Agenda of Māngere-ŌtāhuhuLocal 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 Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Wednesday, 18 November 2015, 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 Māngere-Ōtāhuhu 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 - Kolokesa Mahina-Tuai, Chair of Ōtāhuhu Arts and Culture Sub-Committee

Purpose

1. Kolokesa Mahina-Tuai, Chair of the Ōtāhuhu Arts & Culture Sub-Committee would like to address the board regarding the recent employment of Arts Brokers for the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board area.

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board thanks Kolokesa Mahina-Tuai for her attendance and presentation.

10 Extraordinary Business

Section 46A(7) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:

“An item that is not on the agenda for a meeting may be dealt with at that meeting if-

(a) The local authority by resolution so decides; and

(b) The presiding member explains at the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public,-

(i) The reason why the item is not on the agenda; and

(ii) The reason why the discussion of the item cannot be delayed until a subsequent meeting.”

Section 46A(7A) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:

“Where an item is not on the agenda for a meeting,-

(a) That item may be discussed at that meeting if-

(i) That item is a minor matter relating to the general business of the local authority; and

(ii) the presiding member explains at the beginning of the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public, that the item will be discussed at the meeting; but

(b) no resolution, decision or recommendation may be made in respect of that item except to refer that item to a subsequent meeting of the local authority for further discussion.”

11 Notices of Motion

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

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

09 December 2015

Scope for local dog access rule review

File No.: CP2015/24275

Purpose

1. To determine the timing and scope of the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board’s 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 Māngere-Ōtāhuhu 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 Māngere-Ōtāhuhu 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 Māngere-Ōtāhuhu 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 Māngere-Ōtāhuhu 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

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

· statutory consultation process (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 Māngere-Ōtāhuhu 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 Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board area, the following access rules apply:

· two different sets of default rules (some off-leash, some on-leash) across the two legacy council areas

· different access rules for beaches across the two legacy council areas

· generic rules relating to picnic areas, fitness apparatus and wildlife areas within the former Auckland City and farm paddocks occupied by stock within the former Manukau City

· four exercise areas.

19. The full list of dog access rules for the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu 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 the regional time and season standard is appropriate for each beach and foreshore area.

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 simpler to follow and enforce on the ground

· it aligns with the expectation created in the Auckland Council Policy on Dogs 2012 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 that:

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

· it adds to the workload of local board members during the 2016 pre-election period.

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

26. This option involves deferring the local dog access review until 2016/17. Under this option staff will bring a second 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 access rules.

28. The benefits of this option are that:

· no local board resource is required to investigate options or undertake the formal special consultative process with hearings in 2015/16

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

29. The disadvantages of this option are that:

· 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

· there may be unmet expectations of dog owners 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, from the review of 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 which are more practical and simpler 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 or not 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 board must review the local beach and foreshore area rules. However, the board has discretion as to whether or not it considers 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 being 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 is required to investigate or assess local parks.

35. The disadvantages of this option are that it:

· retains multiple sets of general rules that are often 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 schedules.

Option B2: Targeted review of park rules

36. This option involves three parts; a review of generic rules on parks (i.e. dog access around picnic areas and fitness apparatus etc.) and dog exercise areas, a review of parks adjacent to beaches and foreshore areas, and a review of all high-use parks and parks with identified concerns.

37. The reviews of the generic rules are technical reviews and will consider the appropriateness and applicability of the dog access rules for significant ecological areas, fitness apparatus and picnic areas which are typically difficult to define on the ground and enforce.

38. The review of dog exercise areas is to evaluate whether or not existing dog exercise areas meet the definition of ‘dog exercise area’ within the Auckland Council Policy on Dogs 2012 as a dog priority area or whether it is better described as a shared space for multiple users.

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

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

41. 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

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

· it will result in generic rules being replaced with site specific rules where appropriate which will be easier to understand and better provide for public safety and comfort or protection of wildlife

· it will result in the reclassification of ‘dog exercise areas’ as either ‘designated dog areas’ (where the dog owner is the priority user) or under control off-leash areas in accordance with the criteria in the Auckland Council Policy on Dogs 2012

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

42. The disadvantages of this option are that:

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

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

· it 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 rules and the dog exercise areas

· it 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 the existing practical ‘under control off-leash and on-leash’ parks

43. This option involves a desktop study of all parks in areas where there is a default ‘off-leash’ rule to identify the existing practical ‘under control off-leash’ areas. In areas where there is an existing default ‘on-leash’ rule, all parks where the default rule applies will be identified.

44. The intent behind this option is to make it easier for dog owners and other users to know where dogs could be exercised under control off-leash and where dogs must be on-leash.

45. This option would allow the local board to consider adopting one default rule, or rely on the default rule in Schedule 1, instead of the differing default rules which are currently in place over the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board area. Identifying existing ‘under control off-leash’ and ‘on-leash’ parks means that if the board chose to modify the underlying default rules across the local board area for consistency, the ‘rules on the ground’ will not be significantly changed in these specified parks.

46. The benefits of this option are that:

· the 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

· it allows for a consideration of whether or not the existing default rules are appropriate for the local board area

· it allows for the creation of one default rule across the local board area without significantly impacting the ‘rules on the ground’.

47. The disadvantages of this option are that:

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

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

· 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.

Option B4: Detailed review of all local parks

48. This option involves a detailed review of all parks (both high and low use) in accordance with the ‘Dog Access Rule Change Procedure’ and implements the Auckland Council Policy on Dogs 2012.

49. 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.

50. This option would also allow the local board to consider adopting one default rule for the local board area.

51. 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.

52. The benefits of this option are that it:

· allows 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.

53. The disadvantages of this option are that:

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

· it will increase the 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 detailed 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

54. 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

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

56. Consistency with other local board dog access rules is also a factor that the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board may want to take into consideration. Staff will provide advice on decisions made by other local boards during the options analysis and deliberations stages of the review.

Māori impact statement

57. 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.

58. Feedback from the hui related to the ability of iwi to determine dog access on marae, and focused on control, responsible dog ownership, and ensuring the protection of sensitive ecological areas. The review of areas with protected wildlife is a matter recommended to be included in the review.

Implementation

59. 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.

60. Implementation costs, such as updating basic standard signage, are expected to be from existing regional budgets.

61. 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	Current Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board dog access schedule	19
b View	Dog access review decision-making framework	25
c View	Process and timelines for local dog access review	31

Signatories

Authors

Justin Walters - Policy Analyst

Kimberly Rees - Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Kataraina Maki - GM - Community & Social Policy

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

09 December 2015

Current dog access rules for Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board area

(a) Explanatory Notes:

(b)

The local board has delegation to review and amend Schedule 2. Schedule 1 is under the jurisdiction of the governing body and is for information only.

(c)

(d) About the schedules of dog access rules

· Schedules 1 and 2 identify where dogs may be taken, whether they need to be under control on a leash or allowed to be under control off a leash, and where they are prohibited.

· Schedule 1 contains general dog access rules that apply across Auckland.

· Schedule 2 contains dog access rules specific to a local board area.

· The rules in Schedule 1 prevail over any rule in Schedule 2.

· Department of Conservation rules are included in Schedule 2 as explanatory notes in italics for information purposes only. Department of Conservation rules are not subject to any rules in Schedule 1 or any other rule in Schedule 2.

