Agenda of Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

10 December 2015

Disposal recommendation report

File No.: CP2015/24293

Purpose

1. This report seeks the Maungakiekie-Tamaki Local Board’s endorsement for Panuku Development Auckland (Panuku) to recommend to the governing body the divestment of council owned properties at 6/20 Allenby Road, Panmure, 474 Ellerslie-Panmure Highway, Mt Wellington, 230 Onehunga Mall, Onehunga, Lots 3 and 4 Deposited Plan 60645 Waipu Lane, Onehunga, 45 Waller Street, Onehunga and 3 Paynes Lane, Onehunga.

Executive Summary

2. The council-owned properties presented in this report have been identified as potentially surplus to council requirements through a review process.

3. The first property presented in this report, 6/20 Allenby Road, Panmure, is a residential unit that was acquired to assist in the relocation of a landowner whose property was acquired for a public work. The rationalisation process for this property commenced in August 2015. Consultation with council and its CCOs, Iwi authorities and the Maungakiekie-Tamaki Local Board has now taken place. No alternative service uses have been identified for this property through the rationalisation process and the feedback received has been supportive of the proposed divestment of this site. Due to this, Panuku recommend disposal of this property. Site specific detail, including information and feedback gathered through the rationalisation process is contained in Attachment A of this report.

4. The second property presented in this report, 474 Ellerslie-Panmure Highway, Mt Wellington is a 962m² residential property that was acquired for road widening. This work has now been completed. The rationalisation process for this property commenced in August 2015. Consultation with council and its CCOs, Iwi authorities and the Maungakiekie-Tamaki Local Board has now taken place. No alternative service uses have been identified for this property through the rationalisation process and feedback received has been supportive of the proposed divestment of this site. Due to this, Panuku recommend disposal of this property. Site specific detail, including information and feedback gathered through the rationalisation process is contained in Attachment B of this report.

5. The third property presented in this report, 230 Onehunga Mall, Onehunga is comprised of a total land area of 429m². This property is the residue of a larger block of land that was acquired by the Onehunga Borough Council in 1968. 229m²of this property is formed as an access and is to remain in council ownership. The remaining 200m²of the total property is currently been used as a car park and has been the subject of the rationalisation process. This property has been rationalised as part of the strategic review of the Onehunga town centre. The rationalisation process for the subject area of this property commenced in August 2015. Consultation with council and its CCOs, Iwi authorities and the Maungakiekie-Tamaki Local Board has now taken place. No alternative service uses have been identified for this property through the rationalisation process and feedback received has been supportive of the proposed divestment of this site. Due to this, Panuku recommend that this property be divested and included in the proposed Onehunga Town Centre regeneration. Site specific detail, including information and feedback gathered through the rationalisation process is contained in Attachment C of this report.

6. The fourth property presented in this report, Lots 3 and 4 Deposited Plan 60645 Waipu Lane, Onehunga comprises 116m² of vacant land. This property has been rationalised as part of the strategic review of the Onehunga town centre. The rationalisation process for this property commenced in August 2015. Consultation with council and its CCOs, Iwi authorities and the Maungakiekie-Tamaki Local Board has now taken place. No alternative service uses have been identified for this property through the rationalisation process and the feedback received has been supportive of the proposed divestment of this site. Due to this, Panuku recommend that this property be divested and included in the proposed Onehunga Town Centre regeneration. Site specific detail, including information and feedback gathered through the rationalisation process is contained in Attachment D of this report.

7. The fifth and sixth properties presented in this report, 45 Waller Street, Onehunga and 3 Paynes Lane, Onehunga comprise 2,208m² and 1,269m² respectively. Both properties were acquired for road and car parking purposes and are currently utilised as car parks. These properties are been rationalised as part of the strategic review of the Onehunga town centre. The rationalisation process for these properties commenced in August 2015. Consultation with council and its CCOs, Iwi authorities and the Maungakiekie-Tamaki Local Board has now taken place. No alternative service uses have been identified for these properties through the rationalisation process and feedback received has been supportive of the proposed divestment of these sites. Due to this, Panuku recommend divestment of these properties and inclusion in the proposed Onehunga Town Centre regeneration. Site specific detail, including information and feedback gathered through the rationalisation process is contained in Attachments E and F of this report.

8. A resolution approving the disposal of these sites is required from the Finance and Performance Committee before any divestment of the subject properties can be progressed.

Recommendation/s

That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

a) endorses Panuku Development Auckland’s recommendation to the Finance and Performance Committee to dispose of 6/20 Allenby Road, Panmure;

b) endorses Panuku Development Auckland’s recommendation to the Finance and Performance Committee to dispose of 474 Ellerslie-Panmure Highway, Mt Wellington;

c) endorses Panuku Development Auckland’s recommendation to the Finance and Performance Committee to dispose of 230 Onehunga Mall, Onehunga as part of the proposed redevelopment of the Onehunga town centre;

d) endorses Panuku Development Auckland’s recommendation to the Finance and Performance Committee to dispose of Lots 3 and 4 Deposited Plan 60645 Waipu Lane, Onehunga as part of the proposed redevelopment of the Onehunga town centre;

e) endorses Panuku Development Auckland’s recommendation to the Finance and Performance Committee to dispose of 45 Waller Street, Onehunga as part of the proposed redevelopment of the Onehunga town centre; and

f) endorses Panuku Development Auckland’s recommendation to the Finance and Performance Committee to dispose of 3 Paynes Lane, Onehunga as part of the proposed redevelopment of the Onehunga town centre.

Comments

9. Panuku and Auckland Council Property department work jointly on a comprehensive review of council’s property portfolio. One of the outcomes of the review process is to identify properties in the council portfolio that are potentially surplus to requirements and that may be suitable to sell. The subject sites were identified as potentially saleable through the review process.

10. Once a property has been identified as potentially surplus, Panuku engages with council and its CCO’s through an expression of interest process, to establish whether the property must be retained for a strategic purpose or is required for a future funded project. Once a property has been internally cleared of any service requirements, Panuku then consults with local boards, ward councillors, mana whenua and the Independent Maori Statutory Board. All sale recommendations must be approved by the Panuku Board before it makes a final recommendation to the Auckland Council governing body.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

11. Local Boards are informed of the commencement of the rationalisation process for specific properties. Following the close of the expression of interest period, relevant Local Boards are engaged with.

12. Panuku attended a workshop with the Maungakiekie-Tamaki Local Board about the subject properties on 27 October 2015. The Maungakiekie-Tamaki Local Board provided informal feedback that it was generally supportive of the proposed disposal of the subject properties. Site specific feedback from the Maungakiekie-Tamaki Local Board is contained in the Local Board Views section of the property attachments to this report. This report is intended to provide the Maungakiekie-Tamaki Local Board with an opportunity to formalise its views regarding these properties.

Māori impact statement

13. The importance of effective communication and engagement with Māori on the subject of land is understood. Panuku has a robust form of engagement with mana whenua groups across the region. Each relevant mana whenua group is contacted independently by email based on a contact list which is regularly updated. Each group is provided general property details, including a property map, and requested to give feedback within 15 working days. Confirmation of any interest expressed is sent in writing and recorded for inclusion in the disposal recommendation report.

14. Panuku’s engagement directs mana whenua to respond with any issues of particular cultural significance the group would like to formally express in relation to the subject properties. We also request express notes regarding any preferred outcomes that the group would like us to consider as part of any disposal process.

15. Mana whenua groups are also invited to express potential commercial interest in any sites and are put in contact with Panuku’s Development team for preliminary discussions if appropriate to the property. This facilitates the groups’ early assessment of the merits of a development opportunity to their Iwi. In the event a property is approved for sale all groups are alerted of the decision, and all groups are alerted once a property comes on the market.

16. Consultation with mana whenua groups has now been completed. Property specific feedback received is included in the Mana Whenua Engagement section of the property attachments to this report.

Implementation

17. Following receipt of the Maungakiekie-Tamaki Local Board’s resolutions, these properties will be presented to the Finance and Performance Committee with a recommendation to divest of them. If the governing body approves the proposed disposal of these properties, Panuku will seek to divest of these properties in a manner which provides an optimal outcome and return to council.

18. The terms and conditions of any disposal would be approved under appropriate financial delegation.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	6/20 Allenby Road, Panmure property information	11
b View	474 Ellerslie-Panmure Highway, Mt Wellington property information	15
c View	230 Onehunga Mall, Onehunga property information	19
d View	Lots 3 and 4, Deposited Plan 60645 Waiapu Lane, Onehunga property information	23
e View	45 Waller Street, Onehunga property information	27
f View	3 Paynes Lane, Onehunga property information	31

Signatories

Authors

Letitia McColl - Senior Advisor Portfolio Review, Portfolio Strategy, Panuku Development Auckland

Authorisers

Marian Webb – Team Leader Portfolio Review, Portfolio Strategy, Panuku Development Auckland

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

10 December 2015

Jubilee Bridge

File No.: CP2015/23182

Purpose

1. To approve a preferred option for the future of the Jubilee Bridge.

Executive Summary

2. The existing Jubilee Bridge is in poor repair. In 2013 a decision was made to implement temporary safety repairs for the short term and then replace the bridge.

3. Although replacement has been scoped, there are a range of options for the board to consider, each with their merits and drawbacks, presented in this report.

4. The bridge is a priority project in the local board annual plan, a key link in the AMETI project, part of a greenways route and included in the Panmure Basin Master Plan.

5. The Local Board has governance autonomy over parks infrastructure.

6. Options include:

a) Do nothing;

b) Close the bridge;

c) Remove the bridge;

d) Repair the bridge;

e) Replace with a ‘like for like’ replica;

f) Replace with a concrete span of 2-3m width;

g) Replace with a steel beam span of 2-3m width.

7. Renewals funding will provide an exact ‘like for like’ structure however this is not the recommended optimum replacement option, as it would not be safe for shared use. Repair of the bridge would be funded from operational budgets (OPEX).

8. A concrete arch or steel beam span of at least 2.5m in width is considered to be the best minimum option, with a 3m width being the recommended optimum option in the long term.

Recommendation/s

That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

a) resolve to replace the existing Jubilee Bridge with one of the following options:

i) a 3 metre wide bridge of concrete span construction as a replacement for the existing Jubilee Bridge, or if funding does not permit this option;

ii) a 3 metre wide bridge of steel beam construction as a replacement for the existing Jubilee Bridge;

a) delegate further decision making on all detailed design, non-board funding and art integration, to the Local board chair and parks portfolio holder.

Comments

9. Jubilee pedestrian bridge is a 60m long, 1.2m wide footbridge which forms a part of the McCullough walkway around Panmure Lagoon. It completes a major recreational circuit and provides a pedestrian commuter link to Panmure town centre. It carries power and telecommunication cables.

10. In 2013 the bridge was found to be in a poor state of repair and a decision was made to make interim repairs. These were made in early 2014 to allow use for two years while a replacement was planned.

11. A memo to the Local Board (11/11/2013) from the Parks Advisor outlined a range of options and costs to replace or repair the bridge. Extensive repairs to maintain the existing bridge’s integrity for the immediate future were estimated at $535,000 in 2013.

12. Frame Group Ltd calculated that a replica like for like replacement of the bridge would cost $727,000. On this basis $727,000 renewals funding has been allocated. The Governing Body have also agreed a $150,000 contribution.

13. Any ‘pure’ like for like renewal would be funded from the renewals budget, being the amount required to replace the old bridge with a complying replica at the same width of 1.2m.

14. Estimates for a new complying replacement bridge of extra width which meets current standards and requirements are between $1.2m and $2m. Extra funding would be required to address the shortfall between the estimated renewals amount and the build cost.

Alternative Funding Sources

15. The local board may choose to allocate funding from the Local Board Auckland Transport Capital Fund.

16. A potential source is the Auckland Transport Walking and Cycling Programme which Auckland Transport have indicated could have some capacity.

17. Arts and Culture unit have indicated that approximately $300,000 may be available for public art integration into a new bridge.

18. Utility providers who wish to convey their services over the new bridge will be required to contribute a sum as a part of any new utilities agreement negotiations.

19. Council is developing a new model partnering with trusts and corporate sponsorship for Greenways. It is not known if this project would qualify, as this concept is at an early stage but could be explored further.

20. If these sources are not available alternative funding could be investigated. The local board has two capex options that could be explored, once a decision is made, and a detailed designed defines final costs. There is an option to allocate local board discretionary CAPEX or local board consequential OPEX. This would require to board to reprioritise existing projects from discretionary capital budgets.

21. Table of Options

	Option	Advantages	Disadvantages	Estimated cost and funding
a)	Do nothing	· No major expenditure would be required other than ongoing maintenance and structural assessments.	· Bridge would continue to deteriorate, reducing its useful life to less than one year. · Would then become a risk to public safety and unfit for use, requiring closure. · Frequent structural assessment for health and safety purposes.	Maintenance costs would be incurred for responsive maintenance but are difficult to forecast.
b)	Close the bridge	· OPEX maintenance funding would be saved. · Risk to Public is minimized.	· Complaints from public · Disruption to the public · A new bridge may not be built or delays will lengthen the closure. · Risk to public safety because features are difficult to entirely block from public access. · Connectivity around the basin and to Panmure is lost. · Walking and cycling connections and plans would need revision. · Reduced service.	To impose a closure and install barricades is estimated to Cost in the region of $50,000, Opex.
c)	Remove the bridge	· Capex to demolish would be less than Opex for ongoing repairs and maintenance or a rebuild. · Would remove any potential structural risks.	· Physical link would be lost · Would not align with annual plan or Panmure Basin Master Plan. · Opportunity to maintain and improve walking and cycling connectivity would be lost · Reduced infrastructure and service, and after a year the item would be removed from the register unless replaced. · Would require removal of existing utility services.	$425,000 Opex for removal of the bridge at November 2015.
d)	Repair the bridge	· Cost would need to be met from Opex and Capex depending on whether it is partial renewal or repair. · Could extend the life of the bridge by up to 19 years. · Renewal funding for replacement could be planned for.	· Repairs would have to be extensive and begin in the future. · Bridge would have to be closed for three months for repair work to be undertaken. · Significant investment for a limited return and design life of less than 20 years. · Limits the utility of the bridge. · Would remain a one way footbridge, and not meet greenways standards.	$589,000
e)	Replace with a ‘like for like’ code compliant replica	· Funded from renewals · Would provide a new 1.2m wide footbridge connection to current day regulations.	· Would not meet current standards for greenways, shared use and not be ‘future proofed’ for capacity or need. · Would require different materials than existing bridge to meet requirements. · A significant spend of renewals for a width that limits its use and utility.	$727,000 (note: based on current replacement value. Additional renewals may be provided if needed, determined by market tender value Including professional services and consenting
f)	Replace bridge with steel beam span 2-3m wide.	· Would provide a complying, contemporary, shared use crossing with at least 50 year design life. · Meets growth needs of the area. · Lower construction cost than concrete option. Would provide some opportunity for Maori design principles and art design elements. · 2-2.5m is wide enough for shared use, 3m would be aligned with greenways standards, and eligible for greenways transport funding contribution · Seamless link with proposed greenways from Tamaki estuary, via the proposed East-West link to Mangere inlet and Onehunga if 3m wide. · Would allow existing bridge to be open for parts of the new bridge construction period. · Meets board and council strategies and plans	· Will require extra Capital Expenditure (CAPEX) or contributions possibly from utility providers (Vodafone and Vector) Auckland Council Arts & Culture Unit, and Auckland Transport. · Steel option would cost more OPEX (maintenance) and is less arts/motif capable. · Steel option less durable and palatable environmentally and requires extra footings. · Not an iwi preferred option	$1.2 to $1.4m Renewals and Capex Build cost, made up of $727,000 renewals and $500-700,000 capex.
g)	Replace bridge with concrete arch span 2-3m wide.	· Would provide a complying, contemporary, shared use crossing with at least 50 year design life. · Meets growth needs of the area. · Would provide full opportunity for Maori design principles and art design elements. · 2-2.5m is wide enough for shared use, 3m would be greenways compliant and eligible for greenways transport funding contribution · Seamless link with proposed greenways from Tamaki estuary, via the proposed East-West link to Mangere inlet and Onehunga if 3m wide. · More durable materials and less maintenance costs. · Iwi preferred option. · Less environmental risk over whole of life. · Would allow existing bridge to be open for parts of the new bridge construction period. · Meets board and council strategies and plans	· Will require extra CAPEX or contributions possibly from utility providers (Vodafone and Vector) Auckland Council Arts & Culture Unit, and Auckland Transport. · Higher up front (construction) than steel beam option	$1.5 – 1.8m Renewals and CAPEX Build cost, made up of $727,000 renewals and $700,000 to 1.0m capex.

Summary of Options

22. Do Nothing – This is not recommended. It carries too much on-going risk with the ultimate result being closure. The Local Board have elected to make interim repairs and seek options for bridge replacement.

23. Close the bridge – This is not recommended. It would close a critical pedestrian commuter and recreational connection. It reduces service and poses a public risk. It is likely that the bridge would need removal as a result of deterioration which does not align with plans and strategies.

24. Remove the bridge – This is not recommended. It would remove all risk but severs the connection. It would require removal of utility services affecting the existing agreement. It may result in public expectation of a replacement, and complaints, and does not align with Local Board or Auckland Council plans and strategies.

25. Repair the bridge - This is not recommended. Repairs could extend the operational life for about 19 years before it replacement was needed. It would maintain one way use and be a high cost for no greater function. Cost would be Capex or Opex depending on how much of the work was regarded as renewal.

26. Replace with a like for like replica – This is not recommended. It would provide a 1.2m wide bridge of constrained utility, for 50 years. It would be unsuitable for its role of carrying increased pedestrian and recreational users. To cater for the current and expected high use a 2-3m wide bridge is preferred.

27. Replace with a steel beam span of 2-3m width – Would meet engineering, width, accessibility standards and council plans and strategies, but a sub-optimal option due to additional life costs of maintenance and materials durability. Not a preferred Iwi option as it requires upper and lower foundations on both banks and is not as environmentally robust as a concrete option.

28. Replace with a concrete span of 2-3m width - Would meet engineering, width, and accessibility standards and council plans and strategies and is a recommended option because it has lower overall maintenance costs, lower environmental cost and is iwi preferred. Both the steel and the concrete options require additional capex with the concrete being more expensive to build.

Potential replacement options

29. The options of either a castellated steel beam or concrete arch span at widths of between 2m and 3m offer a number of advantages which are outlined below.

30. A 2-3m wide steel beam or concrete arch replacement bridge will be a key walking and cycling link in the AMETI project, and is a part of the Panmure Basin Master Plan adopted by the Local Board in July 2015.

Option f) The Steel Beam

31. The steel beam option of 2-3m would enable shared walking and cycling but has less design merit, less opportunity for Maori design principles, and art/motif incorporation.

32. Although steel is less durable than concrete, it is lighter and easier to install but comes with higher maintenance costs.

33. The design requires two sets of footings on each bank, and has lower construction costs.

34. Regular steel frame maintenance over water presents increased natural and cultural environment risks.

Option g) The Concrete Arch span

35. A concrete arch span of 2–3m would enable shared walking and cycling and mobility access but the greenways standard is 3m.

36. A 3m width allows simultaneous use by cyclists, pedestrians, prams, mobility vehicles and wheelchairs in both directions without conflict.

37. Concrete is durable, robust and rigid. The design requires only one set of footings on each bank.

38. It has higher construction costs but has greater scope for integrated art, motif and cultural expression along with low whole of life maintenance costs.

Recommended replacement options

39. A 3m wide concrete arch span option is the recommended optimum replacement to provide a bridge that will:

a) meet public needs into the future;

b) align with the Panmure Basin Master Plan;

c) allow art and motif within its design;

d) provide shared walking and cycling;

e) meet greenways and accessibility design standards;

f) minimise environmental damage;

g) be fit for purpose and durable for the next 50 years.

40. The 3m wide steel beam sub-optimal option will also provide for public needs into the future, and would be a viable alternative if its higher maintenance costs, environmental and art integration constraints were acceptable.

41. Table of preferred replacement options width, costs and shortfalls

Bridge Type	Concrete Arch			Steel Beam
Width	2m	2.5m	3m	2m	2.5m			3m
$ Estimated Cost	1,580,000	1,610,000	1,650,000	1,240,000		1,280,000	1,320,000
$ Current Renewals Budget	727,000	727,000	727,000	727,000		727,000	727,000
$ Shortfall	697,012	727,012	767,012,	357,012		397,012	437,012
$ Maintenance*	90,000	96,000	102,000	200,000		224,000	249,000
$ Whole life cost	2,367,012	2,433,012	2,519,012	1,797,012		1,901,012	2,006,012

*based on 2015 costs, subject to inflation.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

42. The Local Board have supported Jubilee bridge renewal since 2013 when the existing bridge’s deterioration and remediation matters were reported. Staff has kept the local board updated since 2013 on actions and considerations in relation the future of the bridge.

43. While the focus of staff updates has been on a replacement bridge which serves a long term purpose, this report offers and examines a range of options at the Board’s request.

44. The Local Board have indicated a desire to ensure a compliant and fit for purpose structure over the channel at the best possible cost. A reality is that any replacement will cost a significant sum if it is to be built to provide for public need over the next 50 years.

Māori impact statement

45. Iwi from Ngai Tai Ki Tāmaki, Ngati Whātua Orakei, Ngati Tamaoho, Ngati Pāoa, Ngati Maru and more recently, Te Akaitai Waiohua have been closely involved in the development of the Panmure Basin Master Plan and specifically in discussions around the future of the Jubilee Bridge. Iwi preference in terms of design is for the concrete span option.

46. After a decision on bridge type, continued discussions will be required with the group for cultural design contribution, siting, excavation effects, and site works protocol. The area over the water and surrounding the channel is culturally sensitive which needs to be recognised in any design and physical works.

47. Maintenance over water of a steel beam bridge will require coating removal with abrasives. In discussions over potential design types, Iwi have stated a preference for the concrete arch option for a range of reasons including less invasive footings and construction work, easier motif and art incorporation, cleaner lines, less maintenance and environmental risk.

48. At a very early stage Iwi requested that for cultural and bird protection reasons, a design which prevents fishing from the bridge is provided so that shags from the Panmure Basin colony are protected, and the Taniwha below the bridge is undisturbed.

49. Iwi have indicated in their engagement on the bridge, a wish to be involved in complementing bridge design with art and motif, interpretive signage and any potential renaming which may be proposed in future.

Implementation

50. The Local Board should be made aware of some implementation implications of a decision to replace the Jubilee Bridge.

51. Any replacement operations will create some disruption to the public for the duration of the works. For 2-3m wide options the old bridge will need to be closed to pedestrians at times during construction. Diversions will be in place to allow site works and pedestrian access to the old bridge as far as is practicable to minimise closures.

52. Careful project and site management to deal with cultural and environmental matters will be required and will involve Iwi and specialists.

53. Current design plans for a replacement option reduce the loss of vegetation and trees from earlier versions, but a resource consent will be required to work within driplines or remove trees as a last resort.

54. Physical works will require installation of temporary pylon towers up to 8m high and use mobile cranes and a barge to install beam sections.

55. Land on the Panmure side of the bridge is owned by AT, while land on the basin side is owned and managed as reserve by Auckland Council, requiring operational agreement for installation.

56. New agreements with utility providers will be required to carry services over any replacement bridge.

57. Detailed design for any selected replacement option will be provided to the Local Board for approval prior to any consenting.

58. Resource consents will be required and Māori art and cultural design contribution will be agreed to prior to application for resource consents.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Allan Christensen - Parks Advisor - Maungakiekie Tamaki

Authorisers

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

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

10 December 2015

2015/16 Lease Workplan – Expediated Renewal Process and Review of Ongoing Lease Management

File No.: CP2015/24606

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is two-fold. Firstly, to introduce the operational approach to the delivery of this year’s community lease work programme. Secondly, to seek the Maungakiekie-Tamaki Local Board’s approval of the community lease renewals being advanced via this approach.

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 scale of the programme includes a number of existing leases that have rolled over beyond their anticipated expiry date and require attention. There are also a number of leases reaching their renewal or expiry date this year. Staff provided an update to a meeting of the Local Board Chairs on 28 September 2015, which identified the scale of the programme at a network level and introduced a programme approach to help deliver the extra volume of work this year.

4. The programme approach aims to simplify procedures to enable a large number of more routine leases to be fast tracked, whilst focusing necessary attention on those community leases that are more complex. Extra staff resources have been made available to support this peak of work.

5. The main categories of work that are being advanced are:

· The renewal of existing leases

· The award of new land related leases

· The award of new building related leases

· Progressing more complex or involved cases

6. This report includes details of the first batch of fast tracked lease renewals. In every case the group has an existing right of renewal. Staff recommend that these leases be renewed.

7. To maintain productive delivery of this year’s programme, staff will be working closely with the portfolio holder and will operate to any delegations that are in place.

Recommendation/s

That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

a) approve the renewal of leases to the community organisations shown on Attachment A on the existing terms and conditions. Those community organisations being:

· The Onehunga Combined Sports Trust

· Auckland Society of Model Engineers

· Auckland Central Model Railway Club

· St Georges Rowing Club Incorporated

· Bangladesh NZ Society Incorporated

· Dolphin Theatre Incorporated

· Youthtown Incorporated

· All Breeds Dog Training Incorporated

· New Zealand Family Planning Associated Incorporated

b) note that community outcome plans are not required or provided with these lease

renewals.

Comments

8. There is a substantial programme of community leasing work to complete this year, with leases due for renewal and/or expired leases to be re-established in all 21 of Auckland’s local board areas. In total there are about 500 work items to complete. Attachment B shows the distribution of this activity by local board.

9. Given the scale of the programme, staff have adopted a new approach to operational delivery this year, aimed at increasing productivity whilst supporting good governance. The approach will simplify procedures to enable a large number of more routine leases to be fast tracked, whilst focusing necessary attention on those community leases that are more complex. Extra staff resources have been made available to support this work.

10. There are three routine categories of work being advanced.

· The renewal of existing leases

· The award of new land related leases

· The award of new building related leases

Staff will work closely with the appointed local board portfolio holder (where applicable) and progress this work in batches.

The following table shows the initial assessment of work in the Maungakiekie-Tamaki Local Board area.

Type of leases	Fast track	Complex
Renewals	24	13
New Leases	2	7

11. Progressing renewals is the priority first phase of this year’s programme. Alongside the fast track renewals, new leases and more complex renewals that require further input will be progressed.

12. Some of the leases requiring consideration are more complex or involved. These typically relate to situations where there are multiple stakeholder interests, external dependencies or issues related to the classification of reserves. Again, staff will work closely with the local board portfolio holder to prioritise and progress these cases once the more routine renewals are able to be progressed.

13. Attachment A includes the details of the lease renewals that are of a routine nature and it is recommended that these renewals be approved.

14. Attachment A includes the details of the lease renewals that are of a routine nature and it is recommended that these renewals be approved.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

15. Staff provided an update to a meeting of the Local Board Chairs on 28 September 2015, which identified the scale of the community lease workload at a network level and introduced a programme approach to help deliver the work this year.

16. The content of this report has been discussed with the local board portfolio holder, including the rationale applied to the assessment of routine and more complex leases.

17. To maintain productive delivery of this year’s programme, staff will continue to work closely with the portfolio holder and will operate to the delegations that are in place.

Māori impact statement

18. Community leases generally supporting a wide range of activities and groups and are awarded based on an understanding of local needs, interest and priorities. As such, they are designed to create local benefits to many communities, including Maori.

Implementation

19. Staff will execute the decisions sought within this report promptly to ensure the occupying groups have clarification/confirmation of their tenancy.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Attachment A: Community Lease Renewals Schedule	47
b View	Attachment B: Distribution of Leases by Local Board	49

Signatories

Authors

Robyn Campbell - Community Lease Advisor

Authorisers

Graham Bodman - General Manager - Arts, Community and Events

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

10 December 2015

New Community Lease, Ian Shaw Park, 252A Panama Rd, Mt. Wellington

File No.: CP2015/24866

Purpose

1. This report seeks the Maungakiekie-Tamaki Local Board’s approval of a new community lease to Nga Hau Maiangi Incorporated over the footprint of the waka ama facility at Ian Shaw Park, 252A Panama Road, Mt Wellington.

Executive Summary

2. Nga Hau Maiangi Incorporated (Nga hau Maiangi) is an umbrella organisation of four waka ama clubs and the Auckland Rowing Club. Nga Hau Maiangi has worked closely with Auckland Council staff over a number of years to develop plans and specifications for a new facility at Ian Shaw Park. (Attachment A)

3. On 8 July 2013, Nga Hau Maiangi entered into a Facility Partnership Agreement with Auckland Council to provide these facilities and it was subsequently granted a licence to use and occupy the land to carry out Stage 1 of its project, to construct and complete the facility, including clubrooms, ablution block, boat shed, roading and parking on Ian Shaw Park.

4. The Project is now nearing completion and a lease agreement is required to be in place following the issue of the Practical Completion Certificate for Stage 1.

5. Clause 7.3 of the Facility Partnership agreement states that Council and Nga Hau Maianga will enter into a lease for the reserve and clubhouse area on terms acceptable to Council including specific terms and conditions included in the recommendations in this report.

6. Nga Hau Maiangi in consultation with Council’s Parks team, is to develop a landscape garden around the perimeter of the waka ama facility. The design and management of the garden will be incorporated into Nga Hau Maiangi’s Community Outcomes Plan.

Recommendation/s

That the Maungakiekie-Tamaki Local Board:

a) approve the grant of the lease Nga Hau Maiangi Incorporated at Ian Shaw Park, 252A Panama Road, Mt Wellington on the following terms and conditions:

i) Term - ten years to commence from the 5^th Business Day after the date of the Practical Completion, with one further right of renewal of ten years.

ii) Rent - $1.00 per annum plus GST

iii) A Community Outcomes Plan to be approved by the Local Board Lease Portfolio Holders and attached as a schedule to the lease agreement.

iv) Nga Hau Maiangi will sign and return the deed of lease within twenty business days of receipt of it.

b) approve all other terms and conditions in accordance with Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012.

Comments

7. Ian Shaw Park is a classified recreation reserve subject to the provisions of the Reserves Act 1977. An amended Management Plan was adopted in 2012 noting the need for the expansion of existing facilities on the reserve, to cater for the clubs who combined to form Nga Hau Maiangi Incorporated. The proposed site for clubrooms on the reserve was also marked out on the plan.

8. Auckland Council staff have worked closely with Nga Hau Maiangi over a number of years to assist their progression of the new facility and to ensure it meets the provisions of the Reserves Act and the Ian Shaw Park Management Plan 2012.

9. In reports to the Local Board, on 4 September 2012 to review the park Management Plan and on 10 December 2013 to obtain land owner approval of the proposed facility, staff confirmed the public notification undertaken as required under the Reserves Act 1977and iwi consultation required under Section 4 of the Conservation Act 1987.

10. As part of its resource consent, an archaeological assessment of the site was completed which was also referred to the Historic Places Trust for approval. Iwi consultation was also undertaken as part of the resource consent.

11. Nga Hau Maiangi has been registered as an incorporated Society since 2004 and its audited accounts for 2013, 2014, confirm proper accounting records have been kept.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

12. The Local Board is supportive of the waka ama development. In 2012 it approved the changes to the Ian Shaw Park management plan to enable the establishment of new facilities. In 2013 the Local Board approved the plans and specifications and provided land owner consent for the development.

Māori impact statement

13. Nga Hau Maiangi has a high Maori membership and the new facility will enable an increase in participation in this sport and promote the cultural aspects intrinsic to waka ama.

14. Consultation with iwi was undertaken on the development of the new facility and at the time of the review of the reserve management plan. Of the 13 iwi consulted, Ngati Whanaunga expressed an interest in the site with a request to be kept up to date with any development on the Park.

Implementation

15. The recommendations in this report do not trigger the Auckland Council Significance Policy.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Attachement A, Nga Hau Maiangi Facility, Ian Shaw Park	53

Signatories

Authors

Robyn Campbell - Community Lease Advisor

Authorisers

Graham Bodman - General Manager - Arts, Community and Events

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

10 December 2015

Draft Regional Pest Management Plan Review

File No.: CP2015/24778

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 Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

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

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

c) note 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	59
b View	Regional Strategy and Policy Committee report – Regional Pest Management Plan – Approval of Discussion Document	67
c View	Regional Pest Management Plan – Discussion Document	69

Signatories

Authors

Helen Sharpe - Biodiversity Specialist

Authorisers

Jacques Victor - GM Auckland Plan Strategy and Research

John Dragicevich – Manager, Infrastructure and Environmental Services

Jim Quinn - Chief of Strategy

Dean Kimpton - Chief Operating Officer

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

10 December 2015

Review of the Food Safety Bylaw 2013

File No.: CP2015/26012

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 Maungakiekie-Tāmaki 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

No.	Title	Page
a View	Food Safety Bylaw 2013	121

Signatories

Authors

Emma Pilkington - Policy Analyst

Belinda Hansen - Principal Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Kataraina Maki - GM - Community & Social Policy

Karen Lyons - Manager Local Board Services

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

10 December 2015

Annual Plan 2016/2017 – local consultation content

File No.: CP2015/25961

Purpose

1. This report seeks agreement of proposed locally driven initiative 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 Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

a) agree indicative LDI priorities for 2016/2017 (Attachment A)

b) adopt local content for consultation (Attachment B)

c) agree that the Chair 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 locally driven initiative 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. 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

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

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

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

15. Local boards will also have further opportunities to provide information and views as council continues through the annual plan process

Māori impact statement

16. 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.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

17. 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	2016/2017 LDI Priorities (Under Separate Cover)
b View	Local consultation content (Under Separate Cover)

Signatories

Authors

Kate Marsh - Financial Planning Manager - Local Boards

Authorisers

Matthew Walker - GM Financial Strategy and Planning

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

10 December 2015

RECORD OF WORKSHOPS

Record of workshop proceedings for 3 November 1pm-5pm

Held at the Local Board office, 7-13 Pilkington Road, Panmure

Members present for all or part of the workshops:

Simon Randall (Chairperson)

Chris Makoare (Deputy Chairperson)

Josephine Bartley

Brett Clark

Bridget Graham

Obed Unasa

Apologies: Alan Verrall

1.0	Resource Recovery
	Update on resource recovery in the local board area.
	Officers present: Emma Joyce, Julie Dickinson, Parul Sood

2.0	East West Connections
	Update on east west connections across the local board area.
	Officers present: Keelin Flynn (NZTA), Joe Schady, Daryl McIntosh

3.0	Panuku Development Auckland
	To discuss Tamaki regeneration
	Officers present: Gavin Peebles, Karen Cooke

4.0	Onehunga Foreshore Kaitiaki Group
	To discuss progressing the Kaitiaki group.
	Officers present: John Hutton, Roger Jolley, Allan Christensen

RECORD OF WORKSHOPS

Record of workshop proceedings for 10 November 10am-3.30pm

Held at the Local Board office, 7-13 Pilkington Road, Panmure

Members present for all or part of the workshops:

Chris Makoare (Deputy Chairperson)

Josephine Bartley

Brett Clark

Alan Verrall

Apologies: Simon Randall (Chairperson)

Bridget Graham

Obed Unasa

1.0	LDI allocation 2015/16
	To discuss the local board LDI allocation for 2015/16
	Officers present: Mary Binney, Sugenthy Thomson

2.0	Annual Plan 2016/17
	To discuss the Annual Plan 2016/17
	Officers present: Mary Binney, Sugenthy Thomson

3.0	Dog access rules
	To discuss review of dog access rules
	Officers present: Jasmin Kaur, Justin Walters

4.0	Leisure centres annual reporting
	To discuss council leisure centre activities.
	Officers present: Jane Franich, Davin Bray

RECORD OF WORKSHOPS

Record of workshop proceedings for 17 November 1.30pm-5.00pm

Held at the Local Board office, 7-13 Pilkington Road, Panmure

Members present for all or part of the workshops:

Simon Randall (Chairperson)

Chris Makoare (Deputy Chairperson)

Josephine Bartley

Brett Clark

Bridget Graham

Alan Verrall

Apologies: Obed Unasa

1.0	Tamaki Redevelopment Company
	To discuss Tamaki redevelopment
	Officers present: Karen Cooke, Shelley Katae, Henry Acland, Namitha Palakshappa, Fleur Lole-Taylor

2.0	Panuku Development Auckland
	To discuss Tamaki redevelopment
	Officers present: Karen Cooke

3.0	Annual Plan consultation
	To discuss the Annual Plan 2016/17
	Officers present: Mary Binney, Jessica Trask

RECORD OF WORKSHOPS

Record of workshop proceedings for 24 November 1.00pm-4.15pm

Held at the Local Board office, 7-13 Pilkington Road, Panmure

Members present for all or part of the workshops:

Simon Randall (Chairperson)

Chris Makoare (Deputy Chairperson)

Josephine Bartley

Brett Clark

Bridget Graham

Obed Unasa

Alan Verrall

1.0	Onehunga Business Association
	Relationship meeting
	Officers present: Rose Cosgrove, Amanda Kinzett

2.0	Glen Innes Business Association
	Relationship meeting
	Officers present: Rose Cosgrove, Gary Holmes

3.0	Panmure Business Association
	Relationship meeting
	Officers present: Rose Cosgrove, Chris Sutton, Leon Matthews

Group and Location	Building Ownership	Renewal Due	Renewal Term and current rent	Notes
The Onehunga Combined Sports Trust. Waikaraka Park, 243 Neilson Street, Onehunga.	Lessee	14/08/2013	1 period of 5 years $500.00 per annum
Auckland Society of Model Engineers. Peterson Reserve, 10 Peterson Road, Panmure.	Licencee	31/10/2014	2 periods of 5 years $500.00 per annum
Auckland Society of Model Engineers. Peterson Reserve, 10 Peterson Road, Panmure.	Sub-licencee	31/10/2014	2 periods of 5 years $10.00 per annum
Auckland Central Model Railway Club. Vi Cowen Reserve, 174 Penrose Road, Penrose.	Lessee	30/04/2015	1 period of 5 years $500.00 per annum
St Georges Rowing Club Incorporated. Panmure Wharf Reserve, 102 Kings Road, Panmure	Lessee	28/02/2015	1 period of 5 years $250.00 per annum
Bangledesh NZ Friendship Society Incorporated. Rowe Reserve, 3 Rowe Street, Onehunga	Council	31/7/2014	2 periods of 5 years $500.00 per annum
Dolphin Theatre Incorporated. Rowe Reserve12 Spring Street, Onehunga	Lessee	31/10/2014	2 periods of 5 years $1,364.00 per annum
Youthtown Incorporated. 143 Tripoli Road, Panmure	Council	31/07/2014	1 period of 5 years $250.00 per annum
All Breeds Dog Training Incorporated. 140A Captain Springs Road, Onehunga.	Lessee	31/07/2015	2 periods of 5 years $500.00 per annum
New Zealand Family Planning Associated Incorporated. Panmure Community Hall, 7-13 Pilkington Road, Panmure.	Council	31/05/2015	1 period of 5 years $500.00 per annum

Chairperson	Simon Randall
Deputy Chairperson	Chris Makoare
Members	Josephine Bartley
	Brett Clark
	Bridget Graham, QSM
	Obed Unasa
	Alan Verrall

Authors	Philippa Hillman - Democracy Advisor, Maungakiekie-Tamaki Local Board
Authorisers	Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager