Agenda of Howick Local Board - 14 December 2015

Howick Local Board

14 December 2015

Auckland Transport Update – December 2015

File No.: CP2015/25425

Purpose

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

Executive Summary

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

3. In particular, this report provides information on:

· The Howick Local Board’s transport capital fund

· New Half Moon Bay ferry facility update

· Eastern ‘New Network’ consultation update

· Update on Howick Local Board August 2015 resolution

· Petition from Cockle Bay ratepayers.

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

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

Discussion

Howick Items

A1. Local board transport capital fund (LBTCF)

4. The Howick Local Board’s funding allocation under the LBTCF is $871,903 per annum.

5. The Board’s active projects are included in Table 1 below (NB: ROC = rough order of costs; FEC = firm estimate of cost):

Table 1:

ID#

Project Description

Progress/Current Status

009

Walkway and amenity improvements at Half Moon Bay (HMB) Marina

· Updated FEC of $477,000

· $27,000 already received from 2011/12 Local Board Discretionary budget

· Remaining budget of $450,000 approved from LBTCF

· On 8-Jun-15, the Board approved the project for construction based on a FEC estimate of $422,000, of which $395,000 would come from the LBTCF.

· TCC approval and the consent for earthworks and trees are currently being progressed. Development of the contract for physical works is being done in parallel with these processes.

· The resource consent application was lodged on 1-Sep-15.

· Updated estimates and design clarifications with cost implications for the project were presented and discussed with the Board’s transport portfolio holders in Oct and Nov-15. The FEC for the project was accordingly revised to $477,000 meaning a further $55,000 (on top of the $395,000 previously approved) was required from the LBTCF.

· On 16-Nov-15, the Board approved the increased allocation of $450,000 from the LBTCF.

· Tender documents are being finalised and the project is planned to be tendered in late Nov-16. Start of construction is being targeted for Feb-16.

155

Burswood Business Area enhancements

· Updated firm estimate of $411,770

· $104,000 received from Council’s Business Area Planning Unit

· $307,770 balance required from LBTCF

· On 10-Nov-14, the Board approved the project for construction.

· Tenders closed on 25-Sep-15. The lowest conforming tender was higher than the approved budget, meaning increased funding is required to complete the project. The updated project and contingency costs were presented and discussed with the Board’s transport portfolio holders on 13-Oct-15 and confirmed in writing thereafter.

· On 16-Nov-15, the Board approved the increased allocation of $307,770 from the LBTCF.

217

Pigeon Mountain Road metering signals

· FEC estimate of $418,000

· On 20-Apr-15, the Board resolved that AT should proceed to complete detailed design and costing.

· Detailed designs were presented to the transport portfolio meeting on 15-Sep-15. The firm estimate for the project is $418,000.

· The Board approved construction of the project on 12-Oct-15.

· TCC approval is being sought on 4-Dec-15.

272

Bucklands Beach walkway improvements

· ROCs for various sections (as per concept plans)

o A-B = $134,000

o B-C = $496,000

o C-D = $57,000

o D-E = $104,000

o E-F = $803,000 or $97,000*

o F-G = $324,000 or $115,000*

o G-H = $97,000

o H-I = $224,000

o I-J = $152,000

o J-K = $93,000

· Total ROC = either $2,484,000 or $1,569,000 with *alternate options

· On 14-Jul-14, the Board approved a Little Bucklands Beach walkway project to progress to detailed design and costing stage.

· On 8-Jun-15, the Board resolved to expand the scope of the project to include pedestrian improvements along the length of The Parade.

· On 13-Jul-15, concept plans showing the length of The Parade, itemising proposed pedestrian improvements in various sections and ROCs for each section were presented to the Board.

· The Board resolved to consult with the public and key stakeholders on the strategic vision for the proposed walkway improvements. Further planning is underway regarding the next steps.

279

Chapel Road pedestrian signals

· FEC estimate of $261,282

· On 11-May-15, the Board approved this project for construction based on the FEC estimate of $261,282.

· TCC approval for the project was given on 3-Jul-15.

· The project is expected to tendered in late Nov-15. Construction is expected to commence in Jan/Feb-16.

396

Half Moon Bay (HMB) new ferry facility

· Up to $2.5m originally allocated

· $1.25m confirmed as required from LBTCF following NZTA subsidy approval

· Further funding and NZTA subsidy application required for Stage 2 landside works

· On 13-Oct-14, the Board allocated up to $2.5m towards a new $4.3m ferry facility at HMB, subject to AT allocating at least $1m towards the project.

· NZTA subsidy approval for approximately 50% of the initial $4.3m project is confirmed.

· AT agreed that the Board’s proportion of funding for the initial $4.3m project should be abated by an equal proportion of the NZTA subsidy, meaning that $1.25m of the Board’s original allocation is definitely required. However, if the project runs over budget the Board will need to contribute to any shortfall on the same basis.

· A further NZTA funding application will be made for the proposed Stage 2 landside works once estimates are finalised.

· A progress update is included at item A2 below.

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

Howick Local Board transport capital fund summary:

Total funding available ($871,903 p.a. across 5 FYs – 2012/13 to 2016/17)	$4,359,515
Actual costs reported for completed projects (3x driver feedback signs; Ti Rakau & Cockle Bay bus shelters; Pedestrian improvements at Meadowlands/Whitford/Millhouse; Crooks Road streetscape improvements; The Parade footpath; Highland Park Adshel double bus shelter; Point View Drive footpath; East Tamaki streetlighting upgrade)	-867,294
Firm estimates for projects given construction approval (Chapel Road pedestrian signals; Pigeon Mountain Road metering signals; HMB walkway/amenity improvements; Burswood Business Area enhancements)	-1,437,052
Confirmed LBTCF funding requirement towards initial Half Moon Bay ferry facility project (though further discussions required regarding funding of Stage 2 landside works)	-1,250,000
*Funding available to allocate* (assuming construction approval given to all projects excluding Bucklands Beach)	*$805,169*
Rough estimates on project requiring further direction (Bucklands Beach/The Parade walkway improvements - two alternate costings provided)	$2,848,000 or $1,569,000

A2. New Half Moon Bay ferry facility update

7. The Stage 1 pontoon and gangway fabrication works have been completed and placed in storage and will not be required until the latter half of 2016.

8. The majority of the fabricated Half Moon Bay pontoon units, whalers and fenders are being used to replace the existing pontoon structure at Down Town Ferry Terminal (DTFT) Pier 2.

9. The pontoon units have been floated onto the East Tamaki and assembled in readiness for bringing around to DTFT Pier 2B when required.

10. All items utilised for DTFT Pier 2 will be replaced with no cost or time implications for the Half Moon Bay project.

11. The wharf design fire reports and the structural peer are being finalised.

12. Costs estimates for the wharf construction and the proposed landside design works have been provided and are being assessed against budget.

13. The Marine Resource Consent Hearing has been held and the project is now awaiting the duty-Commissioners’ ruling, which is anticipated before Christmas.

14. The project is continuing on-going engagement with Mana Whenua to confirm Te Aranga Design Principles in line with Council engagement policies.

15. The overall project is progressing as planned with completion scheduled for October 2016.

16. The high level programme for Half Moon Bay is:

· Marine resource consent period – June to December 2015

· Wharf structure building consent period – October to December 2015

· Landside resource consent – November to January 2016 (noting that landside works are subject to scope finalisation and associated funding approval)

· Tender package release to market – January to February 2016

· Physical works contractor established on site – April 2016

· Physical works – wharf and landside – April to September 2016

· Relocation of ferry service – October 2016.

A3. Eastern ‘New Network’ consultation update

17. Public consultation began on 1 October and is currently underway on proposed New Network changes to the bus services for Central and East Auckland. Almost 53,000 brochures were delivered to properties in East Auckland. The consultation period runs until 10 December.

18. As at 19 November, the following feedback had been received comprising:

· Submissions 674 (hardcopy and online)

· Discussion forum 82 comments

· ‘Map a comment’ 8 pins

· Q and A 27 questions asked.

19. The following meetings and events in support of the New Network consultation were held in the east and attended by Auckland Transport (AT) staff:

1 Sep Howick Local Board briefing

6 Oct Panmure public meeting with AMETI (hosted by Maungakiekie-Tamaki Local Board) – 33 attendees

10 Oct Pakuranga night market – 144 engagements

21 Oct Howick Youth Council – 8 attendees

31 Oct Sylvia Park information day with AMETI – 110 engagements

2 Nov Howick drop-in day (library) – 40 engagements

7 Nov Botany drop-in day (library – 50 engagements

11 Nov Panmure Station information day – 80 engagements

14 Nov Pakuranga Plaza information day – 140 engagements

20. New Network planners were present at all events to answer specific questions on the proposals. The team was also supported by AT staff volunteers and ambassadors. There have been some central isthmus-based events, where staff have responded to queries regarding eastern issues, such as at the Auckland Council staff drop-in, AT transport expo, and hospital drop-in days.