Schedule 1

General dog access rules

(1) Playgrounds under the control of the council

Dogs are prohibited on any playground at all times and must be under control on a leash in the vicinity of any playground when in use.

(2) Sports surfaces under the control of the council

Dogs are prohibited on any sports surface at all times and must be kept under control on a leash in the vicinity of any sports surface when in use.

Dog access rules in the above places are stated in Schedule 2. For the avoidance of doubt, dogs must still be kept under control on a leash in the vicinity of the sports surface when in use.

(3) Roads, private ways, and council-controlled car parks and boating areas

Dogs must be under control and on a leash on all –

(a) formed public roads (including any street, highway, access way, service lane, and any footpath, cycle track, bus stop and berm within the boundaries of the road);

(b) private ways;

(d) council-controlled boating areas (including any wharf, jetty, boat ramp, boat marshalling area).

For the avoidance of doubt, this rule does not apply to any unformed road, or any walkway, track or road within or surrounded by a park.

(4) Council cemeteries, council camping grounds and council holiday parks

Council cemeteries

Dogs are allowed under control and on a leash in the following council-controlled cemeteries:

(a) North Shore Memorial Park

(b) Waikumete Cemetery

Dogs are prohibited from all other council-controlled cemeteries unless permission is obtained from the council (e.g. a park manager with the appropriate delegated authority), or signage indicates dogs are allowed and provided the person whom the dog is accompanying complies with any reasonable conditions imposed by the council in relation to the entry or presence of the dog.

Camping grounds and holiday parks under the control of the council

Dogs are prohibited from all council-controlled camping grounds and holiday parks unless permission is obtained from Council (e.g. park manager with delegated authority), or signage indicates dogs are allowed, and provided the person whom the dog is accompanying complies with any reasonable conditions imposed by the Council in relation to the entry or presence of the dog.

(5) Default dog access rules

Unless otherwise stated in Schedule 2:

(a) dogs must be under control and on a leash in all council-controlled public places with unrestricted access; and

(b) dogs are prohibited in all other public places (e.g. fenced sports stadiums, libraries, cafes, shopping malls, school grounds, non-council cemeteries and urupa) unless permission is obtained or signage indicates dogs are allowed from –

(i) council, in relation to places under control of the council; or

(ii) the person in charge of the place, in relation to places not under control of the council; and

(iii) provided the person whom the dog is accompanying complies with any reasonable conditions imposed in relation to the entry or presence of the dog.

Explanatory Notes:

Dog Faeces

The owner of any dog that defecates in any public place or private way must immediately remove and dispose of the faeces in a way that does not cause a nuisance.

Dogs confined in a vehicle or cage

Dogs confined in a vehicle or cage are not exempt from prohibited dog access rules. They are exempt from under control on leash dog access rules.

Working dogs (includes disability assist and police dogs)

Dog access rules in Schedule 1 and Schedule 2 do not apply to any working dog accompanying and assisting a person with work, or accompanying a person genuinely engaged in the dog’s training.

Female dog in season

The owner of any female dog in season must ensure that dog does not enter or remain in any public place or private way unless that dog is completely confined in a vehicle or cage for the purposes of transportation, or the owner of that dog has the permission of the occupier or person controlling the public place (such as a veterinary clinic) in relation to the entry or presence of the dog, and complies with any reasonable conditions imposed.

Temporary Changes to Dog Access Rules

The council may make temporary changes to dog access rules in Schedule 1 and Schedule 2 in relation to leisure and cultural events (including dog friendly events), dog training, threatened or ‘at risk’ protected wildlife vulnerable to dogs, pest control in any park and/or beach, and events of a comparative nature.

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

09 December 2015

Schedule 2

Specific dog access rules by local board

(e) Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Area

(1) Dogs are allowed under control off a leash on all parks, beaches or foreshores in the former Manukau City not specifically identified as a prohibited or under control on a leash area.

(1) Dogs are allowed under control off a leash in the following dog exercise areas**,*** :

(a) Portage Canal Reserve (1,2a Church St,4-12 Portage Rd, Otahuhu)

(b) Portage Canal Foreshore Reserve (4-12 Portage Rd, Otahuhu)

(d) Stringers Point Reserve (1A Clements St, Otahuhu)

(2) On Shelly Bay Beach, dogs are allowed under control off a leash before 9.00am and after 7.00pm during daylight saving, and are allowed under control off a leash at all times outside of daylight saving. Dogs are prohibited from 9.00am to 7.00pm during daylight saving on Shelly Bay Beach and Kiwi Esplanade from Mangere Boat Club to Shortt Ave unless for the purpose of moving through the park and boat club and their dog is controlled on a leash.

(3) On beaches in the former Auckland City during summer (the Saturday of Labour Weekend and Easter Monday) –

(a) Dogs are allowed under control off a leash when the dog is swimming or walking in areas of the water (excluding safe swimming areas or lanes) before 9am or after 7pm.

(b) Dogs are allowed under control on a leash on areas of a beach not covered by water before 9.00am or after 7.00pm.

(c) Dogs are prohibited on all parts of a beach from 9.00am to 7.00pm, and dogs are prohibited at all times from safe swimming areas or lanes marked out or identified by council.

(4) On beaches in the former Auckland City during winter (the Tuesday after Easter Monday until the Friday before Labour Weekend) –

(a) Dogs are allowed under control off a leash on areas of a beach not covered by water before 10.00am or after 4.00pm. Dogs are allowed under control off a leash at all times when the dog is swimming or walking in areas of the water (excluding safe swimming areas or lanes)

(b) Dogs are allowed under control on a leash on areas of a beach not covered by water from 10.00am to 4.00pm.

(5) Dogs are allowed under control on a leash in the following areas –

(a) Kiwi Esplanade Reserve.

(b) All farm paddocks in a park occupied by stock in the former Manukau City.

(c) All park and foreshore areas in the former Auckland City not specifically identified as a prohibited, off-leash or dog exercise area.

(d) Any area in the former Auckland City that is developed or marked out as a picnic area or fitness apparatus area.

(e) All areas in the former Auckland City within a park, beach or foreshore (except an area identified as a prohibited area or a dog exercise area) identified by the District Plan as a significant ecological area. Dogs must remain on a leash at all times in these areas and shall not be let off a leash to swim or walk in the water in these areas.

(6) In the area of Ambury Regional Park dogs are allowed under control on a leash on the Ambury Farm loop road connecting Kiwi Esplanade to Ambury Road. Dogs are prohibited at all times from all other areas of Ambury Regional Park and associated foreshore (including foreshore associated with the Mangere Waste Water Treatment Plant).

Reasons for Department of Conservation dog access rule –

¹ High population of protected wildlife vulnerable to dogs ² Inter-tidal areas with various species vulnerable to dogs

³ Potential conflict with other users (members of the public) ⁴ Vulnerable wildlife present

Department of Conservation conditions of entry –

⁵ Faeces to be removed ⁶ Leash rule does not apply to hunting dogs.

** Explanatory Note: The region-wide rule that prohibits dogs on any sports surface (unless exceptions are stated) and that requires dogs to be kept under control on a leash in the vicinity of any sports surface when in use as stated in Schedule 1, Rule 1(2) continues to apply. This note is specified in relation to particular parks where a sportsfield is known to exist to assist readers.

*** Explanatory Note: The region-wide rule that prohibits dogs on any playgrounds and that requires dogs to be kept under control on a leash in the vicinity of any playground when in use as stated in Schedule 1, Rule 1(1) continues to apply. This note is specified in relation to particular parks where a playground is known to exist to assist readers.

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

09 December 2015

Auckland Transport Update - December 2015

File No.: CP2015/26341

Purpose

1. This report provides an update on local transport matters over the last month for the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board (MOLB).

Executive Summary

2. This report contains a general monthly update on transport matters both locally and from across Auckland and a list of issues currently being addressed by Auckland Transport for the MOLB.

3. The December 2015 report is shorter than normal because this month’s meeting is two weeks earlier than normal.

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) Receives the Auckland Transport Update – December 2015 report.

Responding to Resolutions

No ‘Resolutions’ required responses this month.

Discussion

HOP Card Price Change – Advertising Campaign

4. Auckland Transport HOP cards will increase in price from $ 5 to $ 10 on 17 December 2015. The original price was heavily subsidised and now that more than 600,000 HOP cards have been sold the price will increase.

5. Auckland Transport is aware that the uptake of HOP cards is lower in South Auckland and a large advertising campaign is currently taking place throughout the area to get people to purchase the cards. The campaign includes:

· Media advertising;

· Auckland Transport staff speaking to people at bus and rail stations

· Auckland Transport communicating with key stakeholder groups; and

· A large poster campaign in public places and public transport stops.

Figure 1: Auckland Transport HOP Poster

Future Streets

6. The ‘Future Streets’ project has now started.

7. The ‘blessing’ ceremony was held on 16 November 2015 and was attended not only by Local Board Members but also by senior managers from Auckland Transport and the New Zealand Transport Agency including the agency’s Regional Director and Auckland Transport’s Walking and Cycling Manager.

8. The project is big and the project team has warned that it will take some time to deliver. Although work starts in November there will be reasonably slow progress initially followed by an increasing tempo in the first six months of 2016.

9. Communications planning is on-going and there will be a range of activities to publicise the project.

Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF)

10. MOLB has a total pool of approx. $1,971,770 available in this electoral term to spend on transport projects.

11. In its first electoral term the MOLB requested a number of projects and the progress of these projects is summarised in Attachment C.

12. So far in this electoral term the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board has identified six projects and these are discussed in detail in Attachment C.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Summary of Engagement	37
b View	Transport Capital Fund Projects	43
c View	Issues Report	51
d View	Summary of Consultation	53

Signatories

Authors

Ben Stallworthy – Elected Member Relationship Manager (South), Auckland Transport

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon, Team Manager, Elected Member Relationship Management, Auckland Transport

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

09 December 2015

Summary of Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board Transport Capital Fund Projects

2013-16 Electoral Term

Projects Submitted	Description	Current Status
Mangere –East Town Centre Traffic Calming	The aim of this project is to improve ease of access to the Mangere-East Town Centre for people on foot.	Project completed
Waddon-Windrush Walk/Cycleway	The walkway is narrow, poorly lit and has become a high crime area and widening the walkway is seen as a solution that will make the area safer with regards to crime. The Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board has decided to use its Local Board Transport Capital Fund to deliver the project.	Delivery of this project as part of the wider ‘Future Streets’ programme started on 16 November 2015.
Future Streets Walking and Cycling Circuit Windrush-Mascot	Constructing a iconic fit-route that runs from Windrush Close to Mascot Road.	Delivery of this project as part of the wider ‘Future Streets’ programme started on 16 November 2015.
Future Streets Walking and Cycling Route Mascot Road	Constructing a walking and cycling route that runs along Mascot Road from its intersection with Windrush Close to Waddon Road. It includes significant work on Mascot Road to improve walking and cycling and pedestrian safety on Mascot Road. Propsoed modifications include: · Better crossings linking the Wananga with the town centre; · Protected on road cycle lanes; and · Intersections designed to slow traffic and make them safer for pedestrians and cyclists.	Delivery of this project as part of the wider ‘Future Streets’ programme started on 16 November 2015.
Station Rd (from Mason Ave to Great Sth Rd)	The overall aim is to upgrade this section of Station Road in accordance with urban design recommendations from the Otahuhu Linkages & Public Realm Initiative and to make it fit with work that is currently funded on the road. This would include mproved footpaths with modern attractive street furniture, and there is the opportunity to provide cycle lanes as well. The reconfiguration will link with other work that is planned on Station Road and will improve the carriageway and general traffic management.	This project has been investigated and was not supported by the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board.
Mason Ave / Station Rd Carpark – Pedestrian Link	Develop a footpath link from Mason Ave and Station Rd through the car park This will provide better access and a natural pathway from Station Road to the the Mason Ave pedestrian crossing and the new upgraded recreatiosn centre. The proposal also include high standards of lighting, lots of decorative planting and other landscape improvements. Another key feature will be signage directing people using the walkway to areas of interest like the recreations centre and bus stops.	This project is complete.
Funds ‘carried over’ from the previous electoral term: $ 418,508 Three years LBTCF allocations of $ 517,754 per annum: $ 1,553,262 Total LBTCF funds available for allocation this electoral term: $ 1,971,770
Mangere-East Town Centre Traffic Calming $ 30,000 Waddon-Windrush Walking and Cycling Route $ 173,366 Future Streets Walking and Cycling Circuit Windrush-Mascot $ 346,000 Future Streets Walking and Cycling Route Mascot Road $ 1,180,000 LBTCF fund potentially committed as at 6 June 2015 $ 1,729,000

2010-13 Electoral Term

Projects Submitted	Description	Current Status
Improving Bus Stops	The Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board has identified 18 bus stops that will improve by building shelters at them. The Board authorised $308,000 from the Local Board Transport Capital Fund.	At this time only the upgrade of the stop at 3 Church Street remains to be completed. The plan for this bus shelter has a number of issues that needed to be checked and the shelter is now being consulted with effected residents. This process is still underway.
Bader Drive, Idlewild Road Intersection	This project involves re-developing the Bader Drive, Idlewild Road intersection to make it safer.	This intersection has now been modified to make it safer and allow better traffic flow.
Improving Speed Limit Signage on Favona Road, Mahunga Drive, Coronation Road and Walmsley Road		This project has been completed and the signs have been installed.
Otahuhu Main Street Poles and Luminaires	This project involves upgrading the lighting in the Otahuhu Town Centre.	This project has been completed and the new light poles and lights installed.
Improving Signage from SH1 and SH20 to the Mangere and Otahuhu Town Centres	This project involves funding the installation of information signs that direct drivers from the motorway to the Otahuhu Town Centre. At the August Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board meeting release of $75,000 from the Local Board’s Transport Capital Fund was authorised.	This project has been completed.
Mangere Town Centre Bus Stop	This proposed project involves the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board paying for development of a concept plan for this site as prelude to potentially financing a redevelopment of this facility.	The bus stop was cleaned up and re-painted. Using Local Board Transport Capital Funds to support this project has been investigated and was not able to be supported. The decision in September 2014 to allocate the majority of the available funds to ‘Future Streets’ and upgrading the Otahuhu Car Park means that there is no money available for allocation to this project.
Commitments made in the previous electoral term: Bus Shelter Upgrades $ 308,000 Otahuhu Lighting Upgrade $ 160,000 Signs in Mahunga Drive $ 2,000 Bader/Idlewild Intersection Remodelling $ 72,000 Directional Signage SH 1 – Otahuhu and SH 20 – Mangere Town Centre $ 75,000 Total committed (or spent) in the last electoral term $ 617,000

