauses requiring adherence to core International Labour Organisation conventions and preventing reduction of labour rights for trade or investment advantage;

(x) Contains enforceable environmental clauses preventing reduction of environmental standards for trade or investment advantage;

(xi) Has general exceptions to protect human rights, the environment, the Treaty of Waitangi, and New Zealand’s economic and financial stability;

(xii) Has been negotiated with real public consultation including regular public releases of drafts of the text of the agreement, and ratification being conditional on a full social, environmental and economic impact assessment including public submissions.”

7. For specific instances of how Local Government can be affected by such an international agreement the experience of Canada and Mexico over the last two decades under the NAFTA is instructive. Following complaints about health effects from residents of Guadalcázar City, Mexico, local officials forced Metalclad to cease operations at its landfill because it contained 20,000 tons of improperly dumped hazardous waste close to the town water supply. In 1997, the company sued the Mexican Government (Metalclad Corporation v. The United Mexican States, ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/97/1) – only national governments can be sued under the Investor State rules – for US$90 million in damages under Chapter 11 of NAFTA. At a closed hearing held in Canada an arbitration panel awarded them $16.7 million. Although this amount was later reduced it is of deep concern that local government can be penalised like this for carrying out one of their most important roles, ensuring that their citizens have safe drinking water.

Attachments

a Notice of Motion - Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement - Vernon Tava.............................................................................................................. 363

Waitematā Local Board

08 September 2015

Auckland Transport Update - September 2015

File No.: CP2015/18172

Purpose

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

Executive summary

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

Recommendations

That the Waitemata Local Board:

a) Receive the Auckland Transport Update – September 2015 report.

b) Approve a budget of $500,000 from its Local Board Transport Capital Fund to contribute to the delivery of the Newmarket Laneways Plan.

Comments

Project Updates

Beach Road Phase 2 Cycleway

3. On 18 September, Auckland Transport and Auckland Council will open Stage 2 of the Beach Road Cycleway.

4. Stage one of the Beach Road Walking and Cycling project was completed in September 2014 to coincide with the opening of Grafton Gully Cycleway to which it connects.

5. Construction on stage two began in March 2015, extending stage one from Mahuhu Crescent through to Britomart Place, connecting with the planned Quay Street Cycleway, expected to begin construction in early 2016.

6. The upgrade is part of Auckland Council’s City Centre Masterplan and of the $3.5 million project cost, $1.5 million is funded through the City Centre Targeted Rate, a special rate that all city businesses pay to fund improvements to streets, parks and plazas.

7. In addition to creating a cycle route, the project has upgraded the Beach Road street environment using distinctive patterned concrete paving, with small pocket parks dotted along the route to act as a natural demarcation between the pedestrian and cycle paths. Coastal plants feature within the pocket parks reflecting the location’s history as Auckland’s shoreline. Seating and feature lighting transforms the street into a place to relax and spend time.

8. Beach road cycleway adds to Auckland’s growing network of safe separated cycle routes. It enables people of all ages and abilities to ride into the city centre and to connect with other cycle routes.

Freemans Bay Residential Parking Zone - Progress

9. Consultation for the Freemans Bay Residential Parking Zone closed on 21 August 2015.

10. The Residential Parking Zone scheme seeks to improve parking availability for local residents and local businesses within the residential parking zone.

11. AT will present the outcome of the public consultation to the Board in September/October and give the Board an opportunity to provide its formal feedback on the proposal.

Local Board Transport Capital Fund Update

12. Newmarket Rail Station Artwork Fencing - The Board through the Arts Portfolio has endorsed a fence design that complements the adjacent Reuben Paterson artwork to proceed to construction. The Board’s allocated $5,000 for an upgraded fence design will complement renewals work AT will undertake on the bridge over rail structure. Update: A verbal update will be provided at the Board’s business meeting.

13. Drinking Fountains Programme – The Board resolved on 18 March 2014 [WTM/2014/37, WTM/2014/38] the intention to install three drinking fountains within their ward. A resolution was passed on 13 June 2014 to install a drinking fountain as part of the Upper Queen Street Bridge Cycleway project and on 10 March 2015 resolved to install a drinking fountain as part of the Carlton Gore Cycleway project and as part of Nelson Street Cycleway project. Update: The fountain for Carlton Gore Road Cycleway has been installed and is operational. The fountain base for the Nelson Street Cycleway project has been installed at corner of Nelson and Union, outside number 159 Nelson Street.

14. Waitemata Greenways Route G1 Grey Lynn Park Shared Path – The route was included in Auckland Council’s (AC) consultation on the Grey Lynn Park Development Plan. Update: Auckland Council is continuing to deliver the in-park component as funded by the Board. The Waitemata Greenways Route was included and funding approved through the NZTA Urban Cycleways Programme. Planning for the route is underway by AT’s Walking and Cycling Team.

15. Ponsonby Road Pedestrian Improvements – The project for a continuous pedestrian experience supports one of the outcomes of the Ponsonby Road Plan. The Board approved at an RCO to be undertaken at their 12 May business meeting AT the Board’s 5 May workshop and reaffirmed at the 12 May business meeting, the Board requested AT to undertake a Rough Order Cost estimate for a continuous pedestrian experience to be provided for on Ponsonby Road between Franklin Road to Williamson Avenue. The ROC and draft concept was presented to the Board’s June workshop, and the Board agreed to advance the project to preliminary design. Update: A project manager has been appointed and internal consultation is underway.

16. Newmarket Laneways Streetscape Improvements – AT has been working alongside City Transformation to develop proposals for delivery. The Board approved development of a Rough Order Cost estimate from its12 May business meeting which focused on six priority areas identified in the plan. Funding was approved in Council’s LTP of $3.5m, with the Board earmarking funding of $500,000 to contribute to the delivery of the plan. Update: An Action Plan has been developed between AT and City Transformation to spend the Board’s funding this financial year on opportunities identified. City Transformation’s recommendations are included in the Board’s September 2015 agenda papers, and the Board is therefore being asked to confirm the budget under its LBTCF for the Newmarket Laneways Plan.

17. The Board has $1,404,786 from 2012-13 to 2015-16 to allocate and has the ability to allocate the 2016-17 year budget of $469,789 at the board’s discretion. Of the total $1,874,575, the Ponsonby and Newmarket projects once budgeted will consume a large component of this fund.

Major Projects Delivery Programme 2015/16 – Waitemata

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

Consultations

18. AT undertook consultation with the Waitemata Local Board Transport Portfolio Leaders on the proposals listed in Attachment A should any further comments by the full Board wish to be made.

19. Projects that may be of particular interest to the Board are detailed below.

Proposed changes to Newmarket Loading Zones

20. After the installation of the paid parking zone in Newmarket, AT discovered that there is public confusion between the operational days for the loading zone when they are less than the operational days for the parking zone, and which restriction applies. This confusion has led customers to believing that a loading zone which operates between Monday to Saturday yet is located within the Monday to Sunday part of the paid parking zone is free unrestricted parking on the Sunday. In this case, the parking space covered by the loading zone becomes part of the paid parking zone and subject to its conditions.

21. To remove the ambiguity, AT is proposing to align the restrictions so that every loading zone in Newmarket which currently has shorter operational days than the paid parking zone become the same restriction, Attachment B and C.

22. In the majority of the cases this means a current Monday to Saturday loading zone will become a Monday to Sunday loading zone. The operational hours of the loading zones will remain 8am to 6pm. While this does not remove the available on-street kerb side parking, it does mean that those loading zone spaces which are currently free on Sunday will fall under the Newmarket Paid Parking Zone.

Berm Planting Policy

23. AT has developed a draft document setting out how planting in the road berm might be managed.

24. This draft was approved by the Customer Focus Committee, of the Auckland Transport Board to go out for consultation with Local Boards. AT will be seeking a workshop time to discuss the draft with local boards in September/October.

Media

City Rail Link Appeals Over

25. The City Rail Link (CRL) has reached a major milestone with all appeals to its land designation now resolved by agreement or dismissed.

26. Five of the six appeals were settled and the only appeal that went to the Environment Court has been dismissed.

27. The designation is now confirmed subject to finalisation of conditions by the Court.

28. Early works start in November this year. While there are still some other planning processes to work through in relation to regional consents and Britomart, AT anticipates a start on the cut and cover in Albert Street in May next year.

29. The Court’s decision ends a two and a half year planning process to get the designation for the project.

30. The now confirmed designation identifies land in the district plan for rail purposes and protects the route for the future.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

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

Māori impact statement

32. Mana whenua and Mana waka are consulted on Auckland Transport’s capital programme and proposed changes to policy.

Implementation

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

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Consultation Register	19
b View	Newmarket Loading Zones	21
c View	Newmarket Loading Zones Maps	23

Signatories

Authors	Priscilla Steel – Auckland Transport Elected Member Relationship Manager
Authorisers	Jonathan Anyon – Auckland Transport Council Engagement Manager

Waitematā Local Board

08 September 2015

Newmarket Laneways Plan update

File No.: CP2015/18552

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to seek Waitematā Local Board endorsement of the Newmarket Laneways Plan (August 2015) and the resulting Newmarket Laneways Streetscape Improvement Project following stakeholder, Mana Whenua and public consultation feedback.

Executive Summary

2. The development of the Newmarket Laneways Plan is a priority for the Waitematā Local Board. The purpose of the Plan is to set a framework to establish the priority for streetscape improvement projects in the area as funds become available over the next three years, whilst ensuring that the improvements contribute to a wider vision for the Laneways.

3. There is currently $4m allocated to Newmarket Laneways streetscape improvements.

4. The Newmarket Laneways Plan has been developed following consultation with key internal and external stakeholders, Mana Whenua and the public generally, via a public engagement exercise. The purpose of consultation was to test the vision and principles for the draft Plan, as well as confirm potential upgrade projects for delivery.

5. Opportunity 4 – Widen footpath on Teed Street is recommended to be taken forward as the preferred option for delivery by the Newmarket Laneways Streetscape Improvement project. Further resolution of what can be delivered with the $4 million total budget will be identified as part of the design phase of the project.

6. The second preference for the Newmarket Laneways Streetscape Improvement project is to take Opportunity 6 - Widen footpath along York Street and look to activate street edge by multi storey parking – forward for delivery. This option will be employed following approval by the Board should further resolution of Opportunity 4 – Widen footpath on Teed Street show major shortcomings in what can be delivered for the total project budget.

7. The current programme proposes that the design of the Newmarket Laneways Streetscape Improvement Project will commence in October 2015, with construction of the project, commencing in the years following (2016/17 and 2017/18).

Recommendations

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a) Receive the Newmarket Laneways Plan Update report.

b) Approve the Newmarket Laneways Plan (August 2015).

c) Approve in principle taking Opportunity 4 – Widen footpath on Teed Street - forward for delivery by the Newmarket Laneways Streetscape Improvement project.

d) Note that Opportunity 6 - Widen footpath along York Street and look to activate street edge by multi storey parking – is the second preference for the Newmarket Laneways Streetscape Improvement project delivery.

Comments

Background

8. The Waitematā Local Board Plan 2014 clearly identifies the need to effectively manage and plan for the expected growth of Newmarket as a Metropolitan Centre (under the Auckland Plan), to ensure the character, heritage and vitality of this community is retained. Given this, the Board has allocated $500,000 in the 2015/16 year from their Transport Capital Fund to commence an upgrade project in Newmarket.

9. The total budget available for the Newmarket upgrade project is $4 million. This is broken down as follows:

· $500,000 in the 2015/16 year from the Waitematā Local Board Transport Capital Fund; and

· $1.5 million in the 2016/17 year from the Auckland Council Long-Term Plan; and

· $2 million in the 2017/18 year from the Auckland Council Long-Term Plan.

10. The Waitematā Local Board (the Board) initiated the development of a Newmarket Laneways Plan (the Plan) to guide how this budget is to be invested.

Consultation

Internal and External Key Stakeholder consultation to date

11. Internal key stakeholder consultation has been carried out with officers from Auckland Council, Auckland Transport and the CCO’s via several project team and project steering group meetings.

12. External key stakeholder consultation has been carried out via a workshop at the Waitematā Local Board office in late 2014 and one-on-one meetings and correspondence. External key stakeholders who have been engaged with are:

· Newmarket Business Association

· Newmarket Community Association

· University of Auckland Council

· KiwiRail

· NZ Transport Agency

13. Consultation with key internal and external stakeholders informed the development of the draft Newmarket Laneways Plan, which was endorsed by the Waitematā Local Board at their March 2015 business meeting.

Engagement with Mana Whenua

14. Engagement with Mana Whenua on the draft Newmarket Laneways Plan commenced May 2015. Given the short timeframes, officers sought to work kanohi ki Te kanohi (face to face) with interested Mana Whenua to obtain their feedback. Ngai Tai Ki Tamaki expressed their interest in providing feedback to the Plan document.

15. Ngai Tai Ki Tamaki’s feedback was presented to the project working party in August 2015. The final Newmarket Laneways Plan has been developed to incorporate Ngai Tai Ki Tamaki’s feedback, following review by the working party in August 2015. All of the requested changes were incorporated into the document (Appendix A), with the exception of a request for a new section 2.2 titled “Waitemata Local Board Plan August 2014 – Commitment to Mana Whenua”. The working party considered that this commitment was already captured by the Waitematā Local Board Plan 2014.

16. Six groups also expressed their interest in being involved in the future Streetscape Improvement project. This initial communication does not preclude further engagement with Mana Whenua on the Streetscape Improvement project; Auckland Transport will lead this future engagement.

Public consultation

17. Following endorsement by the Waitematā Local Board of the draft Newmarket Laneways Plan at their March 2015 business meeting, Council officers commenced the public consultation process in May 2015.

18. The Board’s working party for the project supported the proposed tools for public consultation at a workshop in April 2015.

19. The outcome of the public consultation process was fed back to the Waitematā Local Board at a workshop in July 2015. Two further working party workshops in August 2015 reviewed the finalised plan, as well as the rationale behind the Newmarket Laneways Streetscape Improvement project.

20. In summary, 58 pieces of feedback were received from the public consultation exercise. Key themes of feedback included:

· The retention of on-street car parking was seen as important; however

· Equally important were improvements to cycling and walking facilities such as wider footpaths.

· Intersection safety also factored strongly in the feedback.

21. The Newmarket Laneways Plan Consultation Report is attached in Appendix B.

22. Parnell District School and Newmarket Primary School developed a child friendly version of the feedback form and undertook their own child friendly consultation. In total 188 feedback responses were received.

Key themes of feedback included:

· A large majority of respondents prioritised the creation of child friendly public spaces (89%). Although the general public considered this less of a priority, it is vital to recognise that children’s voices for this principle carries more weight.

· In line with the general survey results, respondents prioritised moving around the streets easily without feeling uncomfortable or unsafe (89%), getting around easier (walking, skating, scootering or skateboarding) (68%), and creating public spaces that are usable as social places that are safe to hangout in was considered important by more than three quarters of respondents (77%).

· Safety came up more than once with 88% considering it important to make Newmarket safer.

· Creating fun public spaces also ranked high on their list (85%), as did building understanding of how young people like to use public space (79%).

· Children support using sustainable, locally sourced materials for development (67%), for businesses to work together to make it easier to move between shops and businesses (67%) and in retaining Newmarket’s history (64%).

Newmarket Laneways Streetscape Improvement project prioritisation exercise

23. The current programme proposes that the design of the Newmarket Laneways Streetscape Improvement projects will commence in October 2015, with construction beginning in mid to late 2016.

24. The Waitematā Local Board agreed in a Members Working Group update in June 2015 that all funding parts making up the total $4 million would be combined to deliver the Newmarket Laneways Streetscape Improvement project. This was confirmed once again at an Auckland Transport update meeting with the Board in July 2015.

25. The delivery cost of each of the six Priority Opportunities has been estimated by an independent Quantity Surveyor, with Osborne Street being used as an example of desired outcome (e.g. footpath width, quality of materials, the installation of traffic calming measures, street planting types etc).

26. Priority Opportunities 4 and 5 (Teed and Kent Street) were estimated to cost above the $4 million budget. .

Total Physical Works Estimate (incl Professional fees and Contingency)		Estimate ($) Excl GST
1	Khyber Pass Road	$4,750,000
2	Broadway	$2,180,000
3	Bourke Street	$4,090,000
4	Teed Street	$6,840,000
5	Kent Street	$7,000,000
6	York Street	$2,050,000
	TOTAL	$26,910,000

27. Officers have developed basic design scenarios to indicate what they believe could be delivered with the $4 million budget available.

28. Because the outcome from public consultation showed no strong preference for any of the six Priority Opportunities, Officers tested the basic design scenarios for each, against the following criteria:

· For and against reasons, from a strategic, need of renewal or delivery perspective.

· Are there other projects happening currently or in the near future (1-3 years) that will aide in the delivery of, or deliver the Opportunity for us.

· Will the Opportunity scenario outcome align with the Vision and Principles of the Newmarket Laneways Plan?

· Are there other projects or works happening within Auckland Council, Auckland Transport or the other CCO’s, that will aide in the delivery, or deliver the Opportunity independent of the Newmarket Laneways Streetscape Improvement project.

· Alignment with the outcomes of the public consultation including the child friendly consultation undertaken by the Parnell District School and Newmarket Primary School

29. Officers found that Priority Opportunities 4, 5 and 6 (Teed, Kent and York Streets) rated highest against the criteria.

30. Of the three, only Opportunity 6 could benefit from combining with existing scheduled works; these being an Auckland Transport led minor kerb and carriageway renewal. Further, it is believed that Opportunity 6 could be delivered in the 2015/16 financial year. This is however, dependent on the LTP funding in years 2016/17 and 2017/18 being brought forward to fund the works, which is not possible at this stage.

31. It should be noted that all three of the Opportunities listed above (4-6) will involve removal of some parking which will be a concern to some stakeholders. Further, initial costings of Opportunities 4 and 5 shows that they will cost significantly more than the available budget to deliver; further investigation is required to determine what scope of works can be delivered by the budget available.

Newmarket Laneways Streetscape Improvement project – Officer recommendation

32. Officers recommend that Opportunity 4 – Widen footpath along Teed Street - be prioritised for delivery as Plan A by the Newmarket Laneways Streetscape Improvement project. This is for the following reasons:

· Immediate need to provide pedestrian space on northern side of street; access along this side of the street is compromised significantly by vehicle overhang.

· The width of the street (building line to building line) provides for considerable flexibility of design; better amenity for pedestrians and cyclists can be achieved, whilst retaining some on-street parking.

· Removal of angled parking enables reallocation of space to pedestrians, whilst maintaining some parking and two-way traffic.

· The removal of angled parking improves safety for cyclists and people crossing the road.

· Teed Street already has a good mix of boutique retail and hospitality to support street trading and street activation.

· There are already high numbers of pedestrians using the street.

· Teed Street is already a slow-speed environment.

33. Issues to consider around the delivering of Opportunity 4 include:

· The removal of some on-street parking is likely to face opposition by some stakeholders.

· To offset on-street parking removal, we are relying on private car parking building owners coming on board.

Opportunities 5 and 6 share tissues as delivering Opportunity 4.

34. Because of the budget concern outlined above, Officers recognise that further resolution of what can be delivered by Plan A within the project budget needs to be identified early in the design phase.

35. Should further resolution of Plan A show major shortcomings in what can be delivered within the project budget, Officers may recommend that Opportunity 6 be taken forward as the second preferred option for the Newmarket Laneways Streetscape Improvement project delivery. If actioned, this change of scope will be brought to the Waitematā Local Board for their consideration and approval. Further, Officers will continue to pursue other funding opportunities to aide in the delivery of Opportunity 4.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

36. Following the development of the initial Newmarket Laneways Plan in July 2014, there have been a number of workshops held with the Waitematā Local Board to refine the document content and agree the process for delivery of the Newmarket Laneways Streetscape Improvement project.

Māori impact statement

37. The unitary plan shows no areas of significance or value to Mana Whenua within the Newmarket Laneways study area, although it is recognised that the Auckland Domain is.

38. Regardless of this, Auckland Council Officers carried out a desktop exercise to understand the cultural significance of Newmarket further, before asking Mana Whenua to provide feedback to the draft Plan. As part of this engagement, Mana Whenua were also asked to register their interest in being involved in the Newmarket Laneways Streetscape Improvement project going forwards.

39. The final Newmarket Laneways Plan has been developed to incorporate feedback received from Mana Whenua, following review by the working party.

40. This initial communication does not preclude further engagement with Mana Whenua on the Streetscape Improvement project; Auckland Transport will lead this future engagement.

Implementation

41. The Waitematā Local Board has allocated $500,000 of their 2015/16 Transport Capital Fund to Newmarket Laneways upgrades. A further $3.5 million has been allocated in the Auckland Council Long-Term Plan (2016-2018).

42. Following public, Mana Whenua and further key stakeholder consultation the draft Newmarket Laneways Plan has been updated to the final version for endorsement by the Waitematā Local Board at their September 2015 business meeting.

43. Officers recommend that Opportunity 4 – Widen footpath on Teed Street be taken forwards as Plan A for delivery by the Newmarket Laneways Streetscape Improvement project.

44. The current programme proposes that the design of the Newmarket Laneways Streetscape Improvement Project will commence in October 2015, with construction of the project, commencing in the years following (2016/17 and 2017/18).

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Newmarket Laneways Plan August 2015	31
b View	Newmarket Laneways Plan Consultation Report	63

Signatories

Authors

Keren Carlyle - Project Leader

Authorisers

Penny Pirrit – GM Plans & Places

Judith Webster - Relationship Manager

Waitematā Local Board

08 September 2015

254 Ponsonby Road, Ponsonby, Auckland Central - Application for Extension of Commercial Lease Term - Lion Liquor Limited

File No.: CP2015/18656

Purpose

1. This report seeks to gain support from the Waitemata Local Board for the application to extend the commercial lease term over the site at 254 Ponsonby Road, Ponsonby, Auckland Central; this will be by way of variation to the current lease agreement.

Executive Summary

2. Lion Liquor Retail Limited (the tenant) has held a lease over the site at 254 Ponsonby Road, Ponsonby since 1 July 1991; the lease finally expired on 30 July 2012. An application to extend the lease term by way of variation of lease was processed for a further two years effective from 1 August 2012 to 31 July 2014. However, given the lack of stability over the site’s future use the variation of lease documentation was never finalised and the tenant has remained on a month to month roll over agreement to date. The tenant leases both the building and land from Auckland Council and manages a sub-lease arrangement directly with Nosh.

3. The Tenant wishes to remain on site for as long as possible and has applied to extend the lease tenure. Council’s principal policy analyst in conjunction with the Local Board has advised that the future of this site is aligned with the impending master plan for Ponsonby and includes a number of concepts for developing 254 Ponsonby Road; one of which is community /open space use. Any movement to formalise a new lease term beyond the next two years and six months would not be favoured by the Local Board and the local community.

4. Given the time frame to redevelop the site has not yet been confirmed Auckland Council Property Limited (ACPL) recommends that retaining the current commercial tenant on an extension of lease term with a six termination clause applicable after two years is the most viable option.

5. Given the location and the high cost of associated maintenance it is strongly recommended that retaining the current tenant and extending the lease term would be advantageous and provide interim stability for all stakeholders. ACPL has the delegation to approve the extension of commercial lease terms for non-service premises zoned as “business use”. However, given the premises was acquired for potential future community use the Waitemata Local Board is seen as an integral stakeholder, hence the request to provide support of this application prior to proceeding.

Recommendations

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a) That the Waitemata Local Board agree to support the extension of the commercial lease term by way of variation of the current lease to Lion Liquor Retail Limited over the premises located at 254 Ponsonby Road, Ponsonby, Auckland Central, subject to the following terms and conditions:

i) an extension of commercial lease term of three years applicable from 1 August 2015;

ii) one further right of renewal of three years applicable from 1 August 2018;

iii) Final expiry date 30 September 2021 (if all rights of renewal are exercised);

iv) A six month termination clause applies after a two year period being 1 August 2017 should vacant possession of all or any part of the premises be required for any reason.