21. Chinese translations of the brochure were also distributed and Chinese-speaking staff and ambassadors were available to speak to members of the Chinese community who needed assistance.

22. Eastern events have been well attended and the New Network proposals generally well received. Participants have been generally understanding of the rationale behind the proposals and were also appreciative to learn that their feedback could influence/affect the final outcome.

23. As anticipated, concerns were expressed about the proposed removal of service from certain areas. Specific areas of concern were:

· Replacing the direct Botany to city service with a transfer at Panmure

· Removing the all day service from Bucklands Beach

· Removing the direct service from Botany to Middlemore Hospital in favour of transfers

· Removing the service from Burswood in favour of providing more frequent services along Ti Rakau Drive.

A4. Update on Howick Local Board August 2015 resolution

24. At its August meeting, under the item “Auckland Transport Update – August 2015”, the Howick Local Board passed the following resolution:

Resolution number HW/2015/114

That the Howick Local Board:

a) Requests that the removal of the bus stop from Crawford Park to Stockade Hill be urgently reconsidered by AT with regard to safety issues and consideration be given to any modification that could be made to Mellons Bay Road to continue to accommodate the bus stop.

25. Further to the ongoing concerns raised by the Howick Local Board, Auckland Transport has been investigating other locations that might be suitable for the bus stop. An alternative location on Picton Street north of Walter MacDonald Street was subsequently ruled out on road safety grounds due to the impact on sightlines of motorists exiting Walter MacDonald Street.

26. Auckland Transport is currently investigating the feasibility of an option that would involve reconfiguring the junction of Ridge Road and Picton Street in order to establish a safer bus stop in the intersection. If this option proves feasible, implementation would be subject to consultation and also funding availability, as the option would involve considerably greater cost. If available, a verbal update will be provided at the meeting.

A5. Petition from Cockle Bay ratepayers

27. On 16 November, a petition from ratepayers of Shelly Beach Parade, Churchill Road and Pah Road in Cockle Bay was formally presented to the Howick Local Board. The petition was referred to Auckland Transport for a response.

28. Auckland Transport’s response to the roading matters raised in the petition is as follows:

29. Request for the traffic island at the intersection to be upgraded and landscaped with suitable features – Auckland Transport’s role is to manage and control the Auckland transport system and to contribute to an effective, efficient, and safe land transport system. Auckland Transport’s role does not include plantings or landscaping within the road corridor solely for beautification purposes. Auckland Transport suggests that this request be referred to Auckland Council Parks, which maintains street trees and plantings located within road reserve. Alternatively, the Howick Local Board may choose to initiate a locally-funded place-shaping project to landscape and beautify the traffic island.

30. Maintenance of current grassed island to an acceptable standard – Auckland Transport’s maintenance contract requires the traffic island to be mown in accordance with Type B specification up to 100mm height. The photo included in the petition was taken after a prolonged period of wet weather which saw some grass lengths exceeding the specifications, but the traffic island was subsequently mown. Auckland Transport has requested its contractor to ensure that the traffic island is maintained in accordance with the required specifications. Auckland Council Parks contractors mow the beachfront in accordance with tighter specifications than those under Auckland Transport’s maintenance contract.

31. Maintenance/repair of damaged kerbing blocks (around planted side islands on Shelly Beach Parade) – Auckland Transport has requested its maintenance contractor to check the kerbing blocks and repair if required.

General Information Items

B1. Southern motorway widening begins

32. Work on widening the Southern Motorway between Manukau and Papakura has begun.

33. Transport Minister Simon Bridges and Mayor Len Brown turned the first sod on the Southern Corridor Improvements (SCI) project on 21 October near Pescara Point Reserve in Karaka, to mark the start of construction on the second of four Government-accelerated transport projects for the Auckland region.

34. The NZTA’s $268 million project extends from Manukau to Papakura along SH1 and will improve safety and journey reliability on Auckland’s Southern Motorway.

35. Leighton Contractors will start establishment work from November with construction beginning in February.

36. Project completion is expected in 2018, however extra southbound lanes will be completed in early 2017 to coincide with the opening of the Waterview tunnel and ensure there’s enough capacity for the additional traffic entering SH1 from SH20.

37. The SCI project includes:

· Southbound widening to 4 lanes between SH20 and Hill Road and to 3 lanes between Hill Road and Papakura

· Northbound widening to 3 lanes from Papakura to Takanini

· Takanini Interchange upgrade

· Upgrade of 16 existing bridges and construction of 6 new structures

· A new 4.5km walking path and cycleway

· New LED lighting

B2. Public Transport Patronage

38. The summary patronage performance for October 2015 is presented below:

39. Auckland public transport patronage totalled 80,701,225 passenger boardings for the 12 months to October 2015, an increase of +0.3% on the 12 months to September 2015 and +8.3% on the 12 months to October 2014. October 2015 monthly patronage was 7,081,999, an increase of 257,795 boardings or +3.8% on October 2014, normalised to ~ +6.3% once adjustments are made to take into account special event patronage and the number of business and weekend days in the month.

40. Rapid and Frequent services totalled 31,455,313 passenger boardings for the 12 months to October 2015, an increase of +0.7% on the 12 months to September 2015. Rapid and Frequent services patronage for October 2015 was 2,841,000, an increase of 204,266 boardings or +7.7% on October 2014.

41. Train services totalled 14,831,482 passenger boardings for the 12 months to October 2015, an increase of +1.3% on the 12 months to September 2015 and +22.3% on the 12 months to October 2014. Patronage for October 2015 was 1,359,606, an increase of 194,549 boardings or +16.7% on October 2014, normalised to ~ +20.1%.

42. Bus services totalled 60,208,175 passenger boardings for the 12 months to October 2015, an increase of +0.05% on the 12 months to September 2015 and +5.1% on the 12 months to October 2014. Bus services patronage for October 2015 was 5,254,757, an increase of 27,753 boardings or +0.5% on October 2014, normalised to ~ +2.9%.

43. Ferry services totalled 5,661,568 passenger boardings for the 12 months to October 2015, an increase of +0.6% on the 12 months to September 2015 and 11.3% on the 12 months to October 2014. Ferry services patronage for October 2015 was 467,636, an increase of 35,493 boardings or +8.2% on October 2014, normalised to ~ +9.3%.

44. The proportion of all trips utilising AT HOP was 72.8% in October 2015 (Bus 75.9%, Rail 77.4%, Ferry 25.0%); down from 73.8% in September 2015.

Media Items

C1. The first double decker hits the road in the east

45. East Aucklanders were the first to gain the benefit of a new fleet of double decker buses rolled out from 4 November. Prior to that, the use of double decker buses had been restricted to the Northern Busway

46. On 4 November, the first double decker bus went into service in the Botany area, operated for Auckland Transport by Howick & Eastern Buses Ltd. The first trip departed Botany Shopping Centre travelling to Britomart along the 500 Route.

47. Residents in the east will notice a big difference. The buses have improved seating, USB charging points and, in time, will have on-board WiFi and infotainment systems.

48. Over the next few months double deckers will become a regular sight in Auckland. Howick & Eastern will have 15 such buses running to the east, while Ritchies will eventually have 15 crossing the harbour bridge and NZ Bus also has plans for 23 buses.

49. The introduction of double deckers is another sign of the phenomenal growth in public transport patronage in Auckland requiring innovative solutions to cope with demand.

50. Bus services in Auckland totalled 60.2 million passenger boardings for the 12 months to September, an annual increase of 5.7%.

51. Other investment in Auckland’s east includes the Auckland Manukau Eastern Transport Initiative or AMETI – a $1.5 billion investment to keep the eastern part of Auckland moving. The first stage of AMETI has already been rolled out and included the Panmure bus and train station. This will be followed a second stage between Panmure and Pakuranga providing a busway, cycle lanes and better roads. Eventually the busway will extend all the way to Botany along Te Rakau Drive and will carry more passengers than the Northern Busway on the North Shore.

C2. Auckland’s most scenic bikes rides

52. The top ten most scenic bike rides in the Auckland region have been revealed today. One of ten bike rides featured in Auckland Transport’s Great Ride Passports is the Twin Streams bike ride in suburban Henderson, it runs alongside a stream and is surrounded by native bush and birds.

53. Each passport contains a map of a ride with a description of the terrain, length, amenities and points of interest along the way. The 10 passports are available at local libraries or on the Auckland Transport website www.at.govt.nz/greatrides.

54. The number of Great Rides has increased to ten from six last year and Kathryn King, Auckland Transport’s Walking and Cycling manager says they have proved very popular.

55. “We are often asked by people who are new to cycling where they can find safe, scenic, fun places to ride. In fact, our cycling maps are among the most searched for items on the AT website,” she says.

56. “These great rides offer a way to get out with family or friends and discover a new part of Auckland by bike. The Auckland region has some stunning natural beauty and what better way to enjoy it than on a bike.”