Projects Investigated but Not Able to be Delivered

Projects Submitted	Description	Current Status
Massey Road Pedestrian Over-bridge	This project involves building a pedestrian over bridge on Massey Road in the Mangere East Town Centre.	Investigated and reported back on at the January 2013 Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board meeting.
Bus stop at the rear of the Mangere Town Centre	This project involves establishing a parking area for the courtesy bus that stops at the Mangere-Town Centre.	Investigated and reported back on at the January 2013 Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board meeting. Auckland Transport delivered the bus stop in April 2014
Traffic calming in Harania Avenue, Dewhurst Road and Massey Road		Investigated and reported back on at the April 2013 Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board meeting.
Bader Drive / Orly Road Roundabout	This project involves re-developing the Bader Drive, Orly Road intersection to make it efficient.	Investigated and reported back on at the January 2013 Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board meeting.
Signalisation of the Favona Road and Harania Road Intersection	The Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board has already requested that speed calming measures be investigated on Harania Road. This request was turned down because of the effect on public transport of speed bumps or other traffic calming measures. The Board is still concerned about speed and safety in this road and would like signalisation of the Favona/Harania Intersection investigated.	This project has been investigated and the results were reported back at the April 2014 Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board Meeting. The Auckland Transport was asked to re-investigate the request for a signals at this intersection. Auckland Transport’s senior engineer met with the Chair and another elected member onsite and the project and its implications were discussed in detail. The engineer discussed Auckland Transport’s concnerns about signals making the turn out of Harania eaiser and therefore ‘rat –running’ through the street more attractive. A result of the conversation was that in order to to improve driver visibility at the intersection Auckland Transport proposes to install additional parking restrictions (shown in the map below). Traffic calming in Harania Road was also re-assessed but the road’s importance as a bus route means that putting in humps or other traffic calming devices would effect public transport so is not an appropriate solution.

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

09 December 2015

Grant of new community leases in the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board area in 2015 - council owned buildings

File No.: CP2015/24974

Purpose

1. To seek Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board approval for new community leases to groups within the Mangere and Otahuhu areas.

Executive Summary

2. Community leases are one of the ways in which Council provides support to local community organisations, assisting them to sustain the activities and experiences they provide in alignment with recognised local priorities.

3. Council has a substantial programme of community leasing work to complete this year. The programme includes a number of existing leases that have rolled over beyond their anticipated expiry date.

4. This report and attachment includes details of groups within the Mangere and Otahuhu areas with expired leases where council owns the building. Due to the services provided by these groups the Local Board have indicated support for the provision of new leases to these existing groups. Staff recommend new leases be approved under the terms and conditions specified in the schedule – Grant of new community leases, council owned buildings (Attachment A).

5. For each of the recommended leases, a process has been followed which includes a review of the lessee’s performance, that the organisation is sustainable, the services and programmes offered are beneficial to the community and that they align with objectives stated in the Auckland and Local Board Plans.

6. New community leases for a term of five years plus a renewal term of five years are recommended for each of the groups for the sites indicated in the site plans (Attachments B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J & K). For the Mangere Bridge Senior Citizens Club Incorporated a lease for a shorter term is recommended as there may be future developments for the Bridge Court Housing for the Elderly Grounds which may affect the leased premises.

7. Community Outcomes Plans will be negotiated with the groups and attached to the lease subject to approval by the Local Board Portfolio Holders.

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) Approves a new community lease for the following groups under the terms and conditions specified in the schedule (Attachment A) - Grant of new community leases, council owned buildings:

· Cook Islands Ta’okotai’anga Charitable Trust, Old School Reserve, 283-287 Kirkbride Road, Mangere

· Hands of Hope Community Services Trust, Old School Reserve, 299R Kirkbride Road, Mangere

· Mangere Bridge Senior Citizens Club Incorporated, Bridge Court Housing for the Elderly Grounds, Bridge Court Hall, 7 Coronation Road, Mangere Bridge

· Mangere Maori Wardens Trust, Mangere Town Centre Grounds, 121R Bader Drive, Mangere

· Motu (Tappy) Tapatuetoa Boxing Gym Mangere Bridge Incorporated, Gerry Preston Pavilion, Swanson Park, 2R McIntyre Road, Mangere Bridge

· Otahuhu Mainstreet & Commercial Association Incorporated, 19 Hall Avenue, Otahuhu

· STRIVE Community Trust, 366 Massey Road, Mangere East

· Te Aho Tapu Trust, Massey Homestead, 337R Massey Road, Mangere East

· Te Oranga Kaumatua Kuia Disability Support Services Trust, Mangere Recreation Centre Grounds, 66R Mascot Avenue, Mangere

· The New Arising Trust, 141R Robertson Road, Mangere East

b) Approves that Community Outcomes Plans where required, will be approved by the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board Community Facilities Portfolio Holder and attached as a schedule to the lease document.

Comments

8. There is a substantial programme of community leasing work to complete this year, work which includes establishing new leases to groups who have an expired lease.

9. Given the scale of the programme, staff have adopted a new approach to operational delivery, allowing a large number of leases to be approved in a batched process.

10. Attachment A includes the details of groups within the Mangere and Otahuhu areas with expired leases for council owned buildings. At the expiry of a lease on a council owned building it is good practice to review alternatives for the use of the premises. An expression of interest process can be undertaken to gauge interest and best use. Alternatively, if the services provided by incumbent groups are needed in the area and the groups are preforming well, new leases can be approved for these groups.

11. Due to the services provided by the groups detailed in this report the Local Board has indicated support for the provision of new leases to these existing groups. Staff recommend new leases be approved under the terms and conditions specified in the schedule – Grant of new community leases, council owned buildings.

12. The recommended term of lease where council owns the building is five years with one five year right of renewal. The recommended rental is $1.00 per annum, if requested. The groups are responsible for some maintenance and utilities and these responsibilities will be set out in a schedule that is attached to the lease document. Council is responsible for structural maintenance and building renewals work and the Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012 recommend the lessee pays a contribution to these costs. The contribution is dependent on the size of the building.

13. If a group shares use of a premise with other groups and utilities cannot be paid directly by them, it is recommended a shared utilities fee be charged. This is presently set at $25.00 per m² per annum for the groups leased area. This is the case for the leases recommended to STRIVE Community Trust and Te Aho Tapu Trust as the groups share the buildings they occupy with other groups. They do not pay for their own utilities or the subsidised maintenance fee and these costs are covered by the annual shared utilities fee.

14. For each of the recommended leases a process has been followed which includes a review of the lessee’s performance to ensure that lease conditions are being met, that the organisation is financially sustainable and that the services or programmes offered from the premises align with the objectives stated in the Auckland and Local Board Plans. Council staff have sought input from relevant council departments to ensure compliance requirements are met.

15. Checks have been undertaken to confirm the land classification for each of the sites and land information is included in the schedule.

16. Community Outcomes Plans will be negotiated with the groups and attached to the lease following approval by the Local Board Community Facilities Portfolio Holder and will be reported upon annually.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

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

18. The recommendations have been discussed with the Local Board Portfolio Holders and at a Local Board Workshop on 7 October 2015. The Local Board indicated support for the approval of new leases to the existing lessee’s listed in this report.