Comments

6. The Auckland Council Principal Policy Analyst has confirmed support in conjunction with the Local Board to extending the lease term and applying a six month termination clause over the premises at 254 Ponsonby Road, Ponsonby to Lion Liquor Retail Limited.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

7. The Local Board has provided initial support to this application via correspondence with the Waitemata Local Board Advisor. There are no known implications to supporting the extension of the current lease term given a six month termination clause has been inserted as part of the variation of lease.

Māori impact statement

8. ACPL has a comprehensive Iwi engagement process that engages with the 19 key Mana Whenua groups in the Tamaki region on four fronts: identifying cultural significance concerns regarding disposal and development properties, flagging commercial interests, development partnering discussions and engagement around design outcomes for council driven development projects. ACPL has also undertaken to be part of council’s Maori Responsiveness Plan pilot program. The project’s key output will be an operational document outlining how ACPL will contribute to council’s strategic and operational commitments to Maori. As there is no change to the property, the existing tenants, or re-tender of the property, there has been no Iwi engagement undertaken in respect of the lessee’s new lease application.

Implementation

9. If the Local Board supports the above recommendations Auckland Council Property Limited will extend the commercial lease term to Lion Liquor Retail Limited over the premises at 254 Ponsonby Road, Ponsonby, Auckland Central.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Lori Butterworth - Property Manager, Auckland Council Property Limited

Authorisers

Margrit de Man - Portfolio Manager, Auckland Council Property Limited

Judith Webster - Relationship Manager

Waitematā Local Board

08 September 2015

21 Princes Street, Auckland Central - Application for New Commercial Lease - Princes Street Childcare Trust

File No.: CP2015/18673

Purpose

1. This report seeks to gain approval from the Waitemata Local Board for the application of new commercial lease to Princes Street Childcare Trust over the site at 21 Princes Street, Auckland Central.

Executive Summary

2. The previous lease to Auckland Community Childcare Centre over the site at 21 Princes Street, Auckland Central finally expired on 30 June 2011. The tenancy proceeded to roll over on a month to month tenancy while the viability of a new lease application was investigated by Auckland Council’s legal department. The tenant was happy to remain at the site on a month to month tenancy during this period.

3. Prior to the childcare lodging a new lease application the manager of Auckland Community Childcare Centre gave notice to vacate the site as 30 November 2014.

4. As a result a Trust under the name of Princes Street Childcare Trust (hereon referred to as the Trust) was formed by a collective group of parents to ensure continuation of the operation of this valuable and community supported childcare centre; Auckland Community Childcare Centre provided full support of the formation of the Trust.

5. The Trust requested to continue occupation of the site directly from the termination of the Auckland Community Childcare Centre to ensure the childcare service was not interrupted. It was deemed the most efficient way forward both in retaining the childcare service and the commercial rental was to apply a monthly tenancy. The intent was then to lodge an official new lease application in 2015.

6. The Trust has proved to be an extremely credible tenant continuing to provide a valuable and much needed childcare service within this location.

7. ACPL has been given the right to manage and control non-service property. Under the Local Government (Tamaki Makarau re-organisation) Council-Controlled Organisations Vesting Order 2010, the definition of “non-service property” excludes early childhood centres and heritage properties. Auckland Council’s legal department have confirmed that given the new commercial lease application relates to the use being that of an early childcare centre and has a heritage listing ACPL does not have the automatic right to manage the building at 21 Princes Street. This means that the grant of the lease requires a resolution from the Local Board.

Recommendations

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a) That the Waitemata Local Board approves the new commercial lease application to Princes Street Childcare Trust over the premises at 21 Princes Street, Auckland Central, subject to the following terms and conditions:

b) 21 Princes Street, Auckland Central:

i) a new commercial lease term of three years applicable from 1 October 2015;

i) two further rights of renewal of three years applicable from 1 October 2018;

ii) final expiry date of 30 September 2024 (if all rights of renewal are exercised).

Comments

8. The property is located within a special conservation area pursuant to the provisions of the Auckland Improvement Trust Act 1971. This Act empowers the Council to lease the said premises for such use as professional, commercial, cultural or community purposes.

9. Auckland Council Parks Department has confirmed they are supportive of the new lease application to Princes Street Childcare Trust over the premises at 21 Princes Street, Auckland Central.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

10. The Local Board has provided initial support to this application via correspondence with the Waitemata Local Board Advisor. There are no known implications to approving the new lease application.

Māori impact statement

11. ACPL has a comprehensive Iwi engagement process that engages with the 19 key Mana Whenua groups in the Tamaki region on four fronts: identifying cultural significance concerns regarding disposal and development properties, flagging commercial interests, development partnering discussions and engagement around design outcomes for council driven development projects. ACPL has also undertaken to be part of council’s Maori Responsiveness Plan pilot program. The project’s key output will be an operational document outlining how ACPL will contribute to council’s strategic and operational commitments to Maori. As there is no change to the property, the existing tenants, or re-tender of the property, there has been no Iwi engagement undertaken in respect of the lessee’s new lease application.

Implementation

12. If the Local Board supports the above recommendations Auckland Council Property Limited will provide a new commercial lease to Princes Street Childcare Trust over the premises at 21 Princes Street, Auckland Central.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Lori Butterworth - Property Manager, Auckland Council Property Limited

Authorisers

Margrit de Man - Portfolio Manager, Auckland Council Property Limited

Judith Webster - Relationship Manager

Waitematā Local Board

08 September 2015

23, 27 and 29 Princes Street, Auckland Central - Application for Extension of Commercial Lease Term - Languages International Limited

File No.: CP2015/18669

Purpose

1. This report seeks to gain support from the Waitemata Local Board for the application to extend the commercial lease term over the sites at 23, 27 and 29 Princes Street, Auckland Central; this will be by way of variation to the current lease agreements.

Executive Summary

2. Languages International Limited (heron referred to as the lessee) have held a commercial lease over the Council owned premises located at 23, 27 and 29 Princes Street, Auckland Central since 1 January 2000. The lease over the sites at 23 and 27 Princes Street are due to finally expire on 30 December 2014. The lease over the site at 29 Princes Street is due to finally expire on 30 November 2017. The tenant leases both the building and land from Auckland Council.

3. The premises located at 23, 27 and 29 Princes Street are freestanding heritage buildings owned by Auckland Council and known as the “Merchant Houses”. The property is located within a special conservation area pursuant to the provisions of the Auckland Improvement Trust Act 1971. This Act empowers the Council to lease the said premises for such use as professional, commercial, cultural or community purposes.

4. Auckland Council Property Limited (ACPL) has maintained a substantial, positive and credible relationship with the lessee since managing the site on behalf of Auckland Council. The lessee respects both the heritage factor of the buildings and their close relationship to Albert Park. The Lessee provides a service that is very well utilised and relevant given their close proximity to the Auckland University.

5. Given the heritage factor, the unique location and the high cost of associated maintenance it is strongly recommended that retaining the current tenant would be advantageous and provide further stability for all stakeholders. ACPL has the delegation to approve the extension of commercial lease terms for non-service premises pursuant to the Auckland Improvement Act 1971. However, given the location of the premises in relation to Albert Park the Waitemata Local Board is seen as an integral stakeholder, hence the request to provide support of this application prior to proceeding.

Recommendations

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a) That the Waitemata Local Board agree to support the extension of the commercial lease terms to Languages International Limited over the premises located at 23, 27 and 29 Princes Street, Auckland Central, subject to the following terms and conditions:

b) 23 & 27 Princes Street, Auckland Central

i) an extension of commercial lease term of three years applicable from 1 January 2015;

ii) one further right of renewal of three years applicable from 1 January 2018;

iii) final expiry date of 31 December 2020 (if all rights of renewal are exercised)

c) 29 Princes Street, Auckland Central (Ground and first floor)

i) an extension of commercial lease term of three years commencing from 1 December 2017;

ii) final expiry date of 30 November 2020 (if all rights of renewal are exercised)

Comments

6. The property is located within a special conservation area pursuant to the provisions of the Auckland Improvement Trust Act 1971. This Act empowers the Council to lease the said premises for such use as professional, commercial, cultural or community purposes.

7. Auckland Council Parks Department has confirmed they are supportive of extending the lease terms to Languages International Limited over the premises located at 23, 27 and 29 Princes Street, Auckland Central.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

8. The Local Board has provided initial support to this application via correspondence with the Waitemata Local Board Advisor. There are no known implications to supporting the extension of the current lease terms.

Māori impact statement

9. ACPL has a comprehensive Iwi engagement process that engages with the 19 key Mana Whenua groups in the Tamaki region on four fronts: identifying cultural significance concerns regarding disposal and development properties, flagging commercial interests, development partnering discussions and engagement around design outcomes for council driven development projects. ACPL has also undertaken to be part of council’s Maori Responsiveness Plan pilot program. The project’s key output will be an operational document outlining how ACPL will contribute to council’s strategic and operational commitments to Maori. As there is no change to the property, the existing tenants, or re-tender of the property, there has been no Iwi engagement undertaken in respect of the lessee’s new lease application.

Implementation

10. If the Local Board supports the above recommendations Auckland Council Property Limited will extend the commercial lease terms to Languages International Limited over the premises located at 23, 27 and 29 Princes Street, Auckland Central.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Lori Butterworth - Property Manager, Auckland Council Property Limited

Authorisers

Margrit de Man - Portfolio Manager, Auckland Council Property Limited

Judith Webster - Relationship Manager

Waitematā Local Board

08 September 2015

Waitemata Community Centre Funding Agreements and License to Occupy

File No.: CP2015/18657

Purpose

1. This report seeks Waitematā Local Board approval for the 2015/2016 funding agreements and licences to occupy and manage for the community operated community centres, within the local board area.

Executive summary

2. As a result of amalgamation, community centres and houses that were operated by community committees had their legacy agreements extended, most for several years. As an initial step, council staff developed a more appropriate funding agreement, with an attached licence to occupy and manage that provided more coherency and consistency as well as aligning to the local board outcomes. Currently these agreements and licences are granted on an annual basis.

3. A funding agreement is an operational grant which includes the monitoring and governance processes as well as operations and programme delivery as outlined in the work programme.

4. A license to occupy replaces the community lease and is owned by property. The license defines the legal conditions and outlines the maintenance schedule and responsibilities for both the Council and the operator.

5. For the past three years Grey Lynn Community Centre Incorporated, Ponsonby Community Centre Incorporated and Parnell Community Trust have been in partnership with council through a funding agreement arrangement. The agreement requires the provision of programmes and activities with a focus on local board outcomes, to be provided from the community centres to the community.

6. In the future the local board could consider offering a range of options for the term of the agreement and/or licence and this would be dependent on a number of factors. For example, new organisations or those still developing their governance structure should remain on a one year term. More experienced organisations could transition to a two or three-year term and major organisations with proven performance, especially those requiring long-term tenure for external funding, could be granted five or more years. Staff will commence discussions with local board on the future options for providing longer term agreements.

Recommendations

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a) Approve the 2015/2016 Funding Agreement for the Grey Lynn Community Centre Incorporated of $65,807 (including $20,000 from the Waitematā Local Board Locally Driven Initiatives) towards operation and activation of the Grey Lynn Community Centre

b) Approve the 2015/2016 Funding Agreement for the Ponsonby Community Centre Incorporated of $47,164 towards operation and activation of the Ponsonby Community Centre and Leys Institute Gymnasium.

c) Approve the 2015/2016 Funding Agreement for the Parnell Community Trust of $54,701 towards operation and activation of the Parnell Community Centre.

d) Approve granting a Licence to Occupy and Manage to the Grey Lynn Community Centre Incorporated for the Grey Lynn Community Centre 510 Richmond Road, subject to the following terms and conditions:

i) Term –1 year commencing on 1 July 2015;

ii) Rent - $1.00 plus GST per annum if requested;

iii) All other terms and conditions in accordance with the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines July 2012.

e) Approve granting a Licence to Occupy and Manage to the Ponsonby Community Centre Incorporated for the Ponsonby Community Centre at 20 Ponsonby Terrace and Leys Institute Gymnasium at 20 St Mary’s Road subject to the following terms and conditions:

i) Term –1 year commencing on 1 July 2015;

ii) Rent - $1.00 plus GST per annum if requested;

iii) all other terms and conditions in accordance with the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines July 2012.

f) Approve granting a Licence to Occupy and Manage to the Parnell Community Trust for the Parnell Community Centre at 545 Parnell Road, Parnell subject to the following terms and conditions:

i) Term –1 year commencing on 1 July 2015;

ii) Rent - $1.00 plus GST per annum if requested;

iii) all other terms and conditions in accordance with the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines July 2012.

Comments

6. The Grey Lynn Community Centre Incorporated has occupied the council owned site on Richmond Road since 1978. It currently operates the Grey Lynn Community Centre from this location. The Grey Lynn Community Centre Incorporated has approximately 121,500 visitors through its doors per annum, and caters to all ages. There is one manager who works 40 hours per week and two volunteers. The Grey Lynn Community Centre Incorporated is made up of a Chairperson, Secretary, Treasurer and three committee members. The Grey Lynn Community Centre Incorporated employs a Finance Administrator for 20 hours per week, an Office Administrator for 12 hours per week, a play group coordinator for 24 hours per week and two after-hours caretakers for 16 and 6 hours respectively. They also have a volunteer for 9 hours per week.

7. The Ponsonby Community Centre Incorporated has occupied the council owned site on Ponsonby Terrace since 1995. It currently operates the Ponsonby Community Centre from this location. The Ponsonby Community Centre has approximately 66,108 visitors per annum, and caters to all ages. The Ponsonby Community Centre Incorporated has operated the Leys Institute Gymnasium on behalf of council since 2012. The Leys Institute Gymnasium has had approximately 22,794 visitors through its doors per annum, and caters to all ages. There is one manager who works 40 hours per week. The Ponsonby Community Centre Incorporated is made up of a Chairperson, Secretary, Treasurer and six committee members. The Ponsonby Community Centre has a full time manager and a financial administrator working for 37 hours a week. They split their hours across three services- Venue Hire for the Ponsonby Community Centre and Leys Institute Gymnasium, Centre Work Programmes and the Ponsy Kids Community Preschool which also has a full time Head Teacher and a full time Assistant Supervisor. Ponsy Kids also employs three part time supervisors. The Ponsonby Community Centre also has a volunteer who completes garden duties.

8. The Parnell Community Trust has occupied the council owned site on Parnell Road since 1996. It currently operates the Parnell Community Centre from this location. The Parnell Community Centre has approximately 84,000 visitors per annum and caters to all ages. There is one manager who works 40 hours per week. The Parnell Community Trust is made up of a Chairperson, Deputy Chairperson, Treasurer and five committee members. The Parnell Community Trust employs 80 people- 38 for its after school and school holiday programmes, 25 in its early childhood centre, 5 focusing on venues and community liaison, 6 working on finance and administration, 4 focusing on the farmer’s market and 2 staff involved in food preparation.

9. Grey Lynn Community Centre Incorporated, Ponsonby Community Centre Incorporated and Parnell Community Trust deliver community programmes and activities to meet local needs and local board outcomes. Their 2015/2016 work programmes are outlined in schedule one of their funding agreement. Schedule two of the funding agreement outlines the reporting requirements.

10. The financial accounts provided by all three organisations indicate that the funds held are sufficient to meet their liabilities and are being managed appropriately.

11. The organisations have the necessary insurance cover, including public liability insurance, in place.

12. The three community centres require funding agreements and a Licence to Occupy and Manage to be granted in order to formalise their occupancy and their funding. This includes:

· Grey Lynn Community Centre Incorporated for the Grey Lynn Community Centre at 510 Richmond Rd, Grey Lynn, Lot 1 DP 55277 Lot 7 Sec 54 DP 1720 for a term of 1 year commencing on 1 July 2015 at a rental of $1.00 plus GST,

· Ponsonby Community Centre Incorporated for the Ponsonby Community Centre at 20 Ponsonby Terrace, Ponsonby PT Allot 60 Sec 8 Suburbs Of Auckland Local Purps Reserve Gaz 1981 P2436 and the Leys Institute Gymnasium at 20 St Mary’s Road DP 3590 Lot 11 Allot 13 Sec 8 Suburbs Of Auckland for a term of 1 year commencing on 1 July 2015 at a rental of $1.00 plus GST and the Parnell Community Trust for the Parnell Community Centre at 545 Parnell Road

· Parnell Lot 2 DP 362696 for a term of 1 year commencing on 1 July 2015 at a rental of $1.00 plus GST.

The licence outlines Auckland Council, Grey Lynn Community Centre Incorporated, Ponsonby Community Centre Incorporated and Parnell Community Trust building maintenance responsibilities.

13. In the near future the local board could consider offering a range of options for the term of the agreement and/or licence and this would be dependent on a number of factors. For example, new organisations or those still developing their governance structure should remain on a one year term. More experienced organisations could transition to a three-year term and major organisations with proven performance, especially those requiring long-term tenure for external funding, could be granted five or more years.

14. Multi-year agreements would not change any of the other conditions in the existing funding agreements or licences. Adjustments for inflation could be included in each agreement and licence that has a term of two or more years.

15. Staff will commence discussions with the local board within the next few months on options for multiyear agreements.

16. The report has sought input from all relevant council departments.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

17. Council staff has begun discussions on the work programmes with local board however, these documents are yet to be finalised. The purpose of the work programme is to outline key service delivery that will enable outcomes in the Waitematā local board plan. Staff will continue to work with the local board to finalise work programmes.

18. The recommendations within this report fall within the local board’s allocated authority relating to local, recreation, sport and community facilities.

Māori impact statement

19. All community centres in the Waitematā local board area endeavour to improve the well-being among Māori within the work programmes they deliver. Council staff will continue to work with the centres to ensure support and development of programmes and activities that directly improve well-being and outcomes for Māori.

Implementation

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Grey Lynn Community Centre License	119
b View	Parnell Community Centre License	141
c View	Ponsonby Community Centre License	163

Signatories

Authors

Jenny McKay, Facility Manager

Authorisers

Kate Holst, Community Facilities

Judith Webster - Relationship Manager

Waitematā Local Board

08 September 2015

Central Joint Funding Committee for the 2015/2016 Financial Year

File No.: CP2015/18170

Purpose

1. To seek the local board’s endorsement to re-establish the Central Joint Funding Committee for the 2015/2016 financial year.

Executive Summary

2. Community grants are one of a suite of tools to provide financial support to community groups who propose activities, events and programmes across the Auckland region.

3. Between 2011 and 2015, approximately $3.2 million per annum was distributed to community groups across Auckland via geographically-aligned joint funding committees. These were established as part of the interim approach to community funding until a new policy was developed. The budgets to support the joint funding committees were held regionally, and were described as ‘multi-board funding’.

4. The Central Joint Funding Committee (the committee), between 2011 and 2015 was responsible for allocating three former Auckland city funding schemes, the Community group assistance fund, Accommodation support fund and Cultural heritage fund, totalling approximately $1.1m.

5. The Community grants policy, adopted in December 2014, introduced a new framework to guide the provision of grants. The policy supports local boards to create their own ‘local grants programme’ and form joint funding committees, which allocate grants that deliver benefits across multiple local board areas. The new policy also replaced all previous legacy council funding schemes.

6. As part of decisions made for the Long-term Plan, all multi-board funding budgets were devolved to local boards via the Local Boards Funding Policy. This provided options for local boards to top-up their community grants budget, allocate the funds to another priority area, or contribute their allocation to continue a joint funding committee.

7. Through informal engagement, the central local boards have indicated a preference to:

· re-establish the committee;

· provide the same funding schemes for the 2015/2016 financial year as an interim measure;

· contribute their entire multi-board funding budget to support the funding schemes; and

· develop a new approach for the 2016/2017 financial year, and onwards.

8. Membership on the committee for 2015/2016 will consist of one member from the Puketapapa, Maungakiekie-Tamaki, Albert-Eden and Waitemata local boards. The Orakei Local Board chose to not contribute their multi-board funding budget to support the committee.

9. Based on the contribution of the four central local board’s multi-board funding budgets, there is $626,427 available to support the committee’s funding schemes.

10. For the 2015/2016 financial year, it is proposed the committee undertake two funding rounds for the Community group assistance fund, and one for the Accommodation support fund.

Recommendations

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a) Approve the continuation of the Central Joint Funding Committee as an interim measure for the 2015/2016 financial year.

b) Approve that the Central Joint Funding Committee will have decision-making responsibility for the following funding schemes:

i. Accommodation support fund.

ii. Community group assistance fund.

c) Approve the following amendments to the funding schemes:

i. the Community group assistance funding rounds will be undertaken between October and November 2015 (round one) and February and March 2016 (round two).

ii. the Accommodation support funding round will be undertaken between October and November 2015.

iii. that both funding schemes have a minimum threshold of $2,000.

d) Allocate the ‘Central Joint Funding Programme’ locally driven initiatives budget line, totalling $180,000 to support the implementation of the Central joint funding committee for the 2015/2016 financial year.

e) Approve the terms of reference to guide the Central Joint Funding Committee.

f) Appoint one local board member, and one alternate to the Central joint funding committee.

g) Note that staff will engage central local boards and the Central joint funding committee to develop a new approach to guide multi-board funding for the 2016/2017 financial year and onwards.

Comments

Background

11. Between 2011 and 2015, approximately $3.2 million per annum was distributed to community groups across Auckland via joint funding committees. The entities were established as part of the interim approach to community funding as a way to administer legacy community funding schemes with as little disruption to the community as possible.

12. These funding schemes were once ‘city-wide’, and post-amalgamation the budgets to support these funds were held regionally. The governing body delegated decision-making over these budgets to multi-board joint funding committees comprised of local board members to ensure that community groups continued to have access to legacy funding schemes.

13. For the central local boards, the funding available through the committee totalled $1,185,000 per annum across three funding schemes:

· Community Group Assistance Fund: $435,000;

· Accommodation Support Fund: $700,00; and

· Auckland City Cultural Heritage Fund: $50,000.

Community grants policy

14. The Community grants policy, which was adopted in December 2014, introduced a new framework to guide the provision of grants to community groups across the Auckland region. The policy supports:

· local boards to create their own ‘local grants programme’ which are guided by local board plans; and

· the governing body’s committees to create regional funding schemes based on the priorities identified in the Auckland Plan and council strategic action plans (e.g. the Sport and Recreation Strategic Action Plan).

15. The policy also includes provisions to enable local boards to form joint funding committees, and allocate grants that deliver benefits to community groups across multiple local board areas.

Benefits and challenges of joint funding committees

16. Joint funding committees have proved to be an effective mechanism to provide financial support to community groups who are not considered ‘local’ or ‘regional’ in the activities, events and programmes that they propose to undertake.

17. A high-level analysis of the three funding schemes that the Central joint funding committee managed has highlighted that between 2013 and 2015:

· approximately 301 community groups, totalling $2.3 million have benefitted from a grant from the committee;

· 75 percent of applicants are physically located in the Albert-Eden, Waitemata and Maungakiekie-Tamaki local board areas;

· 77 percent of all grants have benefitted the five central local boards;

· 11 percent of allocated grants were made to community groups that were physically located outside the five central local boards;

· in addition to benefitting the five central local boards, the funding schemes have provided benefits to communities from neighbouring local boards such as Māngere-Ōtāhuhu, Howick and Whau; and

· it has been a successful mechanism which has ensured continuity and minimal disruption to community groups since the commencement of Auckland Council.

18. The amount of funding requested compared to availability of funds (i.e. over-subscription) has been a significant challenge for all joint funding committees. The following table outlines the amount requested by the amount allocated between 2013 and 2015:

Funding scheme	Amount requested	Amount allocated
Community group assistance fund	$2,729,232	$869,995
Accommodation support fund	$3,027,238	$1,365,243
Cultural heritage fund	$148,278	$104,052
Total	$5,904,748	$2,339,290

19. Other challenges the joint funding committees include:

· the funding schemes the committees managed reflect legacy council, rather than local board priorities; and

· prior to the adoption of the grants policy, many applicants who proposed to undertake activities that were ‘local’ or ‘regional’ in nature applied to the committees because there were limited, or no options provided by council.

Allocation of multi-board funding budgets to local boards

20. As part of decisions made for the Long-term Plan in June 2015, all multi-board funding budgets, totalling $3.2 million have been devolved to local boards via the Local Boards Funding Policy. 90 percent of funding was devolved on the basis of local board population, five percent based on the average level of social deprivation in a local board area, and five percent based on the level of geographic isolation. As a result of this allocation, all local boards have ‘multi-board funding (or similar) budget lines within their locally driven initiatives budgets.

21. It is important to note that the devolving of multi-board funding budgets to local boards has created financial implications that impact on the amount of available funding for the committee. This is outlined in the Budget allocation to support the committee section of this report.

Approach for the 2015/2016 financial year

Committee and funding schemes

22. Staff propose that the committee be re-established, and continue to manage the Community group assistance and Accommodation support funds as an interim measure for the 2015/2016 financial year. This approach is recommended because it:

· reduces the impact of change on community groups and ensures continuity for funding applicants; and

· provides an opportunity for staff to work with the committee and the central local boards to develop a new approach to guide the committee for the 2016/2017 financial year. This will also allow sufficient time to communicate any changes to previous applicants and the wider public (e.g. the committee provides different types of funding schemes).

23. The implications of this approach result that the criteria, guidelines and eligibility associated with both funding schemes will remain the same as previous years.

24. Two amendments are required to successfully deliver both funding schemes for the 2015 / 2016 financial year. The following table outlines the amendments that are required:

Amendment required	Rationale	Recommended approach
Funding rounds	The process to re-establish the committee could not commence until confirmation of multi-board funding budgets were devolved to local boards. This means that funding round one will be undertaken later than previous years	Community group assistance fund: · Round one: opens early October, closes mid November 2015 · Round two: opens early February, closes mid-March 2016. Accommodation support fund: · Round one: opens early October, closes mid-November 2015.
Fund thresholds	Section 144 of the grants policy states that Quick response grants are not available to multi-board applicants. Therefore the committee will need to provide local grants, which as outlined in section 125 are generally for requests over $2,000.	That both funding schemes have a minimum threshold of $2,000.

Amendment required

Rationale

Recommended approach

Funding rounds

The process to re-establish the committee could not commence until confirmation of multi-board funding budgets were devolved to local boards. This means that funding round one will be undertaken later than previous years

Community group assistance fund:

· Round one: opens early October, closes mid November 2015

· Round two: opens early February, closes mid-March 2016.

Accommodation support fund:

· Round one: opens early October, closes mid-November 2015.

Fund thresholds

Section 144 of the grants policy states that Quick response grants are not available to multi-board applicants. Therefore the committee will need to provide local grants, which as outlined in section 125 are generally for requests over $2,000.

That both funding schemes have a minimum threshold of $2,000.

25. Staff also propose that the Cultural heritage fund be discontinued, and the associated budget be evenly allocated to the Community group assistance and Accommodation support budgets. This is recommended because:

· the scope and budget for the funding scheme restricted the number of applicants, and limited the amount that could be granted to community groups. Between 2013 and 2015, the funding scheme:

- received nine applications per round

- on average allocated $3,700 to successful applicants

- did not fully-fund any proposed projects.

· the projects the fund supported are local in nature, and could be supported by individual local boards.

26. If the proposal to discontinue to the Cultural heritage fund is supported by the four central local boards, staff will ensure the public are informed of the change, and work with them on alternative funding opportunities.

Committee membership

27. Membership on the committee for the 2015/2016 financial will consist of one member from the Puketapapa, Maungakiekie-Tamaki, Albert-Eden and Waitemata local boards.

28. The four local boards who will form the committee are requested to recommend one local board member, and one alternate to the committee.

29. The Orakei Local Board chose to not contribute their multi-board funding budget to support the committee. The local board will not be represented on the committee for the 2015 / 2016 financial year.

Budget allocation to support the committee

30. Based on the contribution of the four central local board’s multi-board funding budgets, there is $626,427 available to support the committee.

31. The devolving of multi-board funding budgets to local boards and Orakei’s decision to not contribute their multi-board funding budget has resulted in a $558,573 or 47 percent reduction of total budget to support the committee.

32. It is proposed that the available budgets account for the reduction, and is topped-up by evenly splitting the Cultural heritage fund budget. For the 2015 / 2016 financial year, it is proposed the Community group assistance fund budget will be $384,250 and the Accommodation support fund $242,177.

33. Staff note the reduction in available funds will have an impact on community groups, particularly those who have historically relied on either funding scheme for support. Staff will work with affected community groups to determine alternative funding opportunities (i.e. applying to a local board or regional grants programme).

Other matters

34. A terms for reference has been drafted to guide the committee for the 2015/2016 financial year. It will guide the committee’s purpose, decision-making responsibilities, membership and other administrative components.

35. The four local boards who will form the committee are requested to endorse the terms of reference, which is included as Attachment one.

Approach for 2016 / 2017 financial year and onwards

36. Due to the devolving of multi-board funding budgets, the central local boards and the committee have an opportunity to consider how they provide this type of funding to community groups for the 2016 / 2017 financial year, and onwards. A suite of options are available to consider, such as:

· addressing funding gaps across central local grants programmes;

· identifying mutually beneficial priorities;

· providing multi-year, strategic relationship grants;

· providing match funding; and

· partnering with other funding providers.

37. Staff will engage the central local boards and the committee to seek their input and feedback on the new approach in preparation for 2016/2017 financial year.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

38. The local boards who will form the committee for 2015/2016 received a workshop in August and September 2015 to provide input, and comment on the proposed approach.

39. This report seeks to formalise the views of the local boards, which will inform the final structure of the committee.

40. The committee will have positive implications and outcomes for the four local boards, as well as neighbouring local boards. The committee will:

· encourage collaboration across the central local boards;

· fulfil a funding gap to support community groups who are not considered ‘local’ or ‘regional’ in the activities, events and programmes that they propose to undertake; and

· act as a mechanism to support outcomes and initiatives identified in local board plans.

Māori impact statement

41. Community grants have the potential to make a significant impact on Māori and can respond to Auckland Council’s commitment to improving Māori wellbeing by providing grants to organisations delivering Māori outcomes.

42. The re-establishment of the committee will continue to provide positive outcomes for both Māori community groups and other community groups who provide opportunities for Māori. For example the:

· Accommodation support fund can support rates payments of marae; and

· Community group assistance fund can support events and programmes relating to Matariki.

Implementation

43. This report addresses a number of implementation components associated with the re-establishment of the committee.

44. The committee will be supported by council’s:

· Community grants operations team, who will be responsible for administrative components (i.e. receiving and processing funding applications), providing advice to applicants and working with subject matter experts on funding applications; and

· Local Boards Services Department, who will be responsible for democracy support and meeting management.

45. The committee will also align to council processes, such as using Smartygrants as a grants management tool.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Terms of Reference for the Central Joint Funding Committee	193

Signatories

Authors

Tristan Coulson - Senior Policy Advisor

Authorisers

Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards

Judith Webster - Relationship Manager

Waitematā Local Board

08 September 2015

Hearing Panel Decision Report on Review of Alcohol Bans in the Waitemata Local Board Area 2015

File No.: CP2015/17970

Purpose

1. To decide which existing alcohol bans are to be retained after 31 October 2015.

Executive Summary

2. The Waitematā Local Board has undertaken to review its existing local alcohol bans in its local board area using a public engagement process.

3. The purpose of the review is to identify which existing local alcohol bans meet the new higher statutory threshold to enable them to be retained. Alcohol bans that do not meet the new threshold will lapse on 31 October 2015.

4. The local board appointed a hearing panel to receive, hear and deliberate on submissions and other relevant information and recommend changes to the local board.

5. The key recommendations of the panel are that:

· 45 alcohol bans meet the new higher statutory threshold and should be retained; and

· 52 alcohol bans do not meet the new threshold and should be allowed to lapse.

A full copy of the deliberations and decisions (including any amendments to areas and times) are contained in Attachment B.

6. The hearing panel also notes that the local board has the delegated authority to consider evidence to make a new or remake an alcohol ban post 31 October 2015.

7. The decision required of the local board is whether to approve the recommendations of the hearing panel.

8. Following the decision, staff will update the register of local alcohol bans to commence on 31 October 2015 and update signage.

7. Following the decision, staff will update the register of local alcohol bans to commence on 31 October 2015 and update signage.

Recommendations

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a) Adopt the alcohol bans recommended to be retained (with any amendments) as contained in Attachment B and C pursuant to the Auckland Council Alcohol Control Bylaw 2014, with a commencement date of 31 October 2015.

b) Allow the alcohol bans recommended to lapse as contained in Attachment B to lapse on 31 October 2015.

c) Confirm that the decisions in (a) and (b) are in accordance with relevant requirements of the Local Government Act 2002 and Auckland Council Alcohol Control Bylaw 2014.

d) Authorise the Manager Social Policy and Bylaws to make any minor edits or amendments to Attachment B and C to correct any identified errors or typographical edits.

Comments

9. Alcohol bans are an accepted and effective way of helping to reduce alcohol-related harm. They reduce the amount of alcohol consumed in public places. This helps to reduce harm including levels of intoxication, noise, litter, harm and disorder.

10. Recent changes to legislation to require a review of existing alcohol bans against the new higher threshold is intended to ensure that alcohol bans are only retained in areas of high alcohol-related crime or disorder.

11. Alcohol bans are made under the Auckland Council Alcohol Control Bylaw 2014. Alcohol bans prohibit the consumption of alcohol in public places and are enforced by the New Zealand Police using powers of search, seizure, and arrest. Penalties include an infringement fee of $250.

12. Local boards have the delegated responsibility to review existing local alcohol bans in their local board areas by 31 October 2015. This does not include a review of existing alcohol bans in areas of regional significance which is the responsibility of the Regulatory and Bylaws Committee, nor consideration of new alcohol bans which will be subject to a separate process to commence after 31 October 2015.

Proposal

13. The Waitematā Local Board, at its business meeting on the 12 May 2015 (resolution number WTM/2015/15), adopted for public engagement a proposal to:

· retain 46 existing alcohol bans; and

· lapse 53 existing alcohol bans unless sufficient evidence is provided through the public submission process.

14. The public engagement period opened on 19 June and closed 17 July 2015.

15. The proposed changes were notified as follows:

· a public notice in the New Zealand Herald;

· on the Auckland Council website;

· through social media, including Facebook and Neighbourly; and

· local board e-bulletin (June and July 2015 editions).

16. Additional communication and engagement activities were undertaken as follows:

· in paid advertisements in the Ponsonby News and Central newspapers;

· email to local board stakeholders; and

· notification to the Waitematā Youth Collective.

17. All supporting documents were made available on council’s website and through local libraries and service centres.

18. A total of 46 submitters gave evidence for 53 alcohol ban areas. Thirty three submitters gave general feedback not specific to an alcohol ban area.

Hearing and deliberations process

19. The Waitematā Local Board appointed a hearing panel, the Waitematā Local Board Hearings Committee, with the addition of the Board Chair, member Shale Chambers to receive, hear and deliberate on submissions and other relevant information and make recommendations to the local board (resolution number WTM/2015/16 and WTM/2015/26).

20. A total of four submitters indicated they wished to be heard. The hearing panel heard from five submitters on 5 August 2015 and held deliberations on all written and oral submissions on 5 and 11 August 2015.

21. Copies of all submissions received were made available.

22. In conducting hearings and making decisions, the hearings panel considered a range of the statutory and bylaw requirements, summarised in Attachment A. The most important requirements outlined in the bylaw are:

· evidence that the alcohol ban area has experienced a high level of crime or disorder that can be shown to have been caused or made worse by alcohol consumption in the area;

· that the alcohol ban is appropriate and proportionate in the light of the evidence and can be justified as a reasonable limitation on people's rights and freedoms;

· consideration of community-focused solutions as an alternative to or to complement an alcohol ban;

· consideration of the views of owners, occupiers, or persons that council has reason to believe are representative of the interests of owners or occupiers, of premises within the area to which the alcohol ban will apply;

· consideration of using one of the following times for consistency:

§ 24 hours, 7 days a week (at all times alcohol ban);

§ 7pm to 7am daily (evening alcohol ban);

§ 10pm to 7am daylight saving and 7pm to 7am outside daylight saving (night time alcohol ban); and

§ 7pm on the day before to 7am on the day after any weekend, public holiday or Christmas/New Year holiday period (weekend and holiday alcohol ban).

Comments

23. The decisions of the hearing panel (including any amendments to areas and times) and summary of the evidence considered are contained in Attachment B and maps are provided in Attachment C.

24. The key recommendations of the panel are that:

· 45 alcohol bans meet the new higher statutory threshold and should be retained; and

· 52 alcohol bans do not meet the new threshold and should be allowed to lapse.

25. The panel retained 39 alcohol ban areas as proposed and received sufficient new evidence for one additional alcohol ban to be retained (Vermont Reserve).

26. The panel also reviewed the geographical area and times of a number of areas that resulted in six areas being subsumed into existing ban areas and two new areas being created. An overview of the changes from the proposal is as follows:

· subsume the two areas known as Grey Lynn Park 1 and 2 into a new Grey Lynn Park area;

· subsume the Te Uringutu Reserve into the City Centre alcohol ban area;

· separate the Newton Town Centre alcohol ban area (including Dacre Reserve A) from the City Centre alcohol ban area;

· separate Basque Park from the Newton Town Centre area (to retain its night-time only alcohol ban); and

· subsumes the two night-time bans within the geographical extent of the Newmarket Town Centre alcohol ban area.

27. The hearing panel also notes that the local board has the delegated authority to consider evidence to make a new or remake an alcohol ban post 31 October 2015.

28. The decision required of the local board is whether to approve the recommendations of the hearing panel.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

29. Since the commencement of the review in November 2014 the local board at workshops has been presented with the statutory decision making requirements, review process options, and pre-public engagement process evidence to assist the local board in making decisions on which current alcohol bans will be retained after 31 October 2015.

Māori impact statement

30. Managing alcohol-related harm associated with people consuming alcohol in public places increases opportunities for health and wellbeing, which is consistent with the outcomes of the Māori Plan for Tāmaki Makaurau.

31. Feedback received from mana whenua representatives at a hui held in March 2015 supported alcohol bans in principle, and they believe that non-regulatory approaches should be considered to help reduce alcohol-related harm.

Implementation

32. Any decision on current alcohol bans to be retained or lapsed will require an update to the register of local alcohol bans and to signage. The updating of signage will be coordinated through the Integrated Bylaw Review and Implementation programme.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Decision-making Requirements
b View	Waitemata Local Board Deliberations Table
c View	Maps of Alcohol Ban Areas Retained

Signatories

Authors	Chair Dempsey, Waitematā Local Board Hearings Committee for the review of alcohol bans 2015 on behalf of the panel
Authorisers	Judith Webster, Relationship Manager, Waitemata and Waiheke Local Boards

PDF Creator

Waitematā Local Board

08 September 2015

Hearings Panel Decision Report on Local Dog Access Rules in the Waitematā Local Board Area 2015

File No.: CP2015/18165

Purpose

1. To recommend amendments to local dog access rules in the Waitematā Local Board area.

Executive Summary

2. The Waitematā Local Board at its business meeting on 12 May 2015, adopted for public consultation proposed changes to local dog access rules.

3. The Waitematā Local Board appointed the Waitematā Local Board Hearings Committee, with the addition of the Board Chair, Shale Chambers to hear and deliberate on submissions and other relevant information and recommend changes to the Board.

4. The hearing panel considered 75 submissions and heard from 4 submitters on 12 August 2015.

5. The key recommendations of the panel are as follows:

· apply an under control off-leash rule west of Meola Reef Reserve and east of Garnet Road up to the western headland of Marine Parade Beach

· apply an amended time and season rule from the western headland of Marine Parade Beach to Curran Street and Judges Bay as follows:

Summer (Labour Weekend until 31 March)
10am to 7pm	Before 10am and after 7pm
Sand Prohibited Water Prohibited	Sand Under control on-leash Water Under control off-leash
Winter (1 April until Friday before Labour Weekend)
10am to 4pm	Before 10am and after 4pm
Sand Under control on-leash Water Under control off-leash	Sand Under control off-leash Water Under control off-leash

· apply an under control on-leash rule to all beach and foreshore areas east of Curran Street, excluding Judges Bay

· replace the general wildlife rule with specific rules on the Meola Reef Reserve foreshore to prohibit dogs north of Meola Reef and on-leash east of Meola Reef to Garnet Road

· align the summer season period for parks with the beach summer season period

· retain the time and season rule on Cox’s Bay Reserve

· amend the current under control off-leash rule for Seddon Fields and Victoria Park to under control on-leash

· enlarge the northern under control off-leash area on Grey Lynn Park to north of the pathway running from Dryden Street to Arnold Street

· reclassify Meola Reef within the fenced area as a designated dog exercise area

· reclassify all other dog exercise areas as under control off-leash areas

· remove the general rules for picnic and fitness areas.

6. The decision required of the local board is whether to approve the recommendations of the hearing panel.

7. If approved, the decisions of the panel will be reported to the Governing Body business meeting on 24 September 2015 to make any necessary amendments to the Auckland Council Policy on Dogs 2012 and Auckland Council Dog Management Bylaw 2012.

Recommendations

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a) Approve the recommendations contained in this report.

b) Adopt the amendments to the Auckland Council Policy on Dogs 2012 as contained in Attachment A pursuant to section 10 of the Dog Control Act 1996 with a commencement date of 24 October 2015.

c) Request the governing body to give effect to the amendments in (b) by making any necessary amendments to the Auckland Council Policy on Dogs 2012 pursuant to section 10 of the Dog Control Act 1996 and Auckland Council Dog Management Bylaw 2012 in accordance with section 10(6) of the Dog Control Act 1996.

d) Authorise the Manager Social Policy and Bylaws in consultation with the chair of the local board to make any minor edits to (a) and (b) to correct any identified errors or typographical edits.

Comments

Proposal

8. The Waitematā Local Board at its business meeting on 12 May 2015, adopted for public consultation a proposal on changes to local dog access rules on the beach and foreshore and selected parks as follows (resolution number WTMH/2015/35):

· apply an under control off-leash rule west of Meola Reef Reserve and east of Garnet Road up to the western headland of Marine Parade Beach

· apply an amended time and season rule from the western headland of Marine Parade Beach to Curran Street and Judges Bay as follows:

Summer (Labour Weekend until 31 March)
10am to 7pm	Before 10am and after 7pm
Sand and Water Prohibited	Sand and Water Under control on-leash
Winter (1 April until Friday before Labour Weekend)
10am to 4pm	Before 10am and after 4pm
Sand and Water Under control on-leash	Sand and Water Under control off-leash

· apply an under control on-leash to all areas east of Curran Street, excluding Judges Bay

· replace the general wildlife rule with specific rules on the Meola Reef Reserve foreshore to prohibit dogs north of Meola Reef and on-leash east of Meola Reef to Garnet Road

· align the summer season period for parks with the beach summer season period

· amend the current under control off-leash rule for Coxs Bay Reserve (except north of the stream adjacent to West End Road), Seddon Fields and Victoria Park to under control on-leash

· enlarge the northern under control off-leash area on Grey Lynn Park to north of the pathway running from Dryden Street to Arnold Street

· reclassify Meola Reef within the fenced area as a designated dog exercise area

· reclassify all other dog exercise areas as under control off-leash areas

· remove the general rules for picnic and fitness areas.

Submission process

9. The public consultation submission period opened on 12 June and closed on 17 July 2015.

10. The proposed changes were notified as follows:

· notices to all registered dog owners with their dog registration reminder letter

· a public notice in the New Zealand Herald on 12 June 2015

· in the June local editions of Our Auckland

· on the Auckland Council website

· in the June People’s Panel e-update

· through local social media and print media^{^[1]}

· to local board registered stakeholders^{^[2]}

· notices to previous submitters on dog access in affected local board areas.

11. All relevant documents were made available on council’s website and through local libraries and service centres.

12. A total of 75 submissions were received.

Hearing and deliberations process

13. The Waitematā Local Board appointed the Waitematā Local Board Hearings Committee, with the addition of the Board Chair, Shale Chambers, to receive, hear and deliberate on submissions and other relevant information and recommend changes to the local board (resolution numbers WTMH/2015/28 and WTMH/2015/35).

14. A total of 13 submitters indicated they wished to be heard. The hearing panel heard from four submitters on 12 August 2015 and held deliberations on 12 August 2015.

15. Copies of all submissions received were attached to the agenda.

16. Hearings provide an opportunity for submitters to speak in support of their submission and for members of the hearing panel to ask questions to better understand the views of submitters.

17. In conducting hearings and making decisions, the hearing panel was required to consider:

· the need to meet a range of statutory, policy and delegated authority decision-making requirements summarised in Attachment B, including the need to:

o ensure decisions provide for public safety and comfort, protection of wildlife and habitat and the needs of dogs and their owners

o consider the region-wide standard summer beach times and season

o ensure dog access rules are easy to understand ‘on the ground’

· the weight the hearing panel puts on the matters raised by the submitters

· information used to develop and contained in the statement of proposal

· other information received by the hearing panel.

18. At the conclusion of the hearings, the panel deliberated on the matters raised in submissions and the panel’s recommendations to the local board are contained in this report.

19. The decision required of the local board is whether to approve the recommendations of the hearing panel.

20. If approved, the decisions of the panel will be reported to the Governing Body business meeting on 24 September 2015 to make any necessary amendments to the Auckland Council Policy on Dogs 2012 and Auckland Council Dog Management Bylaw 2012.

Decisions on proposed amendments

21. The decisions of the hearing panel are grouped by topic. The changes to local dog access rules to give effect to the decisions are provided in Attachment A, together with the current rules for comparison and completeness.

Submission Topic 1 – Beaches and foreshore

Summary of proposed change

22. The proposed changes for the beach and foreshore area within the statement of proposal are as follows:

· apply an under control off-leash rule west of Meola Reef Reserve and east of Garnet Road up to the western headland of Marine Parade Beach

· apply an amended time and season rule from the western headland of Marine Parade Beach to Curran Street and Judges Bay as follows:

Summer (Labour Weekend until 31 March)
10am to 7pm	Before 10am and after 7pm
Sand and Water Prohibited	Sand and Water Under control on-leash
Winter (1 April until Friday before Labour Weekend)
10am to 4pm	Before 10am and after 4pm
Sand and Water Under control on-leash	Sand and Water Under control off-leash

· apply an under control on-leash rule to all areas east of Curran Street, excluding Judges Bay

Summary of matters raised in submissions

23. A total of 29 submission points were made regarding the beach and foreshore provisions. The submission points provided a wide spread of views from more restrictive to less restricted dog access rules for the beach and foreshore areas.

Hearing panel decision

24. The decision of the hearing panel is as follows:

Decision/Recommendation

Reasons

To recommend that the proposal to:

· apply an under control off-leash rule west of Meola Reef Reserve and east of Garnet Road up to the western headland of Marine Parade Beach be adopted as publicly notified

· apply an amended time and season rule be amended to apply a time and season rule from the western headland of Marine Parade Beach to Curran Street and Judges Bay where

o in summer (Labour Weekend until 31 March) dogs prohibited on sand and water 10am to 7pm, at other times dogs on-leash on the sand and off-leash in the water

o in winter dogs on-leash on the sand 10am to 4pm, off-leash at other times, and off-leash at all times in water

· apply an under control on-leash rule to all areas east of Curran Street, excluding Judges Bay be adopted as publicly notified.

Reasons included:

· provides a balance between the needs of dog owners and public safety and comfort

· better provides for dog owners needs by providing 24/7 off-leash dog access west of Marine Parade, excluding the wildlife protection areas

· better provides for dog owners needs on time and season beaches by providing a shorter summer season, and an extra hour of dog access on summer mornings

· public safety and comfort can be maintained while allowing for the integration of dogs under control on-leash in the morning and evenings during summer

· retaining the distinction between sand and water allows for some under control off-leash access in the water during summer morning and evenings and throughout the day during winter.

Submission Topic 2 – Protected wildlife areas

Summary of proposed change

25. The proposal is to replace the current general wildlife rule with a specific rule on the Meola Reef Reserve foreshore.

Summary of matters raised in submissions

26. Only one submission point was made that specifically related to the protected wildlife provisions and was in support of the proposal.

Hearing panel decision

27. The decision of the hearing panel is as follows:

Decision/Recommendation

Reasons

· To recommend that the proposal to replace the current general wildlife rule with a specific rule on the Meola Reef Reserve foreshore be adopted as publicly notified,

Reasons included:

· specific rule easier to understand

· all wildlife and habitat areas requiring protection from dogs have been identified

Submission Topic 3 – Parks

Summary of proposed change

28. The proposal as it related to parks was as follows:

· to align the summer season period for parks with the beach summer season period

· to replace the existing time and season rule providing under control off-leash access in the morning and evening on Cox’s Bay Reserve with under control on-leash access on the majority of the park (outside of the sports fields) and under control off-leash north of the stream adjacent to West End Road

· to replace the under control off-leash rule on Seddon Fields (outside of the sports fields) with under control on-leash

· to replace the under control off-leash rule on Victoria Park (outside of the sports fields) with under control on-leash

· to enlarge the northern under control off-leash area on Grey Lynn Park to north of the pathway running from Dryden Street to Arnold Street.

Summary of matters raised in submissions

29. A total number of 53 submission points were made on the parks and reserves being consulted on. Of these submission points, 31 were regarding keeping the time and season rules for Cox’s Bay Reserve with the under control off-leash access in the mornings being an important part of their use of their use and enjoyment of the park.

Hearing panel decision

30. The decision of the hearing panel is as follows:

Decision/Recommendation

Reasons

To recommend that the proposal:

· align the summer season period for parks with the beach summer season period be adopted as publicly notified

· retain a time and season rule on Cox’s Bay Reserve

· replace the under control off leash rule on Seddon Fields (outside of the sports fields) with under control on-leash be adopted as publicly notified

· replace the under control off-leash rule on Victoria Park (outside of the sports fields) with an under control on-leash rule be adopted as publicly notified, subject to an explanatory note to clarify that the under control off-leash area at Pt Erin Park extends east along the base of the cliff to the west of the pedestrian bridge over the motorway

· enlarge the northern under control off-leash area on Grey Lynn Park to north of the pathway running from Dryden Street to Arnold Street be adopted as publicly notified.

Reasons included:

· retains alignment of the summer season for both parks and beaches to make the rules easier to understand

· on Cox’s Bay Reserve the benefit of the under control off leash access in the mornings and evenings outweighs the complication of the retention of the time and season rule.

· on Seddon Fields, simplifies and integrates the dog rules with the region-wide rules for sports fields and playgrounds, and alternative under control off-leash areas available at Meola Reef Reserve and Cox’s Bay.

· on Victoria Park, better provides for public safety and comfort while still maintaining the integration of dogs with under control on-leash access, and alternative under control off-leash areas are available.

· on Grey Lynn Park, dog owners will better be able to meet their needs with the increase of the northern under control off-leash area while still maintaining the public safety and comfort of other users of the park.

Submission Topic 4 – Picnic and fitness apparatus areas

Summary of proposed change

31. The proposal is to remove the general rules for picnic and fitness areas.

Summary of matters raised in submissions

32. One submission point was received that specifically addressed this topic. The submitter opposed the removal of the picnic and fitness apparatus rule as they considered that it works well and is well understood.

Hearing panel decision

33. The decision of the hearing panel is as follows:

Decision/Recommendation

Reasons

· To recommend that proposal to remove the general rules for picnic and fitness areas be adopted as publicly notified.

Reasons included:

· removes confusing and ambiguous rules.

Submission Topic 5 – Dog exercise areas

Summary of proposed change

34. The proposal is to reclassify Meola Reef within the fenced area as a designated dog exercise area with all other dog exercise areas being identified as under control off-leash areas (shared spaces).

Summary of matters raised in submissions

35. A total of 11 submissions point were made regarding dog exercise areas with eight submission points supporting Meola Reef Reserve as a dog exercise area with a number wanting the fenced exercise area expanded as it is over subscribed.

Hearing panel decision

36. The decision of the hearing panel is as follows:

Decision/Recommendation

Reasons

· To recommend that the proposal to reclassify the fenced area on Meola Reef Reserve as a designated dog exercise area and reclassify all other dog exercise areas as under control off-leash areas be adopted as publicly notified.

Reasons included:

· implements the policy on dogs

· 22 of the 23 parks are shared spaces

· only the fenced area on Meola Reef Reserve meets the criteria for a designated dog exercise area in the policy on dogs

· no change in dog access for the majority of dog owners

· provides greater protection for other park users as will prohibit dangerous dogs from being allowed off-leash in these areas.

Submission Topic 7 – Other matters^{^[3]}

37. Matters raised by submitters outside the scope were presented to the panel for completeness.

Summary of matters raised in submissions

38. A total of eight points of submission related to areas outside the scope of the proposal, including, Auckland Domain (1), Western Park (1), and dog access on sports fields (6).

39. A total of 13 points of submissions related to operational matters, including better signage (2), more enforcement (3), dog parks (2), park amenities (5), and provision of maps (1).

Hearing panel decision

40. The recommendation of the hearing panel is as follows:

· to note Auckland Domain Committee is now responsible for the dog access rules on the Auckland Domain and this is scheduled to be reviewed in 2017.

· to note that dogs are currently allowed under control off-leash on Western Park excluding the area to the west of the sports fields and on the sports fields themselves.

· to note that dog access on sports fields is determined by the governing body of Auckland Council.

· to note that signage will be improved as areas are reviewed or as part of parks maintenance.

· to note that Auckland Council’s Licensing and Compliance Services provides enforcement services.

· to note that the provision of dog parks and park amenities is a matter for the local board as part of its administration of local parks.

· to note that information provided on Auckland Council’s website will be improved as areas are reviewed.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

41. Other local boards have not expressed any views or implications of the proposed changes through the public submission process.

Māori impact statement

42. Managing dog access in areas of significance to Maori can help achieve outcomes of the Māori Plan for Tāmaki Makaurau. In this instance, no impacts have been identified.

43. Feedback from Mana Whenua representatives at a Hui held in March 2015 related to the ability of iwi to determine dog access on Marae, a focus on control, responsible dog ownership, and ensuring the protection of sensitive ecological areas.

Implementation

44. Any decision that makes changes to dog access rules will require updates to signage and information, and training of animal management officers and park rangers.

45. The administration and implementation of the changes to dog access rules will be provided for within existing budgets.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Amendments to Schedule 2 of the Policy on Dogs 2012	270
b View	Decision-making Requirements	277

Signatories

Authors	Christopher Dempsey, Chair Waitematā Local Board area hearing panel on local dog access rules on behalf of the hearing panel
Authorisers	Judith Webster - Relationship Manager

PDF Creator

Waitematā Local Board

08 September 2015

Annual Report 2014-2015

File No.: CP2015/15316

Purpose

1. This report compares the actual activities and actual performance with the intended activities and the intended level of service as set out in the Waitemata Local Board Agreement for 2014/15. The information is prepared as part of the Waitemata Local Board’s accountability to the community for the decisions made throughout the year.

Executive Summary

2. The Local Board is required to monitor and report on the implementation of the Local Board Agreement for 2014/15. The requirements for monitoring and reporting are set out in the Local government (Auckland Council) Act 2009. These requirements include providing comment on actual local activities against the intended level of service, and for the comments to be included in the Auckland Council Annual Report.

3. The attached report is proposed for approval from the Waitemata Local Board.

4. The Auckland Council Annual Report will be audited and then reported to the Governing Body for adoption on 24 September 2015.

Recommendations

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a) Note the monitoring and reporting requirements set out in the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 and the local board information proposed for the Auckland Council Annual Report 2014/15

a) Approve:

i. The message from the Chairperson, which provides the Local Boards comments on local board matters in the 2014/15 annual report

ii. The achievements by activity and table of key capital projects that form part of the local board information for the Auckland Council Annual Report 2014/15

c) Delegate authority to the Chair and Deputy to make typographical changes before submitting for final publication

Discussion

5. The Local Board is required to monitor and report on the implementation of its local board agreement for 2014/15. The requirements for monitoring and reporting are set out in the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009, as follows:

Section 23 Monitoring and reporting

(1) Each local Board must monitor the implementation of the local board agreement for its local board area.

(2) Each annual report of the Auckland Council must include, in rep[sect of local activities for each local board area, an audited statement that –

i) Compares the level of service achieved in relation to the activities with the performance target or targets for the activities (as stated in the local board agreement for that year); and

ii) Specifies whether any intended changes to the level of service have been achieved; and

iii) Gives reasons for any significant variation between the level of service achieved and the intended level of service.

6. Each local board must comment on the matters included in the annual report under s subsection (2) in respect of its local board area and the Council must include those comments in the annual report.

7. This report focusses on the formal reporting referred to in Section 23 above. Attachment A provides the draft local board information for inclusion into the Annual Report 2014/15. The draft report contains the following sections:

· message from the Chair

· key achievements

· financial results

· performance measures.

8. Local board comments on local board matters in the annual report will be included in the annual report as part of the message from the Chair.

9. The next steps for the Annual Report are:

· Audit during August 2015

· Report to the Finance and Performance Committee on 17th September

· Report to the Governing Body for adoption on 24^th September

· Full New Zealand Stock Exchange disclosure on 30^th September

· Publication on 23 October

· Copies of the Annual Report will be provided to the local board office.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

10. Local Board comments of local board matters are included in the annual report as part of the message from the Chair.

Māori impact statement

11. The annual report provides information on how the Auckland Council has progressed its agreed priorities in the annual plan over a 12 month period. This includes engagement with Maori, as well as projects that benefit various population groups, including Maori.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Annual Report 2014-2015	285

Signatories

Authors

Audrey Gan - Lead Financial Advisor Local Boards

Authorisers

Christine Watson - Manager Financial Advisory Services - Local Boards

Judith Webster - Relationship Manager

Waitematā Local Board

08 September 2015

Approval of Conference - The Future of Cycling Symposium

File No.: CP2015/18395

Purpose

1. This report informs Local Boards about The Future of Cycling Symposium: Challenges and Possibilities hosted by the University of Waikato in Cambridge, Waikato, from Thursday, 1 October 2015 to 2 October 2015 and invites the board to give approval for members Christopher Dempsey, Rob Thomas and Pippa Coom to attend.

Executive Summary

2. The Future of Cycling Symposium takes place in Cambridge on Thursday, 1October to Friday, 2October 2015.

Recommendations

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a) Approve Member Christopher Dempsey’s attendance at The Future of Cycling Symposium on Thursday, 1 October 2015 and Friday 2October 2015 at a cost of $269, being $80 registration fee, $140 accommodation and $49 transportation, to be funded from the FY15/16 professional development budget.

b) Approve member Rob Thomas’ attendance at The Future of Cycling Symposium on Thursday, 1October 2015 and Friday, 2 October 2015 at a cost of $269, being $80 registration fee, $140 accommodation and $49 transportation, to be funded from the FY15/16 professional development budget.

c) Approve member Pippa Coom’s attendance at The Future of Cycling Symposium on Thursday, 1 October 2015 and Friday, 2October 2015 at a cost of $80 (on registration fee) to be funded from the FY15/16 professional development budget.

Comments

3. The Future of Cycling Symposium is being conducted in Cambridge on Thursday 1^st October and Friday 2^nd October 2015.

4. The Future of Cycling Symposium aims to bring together a range of researchers, sporting organisations, recreation administrators, policy-makers and cyclists to consider what the state of cycling is today and where it is hearing. The sessions will cover a range of topics such as:

· Gender and cycling;

· Planning, space and infrastructure;

· Negotiating cycling spaces: community versus elite use?

· On the road: cycling mobility and tourism;

· Cycling and the environment; and

· Cycling, technology and the digital spaces.

5. Member Dempsey is the Heritage, Urban Design and Planning portfolio lead and Transport portfolio holder. The topics covered in this symposium are directly related to the Waitematā Local Board’s work programme, in particular the development of the Stage Two of the Nelson Street off ramp, the upgrade of Franklin Road and the Greenways Routes Plan, as well as the advocacy position the Board has adopted in relation to the Auckland Cycle Network.

6. Member Thomas is Natural Environment and Sports and Recreation portfolios holder. The topics covered in this symposium are directly related to the Waitematā Local Board’s work programme, in particular the development of the Stage Two of the Nelson Street off ramp, the upgrade of Franklin Road and the Greenways Routes Plan, as well as the advocacy position the Board has adopted in relation to the Auckland Cycle Network.

7. Member Coom is the Transport portfolio lead. The topics covered in this symposium are directly related to the Waitematā Local Board’s work programme, in particular the development of the Stage Two of the Nelson Street off ramp, the upgrade of Franklin Road and the Greenways Routes Plan, as well as the advocacy position the Board has adopted in relation to the Auckland Cycle Network.

8. Given the low cost and multiple interests of the symposium, it is recommended that Christopher Dempsey, Rob Thomas and Pippa Coom attend the conference.

Costs

9. The Waitemata Local Board Professional Development budget for the 2015/16 FY is $10,500.00.

10. To date, $0 has been allocated, leaving a balance of $10,500.00. The registration fee for The Future of Cycling Symposium is $80 (incl. GST).

11. Based on the registration fee, accommodation and transportation costs for members Dempsey and Thomas, a total of $269 would be required for each member (combined total of $538). A total of $80 will be required for member Coom’s registration to the symposium.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	The Future of Cycling Symposium: Challenges and Possibilities - Tickets information	299

Signatories

Authors	Corina Claps - PA/Liaison Waitemata Local Board
Authorisers	Judith Webster - Relationship Manager

Waitematā Local Board

08 September 2015

Deputy Chairperson's Report

File No.: CP2015/18682

Executive summary

This report covers my Waitematā Local Board activities from 1 June – 7 July 2015 as Deputy Chair, lead for the Community and Transport portfolios, Chair of the Grants Committee, and with positions on the Ponsonby Business Association Board, Ponsonby Community Centre Committee and Board liaison for the Parnell Community Centre.

Recommendations

a) That the Deputy Chairperson’s Report be received.

Comments

Conference report back:

Attendance at the LGNZ Conference 2015 Rotorua 19 – 21 July

I attended the LGNZ Conference 2015 in Rotorua as the Waitematā Local Board’s delegate. The conference focused on leading the charge for our communities and had a strong focus on leadership and raising the value provided by local government for all communities in New Zealand.

The conference provided an excellent networking opportunity and a forum to develop thinking and expertise to best fulfil the role of local government. I appreciated the opportunity to attend and take part in the masterclass session: Local Boards – connecting with the community (my presentation is attached)

A highlight for me was Kevin Roberts’ presentation about how we can best make Local Government “irresistible’. I’ve also included below two of the remits from the AGM that support priorities of the Waitematā Local Board and details of the Local Government funding review.

Telling our story and selling the value of the sector

Kevin Roberts, Executive Chairman of Saatchi and Saatchi

Local Government has traditionally done a poor job at sharing the story of what we do and how we benefit the community. I found Kevin Robert’s presentation really spoke to Local Boards looking to increase their visibility, engage effectively and step up as local leaders.

According to Mr Roberts we live in an “age of now” which is about participating in ideas and gaining inspiration not information. We should seek to get a “return on involvement” (not a return on investment) – we need to ask how involved will the community be with our investment. If we make local government irresistible we will bring the best out of New Zealanders.

Five steps of creating a compelling narrative:

Step 1 Start with purpose Purpose defines what you stand for

Step 2 Build reputation through the 3 c’s:

1. Creativity – ideas are the currency of today

2. Connection - communities with the most ideas will win; work back from how people feel; emotion leads to action. People want to feel good about what local government does for the community

3. Collaboration: work together We have been chosen to serve to get things done, to make shit happen

Step 3. Make your community a lovemark

The future is beyond brands but with “lovemarks” owned by people who use them.

He things we have to have good roads, cycling paths, water, rubbish picked up etc but we’ve also got to build a higher emotional brand.

Step 4 Share your stories

- Inspiration not just information

- Truth not just facts

- Humanity not just words

- Pictures not just words

- Showing not telling

Mr Roberts suggest we ask three questions of any idea

- Will people want to see it again?

- Will people want to share it again?

- Will people want to improve it?

Step 5 Make things happen

Focus on getting things done. Focus on execution; Tactics trump strategy

There are only 3 things to do as leaders:

- Access

- Decide

- Execute (70% of time has got to go into the execution)

Quick decision making is where you win. He suggests inviting people to be part of it to help create a movement.

Mr Roberts final advice based on “MIST”

M – think mobile first

I – intimate – stories about people and real experience

S – social

T – transactional. Invite people to be part of it to help create a movement

Sustainable funding for local government – what are the options?

This session, featuring Councillor Penny Webster, Hugo Ellis and Dr Oliver Hartwich, reported back on the work of the multi-sector stakeholder team that delivered the Local Government Funding Review 10 point plan launched at the conference.

The manifesto (details taken from LGNZ’s media release) is the culmination of LGNZ’s year-long review of local government funding and follows its discussion paper released in February 2015. It focuses on key actions and policy decisions needed to provide greater funding flexibility for councils and describes the next steps for local government and its sector partners.

The manifesto is led by four guiding principles:

- an effective partnership between local and central government around shared goals and strategies, pragmatic testing of new ideas, and strong incentives for both arms of government to perform;

- recognition of the value of the private sector and community by recalibrating relationships with those sectors to incentivise partnerships and the achievement of shared goals;

- a local government which is open to innovation in service delivery, funding and financing; (within an environment of strong fiscal discipline); and

- a diverse set of funding tools for New Zealand communities to respond to the different challenges they face, with property rates as a cornerstone supplemented by revenue sources that equip local communities to meet current and future opportunities.

The document is a principles-based manifesto designed to stimulate conversation and action about options for an effective local government funding regime.

The 10 proposals are:

- An agreed priority and action plan to advance “special zones” for growth to test new ideas and drive economic prosperity.

- When new centrally imposed costs are considered (and particularly where national benefit applies) a cost benefit analysis and agreed cost sharing with central government should be mandatory.

- Mandatory rating exemptions should be removed.

- The application and administration process of the rates rebate scheme should be simplified to increase uptake.

- Better guidance is needed to assist councils make decisions on trade-offs about whether to fund services from prices (user charges) or taxes.

- Road user charges, targeted levies and fuel taxes should be allowed where it is economically efficient.

- Councils should be able to retain a share of any value uplift arising from additional economic activity related to local intervention and investment.

- Local authorities should receive a proportion of any mineral royalties attributed to local Activities.

- Allow councils to levy specific charges and taxes on visitors where economically efficient.

- Reconsider the decision to limit the range of community amenities funded through development contributions.

As Oliver Hartwich said in his presentation - if the funding review recommendations are accepted by the Government it could be revolutionary. NZ is an outlier in the funding of Local Government and not following best practice (Every $1 of tax, 92 cents goes to central government – international average is a split of 2/3). Local government deserves a better deal in the interests of the whole country.

All the conference presentations are available at http://www.lgnz.co.nz/home/about-lgnz/lgnz-conference-2/presentations-conference-2015/

Local Government New Zealand remits voted on at the LGNZ AGM

Smoking outside cafes, restaurants and bars

Proposed by Palmerston North City Council asked that LGNZ requests that the Government develops and implements legislation to prohibit smoking outside cafes, restaurants and bars. Members strongly supported this remit.

Levy on plastic shopping bags

This remit asked that LGNZ requests that the Government impose a compulsory levy on plastic shopping bags at point of sale. This remit was proposed by Palmerston North City Council. Members voted strongly in favour.

Members speaking to this remit said they supported the Government’s recent announcement to invest $1.2 million dollars in recycling stations at some major retail outlets but argued that more action is needed. Whilst recycling is important, the country must also focus on reduction in bag usage. Local government’s view is imposing a compulsory levy at the point of sale will act as a deterrent, reducing the total number of single use plastic bags produced. The introduction of levies in countries like Denmark, Ireland and China have led to a dramatic reduction in plastic bag use.

Attendance costs

My conference registration (one day only) and accommodation (x 2 nights) were paid for from a Local Board Services professional development budget. I carpooled to the conference in a Council car.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	LGNZ Conference 2015 Local Boards Masterclass - Local Board Connecting with the Community	313

Author

Pippa Coom, Deputy Chair

[1] Including Waitematā local board Facebook on 12 June, Central Leader, Auckland City Harbour News, East & Bays Courier weeks beginning 15 June and 6 July 2015

[2] 8 June and 13 July 2015

[3] Note: Submission topic 6 in the hearing and deliberation report related to submission points on dog access that was not specific to any of the submission topics in the statement of proposal. These submission points were considered as part of the deliberations on the preceding topics.

No.	Title	Page
a View	4 August 2015 Workshop Proceedings	349
b View	13 August 2015 Workshop Proceedings	351
c View	18 August 2015 Workshop Proceedings	353
d View	25 August 2015 Workshop Proceedings	355

Item	Topic	Lead officer	Notes
1.	Bimonthly Report	Trina Thompson (Senior Local Board Advisor) Eman Nasser (Local Board Advisor)	The Bimonthly report was discussed, with a focus on Greenways, Auckland Domain, Newmarket Laneways, Myers Park, Weona, Parnell Festival of Roses, Western Springs sports club, Richmond Rovers rugby club, Heritage Foreshore, Cowie St, Fukuoka Garden
2.	City Centre Integration	Oliver Roberts (CCI Strategy & Comms Manager) Gavin	The Board received an update on the review of the city centre master plan targets and the Aotea quarter framework and had the opportunity to provide feedback to the officers
3	AT Update	Roger Wilson Rob Douglas Tim	The officers provided an update of the City Centre Rail Link and the Grafton Bridge and received input from the members.
4	Grey Lynn Park & Hakanoa Greenways	Mark Miller (Acting Manager Local & Sports Parks Central) Dawn Bardsley (Park Ranger) Oliver Kunzendorff (Senior Project Manager) Drew Kenney Amir Abraha V K	The officers presented current designs for Grey Lynn greenway (Hakanoa and Grey Lynn Park) and heard some concerns and considerations from the Board

Item	Topic	Lead officer	Notes
1.	MOTAT Programme of Works 2015/2016	Matthew Frawley (Chief Executive Officer, MOTAT) Judy Lawley (Regional Facilities Auckland) Maree Laurent (Director Cultural Partnerships, RFA) Mark Miller	The officers provided an overview of the strategy approach for MOTAT including the new structure of the museum and policy review
2.	Update on Highwic House by Heritage New Zealand	Mark Miller (Manager Local and Sports Parks Central) Shyrel, Natalie	The Board received an update on Highwic House and Ewelme Cottage and there was a discussion around how to underpin their position as top heritage sites
3	Newmarket Designation - NOR	Hannah Thompson, Hamish Scott	The officers provided an update on Newmarket Viaduct (NZTA initiative) and Britomart Station (Auckland Transport)
4	Auckland Museum's Masterplan - meeting with the Director and team	Roy Clare (Director, Auckland Museum) Sally Manuireva (Director, Public Engagement and Capital Projects, Auckland Museum) Clare Dowthwaite (Senior Communications Advisor, Auckland Museum) Victoria Passau (Online Cenotaph Database Coordinator), Clare Lanyon (Project Manager, Cenotaph Community), Shyrel Burt	The Museum staff presented a phased 20 year plan to develop collections and increase access for all and suggested channels to work with the Board.

Item	Topic	Lead officer	Notes
1.	Mana Whenua Relationship Agreements	Ebony Duff (Kaiwhakatere Principal Advisor Governance) Bernard Te Paa (Pae Urungi Tuhono,Manager Maori Outcomes) Peter Thomas (Kaihautu, Senior Advisor Maori Outcomes) Otene Reweti (Kaihautu, Senior Advisor Maori Outcomes)	The officers presented the Framework for the Mana Whenua Relationship Agreement between local iwi and the Local Board and sought feedback from the members.
2.	Review of Alcohol Bans 2015	Daniel Pouwels (Policy Analyst)	A discussion took place about the deliberation report to be included in the Business Meeting agenda.
3	Review of Local Dog Access Rules	Justin Walters (Policy analyst)	Discussion about the review of Local Dog Access Rules and report to be presented to the Board in September.

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

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

Authors	Trina Thompson - Senior Local Board Advisor - Waitemata
Authorisers	Judith Webster - Relationship Manager

Authors	Trina Thompson, Senior Local Board Advisor – Waitemata
Authorisers	Judith Webster - Relationship Manager