57. The rides are suitable for most ages and abilities and take in a variety of environments, scenic vistas and points of historical and cultural interest. The webpage has maps and a short promotional video which provides a glimpse of some hidden gems, accessible only by bike or on foot.

58. The “Great Rides” are:

· Matakana Trails

· Te Ara Tahuna Pathway: Orewa Estuary

· Green Route: Devonport to Takapuna

· Hobsonville Point

· Twin Streams: Henderson Creek and Opanuku Stream

· Auckland Waterfront: Britomart to Mission Bay

· Pakuranga Rotary Pathway

· The Cascades Paths: Pakuranga, Botany and Meadowlands

· Waikaraka Cycleway: Onehunga to Mangere Bridge

· Wattle Downs.

59. Great Rides: www.at.govt.nz/greatrides

C3. A boost for transport connections in Otahuhu

60. Work began on 13 November on a major upgrade of Otahuhu Station, with Transport Minister Simon Bridges, Mayor Len Brown and Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board Deputy Chair Carrol Elliott marking the start of main construction works by turning the first sods at the station construction site.

61. Otahuhu Station is an important part of the new, simpler and more connected south Auckland public transport network. It is designed to provide Aucklanders with a new network of buses that better connect to the trains at Ōtāhuhu.

62. The $28m project is funded by the Government through the NZTA and Auckland Council. The fully integrated bus and train station is expected to open in the second half of 2016.

63. The upgraded station will make it easier to connect between trains and frequent bus services being introduced with the new public transport network. It will be linked with two new bus platforms and a terminal building via an elevated concourse. It will be pedestrian friendly and have improved accessibility for all users.

64. The new Ōtāhuhu station will offer the following benefits:

· A high quality accessible modern facility

· The design and architecture will reflect local and historical stories for mana whenua (portage site for waka)

· Clear separation of buses, trains and a shared pedestrian and cycle pathway (including cycle storage racks), separated cycle crossing at the adjacent signalised intersection

· Passenger drop off zone

· Covered bus platforms for passengers moving between bus and train services

· More frequent bus services from the second half of 2016

· Better connections between bus and rail networks

65. For more information on the interchange visit at.govt.nz/otahuhuinterchange

C4. Rail patronage reaches 15 million passengers

66. On 19 November, annual rail patronage in Auckland reached a new record of 15 million passenger trips.

67. Rail patronage in Auckland has grown by 22% over the past year, just four months ago reaching 14 million passenger trips. Back 10 years ago, there were just 4 million trips made a year. At the current rate, it is expected Auckland will pass the next big milestone – 20 million passenger trips – at the start of 2017.

68. Since the rail network went all-electric in July from Papakura to Swanson, there has been a marked improvement in reliability and on-time performance. In October, 93% of services arrived at their destination within five minutes of their scheduled time and the previous month 94.9% of services arrived on time, a new record for Auckland trains.

69. Rail customers are liking the improved level of service and the comfort and convenience of the new trains. Auckland Transport is also working on a timetable improvement which will see services on the Western Line go to six trains an hour at peak like the Southern and Eastern Lines.

70. Overall public transport patronage in Auckland across rail, bus and ferries now exceeds 80 million passenger trips a year.

Issues Register

71. The regular monthly issues register is Attachment A to this report.

Consideration

Local Board Views

72. The Howick Local Board’s views will be incorporated during consultation on any proposed schemes.

Implementation Issues

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

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Issues Register - December 2015	21

Signatories

Author	Jenni Wild – Elected Member Relationship Manager (South); Auckland Transport
Authoriser	Jonathan Anyon – Elected Member Relationship Team Manager; Auckland Transport

Howick Local Board

14 December 2015

Grant of New Community Lease for Alzheimers Auckland Charitable Trust

File No.: CP2015/23641

Purpose

1. To seek Howick Local Board approval for a new community lease for Alzheimers Auckland Charitable Trust (formerly Alzheimers Society Counties Manukau Incorporated) for the property at 24R William Roberts Road, Pakuranga.

Executive Summary

2. Alzheimers and Related Disorders Society (ADARDS) South Auckland Incorporated was founded in 1985 by a group of carers who identified the need for common support to those with Alzheimers and their carers, families and whanau. In 2011 Alzheimers Auckland Incorporated and Alzheimers Society Counties Manukau Incorporated merged to form the Alzheimers Auckland Charitable Trust (the Trust).

3. The Trust has been serving the Howick and Pakuranga communities from 27R William Roberts Road, Pakuranga since 1990, initially by the regular hire of the space and since 2001 with a formal agreement.

4. The current lease was signed in July 2008 and expired on 30 June 2011. There was no right of renewal contained in the lease. The Trust have applied for a new lease at the property (site plan Attachment A). It has been holding over on the last lease since 2011 and any new lease can commence from now.

5. The Trust has exclusive use of the building containing three offices, a board/meeting room, kitchen, toilets and a storage room. A Community Outcomes Plan would be an attachment to the lease, subject to Local Board approval (Attachment B).

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a) Approves a new community lease to Alzheimers Auckland Charitable Trust for the property at 24R William Roberts Road, Pakuranga, subject to the following conditions:

i) Term – 5 years commencing 1 December 2015 with one 5-year right of renewal;

ii) Rent - $1.00 (+ GST) per annum, if requested;

iii) Maintenance Fee - $500 (+ GST) per annum;

iv) An approved Community Outcomes Plan attached to the lease document;

v) All other terms and conditions in accordance with the Reserves Act 1977 and the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012.

Comments

6. Support services to those with Alzheimers, their carers, families and whanau have been provided from 24R William Roberts Road since 1990, initially with a regular booking in what was then the Pakuranga Wellness Centre. The group provides services to empower and enable all people affected by dementia – including carers, friends, family and whanau by delivering information, education, advocacy, specialist assessment and support.

7. The Alzheimers Society, Counties Manukau obtained a Licence to Occupy the entire building in August 1999. The group had been set up and registered with the Companies Office in July 1986 as the Alzheimers and Related Disorders Society (ADARDS) South Auckland Incorporated and became Alzheimers Counties Manukau Incorporated in August 1988.

8. In 2009/2010 members of the board and management team from Alzheimers Auckland and Alzheimers Counties Manukau met to discuss a possible merger as a way of streamlining infrastructure and administration for greater efficiency and consistency of service delivery in the greater Auckland region. In 2011 Alzheimer’s Auckland Incorporated and Alzheimers Society Counties Manukau Incorporated merged to form Alzheimers Auckland Charitable Trust.

9. The building comprises three offices, a board/meeting room, kitchen, toilets and a storage room. The land is described as Part Lot 1 DP 51777 and shown marked “A” on SO 59043 - 992 m² - Part NA21A/916 (Part-Cancelled) is part of Ti Rakau Park held in fee simple by Auckland Council as a classified local purpose (site for a community buildings) reserve and subject to the Reserves Act 1977. The activity of the Trust aligns with the classification of the reserve.

10. The club’s last lease on the site was for three years and expired on 30 June 2011. It is recommended that a new community lease be granted to Alzheimers Auckland Charitable Trust for the property at 24R William Roberts Road, Pakuranga for five years commencing 1 December 2015 with one five year right of renewal. The Trust has been holding over on its last lease since 2011 and any new lease can commence from now.

11. The rent recommended would be $1.00 (+ GST) per annum, if requested, with an annual subsidised maintenance fee of $500.00 (+ GST) per annum. This is the standard fee recommended for groups with sole use of a Council owned building. The trust would be responsible for some maintenance, which would be set out in a schedule attached to the lease, and for the payment of utilities. A Community Outcomes Plan will attached to the lease and reported upon annually.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

12. The recommendations within this report fall within the Howick Local Board’s allocated authority relating to the local, recreation, sports and community facilities.

13. The board may award a lease to an incumbent group who is providing a needed service in an area to enable provision of uninterrupted service. Alternatively it is considered best practice, at the expiry of a lease of a Council owned building, to call for expressions of interest to assess other uses for the building.

14. Council staff have sought input from relevant council departments on the suitability of this tenant.

Māori impact statement

15. There are no significant changes or impacts for Maori associated with the recommendations in this report. Maori benefit as users of the facilities.

Implementation

16. The recommendations within this report do not trigger the Auckland Council Significance Policy.

17. All costs involved in the preparation of lease documents are borne by Auckland Council.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Attachment A: Site Plan 24R William Roberts Road, Pakuranga - Alzheimers Auckland Charitable Trust	29
b View	Attachment B: Community Outcomes Plan, Alzheimers Auckland Charitable Trust	31

Signatories

Authors

Jenny Young - Community Lease Advisor

Authorisers

Graham Bodman - General Manager Arts, Community and Events

Angeline Barlow - Relationship Manager

Howick Local Board

14 December 2015

Howick Local Board Dog Access Review 2015/2016- Scope Report

File No.: CP2015/22240

Purpose

1. To determine the timing and scope of the Howick Local Board review of local dog access rules in 2015/16.

Executive Summary

2. In 2012, Auckland Council’s Governing Body made the Dog Management Bylaw and the Policy on Dogs. The governing body delegated the review of the dog access rules on local parks, beach and foreshore areas to local boards.

3. The governing body delegation requires local boards to review their beach and foreshore dog access rules. The local board has full discretion on whether to review other local dog access rules, including those on local parks.

4. The governing body has established a standard process to assist local boards with the review. The current review process started in September 2015 and is due to end in October 2016.

5. The local board’s decision on the review scope is the first step in determining what aspects of dog access rules are reviewed and consulted on, in 2016.

6. Staff recommend that a review of the local dog access rules commence in 2015/16 as scheduled (Option A1), as it allows for the implementation of dog access rules that are in keeping with the Auckland Council Policy on Dogs 2012 which are more practical and simpler to understand by the general public.

7. If the board confirms the review of the local dog access rules in 2015/16 it is recommended that a review of local dog access rules incorporate a targeted review of parks (Option B2) and a high level review to identify practical “under control off-leash” parks (Option B3). This would strike the most appropriate balance between implementing the Auckland Council Policy on Dogs 2012, the complexity and scope of the review and the resource required to undertake that review.

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a) confirm the review of its local dog access rules in 2015/16 (Option A1)

b) confirm the inclusion of the following additional matters within the scope of the review:

i. confirms a targeted review of park rules (Option B2)

ii. confirm a high level review to identify practical “under control off-leash” parks (Option B3)

Comments

Responsibilities

8. In 2012, the governing body made the Policy on Dogs, and delegated the review of the dog access rules on local beaches, foreshore and parks to local boards. This includes a requirement to review all local beach and foreshore areas by a date determined by the local board (resolution number GB/2012/157).

9. Responsibility for areas of regional significance (including regional parks) and Tūpuna Maunga are delegated to the Auckland Council Parks, Sport and Recreation Committee and the Tūpuna Maunga o Tāmaki Makaurau Authority respectively. The Regulatory and Bylaws Committee has overall responsibility for the Policy on Dogs 2012 and region-wide dog access rules (e.g. council playgrounds, sports surfaces, roads, car and boat parking areas, cemeteries, campgrounds and holiday parks).

Process and funding

10. In August and September 2013, local boards were consulted on the level of priority for the local board dog access rule review within their local board areas. As a result of this prioritisation, the Howick Local Board is scheduled to commence its review of local dog access rules in 2015, with any changes effective from Labour Weekend 2016.

11. In order to facilitate the local board’s review of their dog access rules and take advantage of economies of scale, a regionally funded ‘standard process’ has been established. The ‘standard process’ timeline is structured around council’s annual dog registration process which takes place in June each year.

12. The Dog Control Act 1996 requires all dog owners to be notified of any proposed changes to the dog access rules and to follow special consultative procedure under the Local Government Act 2002 (see Attachment B). Therefore, the standard process for this review consists of the following phases and timeline:

· summer 2015/16: staff will gather information and community views to inform the development of proposed changes

· April/May 2016: proposed changes will be adopted by the local board

· June 2016: proposed changes are notified for consultation to align with the dog registration process

· August and September 2016: public hearings and deliberations will be held and a final decision is made.

13. The regional funding provides for the review of beach and foreshore dog access rules, generic public notification initiatives and generic signage to implement decisions. These activities include:

· desktop research

· site visits (beach and foreshore areas and high-use parks only)

· on-line survey of beach and foreshore areas

· on-beach intercept survey

· on-beach time lapse camera

· internal stakeholder engagement with staff from parks, animal management, and biodiversity

· statutory consultation requirements (which includes public notification, submission collation, analysis and associated reporting, staff support at hearings and deliberations).

14.
Local boards are required to resource:

· any additional external workshops or engagement not included in the standard process outlined above

· advertisements, media / social media releases not included in the standard process outlined above

· the organisation and running of hearings

· funding of non-standard signage.

15. Further details of the process and funding are provided in Attachment C.

Existing local board rules

16. The existing dog access rules in the Howick Local Board area consist of both local dog access rules and regional dog access rules.

17. The regional rules were considered as part of the 2012 review of the Auckland Council Policy on Dogs and apply to all local board areas. The regional rules take precedence over any local dog access rule for common public places such as playgrounds, sports fields, roads, car and boat parking areas, cemeteries, campgrounds and holiday parks.

18. Within the Howick Local Board area, the following local dog access rules apply:

· default under control off-leash rule

· time and season rules for beaches, foreshore and adjoining parks

· under control on-leash for any farm paddocks in a park occupied by stock and a further five park and walkway areas

· prohibited Mangemangeroa Reserve foreshore and Crown foreshore of Wakaaranga Creek Tamaki River

19. The full list of dog access rules for the Howick Local Board area is included as Attachment A.

Options for the local board to consider

20. The first decision for the local board is to consider when to commence the review of their local dog access rules, that is, in 2015/2016 or 2016/2017.

21. If the local board resolves to undertake a review of the local dog access rules in 2015/16, the local board then needs to consider what, if any, rules that relate to local parks will be reviewed (in addition to local beach and foreshore areas which is required).

Start of review

Option A1: Commence the review of the local dog access rules in 2015/16 as scheduled

22. This option involves commencing the local dog access review in 2015/16 as currently scheduled. Under the delegations to the local board, the local board must review their beach and foreshore areas.

23. As part of the beach and foreshore areas review, the local board must consider whether or not the regional time and season standard is appropriate to be applied to each beach and foreshore area and the provision of under control off-leash at all times dog access areas.

24. The benefits of this option are that:

· it allows for the implementation of dog access rules that are in keeping with the Auckland Council Policy on Dogs 2012, community preferences and wildlife considerations by October 2016 as currently scheduled

· it allows for the consideration of access rules that are simple to follow and enforce on the ground

· the Auckland Council Policy on Dogs 2012 has created an expectation that the local board will consider whether or not the regional ‘time and season standard’ is appropriate to be applied to the beaches and foreshore areas within their jurisdiction.

25. The disadvantages of this option are:

· local board resource is required to investigate options or undertake formal special consultative procedure with hearings in 2016

· additional workload for local board members during the 2016 pre-election period.

Option A2: Defer the review of the local dog access until 2016/17

26. This option involves deferring the local dog access review until 2016/17. Under this option staff will report to the local board in 2016/17 to consider what will be included within the scope of the local dog access review.

27. It is noted that while the local board may defer the review of the local dog access rules, it is required by the delegations to undertake a review of their local dog access rules.

28. The benefits of this option are:

· no local board resource required to investigate options or undertake formal special consultative procedure, with hearings in 2016

· no additional workload for local board members during the 2016 pre-election period.

29. The disadvantages of this option are:

· resource required in 2016/17 may conflict with 2017 local board plan reviews

· confusing or inappropriate dog access rules remain in effect until October 2017

· dog owners have an expectation that the local board will consider whether the regional ‘time and season’ standard is appropriate to be applied to the beaches and foreshore areas within their jurisdiction, as outlined in the Auckland Council Policy on Dogs 2012.

Recommendation

30. Staff recommend that a review of the local dog access rules commence in 2015/16 as scheduled (Option A1), as it allows for the implementation of dog access rules that are in keeping with the Auckland Council Policy on Dogs 2012 that are practical and simple to understand by the general public.

31. Furthermore, the Auckland Council Policy on Dogs 2012 has created an expectation that the local board will consider whether the regional ‘time and season standard’ is appropriate to be applied to the beaches and foreshore areas within their jurisdiction.

Scope of local dog access review

32. As discussed above, where the local board resolves to undertake a review, the local board must review the local beach and foreshore area rules but the local board has the discretion to consider any rules that relate to local parks. The scope of the review may include either a single option, or a mix of options:

· target review of parks (Option B2)

· a high level review to identify practical “under control off-leash” parks (Option B3), or

· a detailed review of all local parks (Option B4).

Option B1: No review of local parks (status quo)

33. This option involves only reviewing the beach and foreshore areas with no local park rules considered as part of this review.

34. The benefits of this option are that:

· any consultation carried out around the beach and foreshore rules will be simpler with fewer issues for the public to consider

· any changes or impacts of the changes to the local dog access rules will be limited to the beach and foreshore areas

· no additional resource required to investigate or assess local parks.

35. The disadvantages of this option are:

· retains the general rules that are confusing and difficult to communicate and enforce

· does not allow for an integrated approach to be taken between beach and foreshore areas and the adjacent parks and reserves

· does not allow for a review of high-use parks or areas of potential concern to the local board or the community

· does not allow for the identification of practical under control off-leash parks within the local board schedule.

Option B2: Targeted review of park rules

36. This option comprises of three parts. Firstly, a review of generic rules (i.e. dog access rule for stock on parks); secondly a review of parks adjacent to beaches; and lastly, a review of high use parks or parks with identified concerns.

37. For the Howick Local Board, a review of generic rules will consider the applicability and appropriateness of the dog access rule when there is stock on parks. These rules are typically difficult to practically define and enforce.

38. The review of parks adjacent to beaches ensures an integrated approach to the activities within a coastal environment.

39. The review of high use parks and parks with identified concerns is a targeted review of selected parks to identify conflicting use and the appropriateness of dog access rules, and will include site visits and internal workshops as required.

40. The benefits of this option are that:

· it allows for an integrated approach to be taken to the review of the dog access rules on the beach and foreshore areas and the adjacent parks and reserves

· a targeted review of high-use parks and parks with identified issues will limit areas affected by any changes in the dog access rules

· a targeted review will limit the complexity of the review when compared to a wider review of all parks within the local board area

· will result in generic rules being replaced with site specific rules where appropriate, will be easier to understand and better provide for public safety and comfort

· a targeted review allows for resources to be concentrated on areas with the greatest impact on users.

41. The disadvantages of this option are:

· may result in parks adjacent to the beach and foreshore having different access rules than other local parks

· may result in high use parks and other local parks having different dog access rules

· will increase the complexity of the issues considered as part of the review

· changes to the access rules will affect a number of parks given the general nature of the generic access rule

· may be perceived by dog owners as a reduction in dog access in popular or high amenity parks

Option B3: High level review to identify practical ‘under control off-leash’ parks

42. This option involves a desktop study of all parks to identify the practical under control off-leash areas and list them within Schedule 2 of the local dog access rules. The intent behind this option is to be able to provide a list of existing locations where dog owners have the space and access to be able to exercise their dogs under control off-leash.

43. This option would allow the local board to consider whether or not the existing default under control off-leash rule is appropriate for the local board area.

44. The benefits of this option are:

· identification and listing of “under control off-leash” areas/parks that have sufficient characteristics (e.g. size and shape) for undertaking typical under control off-leash activities (e.g. throwing a ball, etc) which will be easier to communicate and understand

· allows for a consideration of whether or not the existing default under control off-leash rule is appropriate for the local board area.

45. The disadvantages of this option are:

· the inclusion of a number of additional parks within the consultation documents will increase the complexity of the documents

· it may be perceived by dog owners as (or if the default dog access rule is changed may result in) a reduction in under control off-leash dog access areas

· is not a detailed review of all parks as this option only seeks to identify areas with existing practical under control off-leash areas.

Option B4: Detailed review of all local parks

46. This option involves a detailed review of all parks (both high and low use) and implements the Auckland Council Policy on Dogs 2012.

47. This option would involve site visits to all parks with consideration as to what dog access rules are best suited to activities occurring on the park and a network based approach to the wider provision of dog access.

48. This option would allow the local board to consider whether the existing default under control off-leash rule is appropriate for the local board area.

49. In contrast to the target review of parks (Option B2) and a high level review to identify practical “under control off-leash” parks (Option B3), the local board would be required to co-ordinate and fully fund this option.

50. The benefits of this option are:

· would allow for a detailed site-specific review of all parks based in accordance with the Auckland Council Policy on Dogs 2012, community preferences and wildlife considerations

· allows for an integrated approach to be taken to the review of the dog access rules on all parks and reserves

· provides greater certainty in all parks and reduces the potential for conflict in these areas

· removes or replaces confusing rules that are difficult to communicate and enforce.

51. The disadvantages of this option are:

· local board will be required to co-ordinate and fund this detailed review of all parks and reserves which will be resource intensive^{^[1]}.

· will increase complexity of the issues to be considered by the local board and the community as part of the consultation on any proposed changes to the dog access rules

· a full review is likely to result in changes to a larger number of parks

· additional local board resources would be required when the target review of parks (Option B2) and a high level review to identify practical “under control off-leash” parks (Option B3) are likely to achieve the same outcome in most areas of interest.

Recommendation

52. Staff recommend that a review of the local dog access rules incorporates both the target review of parks (Option B2) and a high level review to identify practical “under control off-leash” parks (Option B3) as a targeted approach to the review which strikes the most appropriate balance between implementing the Auckland Council Policy on Dogs 2012, the complexity and scope of the review, and the resource required to undertake the local dog access review.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

53. The views of other local boards have not been sought on the scope of this review. During the 2013/14 and 2014/15 reviews, local boards have chosen to review the beach and foreshore areas and adjacent parks, high-use parks, generic rules and dog exercise areas.

54. Consistency with the other local board is a factor that the local board may want to take into consideration when determining their specific rules. Staff will provide advice on decisions made by other local boards during the options analysis and deliberations stages of the review.

Māori impact statement

55. The views of 23 iwi in relation to dog access were sought as part of hui consulting on a range of bylaws held in October 2013 and in March 2015.

56. Feedback from the hui 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. The review of areas of protected wildlife is a matter recommended to be included in the review.

Implementation

57. Staff will work with local board members, engagement advisors and communication advisors to develop a more detailed engagement plan in accordance with the decisions of the local board and existing budgets.

58. Implementation costs such as updating basic standard signage is expected to be from existing regional budgets.

59. Potential implementation issues to come from local board budgets include additional research, engagement, and public notification initiatives, and any non-standard signage.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Howick Local Board current dog access rules	41
b View	Local dog access review decision making framework	45
c View	Process and timelines for local dog access review	51

Signatories

Authors

Jasmin Kaur - Policy Analyst

Justin Walters - Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Kataraina Maki - GM - Community & Social Policy

Angeline Barlow - Relationship Manager

Howick Local Board

14 December 2015

Landowner approval for a new pipeline and outlet in Guys Reserve, East Tamaki

File No.: CP2015/25895

Purpose

1. To seek landowner approval for the installation of a public stormwater pipeline and outlet in Guys Reserve, 181R Guys Road, East Tamaki.

Executive Summary

2. The developer of the properties at 47A and 47B Huntington Drive, East Tamaki, has requested approval to construct a pipeline and outlet on the adjacent reserve at 181R Guys Road. Attachment A shows the proposed works. Guys Reserve is a drainage reserve which contains a stream and stormwater pond.

3. The proposal includes building up a portion of the reserve to ensure an appropriate depth of soil cover to enable a pathway to be constructed in the future.

4. The proposal is considered to have minimal impact on the reserve as:

· the pipeline, once installed, will not be visible;

· the outlet will be disguised with rocks and vegetation;

· the area will be reinstated

5. Construction effects and appropriate reinstatement can be managed through conditions of landowner approval which is recommended to be delegated to the Manager of Parks (South).

6. If landowner approval is withheld, it is likely that detention tanks and pumping to the road network would be required as an engineered solution to deal with the stormwater. This is not considered as appropriate since it will require higher ongoing maintenance and running costs.

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a) Grants landowner approval for the installation of a public stormwater pipeline and outlet in Guys Reserve, 181R Guys Road, East Tamaki (as shown on the Drawing titled “Proposed Apartment Development 415 Ti Rakau Drive, East Tamaki, Drainage”; being drawing number 45457-D101 Rev D, dated 5/6/15) subject to conditions to be provided by the Manager of Parks (South) to manage the construction effects, planting and reinstatement of the reserve.

Comments

7. The developer of the properties at 47A and 47B Huntington Drive, East Tamaki has applied for landowner approval to construct a new public stormwater pipeline (approximately 62 meters in length) and outlet within Guys Reserve at 181R Guys Road. The properties adjoin the reserve and the proposed infrastructure will service the proposed apartment block portion of their site. Attachment A shows the planned stormwater line and outlet.

8. The pipeline and outlet are proposed for the following reasons:

· The capacity of the existing network in the road reserve will not take the additional stormwater from the apartment lot; and

· The fall of the land in this location, combined with the proposal to excavate a basement for the apartment, means a pump would otherwise be required to get stormwater to existing lines in road reserve. This is not considered as appropriate since it will require higher ongoing maintenance and running costs.

9. Guys Reserve primarily serves as a flood protection area with a stream and stormwater treatment pond. The pond is planted and the surrounding area is a grassed passive open space. There is a walkway from Te Irirangi Drive that terminates in the park. It would be beneficial to extend the pathway to connect to Ti Rakau Drive in the future.

10. The pipeline would be trenched through the park and the outlet would terminate in a vegetated area of the existing pond. The outlet design includes a rock covered wingwall and apron and terminates in a planted area which will screen the structure once plants are re-established. Conditions of landowner approval are recommended to ensure affected areas are reinstated and replanted areas are maintained for two years until self-sustaining.

11. The proposed pipeline cuts under a location where the existing walkway could be extended. To future-proof this, it is proposed to increase the soil depth to ensure a minimum 600mm cover at all points along the pipeline. Attachment A shows the location where additional soil is proposed. Landowner approval conditions could ensure the works include benching to create a flat 1.8m wide section to accommodate any future pathway, and appropriate reinstatement of grassed and planted areas.

12. If landowner approval is not given, it is likely that detention tanks and pumping would be required as an engineered solution to deal with the stormwater. This would add to the ongoing costs of the stormwater system to future residents.

13. Originally a request for affected party approval accompanied the application as the apartment building infringes District Plan height and height in relation to boundary controls. However the request has been withdrawn while the applicant investigates provisions for the development to become a Special Housing Area for which different rules apply under the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

14. The proposal was workshopped with the local board on 12 November 2015. Since that time, the proposal has changed with the addition of earth as shown on Attachment A to ensure adequate cover of the pipe if a walkway is benched over the pipeline.

Māori impact statement

15. There are no sites of significance or value to mana whenua shown on the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan at this site.

16. The pipeline and outlet result in minimal impacts, and the construction works can be controlled through the regulatory consents process including conditions to ensure works comply with environmental controls.

Implementation

17. The applicant will need to obtain all relevant regulatory consents to ensure the infrastructure is built to public standard and vests in the council.

18. It is recommended that landowner approval be subject to conditions to manage the construction and reinstatement works to be provided by the Manager of Parks (South).

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Drainage plan	63

Signatories

Authors

Tania Utley - Team Leader Parks & Open Space Specialist (Cen/Sth)

Authorisers

Mark Bowater - Acting General Manager - Parks, Sports and Recreation

Angeline Barlow - Relationship Manager

Howick Local Board

14 December 2015

Landowner approval for stormwater infrastructure in Tamaki Bay Drive Reserve, Ennis Avenue Reserve and Bucklands Beach Domain

File No.: CP2015/26102

Purpose

1. To seek support for a private easement and landowner approval for public stormwater lines across park land in Tamaki Bay Drive Reserve, Ennis Avenue Reserve and Bucklands Beach Domain.

Executive Summary

2. The owners of three separate sites are seeking landowner approval from the local board to construct stormwater infrastructure on council reserves, being Tamaki Bay Drive Reserve, Ennis Avenue Reserve and Bucklands Beach Domain. The three proposals are:

1. A private line requiring an easement from 13 Riverlea Avenue, Pakuranga, see Attachment A.

2. A public line and outlet from 52 Ennis Avenue, Pakuranga Heights, see Attachment B.

3. A public line connecting to the existing network from 32 Devon Road, Bucklands Beach, see Attachment C.

3. Proposal one: A private line is proposed from 13 Riverlea Avenue, down through the reserve, into the back of the gabion baskets. An alternative is the construction of a larger public outlet opening to the sea. However construction of a larger outlet would result in greater disruption to the Rotary Walkway, and additional costs when the gabion baskets require renewal. A large outlet would also result in long term adverse effects on the amenity of the reserve.

4. Proposal three: There are two options shown in Attachment C for the line from 32 Devon Road. Option 2 is recommended as it provides better opportunities for adjacent properties to connect and is less restrictive on potential park development. It is anticipated that the works can be done without adverse impacts on park trees however further information is required before this can be confirmed. It is recommended that approval be given subject to the Parks arborist giving approval for the detailed plans and methodology.

5. Other options for all three proposals were considered. Local soils and the intensity of developments meant soakage on site was not appropriate. Options to pipe the lines to road reserve were ruled out as those lines would either be prohibitively deep or the existing network was at capacity.

6. All three proposals are recommended for approval as they will provide appropriate solutions to stormwater treatment while having minimal impacts on the reserves. It is recommended that approval be subject to conditions be provided by the Manager Parks (South) to manage construction effects and provide for reinstatement.

Recommendation/s

7. That the Howick Local Board:

a) Endorse the granting of an easement over part 30R Tamaki Bay Drive (Lot 84 DP 39000) for a stormwater pipeline as shown on the plan labelled “Drainage Plan” and “Drainage Section” being Sheet 70-02, dated 20th November 2015; subject to conditions to be provided by the Manager of Parks (South) to manage construction effects and provide for reinstatement.

b) Grant landowner approval for the works associated with the installation of the stormwater pipe within Ennis Avenue Reserve (60R Ennis Avenue) shown in the plans titled “Proposed Engineering Works For Newcastle Homes 52 Ennis Avenue Pakuranga” prepared by Airey Consultants dated 7 April 2014, Sheet 1 Site Plan, revision 2, Sheet 2 - Drainage Long Section.

Subject to conditions to be provided by the Manager of Parks (South) to manage construction effects and provide for appropriate outlet design and reinstatement.

c) Grant landowner approval for the installation of the stormwater pipe within Buckland Beach Domain in general accordance with Option 2 the plans titled “32 Devon Road Public SW Pipe Through Buckland Beach Domain” dated 17 July 2015. Subject to Parks arborist approval and conditions to be provided by the Manager of Parks (South) to manage construction effects and provide for reinstatement.

Comments

8. The owners of three separate sites are seeking landowner approval from the local board to construct stormwater infrastructure on council reserves at Tamaki Bay Drive Reserve, Ennis Avenue Reserve and Bucklands Beach Domain. The three proposals are summarised below.

13 Riverlea Ave, Pakuranga

9. The owner of 13 Riverlea Ave has applied for building consent for a residential building which has replaced the existing house at that site. In order to fulfil building regulations, an appropriate stormwater solution is required. Onsite soakage was originally proposed however geotechnical testing showed the soil was not suitable. The proposal is to pipe stormwater to the sea via Tamaki Bay Drive Reserve (Lot 84 DP 39000). Attachment A shows a plan of the proposal which includes:

· a sediment trap at the top of the slope within the applicant’s boundary;

· a flexible corrugated 100mm diameter stormwater pipe laid over the vegetated slope within the reserve land below;

· an inspection chamber at the foot of slope where the pipe will connect to a PVC pipe

· hand excavation of the pipe beneath the Rotary Walkway terminating against the gabion basket assembly at Tamaki River.

10. Other options to manage the stormwater were investigated. The nearest road reserve cesspit is 40m west; however concerns around the capacity of that catchpit have ruled out connection to that location. The stormwater unit has advised that no public line is proposed in the area that would service this site as it is considered the area is of low growth potential. Options for the applicant to construct a larger public line to service this and adjacent sites was also considered; however a public standard outlet through the Rotary Walkway area would cause significant disruption to the walkway during construction and negative ongoing impacts on the amenity of the area.

11. The proposal for the private pipeline is considered appropriate in this case as the overland novacoil pipe will be covered in mulch to avoid damaging vegetation; which will also screen the pipe in the future. It is proposed to manually excavate the line under the walkway so that public access can be maintained during construction. If this is not possible, the walkway may need to be closed for a short period to ensure public safety. However conditions of landowner approval can be put in place to minimise disruption, carry out the works at a time when the walkway is used less, and provide appropriate signage to warn pedestrians.

12. A private easement will be required over the park land to legalise the use of that area in accordance with council standard operating procedure and Reserve Act requirements. The easement area will be a length of approximately 17m and a width of 0.5m.

52 Ennis Avenue

13. The owner of 52 Ennis Avenue, Pakuranga, has been granted resource consent for a two lot subdivision. To serve this development, they are seeking approval for a new public standard stormwater pipe, manhole and outlet to the estuary within Ennis Avenue Reserve (Lot 118 DP 55287). Attachment B includes plans of the proposed works.

14. Other options have been examined including on-site soakage and piping to existing pipelines.

15. Council engineers have advised that on-site soakage is not appropriate in this location. Other options to connect to existing outlets were considered; however these require substantial pipelines (more than 60m in length) through the esplanade. A new outlet in this location will serve any development on adjacent properties. It is also considered appropriate as:

· the pipe would be thrust below 1m depth to avoid adversely affecting reserve trees;

· the manhole and outlet will be located down the bank, so that they are less visible from the reserve; and

· conditions of landowner approval can ensure that the outlet is designed to blend better into the landscape by having a rock batter and planting around the manhole, outlet and scour protection area.

32 Devon Road

16. The owner of 32 Devon Road, Bucklands Beach, has resource consent for a three lot subdivision. To serve this development, they are seeking approval to install a public stormwater pipe through park land from 32 Devon Road into an existing stormwater manhole in Bucklands Beach Domain (Lot 183 DP 17870). Attachment C shows two options to connect the site to existing lines within Bucklands Beach Domain. Option 2 is considered most appropriate as it can more easily serve adjacent sites should they need to connect and will keep the pipeline to the edge of the park. This reduces the chance that any future development of the park would be restricted by a pipeline. While there is a slope within the park in the location of option 1, this does not foreclose using that land for park development or planting large trees over that area in the future.

17. Options to provide for on-site soakage were deemed inappropriate by council engineers due to soakage limitations and the density proposed. A connection to the existing line in road reserve was also considered however this was assessed as inappropriate as it would lead to the line being up to 5m deep along the driveway creating construction difficulties and impacting on future maintenance requirements.

18. Council engineers also advised that the road reserve line was constructed for a different catchment and moving water to other catchments is inappropriate as it impacts on design capacity constraints.

19. The applicant will need to provide evidence that the pipeline can be installed without adverse effects to the health of trees in the park. It is anticipated that the line can be thrust at a depth to avoid those adverse effects. However if the Park’s arborist assesses that the works are not appropriate, then alternative stormwater solutions will be sought.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

20. The proposal for 13 Riverlea Avenue was discussed at a local board parks portfolio holder meeting on 8 September 2015 with those board members being supportive. A request was made for a formal workshop and report.

21. A workshop on all three proposals was held on 26th November 2015. Board members were supportive of all three proposals

Māori impact statement

22. There are no sites or places of significance or value to mana whenua at these locations under the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan.

23. As the works are considered minor, it is considered that no specific consultation is necessary.

Implementation

24. The proposal for a private line with easement from 13 Riverlea Avenue requires governing body approval as an easement is considered a divestment of property rights. If the local board support the proposal, a memo will be prepared for the approval of the Manager Parks (South) on behalf of the governing body as the works are considered minor and can be approved under current delegations.

25. Where the local board supports the proposals, it is recommended that landowner approval be subject to conditions to be provided by the Manager Parks (South) to control construction effects and provide for reinstatement.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	13 Riverlea Avenue	69
b View	52 Ennis Ave	71
c View	32 Devon Road	73

Signatories

Authors

Simon Roche - Parks and Open Space Specialist

Authorisers

Mark Bowater - Acting General Manager - Parks, Sports and Recreation

Angeline Barlow - Relationship Manager

Howick Local Board

14 December 2015

Mangemangeroa Environmental Education Facility

File No.: CP2015/26518

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is threefold: firstly to recap on the background of this project to date, secondly to advise on progress since the boards April 2014 resolutions and thirdly to seek a reallocation of funds to allow the project to progress to the next stage.

Executive Summary

2. In April 2014, The Howick Local Board endorsed the completion of stage 1 and approved advancing to stage 2 (HW/2014/41) where a further $132,500 would be allocated by the board to provide greater clarity to this project.

3. This funding was on the condition that the Somerville Foundation made a matching financial contribution.

4. A copy of the April 2014 report to the Howick Local Board is attached as a reference and provides progress until that date (Attachment A).

5. Since that time the PPG has been in negotiations with the Somerville Trust in order to secure funding towards this project however, it currently appears they no longer support this project.

6. During this time the PPG have also been investigating other capital funding options as per resolution number HW/2014/41 (c) from the April 2014 business meeting.

7. The Howick Local Board passed a resolution HW/2015/105 in July 2015 to accrue the funds to the 2015/16 financial year. A copy of the Urgent Decision approving the allocation of the remaining Howick Local Board Operational budget is attached to this report (Attachment B).

8. Following recent negotiations with the Somerville Trust, The Project Planning Group recruited Rebecca Robinson to further bolster community buy in for this project.

9. Rebecca Robinson has since set up the Mangemangeroa Environmental Education Facility Trust (MEEF) in order to find alternative sources for funding this facility.

10. The MEEF Trust presented a proposal to the Howick Local Board on November 19^th 2015 and as part of working with the PPG in order investigate the next stage of the project.

11. The previous resolutions now need amending in order for this project to continue.

12. The resolutions from the April 2014 business meeting were as follows;

Resolution number HW/2014/41

That the Howick Local Board:

(a) Endorses and signs off on the completion of Stage 1 of the Mangemangeroa Reserve Environmental Education Centre Project.

(b) Approves advancing to Stage 2 of the project by reallocating $132,500 from Howick Local Board Discretionary Fund on the condition that the Somerville Foundation makes a matching financial contribution.

(c) Authorises the Project Planning Group to continue in negotiations with the Somerville Foundation, or other funding parties, with a view to securing the capital funding that will allow the project to move to Stage 3 and the subsequent completion of a building on Mangemangeroa Reserve.

(d) Appoints additional Members Boles, Wichman and Collings to the Project Planning Group.

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

(a) Amends resolution (b) of HW/2014/41 and replaces it as follows:

b) Approves reallocating the balance of funds $130,020 from the Howick Local Board Operational Budget to a project code to be created and managed by the Parks Department to enable the Project Planning Group and the Mangemangeroa Environmental Educational Facility Trust to progress the project.

(b) Amends resolution (c) of HW/2014/41 and replaces it as follows:

(c) Authorises the Project Planning Group to continue in negoitations with the Somerville Foundation, or other funding parties, with a view to securing capital funding that will allow the project to move to Stage 3 and subsequent completion of a building on Mangemangeroa Reserve.

c) Authorises the Project Planning Group and Mangemangeroa Environmental Educational Facility Trust to continue investigations and negotiations to secure capital funding to allow the completion of a building on the Mangemangeroa Reserve.

Comments

13. The Mangemangeroa Environmental Educational Facilities’ Trust has 7 trustees; Rebecca Robinson, Craig Whitford-Joynt, Geoff Foster, Patrick Dobson, Colleen Graying, Linden Jonson and Kit Wong. These trustees bring a large number of different skillsets and expertise to the project planning group and include but are not limited to; Environmental expertise, iwi relations, business planning and strategy, conservation, property development and finance.

14. The vision of the MEEF trust is to inspire and educate people to understand, enjoy and experience the uniqueness of the Mangemangeroa Reserve and its wider surroundings.

15. The MEEF Trust’s mission statement is to provide a world class self-sustaining environmental facility.

16. The MEEF Trust intends to capitalise on the platform already established through all the Project Planning Groups work to date and to help carry the project through to fruition.

17. The MEEF Trust presented their vision for Mangemangeroa to the Howick Local Board at an update session on 19 November 2015.

18. The MEEF Trust have received all the information the Project Planning Group have gathered to date and would like to continue to work closely with the PPG to provide final detailed design, consenting, operational costings, etc.

19. Once this work is completed then the Howick Local Board will have all the information they require to be able to approve the building of such a facility.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

20. The Howick Local Board was updated on progress at a meeting on November 19^th 2015 and in addition board member John Spiller has regularly chaired the Project Planning Group meetings.

21. The Howick Local Board will be provided with regular updates on any future progress.

Māori impact statement

22. Ngai Tai ki Tamaki Tribal Trust have been invited members of the PPG however their representative Dave Beamish has found it difficult to attend meetings. At the detailed design stage there will need to be engagement with Ngai Tai with a view to incorporating Maori and cultural elements in the building and its operation and programmes.

Implementation

23. This project is not yet at implementation stage

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Report to Howick Local Board 14 April 2014 "Environmental Education Centre at Mangemangeroa	79
b View	Urgent Decision to allocate remaining Howick Local Board opeational budget - 30 June 2015	85

Signatories

Authors

Gregor Leishman - Parks Advisor - Howick

Authorisers

Mark Bowater - Acting General Manager - Parks, Sports and Recreation

Angeline Barlow - Relationship Manager

Howick Local Board

14 December 2015

Draft Regional Pest Management Plan Review

File No.: CP2015/24725

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to:

· inform local boards about the first stage of public consultation on the Regional Pest Management Plan review

· request local boards to provide any initial feedback on pest management issues in preparation of the draft Regional Pest Management Plan (RPMP)

· note that informal and formal local board engagement will be undertaken in early 2016 to inform the final draft RPMP.

Executive Summary

2. The Auckland Regional Pest Management Plan is undergoing a major review, driven by legislative and operational changes. Council is now inviting public comment on pest management issues in the region, as part one of a two-stage consultation process. Public comments close on 27 November 2015.

3. Pest management is important at a local as well as a regional scale. Local board views have been sought through meetings and a combined local board workshop on 20 April 2015. Following local board and mana whenua engagement, a discussion document and a brief summary brochure have been prepared for the first stage of consultation. These documents are presented for your information, dissemination, and further feedback if desired.

4. Comments from this consultation will inform the proposed Auckland Regional Pest Management Plan which will be developed for the second stage of consultation (formal public submissions and hearings) in 2016. Comments can be made on the topics raised in the document or on any other pest management issue.

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a) Provides any initial feedback on pest management issues impacting their area.

b) Notes the October 2015 Regional Strategy and Policy Committee report and attachments titled Regional Pest Management Plan Review – approval of discussion document

c) Notes that informal and formal local board engagement will be undertaken in early 2016 to inform the final draft Regional Pest Management Plan.

Comments

5. The Auckland Regional Pest Management Plan is the main statutory document implementing the Biosecurity Act 1993 in the region. It provides a strategic and statutory framework for the effective management of plant and animal pests. Auckland Council is reviewing its plan (which dates from 2007). The purpose of the review is to update the council’s approach to pest management, especially with regard to changes in pest species, distribution, and issues arising from their control; along with community expectations and available resources.

6. It is also necessary to incorporate new provisions which come from the reform of the Biosecurity Act in 2012. Among other changes, the Act now requires councils to be consistent with the National Policy Direction on Pest Management (NPD), which was gazetted on 24 August 2015 and introduces new pest programme categories.

7. A two-stage consultation process is being used for the review. The first stage includes an informal public consultation on pest management issues in the region. The attached discussion document and summary brochure have been prepared for this first stage. Following local board comments and feedback in the early part of 2015 and a combined workshop on 20 April 2015. Feedback from this consultation will help to inform the content of the review and the drafting of a Proposed Regional Pest Management Plan in 2016.

8. The first stage of consultation also includes hui with mana whenua, and meetings with community groups and industry. Materials have been distributed widely via email, social media, and the Auckland Council website. Copies of the discussion document have has also been sent to libraries and service centres as well as Local Board offices.

9. The second stage of consultation will commence once the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee adopts a proposed draft plan. The second stage will comprise a formal submission period followed by hearings.

10. The discussion document and summary brochure were approved by the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee on 8 October for a six week consultation period, ending on 27 November 2015. The discussion document summarises proposed changes and key issues, including:

· Feral goat exclusion zones

· Contolling widespread weeds

· Red-eared slider turtles

· Bangalow palms

· Community pest control

· The Hauraki Gulf

· Marine pests

11. Both documents seek to encourage comments from a broad cross-section of the community and technical detail has been kept to a minimum. Comments can be made on the topics raised in the document or on any other pest management issue.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

12. To date, local boards have provided input into the discussion document through two briefing sessions in April 2015.

13. This report requests local boards provide initial feedback on pest management issues impacting their area to provide guidance and direction to staff.

14. Local boards will have a further opportunity to inform to the development of the proposed Regional Pest Management Plan informally and formally in the first half of 2016.

Māori impact statement

15. One of the primary purposes of pest management is to manage the effects of pests on the relationship between Māori and their culture, traditions, ancestral lands, waters, sites, wāhi tapu and taonga. Initial consultation with māori has occurred through a series of individual and combined hui. A further combined hui was held on 15 October.

16. Ongoing consultation with iwi authorities and tribal rūnanga will occur throughout the review process.

Implementation

17. The review of the Regional Pest Management Plan (including producing and distributing the discussion document) is funded through existing Biosecurity and Natural Environment Strategy budgets.

18. Any changes to the plan arising from the review are likely to have operational cost implications. These will be considered during the cost-benefit and cost-allocation stages of the review, and in subsequent annual plan and LTP processes.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Regional Pest Management Plan – Have Your Say material	95
b View	Regional Strategy and Policy Committee report – Regional Pest Management Plan – Approval of Discussion Document	103
c View	Regional Pest Management Plan – Discussion Document	105

Signatories

Authors

Helen Sharpe - Biodiversity Specialist

Authorisers

Jacques Victor - GM Auckland Plan Strategy and Research

Angeline Barlow - Relationship Manager

Howick Local Board

14 December 2015

Review of the Food Safety Bylaw 2013

File No.: CP2015/26007

Purpose

1. To seek the local board’s views regarding proposals to retain the grading provision of the Auckland Council Food Safety Bylaw 2013 and require the display of food safety grade certificates.

Executive Summary

2. From 1 March 2016 the Food Act 2014 (“the Act”) will replace the Food Act 1981 and Food Hygiene Regulations 1974 over a three year transition period. The Act also requires the amendment of existing food safety bylaws to ensure consistency. A formal public consultation process is not required for this bylaw review.

3. Staff analysis has identified that most of the existing Food Safety Bylaw 2013 (“the Bylaw”) provisions can be revoked and will be regulated by the Act and subsequent regulations.

4. National food safety grading will not be implemented through the new Act.

5. Staff propose to retain the grading provision of the Auckland Council Food Safety Bylaw 2013 and require the display of food safety grade certificates. Staff consider that the mandatory display of food safety grade certificates provides an incentive for food operators to proactively improve and maintain the safety of their food and enables customers to make informed choices.

6. A proposed amended bylaw will be presented to the Regulatory and Bylaws Committee in February 2016 followed by the Governing Body for consideration. The views of local boards will be presented in the accompanying report.

Recommendations

That the Howick Local Board:

a) endorses the proposal to retain the grading provision of the Auckland Council Food Safety Bylaw 2013 and require the display of food safety grade certificates.

Comments

Background

The Food Act 2014

7. The Food Act 2014 (“the Act”) will come into effect on 1 March 2016. It will replace the Food Act 1981 and the Food Hygiene Regulations 1974 over a three year transition period. The Act will introduce significant improvements to the way that food safety is addressed by food businesses across New Zealand.

8. The primary duty of ensuring food safety will be the responsibility of food businesses, including food operators of mobile shops and food stalls at markets. For most businesses, this will involve a new requirement to document their procedures which will be audited by the council.

9. Businesses that prepare food with a high risk to food safety will be required to operate under a Food Control Plan. In most cases, a business subject to a Food Control Plan will be required to register with their local council. This enables councils to manage compliance activities and identify operators’ understanding of food safety.

10. The Act introduces new registration and auditing requirements for food businesses that operate from school tuckshops, childcare centres, work cafeterias and marae.

11. Businesses or charities that sell food for community purposes or to raise funds will be exempt from registration and auditing requirements for up to 20 occasions per year (e.g. sausage sizzles or home baking at school fairs).

Auckland Council Food Safety Bylaw 2013

12. On 23 May 2013, the council’s Governing Body adopted the Auckland Council Food Safety Bylaw 2013 (“the Bylaw”) to replace seven legacy council food safety bylaws (Resolution Number: GB/2013/47).

13. The Bylaw was introduced to minimise potential food safety risks associated with the sale of food. The Bylaw provides the council with powers related to:

· the closure of unhygienic or unsafe food premises

· minimum standards for staff training in basic food hygiene

· grading of food premises

· standards for preparing, handling and labelling food sold to private premises, and

· operating food stalls and mobile food shops.

14. The Bylaw requires each registered food business to display a food safety grade certificate, which the council issues following its inspection of the premises, pursuant to the Food Hygiene Regulations 1974. The certificate shows customers the premises’ food safety level.

Discussion

Impact of the Food Act 2014 on the Food Safety Bylaw 2013

15. The new Act requires the council to amend its Bylaw to ensure consistency with the new regulatory regime for food businesses. In June 2015, the Regulatory and Bylaws Committee directed council staff to undertake a review of the Bylaw (Resolution Number: RBC/2015/19).

16. Staff have now completed this review and recommend that the council revoke most of the Bylaw as the relevant activities will instead be regulated by the Act and subsequent regulations. The exception to this is the food grading system.

17. National food safety grading will not be implemented through the new Act, although there is potential for the development of a national scheme after 2019. Staff recommend retaining the grading provision (with minor amendments) of the Bylaw and require the display of food safety grade certificates.

18. There would be no additional cost to businesses for a food safety grade certificate. The grade assessment would be undertaken at the same time as the audit required by the new Act.

19. The benefits of a food safety grading scheme is that it provides:

· food operators with an incentive to take responsibility for the safety of the food they sell and to proactively improve and maintain the safety of their food

· the public with concise information on a business’ level of food safety so that customers can make informed choices.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

20. This report seeks the views of local boards on retaining the Food Safety Bylaw 2013 to require the display of a food safety grade certificate for food businesses registered with the council.

21. The views of local boards will be presented to the Regulatory and Bylaws Committee and the Governing Body in February 2016.

22. Local boards were engaged on the consolidation of legacy food safety bylaws in 2011 and feedback received at the time indicated there was general support for the grading of food premises. Some local board members expressed concern about the standards applying to food sold from stalls at markets.

Māori impact statement

23. Engagement with mana whenua and mataa waka is currently underway.

24. Food prepared and served on a marae that is not provided as part of a commercial activity is outside the scope of this bylaw review. In addition, registration and auditing requirements of the new Act do not apply to the preparation and sale of food for the purpose of raising funds up to 20 times a year.

25. Food businesses that operate from marae, for instance catering at events more than 20 times per year, will be subject to registration and auditing requirements under the Act in the same way as other food businesses.

Implementation

26. The Governing Body is responsible for making a decision on the review of the Food Safety Bylaw 2013. A proposed amended bylaw will be presented to the Regulatory and Bylaws Committee in February 2016. It will then be considered by the Governing Body. The views of Local Boards and targeted stakeholders will be presented in the accompanying report.

27. The method for determining the criteria of food safety grades is an operational matter and is outside the scope of this bylaw review.

28. Registration fees for food businesses are also out of scope of this bylaw review. For information purposes, proposed fees under the new Act were presented to the Finance and Performance Committee at their meeting on 19 November 2015. The consultation period on proposed fees will be from 20 November to 21 December 2015. Current registration and inspection fees will continue to apply for existing food businesses until they transition to the new regulatory regime.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Emma Pilkington - Policy Analyst

Belinda Hansen - Principal Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Kataraina Maki - GM - Community & Social Policy

Karen Lyons - Manager Local Board Services

[1] It is expected that a detailed review would take approximately 3 months at 1 FTE per board.

Chairperson	David Collings
Deputy Chairperson	Adele White
Members	Garry Boles
	Katrina Bungard
	Jim Donald
	Lucy Schwaner
	John Spiller
	Steve Udy
	Bob Wichman

Authors	Lynda Pearson - Local Board Democracy Advisor
Authorisers	Angeline Barlow - Relationship Manager