19. Council staff have sought input from relevant council departments.

Māori impact statement

20. Community leases support a wide range of activities and groups and are awarded based on an understanding of local needs, interests and priorities. They create local benefits for many communities, including Maori. Of particular note the work of the Mangere Maori Wardens Trust, Te Aho Tapu Trust and Te Oranga Kaumatua Kuia Disability Support Services Trust provides support and benefit to local maori communities and their work is widely influenced by its basis in tikanga maori.

Implementation

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

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

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Grant of new leases, council owned buildings	59
b View	Cook Island Taokotaianga Charitable Trust Site Plan	63
c View	Hands of Hope Community Services Trust Site Plan	65
d View	Mangere Bridge Senior Citizens Club Site Plan	67
e View	Mangere Maori Wardens Trust Site Plan	69
f View	Motu Tapatuetoa Boxing Gym Site Plan	71
g View	Otahuhu Mainstreet & Commercial Association Site Plan	73
h View	STRIVE Community Trust Site Plan	75
i View	Te Aho Tapu Trust Site Plan	77
j View	Te Oranga Kaumatua Kuia Disability Support Services Trust Site Plan	79
k View	The New Arising Trust Site Plan	81

Signatories

Authors

Christine Benson - Community Lease Advisor

Authorisers

Graham Bodman - General Manager - Arts, Community and Events

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

09 December 2015

New Road Name Approval for the residential subdivision by Watercare at 500 Island Road, Mangere Bridge

File No.: CP2015/24003

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to seek approval from the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board, for a new road name for a road created by way of subdivision at 500 Island Road, Mangere Bridge.

Executive Summary

2. Auckland Council has road naming guidelines that set out the requirements and criteria of the Council for proposed road names. These requirements and criteria have been applied in this situation to ensure consistency of road naming for the Auckland Council.

3. Following assessment against the road naming criteria, the road names ‘Mark Ford Drive’ (applicant’s preferred road name), ‘Manukau Harbour Drive’ and ‘Restoration Drive’ were determined to meet the road naming guideline criteria.

4. Local iwi groups were consulted via email on 2 October 2015. The applicant has stated that no responses were received following the email.

5. The name ‘Mark Ford Drive’, proposed by the Applicant and the names ‘Manukau Harbour Drive’ and ‘Restoration Drive’ are considered for approval by the Local Board.

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board pursuant to section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974, considers for approval, the road name ‘Mark Ford Drive’, proposed by the Applicant, for the new road created by way of subdivision at 500 Island Road, Mangere Bridge while noting that ‘Manukau Harbour Drive’ and ‘Restoration Drive’, also meet the road naming criteria.

Comments

6. The Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines allowed that where a new road needs to be named as a result of a subdivision or development, the subdivider/developer shall be given the opportunity of suggesting their preferred new road name for the Local Board’s approval.

7. The road to be named is a straight, 530m access road with a width of 13.5m which connects the Ascot Road roundabout to Island Road. This development was granted consent under resource consent 42936 (in conjunction with P42936, P42938, P42934, P43917 and P43918).

The Applicant has proposed the following names for consideration for the road created as part of the development at 500 Island Road, Mangere Bridge.

Preference	Proposed New Road Name	Meaning
Preferred Name	Mark Ford Drive	Mark Ford was Watercare’s Chief Executive for nearly 20 years, until he passed away in October 2014. Mark drove the biggest environmental restoration programme, in New Zealand, called Project Manukau which restored 500ha of oxidation ponds to natural tidal flats and 13km of coastline. Under his leadership, Watercare’s wastewater operations were transformed to benefit the Manukau Harbour which is the healthiest it has been for generations. Mark was also committed to the public sector; he served as executive chairman of the Auckland Transition Agency, chairman of Auckland Transport, chairman of Solid Energy, independent chair of the Christchurch Client Governance Group for Infrastructure Rebuild and as a member of the Better Public Services Advisory Group.
First Alternative	Manukau Harbour Drive	The road follows the previous shoreline and will lead to harbour access and viewing points.
Second Alternative	Restoration Drive	The road adjoins the past location of the wastewater oxidation ponds of the original Manukau Sewage Purification Works, which were restored back to the sea when the upgraded Mangere Wastewater Treatment Plan was established.

Figure One: Location and Layout of new Road

Decision Making

8. The Auckland Council, by way of the Auckland Council Long Term Plan (2012 - 2022), allocated the responsibility for the naming of new roads, pursuant to section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974, to Local Boards.

Assessment

9. The Applicant’s proposed road names have been assessed against the criteria set out in the Auckland Council road naming guidelines;

10. The Applicant’s preferred name ‘Mark Ford Drive’ meets all the criteria of the road naming guidelines. It is also noted that the proposed names ‘Manukau Harbour Drive’ and ‘Restoration Drive’ also comply with the criteria.

11. The proposed suffix of ‘Drive’ is appropriate in this circumstance, as the road is a wide, main roadway without many cross-streets. The suffix ‘Road’ also meets the definition, however, the applicant’s preference was ‘Drive’.

12. As the Applicant’s preferred name ‘Mark Ford Drive’ meets the criteria, it is recommended for consideration for approval while noting that the alternative names ‘Manukau Harbour Drive’ and ‘Restoration Drive’ are also appropriate as they comply with all the criteria of the road naming guidelines.

Consideration

Significance of Decision

13. The decision sought from the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board for this report does not trigger any significant policy and is not considered to have any immediate impact on the community.

Māori impact statement

14. The decision sought from the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board on this report is linked to the Auckland Plan Outcome, “A Maori identity that is Auckland’s point of difference in the world”. The use of Maori names for roads, buildings and other public places is an opportunity to publicly demonstrate Maori identity.

Consultation

15. The applicant states that Watercare initially advised the Mana Whenua Kaitaki Forum of the proposed road at the Forum’s quarterly meeting on 29 January 2015. The meeting was attended by nine of the 19 iwi of Tamaki Makaurau. The matter was raised again at the Forum meeting on 9 April attended by 15 of the iwi of Tamaki Makaurau. The applicant has supplied a letter from the Chairman of the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum, Tame Te Rangi, dated 3rd March 2015 and one email from Waikato-Tainui, confirming support for the name ‘Mark Ford Drive’.

Watercare wrote to all the relevant Mana Whenua entities on 2 October 2015 and gave them one month to respond, the applicant states that no responses were received.

16. New Zealand Post was consulted and indicated that all proposed road names are acceptable from their perspective.

17. The family of Mark Ford (Merelyn Ford on behalf of both Luke and Ben Ford) have been consulted and state that they would be honoured to have the main access way to the island named after him.

Financial and Resourcing Implications

18. The cost of processing the approval of the proposed new road name and any installation of road name signage is recoverable in accordance with Council’s Administrative Charges.

Legal and Legislative Implications

19. The decision sought from the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board for this report is not considered to have any legal or legislative implications.

Implementation

20. The Resource Consenting Team is involved in ensuring that appropriate road name signage will be installed accordingly once an approval is obtained for the new road name.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Debby Blackburn - Resource Consent Administrator

Authorisers

Ian Smallburn - General Manager Resource Consents

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

09 December 2015

Funding for Pacific Arts Association Closing Night Event

File No.: CP2015/25976

Purpose

1. This report provides information about the Pacific Arts Association XII International Symposium to be held in March 2016 and requests that the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board support hosting costs for a closing night event.

Executive Summary

2. Auckland War Memorial Museum is organising the Pacific Arts Association XII International Symposium (the symposium) from 14 to 17 March 2016 in Auckland.

3. Māngere Arts Centre – Ngā Tohu o Uenuku has been confirmed as a symposium partner, as the host venue for the final day of the Pacific Arts Association XII International Symposium on Thursday 17 March 2016.

4. The hosting of the symposium aligns with the Māngere Arts Centre’s vision, to be the “home of Māori and Pasifika visual and performing arts in Auckland” and one of the centre’s business plan actions and initiatives, to “utilise the centre as a hosting venue for local, regional, national and international events and programmes”.

5. The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board allocated funding for the symposium on 15 July 2015, as part of the Community Development, Arts and Culture Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Work Programme for 2015/16 [Resolution number MO/2015/113].

6. There is an additional opportunity for the local board to support by way of funding a closing night event on 17 March 2016 at Māngere Arts Centre – Ngā Tohu o Uenuku. This event would bring together Pacific leaders and Pacific artists in the community, to meet with delegates attending the symposium.

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) Notes that Māngere Arts Centre – Ngā Tohu o Uenuku has been confirmed as a symposium partner and the host venue for the final day of the Pacific Arts Association XII International Symposium on Thursday 17 March.

b) Notes that the estimated cost to host the one-day programme is up to $20,000 ($88 per person) with actual costs to be confirmed closer to the time of the symposium.

c) Provides funding of up to $8,000 ($32 per person) towards hosting costs for a closing night event from the Local Board’s Community Response Fund (LDI).

Comments

7. Auckland War Memorial Museum is organising the Pacific Arts Association XII International Symposium (the symposium) from 14 to 17 March 2016.

8. In August 2015, Auckland War Memorial Museum staff (the organisers) confirmed Māngere Arts Centre – Ngā Tohu o Uenuku and Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board as one of the symposium partners, alongside Auckland Art Gallery Toi o Tāmaki, Ngāti Whātua Orakei and the University of Auckland.

9. Māngere Arts Centre – Ngā Tohu o Uenuku will be the venue for the final day of the symposium, on Thursday 17 March 2016, subsidised by Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board.

Hosting Costs

10. On 15 July 2015, as part of the Community Development, Arts and Culture Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Work Programme for 2015/16, the local board allocated locally driven initiative (LDI) budget towards several Māngere Arts Centre Business Plan initiatives, as follows [Resolution number MO/2015/113]:

Project, Programme, Event	Description/Key activities	Timeframe	Cost
Māngere Arts Centre Business Plan	Implement actions and initiatives from Māngere Arts Centre Business Plan	Full year	$38,000 (LDI)

11. The hosting of the symposium aligns with one of the business plan actions and initiatives, to “utilise the centre as a hosting venue for local, regional, national and international events and programmes”, dependent on funding.

12. The current estimate to host a one-day programme is up to $20,000 ($88 per person) for transport and catering for 225 delegates; and for venue hire and artist fees.

13. The actual costs for hosting the symposium won’t be confirmed by the organisers until the number of delegates is confirmed (approximately 1 March 2016).

Proposed Closing Night Event

14. Local board members have shown an interest in hosting a closing night event on 17 March 2016. The purpose of the proposed event is to bring together Pacific leaders and Pacific artists in the community, to meet with delegates attending the symposium.

15. The proposed theme and concept for the evening is: “Talofa lava, afio mai” (hello and welcome) – a chance to meet with local community leaders, artists and guests. The evening will offer the opportunity to experience entertainment by Pacific artists that have featured in the symposium programme during the day, and end with a culturally-appropriate traditional taualuga.

16. The costs for this event would require additional funding by the local board from their Community Response Fund (LDI). Indicative costs are outlined in the table below:

Item	Description	Cost
Catering	For 250 guests	Up to $6,500
Venue hire	Courtyard	$110
Entertainment	Eg MC, DJ or live music	Up to $1,390
Total (excluding GST):		Up to $8,000 ($32 per person)

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

17. The focus of the international symposium aligns strongly with the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Plan 2014-17 and the outcome: “Māngere-Ōtāhuhu is the heart of Māori and Pasifika arts and culture.”

18. The proposal for Māngere Arts Centre – Ngā Tohu o Uenuku to host the Pacific Arts Association XII International Symposium in March 2016 was outlined in a memo to the local board dated 16 January 2015.

19. Local board members (Member Lauese, Member O’Brien and Member Skelton) met with the organisers on 24 August 2015 and have been provided with updates at monthly arts and culture portfolio catch up meetings (Member Lauese and Member Skelton).

20. A memo was provided to the local board on 10 November with an update on the symposium planning for the one-day programme at Māngere Arts Centre – Ngā Tohu o Uenuku and the proposed closing night event.

Māori impact statement

21. The overarching theme of the Pacific Arts Association XII International Symposium, as expressed in the Māori whakatauki (proverb) Ma te ahuatanga o mua, E arataki te huarahi, Hei haere whakamua: “we look to the past to inform the way we move into the future”.

22. The symposium programme will include Māori arts content and participation by Māori.

23. The vision for the centre is: “Māngere Arts Centre – Ngā Tohu o Uenuku is the home of Māori and Pasifika visual and performing arts in Auckland”.

24. The Māngere Arts Centre – Ngā Tohu o Uenuku provides opportunities for all Aucklanders to engage with arts and culture including Māori communities and their stories.

Implementation

25. The local board will have an opportunity to identify community leaders, individuals and organisations to be invited to the closing night event.

26. Local board members will be invited to perform hosting duties, and take part in formalities at the closing night event.

27. Staff expected that local board attribution (such as acknowledgement of the local board and logo placement) will be incorporated into the delivery plan for the event by the organisers, in discussion with the board.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Naomi Singer, Arts and Culture Advisor (South)

Authorisers

Graham Bodman - General Manager Arts, Community and Events

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

09 December 2015

Mangere-Otahuhu Quick Response, Round Two, 2015/2016

File No.: CP2015/25860

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to present applications received for round two of the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Quick Response grants 2015/2016. The local board is required to fund, part-fund or decline these applications.

Executive Summary

2. The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board has set a total community grants budget of $137,000 and a local events budget of $122,000 for the 2015/2016 financial year. To date a total of $60,617 has been allocated from the community grants budget, leaving a total of $76,383 and a total of $93,300 has been allocated from the local events budget, leaving a total of $28,700.

3. There were 18 applications received in this round, with a total requested of $26,433.00.

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) consider the applications listed in Table One below and agree to fund, part-fund or decline each application in this round.

ID	Applicant	Focus	Project	Requested
201	The Rainbow Corner Early Learning Centre	Environment	Towards the cost of a worm farm and family workshops.	$2,000.00
202	Mangere East ACCESS Trust	Community	Towards promotion, performer and entertainer fees and hall hire for the event	$2,000.00
204	Rabaul Upu	Sport and recreation	Towards tour costs including travel, accommodation, uniform, food and tournament fees.	$1,000.00
207	Waterlea Indoor Bowling Club	Sport and recreation	Towards hall hire at the Mangere War Memorial Hall	$2,000.00
208	Mangere Central Indoor Bowling Club	Sport and recreation	Towards hall hire at the Mangere Central Community Hall	$2,000.00
209	Youthline Manukau (Youthline Auckland Charitable Trust)	Community	Towards resources (design, printing, promotion, event costs) and youth worker time and expenses.	$1,000.00
212	Aukilani Samoan Wardens Charitable Trust	Community	Towards set-up of Otara Samoa Wardens office including furniture, phones, office equipment and promotion of service	$2,000.00
214	Rebecca Gerdena Voorwinden	Community	Towards the purchase of children’s Christmas gifts to be donated to Pillars (a charity that supports children of prisoners).	$1,000.00
217	CAP (Christians Against Poverty)	Community	Towards fifty percent of the annual costs for the client free phone for Mangere-Otahuhu.	$1,600.00
218	Laione Hau Tonga Tag NZ	Sport and recreation	Towards registration fees, team uniforms and playing gear	$1,000.00
219	Connect the Dots Charitable Trust	Arts and culture	Towards venue hire at Mangere East Community Learning Centre for “Mind the Gap”	$625.00
220	Connect the Dots Charitable Trust	Community	Towards materials and venue costs for the programme for the “Make Do Mangere” programme.	$1,708.00
221	Bhartiya Samaj Charitable Trust	Community	Towards venue hire and transport reimbursement	$750.00
222	Southern Cross Campus - Pohutukawa House Project	Environment	Towards purchase and colour coding of bins and volunteer costs.	$1,000.00
223	The New Zealand Retreat (Auckland) Ltd.	Community	Towards improvements to the website, improving local advertising channels, launching of the social media and print campaign targeting Mangere-Otahuhu	$2,000.00
224	Connect the Dots Charitable Trust	Community	Towards venue hire at Mangere East Community Learning Centre for “Girls to the Front” programme	$750.00
225	Action Education Inc	Community	Towards the cost of the workshops in the Mangere-Otahuhu area	$2,000.00
226	Ohomairangi Trust	Community	Towards costs for the Children’s Day event including hiring Old Macdonald's Farm, pony rides, bouncy castle, food, BBQ, drinks and the “Science in a Van performance for families.	$2,000.00
	Total			$26,433.00

Comments

4. The implementation of the new Community Grants Policy commenced on 1 July 2015. The policy supports each local board to adopt a grants programme for 2015/2016 and the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board adopted its grants programme on 15 April 2015 (see Attachment A).

5. The local board grants programme sets out:

· local board priorities

· lower priorities for funding

· exclusions

· grant types, the number of grant rounds and when these will open and close

· any additional accountability requirements.

6. The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board will operate two local grants rounds and four quick response rounds for this financial year.

7. The new community grant programmes have been extensively advertised through the new council grant webpage, local board webpages, local board e-newsletters and Facebook pages, council publications, radio, local newspapers and community networks. Staff have also conducted a series of public workshops in local board areas, which have been attended by approximately 1000 people across the Auckland region.

8. The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board has set a total community grants budget of $137,000 and a local events budget of $122,000 for the 2015/2016 financial year. To date a total of $60,617 has been allocated from the community grants budget, leaving a total of $76,383 and a total of $93,300 has been allocated from the local events budget, leaving a total of $28,700.

9. There were 18 applications received for this quick response round, requesting a total of $26,433.00.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

10. Local boards are responsible for the decision-making and allocation of local board community grants. The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board is required to fund, part-fund or decline these grant applications against the local board priorities identified in the local board grant programme.

11. The board is requested to note that section 50 of the Community Grants Policy states “We will also provide feedback to unsuccessful grant applicants about why they have been declined, so they will know what they can do to increase their chances of success next time.”

Māori impact statement

12. The provision of community grants provides opportunities for all Aucklanders to undertake projects, programmes, activities that benefit a wider range of individuals and groups, including Maori. As a guide for decision-making, in the allocation of community grants, the new community grants policy supports the principle of delivering positive outcomes for Maori.

Implementation

13. The allocation of grants to community groups is within the adopted Long Term Plan 2015-2025 and local board agreements.

14. Following the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board allocating funding for round two of the quick response grants, Commercial and Finance staff will notify the applicants of the local board’s decision upon receipt of the official minutes.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Mangere-Otahuhu Grants Programme 2015/2016	95
b View	Mangere-Otahuhu Quick Response Round Two 2015/2016 (Under Separate Cover)

Signatories

Authors

Jaimee Wieland - Community Grants Coordinator

Authorisers

Marion Davies - Community Grants Operations Manager

Jennifer Rose - Operations Support Manager

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

09 December 2015

Draft Regional Pest Management Plan Review

File No.: CP2015/25117

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 Māngere-Ōtāhuhu 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

· Controlling 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	125
b View	Regional Strategy and Policy Committee report – Regional Pest Management Plan – Approval of Discussion Document	133
c View	Regional Pest Management Plan – Discussion Document (Under Separate Cover)

Signatories

Authors

Helen Sharpe - Biodiversity Specialist

Authorisers

Jacques Victor - GM Auckland Plan Strategy and Research

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

09 December 2015

Annual Plan 2016/2017 – local consultation content

File No.: CP2015/25966

Purpose

1. This report seeks agreement of proposed locally driven initiative (LDI) priorities for 2016/2017 and adoption of local content for consultation, as part of the Annual Plan 2016/2017.

Executive Summary

2. Legislation governing the annual plan process has changed - there is no longer a requirement to produce a draft Annual Plan. Instead, council must produce a consultation document which includes:

a) proposed significant or material changes (if any) to year two of the Long-term Plan 2015-2025 (LTP); and

b) content relating to local board agreements.

3. This report seeks agreement of proposed locally driven initiative priorities for 2016/2017 and adoption of local content for consultation.

4. Following this business meeting, the governing body will meet on 17 December to agree consultation topics for the annual plan, and again in early February to agree consultation material, including local content from each local board.

5. Following consultation, a local board agreement with the governing body for 2016/2017 will be developed.

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) Agrees indicative locally driven initiative priorities for 2016/2017 (Attachment A).

b) Adopts local content for consultation (Attachment B).

c) Agrees that the Chairperson be delegated the authority to make any final minor changes to local consultation content for the Annual Plan 2016/2017 prior to publication, including online consultation content.

Comments

6. Legislation governing the annual plan process has changed - there is no longer a requirement to produce a draft Annual Plan. Instead, council must produce a consultation document which includes:

a) proposed significant or material changes (if any) to year two of the Long-term Plan 2015-2025 (LTP); and

b) content relating to local board agreements.

7. Over the last three months local boards have refined local priorities within funding envelopes outlined in year two of the LTP to prepare for consultation. This included consideration of locally driven initiatives and asset based services work programmes.

8. This report seeks agreement of proposed LDI priorities for 2016/2017 and adoption of local content for consultation.

9. Following this business meeting, the governing body will meet on 17 December to agree consultation topics for the Annual Plan, and again in early February to agree consultation material, including local content from each local board.

10. Consultation on the Annual Plan will take place from 15 February to 15 March 2016.

11. The consultation is anticipated to involve opportunities for feedback to be submitted via ‘Have Your Say’ events in each local board area, or to be submitted in writing. The event for the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board area has been scheduled for 10 March 2016 in Otahuhu. It is expected that the consultation will be promoted via the Council newsletter (Our Auckland), local newspapers, and social media among other channels.

12. Following consultation, a local board agreement with the governing body for 2016/2017 will be developed. The Annual Plan, including 21 local board agreements, is due for adoption in June 2016.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

13. Local board feedback on regional matters for consultation was sought in November business meetings.

14. Advocacy discussions between local boards and the Finance & Performance Committee were held in November prior to decisions being made on Annual Plan consultation topics.

15. The top three topics the board are advocating to the governing body are:

· Support development of the Māngere-East multi-purpose community facility

· Progress the ‘route protection’ for the City to Airport Rail Connection

· Further consideration for recommended changes to the District Licensing Committees (DLC)

16. In addition, the following topics of importance were noted in the discussion:

· Support tighter controls for proliferation of boarding houses

· Funding mechanism for Spatial Priority Areas

· Further consideration for recommended changes to the District Licensing Committees (DLC)

· Support for the development of localised resource recovery centres

· Direct a percentage of development contributions back for local projects

17. The purpose of this report is for local boards to agree local priorities and adopt local content for consultation.

18. Local boards will also have further opportunities to provide information and views as council continues through the Annual Plan process.

Māori impact statement

19. Many local board decisions are of importance to and impact on Māori. Local board agreements and the Annual Plan are important tools that enable and can demonstrate council’s responsiveness to Māori. Local board plans, which were developed in 2014 through engagement with the community including Māori, form the basis of local priorities.

20. There is a need to continue to build relationships between local boards and iwi, and where relevant the wider Māori community. Ongoing conversations will assist local boards and Māori to understand each other’s priorities and issues. This in turn can influence and encourage Māori participation in council’s decision-making processes.

Implementation

21. Following consultation, proposed initiatives and budgets will be considered and updated to reflect feedback and new information available, prior to adoption of the final Annual Plan.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Indicative Local Driven Initiative Priorities	139
b View	Local Contect Consultation Content	141

Signatories

Authors

Kate Marsh - Financial Planning Manager - Local Boards

Authorisers

Matthew Walker - GM Financial Strategy and Planning

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

09 December 2015

Review of the Food Safety Bylaw 2013

File No.: CP2015/25989

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 Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) Endorse 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

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

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

Chairperson	Lemauga Lydia Sosene
Deputy Chairperson	Carrol Elliott, JP
Members	Nick Bakulich
	Tafafuna'i Tasi Lauese, JP
	Christine O'Brien
	Leau Peter Skelton
	Walter Togiamua

Timeslot	Topic	Presenter	Purpose
1.00 - 1.30pm	Governance Director Introduction	Phil Wilson	Governance Director Phil Wilson was introduced to the Board and Phil updated the Board on his role.
1.30 – 1.45pm	Portfolio Update	Board Members	The Board discussed their portfolio meetings.
1.45 - 2.00pm	Board Forward Planning	Rina Tagore	The Board discussed the Toia swimming pool charges and entry and the Sod turning for Future Streets 16 November at 6.00am. Member Leau Peter Skelton will do the sod turning.
2.00 - 3.00pm	Annual Plan 2016/2017 Workshop 2 – LDI	Faithe Smith, Naomi Singer, Sharon McGinity, Jane Sheetz, Vince Perry, Janine Field, Cheryl Fowler, Ayr Jones, Mark Evans, Bobby Kennedy, Nicola Mochrie, Biran Singh	The Board identified the key LDI requests and targeted rate proposals and followed up on obtaining indicative pricing (using LDI Pricing Tool).
3.00 - 3.30pm	Call Centre and customer requests and complaints in the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board Area	Sally Woods, Rachael Moore, Muriel Kelly, Karen Meikle, Charlotte Masters-Wood	The local board had a presentation on Auckland Council customer relationships in its area. The board discussed what sorts of customer relationship information is available to local elected members and how they might regularly receive this information, e.g.: • Volumes of customer contacts (overall and by local board) • Types of service requests and complaints raised by customers (overall and by local board)
3.30 - 4.00pm	2016 Engagement Activities	Thomas Murray	The Board discussed the options for engagement activities to replace the Fono in 2016.

Timeslot	Topic	Presenter	Purpose
12.45 - 1.15pm	Portfolio Update	Board Members	The board members gave a brief account of their portfolio meetings.
1.15 - 1.30pm	Deferred Local Grants Round One application	Board Discussion	The board discussed the Life Education Trust South East Auckland application and a report is on the November business meeting.
1.30 - 2.15pm	Community Facilities Partnership Fund - Future Direction	Martin Devoy, Kim Squire, Willie Losia	Following up on the workshop held on 2 September: • To consider options to gain better outcomes for the sports /facilities needs in the local area. • That is, consider impact of past funding and discuss strategic alternatives for best use of LDI resources. • Set direction for work programme for 2015/2016 (and also next two years)
2.15 - 3.15pm	Quarterly Report	Faithe Smith	The Board discussed the Quarterly Report. Environmental Management query on Oruarangi re resource recover forwarded to Emma Joyce. Housing for the elderly re suggestion to Panuku.
3.15 - 4.15pm	Annual Plan 2016/2017 Workshop 3 - Review Draft Consultation Material	Faithe Smith	The board discussed the local priorities and updated the spreadsheet.

Timeslot	Topic	Presenter	Purpose
1.00 - 1.30pm	ATEED Local Board Engagement and Action Plan	Chris Lock, Luo Lei	The Board and ATEED discussed options for the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board Area: Top priorities for the Board: · Useful employment in trades. (Young Enterprise Scheme/Trades Academy). · Free Event for young people which could include free food. · More employment for Mangere-Otahuhu residence in their area. · To develop a tourist trail from the airport to Mangere Bridge ATEED to attend a cluster portfolio meeting.
1.30 - 2.00pm	Parks concept for Otahuhu Portage link and Local Board Investment into Parks	Janine Field, Vincent Perry, Damian Powley	The Board discussed the parks concept plan for Portage Link and to go through the investment into parks. A Hickey will be arranged with the Board early in 2016 to walk the portage link trail. Parks to arrange the Hickey.
2.00 - 2.30pm	Greenways plans adoption	Janine Field, Vincent Perry, Damian Powley	The Board discussed the Greenways plan. Future ongoing discussion will go to a portfolio cluster meeting in December.
2.30 - 3.00pm	Parks Capex budget priorities for 2015/16	Janine Field, Vincent Perry, Damian Powley	The Board discussed the Capex Budget Priority for 2015/16 and new projects will be discussed at a cluster portfolio meeting.
3.00 – 3.50pm	Rationalisation of 1 Victoria Street Otahuhu and an overview of optimisation.	Letitia McColl, Marion Webb	The Board had a powerpoint presentation and discussed the 1 Victoria Street, Otahuhu and the Optimisation overview. Once all information is received for 1 Victoria Street a report will come back to the board.
3.50 – 4.00pm	Community Arts Broker Services	Naomi Singer, Sally Barnett, Bronwyn Bent	Introduction of the Community Arts Brokers to the Board. The Brokers will be meeting with artists, groups, community organisations and local business to work together and collaborate on a range of temporary arts activities and projects in the local board area between January and September 2016. They will also be working on several projects with the Mangere Arts Centre – Nga Tohu o Uenuku in the Mangere Town Centre.

Authors	Janette McKain - Local Board Democracy Advisor
Authorisers

Authors	Kenneth Tuai - Local Board Advisor
Authorisers	Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager