Agenda of Upper Harbour Local Board

	Portfolio Activity	Responsibilities	Board Lead/s and Alternate
1	Governance	· Board Leadership · Board-to-Council Relationships · Board-to-Board Relationships · Civic Duties · Advocacy (local, regional, and central government) · Relationships with Maoridom · Relationships with government departments and agencies · Relationship with Property CCO · Relationship with Auckland Waterfront Development · Advocacy with Governing Body (Local Board Plan; Local Board Agreements) · Unitary Plan · Local area plan	Brian Neeson Lisa Whyte
2	Regulatory & Bylaws / Civil Defence Emergency Management .	· Resource consents · Heritage · Liquor · Gambling · Swimming pools fencing · Trees · Bylaws · Relationships with the Civil Defence Emergency Management Group · Community preparedness, disaster response, relief, and recovery	Callum Blair John McLean Christine Rankin-MacIntyre Margaret Miles (Resource Consents only)
3	Events / Arts and Culture	· Community celebration · Community identity · Neighbourhood gatherings and renewal · Event compliance · Relationship with ATEED · Relationship with Regional Facilities CCOs · Tourism · Artistic and cultural service levels · Promoting all aspects of artistic endeavour · Development of public art strategy and policy	Margaret Miles
4	Community and social well-being / Local Facilities	· Community development · Neighbourhood relationships · Funding for neighbourhood projects · Community safety (excl. town centres) · Graffiti removal · Community advocacy · Relationships with Youth · Leisure centres · Community houses · Halls · Community hubs · Arts facilities · Community Partnerships · Asset Management	Callum Blair Margaret Miles

	Portfolio Activity	Responsibilities	Board Lead/s and Alternate
5	Libraries	· Stewardship of libraries · Mobile library	Christine Rankin-MacIntyre Lisa Whyte
6	Sports parks and recreation (active) / Parks, Reserves and playgrounds (passive)	· Stewardship of sports parks · Stewardship of recreation facilities · Relationship with sports clubs · Neighbourhood parks and reserves (incl. esplanade reserves and the coastline) · Design and maintenance · Plantings, playgrounds, bollards, and walkways · Skateparks · Track Network development	Margaret Miles Lisa Whyte
7	Town Centres	· Town centre renewal · Design and maintenance · Community safety within town centres · Business Improvement Districts liaison · Urban design · Built Heritage	Margaret Miles Brian Neeson
8	Transport / Regional Transport and CBD development	· Local transport projects and public transport (incl. roading, footpaths, cycleways) · Liaison on regional Transport matters · 2^nd harbour crossing · Bridge walk cycleway · Inner City Rail Link · Waterfront development · CBD master plan	John McLean Margaret Miles
9	Natural Environment .	· Restoration of wetlands, streams, and waterways · Local priorities in relation to regional environmental management · Costal management including mangrove encroachment and erosion mitigation · Relationships with Watercare · Waste minimisation strategy · Bio security	John McLean Callum Blair Lisa Whyte (waste minimisation only)
10	Economic Development / Financial oversight	· Key relationship with Business Development Manager in Auckland Tourism Events and Economic Development team · Establish and promote local opportunities for increased tourism and economic development · Budgets · Project expenditure · Monitor GB strategy and Finance · Service Levels · Local funding policy	Lisa Whyte Margaret Miles

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.

The Auckland Council Code of Conduct for Elected Members (the Code) requires elected members to fully acquaint themselves with, and strictly adhere to, the provisions of Auckland Council’s Conflicts of Interest Policy. The policy covers two classes of conflict of interest:

i) A financial conflict of interest, which is one where a decision or act of the local board could reasonably give rise to an expectation of financial gain or loss to an elected member; and

ii) A non-financial conflict interest, which does not have a direct personal financial component. It may arise, for example, from a personal relationship, or involvement with a non-profit organisation, or from conduct that indicates prejudice or predetermination.

The Office of the Auditor General has produced guidelines to help elected members understand the requirements of the Local Authority (Member’s Interest) Act 1968. The guidelines discuss both types of conflicts in more detail, and provide elected members with practical examples and advice around when they may (or may not) have a conflict of interest.

Copies of both the Auckland Council Code of Conduct for Elected Members and the Office of the Auditor General guidelines are available for inspection by members upon request.

Any questions relating to the Code or the guidelines may be directed to the Relationship Manager in the first instance.

4 Confirmation of Minutes

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Tuesday, 24 November 2015, including the confidential section, as a true and correct record.

5 Leave of Absence

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

6 Acknowledgements

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

7 Petitions

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

8 Deputations

Standing Order 3.20 provides for deputations. Those applying for deputations are required to give seven working days notice of subject matter and applications are approved by the Chairperson of the Upper Harbour 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.

8.1 Hobsonville Community Trust Update

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is for the board to receive a deputation from Mr Gavin Gunston of the Hobsonville Community Trust.

Executive Summary

2. Gavin Gunston, Community Coordinator/Chaplain/Youth Worker at the Hobsonville Community Trust, will be in attendance to provide the Upper Harbour Local Board with a deputation which will entail an update on the Hobsonville Community Trust work that they are supporting in Hobsonville, along with the work they are doing around community strategy alongside Greenhithe Community Trust, Albany Community, Sustainable Paremoremo, Upper Harbour Local Board and CDAC.

Recommendation

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) receive the presentation from Gavin Gunston, Community Coordinator/Chaplain/Youth Worker at the Hobsonville Community Trust and thank him for his attendance at the meeting.

8.2 North Harbour Business Association

Purpose

1. Debra Metcalfe will be in attendance to address the Upper Harbour Local Board regarding the expansion ballot.

Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) receive the presentation by Debra Metcalfe from North Harbour Business Association regarding the expansion ballot.

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 Howard Williams - Clark House, Hobsonville

Purpose

1. Howard Williams, Chairperson of the New Zealand Ceramic Heritage Trust, will be in attendance to discuss the potential of using Clark House as a national arts and educations centre, as well as a ceramics museum.

Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) receive the public forum presentation by Howard Williams, Chairperson of the New Zealand Cermaic Heritage Trust regarding the use of Clark House

b) thank Howard for his attendance.

10 Extraordinary Business

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

11 Notices of Motion

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

Upper Harbour Local Board

15 December 2015

Approval to move to consenting, procurement and build of Albany Community Hub

File No.: CP2015/20466

Purpose

1. To seek approval from the Upper Harbour Local Board to undertake detailed design, resource and building consent, procurement and construction of the Albany Community Hub.

Executive summary

2. The proposed Albany Community Hub is to be located on the Albany Domain. The building is approximately 270 square metres and is intended to have a large outdoor courtyard and additional parking.

3. Reclassification of part of Albany Domain from recreation reserve to local purpose (community building) reserve is currently underway. It is expected that this process will take six months to complete. No building work can commence until after the reclassification is completed.

4. The attached design (refer to Attachment A) has been thoroughly discussed with all relevant departments in Auckland Council. It reflects the current thinking on how community facilities work best. It also reflects the consultation findings.

5. The budget for the project is held over two financial years as follows:

· 2015/2016 – $578,671; and

· 2016/2017 – $596,622.

6. The budget for this project is insufficient to construct the building as designed. Several issues have contributed to the budget shortfall including significant rises in building costs over the past five years.

7. The estimated cost to construct the hub as designed is $314,083 more than the $1,751,293 budget, with costs broken down as follows:

Quantity surveyors estimate with exclusions	$1,179,001
Additional excluded items including preliminary and general and margins	$136,875
Additional excluded items not including preliminary and general and margins	$81,000
Optional extras to enhance the building	$92,500
Total	$1,489,376
Budget	$1,175,293
Shortfall	- $314,083

8. Discussions have taken place on how the shortfall can be managed. Staff recommend that $400,000 be reallocated from the Hobsonville Point Community Hub project to the Albany Community Hub project, which will allow the Albany Community Hub project to progress without delay. The budget for the Hobsonville Point Community Hub project budget appears generous, and it is likely that not all of the appropriated budget will be required to undertake the work needed. This will be confirmed once a costed scope of works is completed in 2016.

Recommendation/s

That the <Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) approve the Albany Community Hub amended concept design.

b) approve the Albany Community Hub project proceeding to detailed design, resource and building consent, procurement and construction.

c) endorse the reallocation of $400,000 of capital funding from the Hobsonville Point Community Hub project to the Albany Community Hub project, which will allow the Albany Community Hub project to progress without delay.

Comments

9. The proposed Albany Community Hub is a key project for the local board. The hub is to be located on the Albany Domain nearby the current Albany House. It was originally designed to be larger than the plan shown in Attachment A, but its size was reduced to fit within the budget.

10. To enable the hub to be built on this site it is necessary to undertake a reclassification from recreation reserve to local purpose (community building) reserve. This work is underway and should take six months to complete.

11. Changes to the approved concept design were made in consultation with various departments within Auckland Council and at a workshop with members of the local board Albany Hub working party. The design in Attachment A reflects previous consultation findings, learnings from recent hub developments and consultation held with Citizens Advice Bureau, Plunket and Justice of the Peace services.

12. It is anticipated that work will commence on the construction of the hub in May/June 2016, as set out in the chart included in Attachment B.

13. Throughout the process it is intended to meet at set times with the working party of the Upper Harbour Local Board to keep them informed of all developments.

Estimate of cost

14. The quantity surveyors estimate for the project came in at $1,179,001. The following items were tagged outside of the estimate but do need to be accounted for when considering the actual cost to build the new facility:

Additional items incurring preliminary and general and margins	Cost
Kitchen fittings	$17,000
Landscaping	$5,000
Security and IS	$40,000
Autex/plywood to some of the walls	$10,000
Fixed servery bench in kitchen	$7,500
Operable wall	$15,000
Rain water tanks	$5,000
LED lighting to meet council sustainability standards	$10,000
Additional preliminary and general (P&G) at 10%	$10,950
Additional margin at 5%	$5,475
Additional contingency at 10%	$10,950
Additional items not incurring P&G and margin, these include water meter & processing fee, infrastructure growth charges, development contributions and the resource consent	$81,000
Total	$217,875

Optional extras the local board may wish to fund

15. The project team has identified a number of items that while not essential to the building of the community hub, will enhance its function and appearance. Should the local board wish to include them into the build then they would need to be funded:

Canopy to courtyard	$45,000
Hearing loops to support the hearing impaired	$6,000
Integrated design features	$20,000
Tuck shop window in kitchenette to support sports	$3,000
Additional P&G at 10%	$7,400
Additional margin at 5%	$3,700
Additional contingency at 10%	$7,400
Total	$92,500

16. The total cost including all excluded items from the quantity surveyors estimate, optional extras is:

Quantity surveyors estimate with exclusions	$1,179,001
Additional excluded items including preliminary and general and margins	$136,875
Additional excluded items not including preliminary and general and margins	$81,000
Optional extras to enhance the building	$92,500
Total	$1,489,376
Budget	$1,175,293
Shortfall	- $314,083

17. Discussions have taken place on how the shortfall can be managed and it has been suggested to reallocate $400,000 from the Hobsonville Point Community Hub project to the Albany Community Hub. The Hobsonville Point Hub has a generous budget that may not all be required to undertake the work needed. This should provide sufficient funds to complete the Albany Hub build.

18. The $400,000 reallocation assumes that the $85,000 from Park Sport and Recreation regarding the car park component might be difficult to secure, owing to other pressures on this funding.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

19. A meeting was held with the Upper Harbour Local Board Albany Hub working party on the 8 September 2015. At this meeting the reasons for the amendments to the layout were explained and the working party indicated informal support for the changed concept design.

20. A further working party meeting was held on the 19 November to discuss the quantity surveyors estimate and the budget shortfall.

Maori impact statement

21. During the consultation phase in 2013 Te Kawerau a Maki provided to council a cultural impact assessment, in which they indicated that they would like to provide input into the design process and that they have no objection to reclassification.

22. Further iwi consultation has recently commenced in regard to the proposed reclassification. At the same time, iwi were provided with a copy of the concept design and asked for their feedback. Ngati Whatua o Kaipara asked to meet with council and from this meeting they too indicated a desire to have some involvement in the project. Council will work with both iwi to make sure that their views are considered and where possible taken into account.

Implementation

23. The timeframe for the implementation is:

Action	Timeframe
Detailed design phase	January/February 2016
Resource and building consenting	March/April 2016
Procurement	May 2016
Award contract	June 2016

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Concept design for Albany Hub	5
b View	Gantt chart for Albany Hub	5

Signatories

Authors

Jan Brown - Principal Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Graham Bodman - Manager - Community Development, Arts and Culture

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Upper Harbour Local Board

15 December 2015

2015/16 Lease Workplan - Expedited Renewal Process and Review of Ongoing Lease Management

File No.: CP2015/26128

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to introduce the operational approach to the delivery of this year’s community lease work programme. In addition, this report seeks Upper Harbour Local Board approval of the community lease renewals being advanced via this approach.

Executive Summary

2. Community leases are one of the ways in which Auckland 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; and

· progressing more complex or involved cases.

6. This report includes details of the first batch of fast tracked lease renewals (refer to Attachment A). In every case the group has an existing right of renewal, and 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 Upper Harbour Local Board:

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

· Greenhithe Pony Club Branch Incorporated

· Greenhithe Group Riding For The Disabled Incorporated

b) notes 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 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; and

· the award of new building related leases.

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

12. The following table shows the initial assessment of work in the Upper Harbour Local Board area.

Type of leases	Fast track	Complex
Renewals	1	(ins4rt #4ththh00f 4com4plex 0 wor4k plan)
New Leases	2	2

13. 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.

14. 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.

15. 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

16. 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.

17. 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.

18. 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

19. 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 for many communities, including Māori.

Implementation

20. 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	Community lease renewals schedule	5
b View	Distribution of leases by local board	5

Signatories

Authors

Michelle Knudsen - Community Lease Advisor

Authorisers

Graham Bodman - General Manager Arts, Community and Events

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Upper Harbour Local Board

15 December 2015

New community lease to the Herald Island Residents and Ratepayers Association Incorporated, 44A Ferry Parade, Herald Island

File No.: CP2015/25997

Purpose

1. This report seeks Upper Harbour Local Board’s approval for a new community lease to Herald Island Residents and Ratepayers Association Incorporated, located at 44A Ferry Parade, Herald Island.

Executive Summary

2. The Herald Island Residents and Ratepayers Association Incorporated (the association) had a community lease with Waitakere City Council from 1 October 2001 for a term of five years that expired on 30 September 2006. Since this date the terms of the lease to the association has run on a month by month basis.

3. The building and improvements on the site are owned by Auckland Council.

4. As specified in the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012, leases for community halls and community houses may not necessarily be publicly notified.

5. The land is described as being Section 1 SO 70457 and is held by the Crown through Department of Conservation as a classified local purpose (community buildings) reserve and subject to the Reserves Act 1977 (refer to Attachment A).

6. The association has applied for a new community lease on the terms and conditions provided for in the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines adopted on 1 July 2012.

7. The application to lease has been assessed by staff and the association meets all the criteria as outlined in the guidelines.

8. The association wishes to continue providing a valuable service to the Herald Island community.

9. Due to the service provided by the association, the local board has indicated support for the provision of a new lease to the association.

10. This report recommends that a new community lease including a Community Outcomes Plan (refer to Attachment B) be granted to the association for a period of five years from 15 December 2015 with one five year right of renewal in accordance with the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012.

Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) approve a new community lease to the Herald Island Residents’ and Ratepayers Association for part of the land described as being Section 1 SO 70457 and held by the Crown through Department of Conservation as a classified local purpose (community) buildings reserve (as outlined in Attachment A to the agenda report), subject to the following terms and conditions:

· Term – 5 years commencing 15 December 2015 with one 5 year right of renewal;

· Rent - $1.00 plus GST per annum if requested;

· Maintenance fee - $500.00 plus GST per annum;

· The Herald Island Residents’ and Ratepayers Association Incorporated Community Outcomes Plan are attached to the lease document (Attachment B).

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

Comments

11. The association had a lease with Waitakere Council of this site at 44A Ferry Parade, Herald Island from 1 October 2001 for a term of five years. The lease expired on 30 September 2006. Since this date the terms of the lease to the association has run on a month by month basis.

12. The association has been registered as an incorporated society since 11 October 1949. The building is known as the Herald Island Hall. The hall is owned by Auckland Council.

13. The objectives of the association are to:

· promote the best interests and welfare of members and their families;

· foster interest in the local and surrounding environment;

· promote good fellowship and harmony amongst the people of the Herald Island community; and

· pecuniary gain is not a purpose of the association.

14. Over the term of their community lease the association has provided a community based facility for residents in the Herald Island community.

15. The association maintains the hall and promotes and manages activities at the hall to a high standard and in conjunction with Auckland Council.

16. The hall is well managed with bookings taken for weddings, educational activities, indoor recreation and the use of the hall as a meeting place. The money raised has funded the Herald Island Christmas Parade and the buying of new equipment for the casual hirers of the hall.

17. The hall is used as a well prepared community emergency response centre (evacuation centre) for the Herald Island community, with all civil defence equipment itemised and stored securely in the civil defence cupboard.

18. 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 the incumbent group are required in the area and the group is performing well, a new lease can be approved for the group.

19. Due to the service provided by the group detailed in this report, the Upper Harbour Local Board has indicated support for the provision of a new lease to the association.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

20. The issues involved in this report have been considered by the Upper Harbour Local Board portfolio holders.

Māori impact statement

21. There is no significant change or impact for Maori.

Implementation

22. There are no additional cost implications for Auckland Council.

23. Council staff has sought input from relevant council departments.

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

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Location map and leased area	5
b View	Community Outcomes Plan	5

Signatories

Authors

Michelle Knudsen - Community Lease Advisor

Authorisers

Graham Bodman - General Manager Arts, Community and Events

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Upper Harbour Local Board

15 December 2015

Auckland Transport update - December 2015 - Upper Harbour

File No.: CP2015/26351

Purpose

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

Executive Summary

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

3. In particular, this report provides an update on:

· Local Board Transport Capital Fund projects;

· consultation documents on proposed safety improvements;

· speed limit review;

· HOP card price change; and

· media.

Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) receive the Auckland Transport Report – December 2015, to the Upper Harbour Local Board.

Comments

Local Board Transport Capital Fund

4. In 2015, the local board provided several lists of potential Local Board Transport Capital Fund projects.

5. The table below outlines an update and an associated rough order of cost (ROC):

Project Description

Progress/Current Status

Gills Road - investigate footpaths for the entire length of Gills Road and particularly the cost of adding a footpath to the one-way bridge or a separate pedestrian bridge.

This project has been split into three parts;

1) Dairy Flat Highway to Living Stream Drive

· AT has engaged a consultant to carry out a design and is awaiting more accurate costing.

· ROC to be confirmed.

· In October 2015 (resolution UH/2015/157) the local board approved funds of up to $250,000 for a pedestrian bridge, if AT allocates funds to build a footpath from the bridge to Living Stream Rd.

2) Living Stream to No 219 (already has footpath)

· No ROC required.

3) No 219 to Lonely Track Rd

· New kerb and channel.

· Retaining wall for most of length.

· New concrete footpath.

· ROC $271,000.

Huntington Park Drive, Footpath at the corner of Pitotoi and Kyle Road, towards the dead end that provides pedestrian access to the school

· ROC $25,000.

· Approved by board (resolution UH/2015/157).

· Project commencing 1 December 2015, to be completed within 10 days.

Consultation documents on proposed safety improvements

6. Consultation documents for the following proposals have been provided to the Upper Harbour Local Board for its feedback. As the board’s transport portfolio holders provide feedback on the board’s behalf, the material below is included for general information purposes only.

· Scarlet Oak Drive, Schnapper Rock – proposed no stopping at all times (NSAAT) Restriction – In order to address concerns from local residents regarding accessibility due to vehicles parking on both sides of the bend on Scarlet Oak, Auckland Transport is proposing to install NSAAT broken yellow lines on one side of the road as shown in Attachment A.

· Constellation Drive, Cycle Lane – In order to complete the cycle network from Constellation Drive to East Coast Road and to improve safety for cyclists, Auckland Transport is proposing the following:

· installing a new dedicated 1.5 metre-wide cycle lane on Constellation Drive, eastbound from Centorian Drive to East Coast Road;

· replacing the existing splitter island with a shorter traffic island to increase eastbound vehicle capacity; and

· shifting the road markings to accommodate the new on-road cycle lane.

This will alleviate the current situation that creates a dangerous pinch point for cyclists as they transition from the T2 lane on Constellation Drive to the regular traffic lanes. The new proposal would allow cyclists to transition safely from the T2 lane onto the new cycle lane, allowing cycle and vehicle traffic to flow more smoothly and safely, as shown in Attachment B.

· Catalina Precinct Stage 1, Hobsonville Point (Wallace Road) – Consultation Plan – Proposed Give Way and Stopping Ssigns – Auckland Transport is proposing to install controls as per the attached plan as shown in Attachment C.

· Killybegs Drive, Fairview Heights – Consultation Plan- proposed no stopping at all times (NSAAT) Restriction – In order to address concerns from local residents, regarding visibility caused by parked vehicles along the bend in Kellybegs Drive, Auckland Transport is proposing to install NSAAT broken yellow lines as shown in Attachment D.

· Namsan Close, Fairview Heights - Consultation Plan - proposed no stopping at all times (NSAAT) Restriction – In order to address concerns from local residents, regarding accessibility due to vehicles parking near the island on Namsan Close, Auckland Transport is proposing to install NSAAT broken yellow lines as shown in Attachment E.

· Travis View Drive, Fairview Heights – Consultation Plan – proposed no stopping at all times (NSAAT) Restriction – In order to address concerns from local residents, regarding visibility and accessibility due to vehicles parking very close to the raised crossing platform outside 79 Travis View Drive, Auckland Transport is proposing to install NSAAT broken yellow lines as shown in Attachment F.

· Rosedale Road, Pinehill - Consultation Plan - Proposed Pedestrian Crossing Facility. – In order to address concerns from local residents regarding the lack of a pedestrian crossing facility on Rosedale Road, Pinehill, Auckland Transport is proposing to provide a refuge facility as shown in Attachment G.

Speed Limit Review

7. Auckland Transport’s legislative team has been working with New Zealand Transport Authority (NZTA) on new draft Speed Management Guidelines.

8. NZTA have now released a new draft Speed Management Guide, which shows the direction in which this subject is heading, which can be found on the following link: https://www.pikb.co.nz/assets/Uploads/Documents/Speed-Management-Guide-final-draft-1-September-2015-2.pdf

9. The key changes are:

· the guide puts greater emphasis on ‘safe and appropriate speeds’ and is trying to align both the speed limits and the actual operating speeds to a safe speed;

· in terms of rural speed limits this means moving from having one rural speed limit (100kph) and a couple of semi-rural limits (dependent on the development of 70 and 80kph) to a new approach that has 3 rural speed limits, 60, 80 and 100kph, which can be set depending on what is most suitable for the particular road;

· the intention is that major rural arterials with good geometry and a safety feature will be at the top end of the range (100kph), while lower traffic roads, roads with more difficult geometry and roads with greater levels of roadside hazards will qualify for the lower speed limits; and

· in the urban context the new guide gives some improvement in flexibility to use 40km/h instead of 50km/h in local residential areas, where vehicle movements are minimal and there is significant levels of pedestrian or cyclist activity.

10. The draft guideline is still in an evaluation phase with a trial project being undertaken in the Waikato at present.

11. AT are not expecting the Draft Speed Management Plan to be rolled out in Auckland until approximately the middle of 2016, at which time there will be local engagement on the draft plan.

12. Until the plan is agreed upon and finalised, NZTA have imposed a moratorium on speed limit changes other than for addressing high crash risk locations.

13. It is to be noted that the Speed Management Plan will largely agree the future speed limits for each area, but is not purely about setting speed limits alone, as it will also identify infrastructure requirements (e.g. traffic calming to support lower speeds, safety improvements to make roads safer where the safe speed is in conflict with the desirable speed for an arterial road function) and the need for targeted enforcement (Police) to support speed limit changes.

HOP Card Price Change

14. In 2012 the HOP card was introduced to the public transport system, with the original cost of $10, including GST. However, in order to encourage uptake, Auckland Transport discounted it to $5.

15. The actual cost of the card is $8.54, excluding GST, so Auckland Transport has been funding the short fall to date.

16. With over 600,000 HOP cards sold this short fall is a considerable cost to Auckland Transport.

17. Now that it is considered that most customers will have a HOP card, as of 17 December 2015, Auckland Transport will remove the discount price, at which time the cost of a new HOP card will be $10.

Media

Keep Safe on the Water this summer

18. As boaties head out on the water for the summer, Auckland’s Harbourmaster is reminding everyone to stay safe.

19. Harbourmaster Andrew Hayton says all boaties should know the rules and be prepared with the right equipment on board.

20. Every boat must have a suitable lifejacket for every person on board and if the boat is 6 metres or smaller, everyone on board must wear their lifejacket unless the skipper says it is safe to take it off.

21. The rules differ between regions, so all boaties need to remember to check the rules for the area they will be on the water, i.e. in the Coromandel, lifejackets are compulsory at all times.

22. Captain Hayton says it makes good sense for everyone to wear their jacket or to keep it close so they can reach it quickly.

23. Drowning is consistently the third highest cause of unintentional death in New Zealand and everyone on the water must respect and appreciate the risks of being at sea. The Harbourmaster’s advice is that if you have it, wear it.

24. The Harbourmaster also advises, that if you’re planning a trip on the water, make sure to tell a friend or loved one and be sure to check in regularly. Communication equipment is also an essential part of safe boating so be sure that you have a VHF radio, mobile phone, distress beacon or flares on board.

25. It is recommended that cellphones are kept in a waterproof container so it is ready for use.

26. In an emergency call 111 or broadcast a message on VHF channel 16.

27. Captain Hayton advises, skippers to keep their speed to five knots or less when sailing around people, other vessels and the shore and to always drink responsibly.

28. Harbourmaster patrol vessels will be on the water around Auckland throughout the summer.

29. The Harbourmaster can be contacted by calling 09 362 0397 or visit www.at.govt.nz/harbourmaster for more information.

Auckland’s Top Ten scenic bike rides

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

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

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

33. Auckland Transport is often asked by people who are new to cycling where they can find safe, scenic, fun places to ride. In fact, Auckland Transports cycling maps are among the most searched for items on the AT website.

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

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

36. The Great Rides are:

· Matakana Trails;

· Te Ara Tahuna Pathway: Orewa Estuary;

· Green Route: Devonport to Takapuna;

· Hobsonville Point;

· Twin Streams: Henderson Creek and Opanuku Stream;

· Auckland Waterfront: Britomart to Mission Bay;

· Pakuranga Rotary Pathway;

· The Cascades Paths: Pakuranga, Botany and Meadowlands;

· Waikaraka Cycleway: Onehunga to Mangere Bridge; and

· Wattle Down.

Improved facilities for ferry customers

37. A new pier is now being used by ferry customers to Gulf Harbour, Hobsonville, Beach Haven, Coromandel and Tiritiri Matangi.

38. On 4 November 2015 Auckland Transport opened the new facility at Pier 4 at the Downtown Ferry Terminal. It replaces the old pier which was closed at the beginning of September.

39. Ferry Services Manager, Gareth Willis stated the old pier was 16 years old and that the new pontoon and gangway is a great improvement for our customers. There is now a covered gangway which provides shelter for customers from bad weather or the afternoon sun and with the gangway being wider it also means better access for people using wheelchairs and baby strollers.

40. The new pontoon has two different boarding heights which allows larger vessels to use it, and also additional safety lighting, CCTV cameras and repositioned AT HOP card readers.

41. Auckland Transport believes these improvements to facilities for ferry customers are really important, as customer comfort is an important part of the overall experience for passengers, particularly as patronage across all ferry services continues to see growth in excess of 8% on 2014 levels.

42. The new concrete pontoon, is 28 meters long and was fabricated at Total Marine Services’ fabrication yard in West Auckland. Six concrete units, each weighing 25 tonnes, were transported to Silo Park in Wynyard Quarter where they were connected using steel through rods.

43. The pontoon was then floated around Princes Wharf and into its new position at Pier 4 and secured to new anchor piles.

44. The new gangway was fabricated by Manson Marine in West Auckland.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

45. The board’s views will be incorporated during consultation on any proposed schemes.

Māori impact statement

46. No specific issues with regard to the Maori Impact Statement are triggered by this report.

General

47. The activities detailed in this report do not trigger the Significance Policy. All programmes and activities are within budget/in line with the Auckland Council’s Annual Plan and Long-term Plan documents and there are no legal or legislative implications arising from the activities detailed in this report.

Implementation

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

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Scarlet Oak Drive (NSAAT)	5
b View	Constellation Drive (cycle lane)	5
c View	Catalina Precinct Stage 1	5
d View	Killybegs Drive (NSAAT)	5
e View	Namsan Close (NSAAT)	5
f View	Travis View Drive (NSAAT)	5
g View	Rosedale Road (pedestrian crossing facilities)	5

Signatories

Authors

Ivan Trethowen – Elected Member Relationship Manager , Auckland Transport

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon - Elected Member Relationship Team Manager, Auckland Transport

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Upper Harbour Local Board

15 December 2015

Adoption of the Upper Harbour Local Board Economic Development Action Plan

File No.: CP2015/26322

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to seek adoption of the Upper Harbour Local Economic Development (ED) Action Plan.

Executive Summary

2. The local ED action plan has been developed following consultation with a range of key stakeholders.

3. Local boards have an important role to play in local economic development, and provide useful input to regional economic development initiatives where appropriate. Development of a local ED action plans provide a mechanism to identify local economic development issues and opportunities, and to identify and implement initiatives in response.

4. This report outlines amendments made to the local ED action plan since the local board workshop on 4 August 2015. These changes reflect feedback from the workshop and from key stakeholders since the workshop.

5. The board is now being asked to adopt the Upper Harbour Local ED Action Plan.

Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) adopt the Upper Harbour Local Economic Development Action Plan.

Comments

Background

6. The Upper Harbour Local ED Action Plan supports the Auckland Plan, Auckland’s Economic Development Strategy (EDS) and the Upper Harbour Local Board Plan 2014. It is structured into sections that align with the five priorities and cross-cutting themes of the Auckland Economic Development Strategy, namely:

· grow a business friendly and well-functioning city;

· develop an innovation hub of the Asia-Pacific rim;

· be internationally connected and export driven;

· enhance investment in people to grow skills and a local workforce; and

· develop a creative, vibrant international city.

7. The plan will provide a framework that guides local economic development actions in the Upper Harbour Local Board area for the next three to five years. It provides a mechanism for the local board to engage with individuals and organisations delivering economic development initiatives and also the Upper Harbour business community.

Local economic development – the role of local boards

8. Local boards have an important role to play in local economic development, and provide useful input to regional economic development initiatives where appropriate. The prime role of local boards in economic development is to consider unique local conditions and determine how best to respond to local needs and opportunities.

9. The local board cannot deliver the Upper Harbour Local ED Action Plan alone, and will need to partner with key stakeholders from both the public and private sectors to ensure effective delivery.

Consultation and feedback

10. Consultation has been undertaken with the following key stakeholders: various teams within Auckland Tourism Events and Economic Development (ATEED), Auckland Transport, Panuku Development Auckland, Regional Facilities Auckland, Auckland Council organisation (Community Development, Local Board Services, Planning North/West, Development Project Office, BID Programme Team, Auckland Plan Strategy and Research), New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA), AUT Millennium, Massey University, Unitec, Albany Community Coordinator, North Harbour Business Association and Albany Village Business Association.

11. Feedback has been sought from stakeholders and has been positive. The level of stakeholder engagement has been good with no significant changes requested. The following amendments to the version seen by the local board at the 4 August 2015 workshop have been made:

Introductory text:

· Page 9 – additional sentence regarding mana whenua to align with the Upper Harbour Local Board Plan 2014;

· Page 10 – criteria for local board support for project delivery – this was developed following feedback from the 4 August 2015 local board workshop and provides a guide for the development, assessment and measurement of local economic development projects, that could be supported by the Upper Harbour Local Board; and

· Page 11 – ATEED – changes to reflect local economic development responsibilities moving to ATEED and a better description of ATEED’s activities, particularly in respect of business capability support.

Action Plan (Appendix 1):

· Action 1.7 – Albany Village Business Association (AVBA) – changes to reflect feedback received. AVBA are keen to advocate on a number of matters (1.7a) and would like to develop a revised strategic plan and action plan as soon as possible (1.7b);

· Action 1.10 – Albany Metro Centre – The proposed scope for this project has been scaled back and suggested implementation moved back by one year. The action would be undertaken by partners, rather than direct delivery by the Upper Harbour Local Board. A related action proposing a commercial property study covering the Albany Metropolitan Centre and other key employment sites in Upper Harbour, has been deleted. These changes reflect feedback from the 4 August local board workshop;

· Action 1.12 – Transport projects – changes relating to the release of further details around NZTA/AT Northern (transport) Corridor Improvements;

· Action 2.3 – Massey University – expanding this action following several meetings with Massey University;

· Deleting action 3.3 – Hobsonville screen precinct, as this project is no longer being considered for the Hobsonville site;

· New action 4.3 – Unitec – action relating to Unitec’s northern campus, following discussions directly with Unitec;

· Action 5.6 – Sports cluster – changes to wording to reflect clarification of the project scope from ATEED; and

· New action 6.1 – To reflect a potential approach to support Māori economic development in Upper Harbour.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

12. The Upper Harbour Local Board has been kept up to date with the development of the Local ED Action Plan. A local board workshop reviewed an earlier draft on 4 August 2015. Changes from this workshop and from additional stakeholder feedback, were discussed a meeting with the Upper Harbour Local Board Chairperson and ATEED on 10 September 2015.

Māori impact statement

13. Action 6.1 of the local ED action plan outlines an approach to support the development of Māori economic development initiatives in Upper Harbour. This action does not contain specific initiatives; rather it is a signal for future dialogue between the board working in partnership with Māori, building on existing relationships between Māori and the Upper Harbour Local Board.

14. Future initiatives as part of Action 6.1 could focus on:

· how positive outcomes for Māori can be created across different well-beings (social, economic, environmental and cultural); and

· how treaty settlements and iwi, as business investors, can help with future prosperity of all communities in Upper Harbour.

Implementation

15. The action plan will form the local economic development work programme for the local board.

16. It is envisaged that there will be an annual planning workshop with the local board. At the workshop there will be a review of the action plan, with completed actions will be removed and new ones added. The revised action plan will then be finalised as the local economic development work programme for that financial year.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Upper Harbour Local Board Economic Development Action Plan	5

Signatories

Authors

Stephen Cavanagh – BID Partnership Advisor

Authorisers

John Norman – Strategic Planner Local Economic Development

Paul Robinson – Local Economic Growth Manager

Eric Perry – Relationship Manager

Upper Harbour Local Board

15 December 2015

Draft Regional Pest Management Plan Review

File No.: CP2015/24796

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); and

· 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. Auckland Council invited public comment on pest management issues in the region, as part one of a two-stage consultation process which closed 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 the board’s 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 Upper Harbour 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 that dates from the year 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 informal public consultation on pest management issues in the region. The discussion document and summary brochure have been prepared for this first stage (refer to Attachments A to C). Local board comments and feedback followed in the early part of 2015, and a combined workshop was held on 20 April 2015. Feedback from this consultation helped 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 2015 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; and

· 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 Long-term Plan (LTP) processes.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Regional Pest Management Plan – Have Your Say material	5
b View	Regional Strategy and Policy Committee report – Regional Pest Management Plan – Approval of Discussion Document	5
c View	Regional Pest Management Plan – Discussion Document	5

Signatories

Authors

Helen Sharpe - Biodiversity Specialist

Authorisers

Jacques Victor - GM Auckland Plan Strategy and Research

Jim Quinn - Chief of Strategy

Dean Kimpton - Chief Operating Officer

John Dragicevich - Director Civil Defence and Emergency Management

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Upper Harbour Local Board

15 December 2015

Proposal to locate infrastructure associated with the Northern Interceptor (wastewater) and Greenhithe Bridge (watermain) projects in Reserves within the Upper Harbour Local Board area

File No.: CP2015/25646

Purpose

1. To seek support on a proposal by Watercare Services Limited for works in an esplanade reserve (Lot 3 DP475006), Rahui Reserve, Wainoni Park and Rosedale Park in relation to Watercare’s Greenhithe Bridge (watermain) and Northern Interceptor (wastewater) projects.

Executive Summary

2. Watercare Services Limited (Watercare) is proposing to construct new water and wastewater infrastructure to service north-west Auckland, the North Shore and North Auckland. They have lodged applications for resource consent for two major projects:

· the Greenhithe Bridge Watermain Duplication and Causeway project; and

· the Northern Interceptor Phase 1 (wastewater) project.

3. The Greenhithe Bridge Watermain Duplication and Causeway (GBWDC) project involves a new trunk watermain located adjacent to State Highway 18 at Hobsonville and attached to the existing Greenhithe Bridge. The primary objective of the project is to increase security of supply to the North Shore and North Auckland. The current planned construction start date is late 2016.

4. The Northern Interceptor Phase 1 project involves a new wastewater pipeline from the existing Hobsonville Pump Station to the Rosedale Wastewater Treatment Plant in Albany. The pipeline route passes through Greenhithe, Schnapper Rock, Albany and Rosedale. The primary objectives are to provide for growth in north-west Auckland, increase capacity in the existing wastewater network, and divert some flows away from the Mangere Wastewater Treatment Plant to accommodate growth in other parts of Auckland. The current planned construction start date for Northern Interceptor Phase 1 is 2017.

5. In summary the works involve:

· construction of a temporary access road and associated causeway widening works within the Esplanade Reserve at Squadron Drive, Hobsonville;

· underground pipe infrastructure and associated underground chamber within Rahui Reserve at 17 Rahui Road, Greenhithe;

· underground pipe infrastructure and associated underground chamber within Wainoni Park, Greenhithe; and

· underground pipe infrastructure and associated underground chamber at Rosedale Park, Rosedale.

6. Watercare is seeking landowner approval for the temporary construction works and easements from Auckland Council for permanent infrastructure within the parks.This report outlines the works, the effects on the parks and the mitigation proposed, and the consultation undertaken to date.

7. Parks staff consider that the proposal does not need to be publicly notified, and that following completion of the works there will be no ongoing impact on users of the reserves. Mitigation measures negotiated by Parks staff and the Parks portfolio holders will be included as conditions of landowner approval to be signed by the Local and Sports Park Manager North.

Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) support the proposed works associated with the Greenhithe Bridge Watermain Duplication and Causeway project and the Northern Interceptor Phase 1 project as outlined in plans at Attachments A-D to the agenda report, and the granting of easements under section 48(1) of the Reserves Act to Watercare to construct the following infrastructure:

i) construction of a temporary access road and associated causeway widening works within the Esplanade Reserve at 2 Squadron Drive, Hobsonville;

ii) underground pipe infrastructure and associated underground chamber within the Reserve at 17 Rahui Road, Greenhithe;

iii) underground pipe infrastructure and associated underground chamber within Wainoni Park, Greenhithe; and

iv) underground pipe infrastructure and associated underground chamber within Rosedale Park, Rosedale

b) support that final mitigation for the adverse effects related to construction will be agreed between Watercare, Auckland Council’s Parks department and the Upper Harbour Local Board parks portfolio holders.

Comments

Proposal

8. The Northern Interceptor Phase 1 project involves construction, operation and maintenance of a new wastewater pipeline from the existing Hobsonville Pump Station to the Rosedale Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) in Albany. The pipeline route passes through Greenhithe, Schnapper Rock, Albany and Rosedale. The new pipeline is the first phase of a staged project to be implemented over the next 20 or so years.

9. The primary objectives are to provide for growth in north-west Auckland, increase capacity in the existing wastewater network, and divert some flows away from the Mangere WWTP to accommodate growth in other parts of Auckland. The current planned construction start date for the Northern Interceptor is 2017.

10. The Greenhithe Bridge Watermain Duplication and Causeway (GBWDC) project involves construction, operation and maintenance of a new trunk watermain located adjacent to State Highway 18 (SH18) at Hobsonville and attached to the existing Greenhithe Bridge. The primary objective of the project is to increase security of supply to the North Shore and North Auckland.

11. The new watermain will duplicate the existing North Harbour 1 watermain, which conveys water from sources in the Waitakere Ranges to northern parts of Auckland. The proposed work includes widening along the northern edge of the existing SH18 motorway causeway to incorporate the new watermain, as well as new wastewater infrastructure. The current planned construction start date for the GBWDC project is 2016.

12. The future construction of a wastewater pump station in the south-eastern corner of Wainoni Park, near the Greenhithe Pony Club and the intersection of Greenhithe and Orwell Road, will be addressed in a separate report.

13. The following sections outline the works proposed in each park affected by the proposed works within the Upper Harbour Local Board area (Esplanade Reserve (Lot 3 DP475006), Rahui Reserve, Wainoni Park and Rosedale Park), the potential effects and mitigation proposed.

Esplanade Reserve (Lot 3 DP475006)

Description of works

14. As part of the causeway widening, a construction platform will be established approximately 600m from the western end of the causeway. This area will integrate with a small peninsula of land over a distance of 40m or so, and will allow for a construction access area to be established at the west of the causeway via the private road off Squadron Drive, near the Te Okariki Inlet (see Attachment A).

Options considered

15. A number of options for construction access and egress to and from the construction area were considered, including access via the motorway and egress via private road and temporary access road, and access and egress via the motorway. The chosen option was considered to be the least disruptive.

Potential effects and proposed mitigation

16. Installation of a temporary construction access road requires the removal of a group of exotic trees in the southeastern corner of the private property and within the Esplanade Reserve.

17. Once works are complete, the temporary access track will be removed and replacement planting undertaken. The specific species and the extent of planting will be undertaken in consultation with Parks staff.

18. Watercare are aware that council is seeking to establish a connection from the existing shared path/cycleway that crosses the Upper Harbour motorway, to the Esplanade Reserve, to enhance public access to the Common Marine and Coastal Area (CMCA) and increase recreational opportunities in the area. Watercare will continue to consult with parks staff and the local board to explore this option, and to see how this may also connect to the proposed pedestrian/cycle path along the coastal edge, which has been proposed as part of the GBWDC project.

Rahui Reserve (R17 Rahui Road)

Description of works

19. Watercare is seeking resource consent for construction of the harbour crossing. Approval for two construction methods is sought, Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD) and trenched construction to provide the contractor with some flexibility (see Attachment B). The final nature and extent of construction activities undertaken, and the use of the reserve, will be influenced by the construction methodology.

20. The project requires the crossing of the Upper Waitemata Harbour. The crossing will begin at the proposed widening alongside SH18 to a landing point within Rahui Reserve. This applies for both methods, and each method will require a different site setup. The proposed works for these two options is described below:

Option 1 – Horizontal Directional Drilling

HDD is a trenchless method of installing underground pipes using a drilling rig to drill and ream a hole slightly larger than the pipe diameter, which is then pulled through the hole from the entry pit to an exit pit in the reserve. An exit pit and works area will be established at Rahui Reserve. The proposed works will include the following:

· site establishment at the landing site (along causeway widening, and at Rahui Reserve). This will include working areas, welfare, offices and storage containers;

· construction of hardstand and parking areas at both the causeway and Rahui Road sites. This could include the demolition of the toilet block located at Rahui Reserve and the construction of a new toilet block on completion of pipework construction (as agreed with the landowner); and

· set up for directional drilling activities, which will include drill rod racks and associated plant at the Rahui Road site.

Option 2 – Marine Trenching: Within the intertidal areas at Rahui Road, the trench will likely be excavated by long reach excavation equipment operating on a temporary berm. This temporary berm is proposed to be constructed on top of a geotextile mat placed within the intertidal area. The proposed works will include the following:

· site establishment at Rahui Road, including working areas, welfare, offices and storage containers; and

· construction of hardstand and parking area at both the causeway and Rahui Road construction sites.

Options considered

21. A number of alternative landing sites in Greenhithe were considered, including:

· Rahui Road (southern option) in the open area adjacent to the toilet block on the harbour edge at the bottom of Rahui Road;

· Rahui Road (northern option) in an open area adjoining the northern end of Rahui Road (only viable for HDD);

· Traffic Road at the western end (cul-de sac head);

· Koki/Marae Road, at the bottom; and

· Remu Place.

22. The Rahui Road (southern option) was identified as the preferred landing site, as it is the most direct route for the harbour crossing and it is relatively low, avoiding the pipeline hydraulic issues associated with the more elevated land on the Greenhithe ridgeline.

Potential effects and proposed mitigation

23. If HDD is the preferred methodology for crossing the harbour, removal of the toilet block and site preparation to receive supporting equipment (e.g. HDD drill rig, excavation equipment) may be required.

24. A site compound would be established extending from the road reserve and across Rahui Road to the boundary of the site where access to the boat ramp currently exists. This would cut off access for boats and pedestrians making the boat ramp inaccessible during the time that the site is being used. The length of time the site compound will be established is dependent on the construction methodology, but it is estimated to between 3 – 6 months.

25. Once the site is disestablished and pipe construction works are complete, the toilet block will be reconstructed (if removed) at Watercare’s cost, and the site reinstated in consultation with Parks staff and the Sea Scouts.

Wainoni Park

Description of works

26. The alignment follows Greenhithe Road until around 77 Greenhithe Road, where it turns northwards and goes into Wainoni Park. The pipeline will be conventionally trenched through the park and will cross a small unnamed stream at the northern end of the park by open trench. Ongoing consultation with various park stakeholders including Parks staff, the Local Board, North Harbour Air Gun Club, Greenhithe Pony Club and Greenhithe Riding for the Disabled has informed the proposed alignment though the park. The expected duration of these works is approximately 3 – 5 months (see Attachment C).

27. The following construction activities will be required:

· vegetation clearance;

· construction of temporary access ways;

· stripping and stockpiling of topsoil;

· temporary bunding and diversion of the stream;

· trench excavation and removal of spoil;

· delivery and installation of pipes, imported fill and concrete; and

· park surface reinstatement and planting.

Options considered

28. Alternative alignments through the park were considered. Following consultation with parks staff and park stakeholders, it was determined that aligning the pipeline along the eastern boundary would be the least disruptive to park users.

Potential effects and proposed mitigation

29. To facilitate the works during construction, fencing and jumps within the Greenhithe Pony Club’s cross-country course may need to be temporarily relocated, and access for horses, ponies, and riders/users may need to be restricted at times. On completion, the pipeline infrastructure will be below ground.

30. A number of structures exist in the paddocks which are fenced off to prevent injuries. A similar treatment may be required for several manhole covers within the park, which will be done in consultation with the Pony Club.

31. Access to the park from Churchhouse Road should not be impacted. Access to walking facilities, paths and sports fields (outside the Pony Club) will also be retained.

32. Watercare has been working with the various park stakeholders to identify specific mitigation measures and opportunities to achieve mutually beneficial outcomes. These include:

· replanting trees within the riding areas with ‘horse-friendly’ species;

· potential opportunity to upgrade existing access roads, re-contour land with excess spoil and improve drainage; and

· potential opportunity to provide an earth bund around the edge of the shooting area at the North Harbour Air Gun Club.

Rosedale Park

Description of Works

33. The proposed alignment enters into Rosedale Park at the western boundary (via 169/179 Bush Road), crossing beneath Alexandra Stream and landing near the parking area (see Attachment D). The route then generally follows the road reserve prior to entering into the Rosedale WWTP in order to minimise effects on park users.

Options considered

34. Due to the location of Rosedale Park being immediately adjacent to the Rosedale WWTP, no alternative routes were considered.

Potential effects and proposed mitigation

35. The preparation of a site compound to receive supporting equipment (e.g. HDD drill rig, excavation equipment) will be required on either side of Alexandra Stream. On the eastern side of the stream the site compound will extend from outside the stream to the road reserve, resulting in temporary effects on traffic travelling through the park. The expected duration of these works is approximately 2 – 4 months. Traffic will be managed through the implementation of a Traffic Management Plan.

36. The construction site will temporarily block access to the start of the cycle / pedestrian Green Route at this location (Rosedale Park to Unsworth Reserve). A temporary diversion will be established to safely divert users of the Green Route around the construction area, and the Green Route infrastructure and trees (if impacted), will be reinstated once the works are complete.

Consultation

Public consultation events

37. Public consultation events were held at Albany Junior High School, Hobsonville Point Primary School and the North Shore Dog Club in March, 2015.

38. A targeted mail-out was sent to residences in close proximity to the proposed works and to local community organisations and residents groups.

39. Key points/matters from these events included:

· the alignment through Greenhithe rather than along Upper Harbour Highway; and

· the duration of works and impact to roadways and Wainoni Park.

Specific consultation

40. Watercare have consulted with the clubs who use/lease the affected parkland. This is summarised as follows:

41. Tauhini Sea Scouts

· The Sea Scouts have use of the Sea Scout Hall on Rahui Reserve and primarily use the Salthouse boat ramp on Rame Road to launch their vessels, but also use the Rahui Road boat ramp on occasion. As construction methodologies are confirmed, appropriate mitigation to construction impacts will be identified with the assistance of the Sea Scouts.

42. Greenhithe Pony Club

· The club leases the grounds at Wainoni Park South from Auckland Council and adjoins the land leased by GRDA at Wainoni Park North. The Pony Club has suggested that if any of the Monterey Pine trees are removed that they be replaced by a species suitable for equine activities.

43. Greenhithe Riding for the Disabled Association (GRDA)

· The GRDA leases the grounds at Wainoni Park north. They have identified potential opportunities for improvements to their facilities that could be incorporated into the proposed works. These include upgrading the GRDA’s existing access road, re-contouring land with excess spoil and improving drainage. Watercare will continue to consult with GRDA to further refine these potential opportunities and ensure that the needs of both parties can be accommodated.

44. North Harbour Air Gun Club

· The club leases land at the northern-most part of Wainoni Park North. The opportunity to provide an earth bund around the edge of the shooting area to increase safety was identified and may be incorporated into the proposed works subject to Council approval.

45. Watercare will continue to consult with all the clubs to ensure any concerns about impacts on their operations are appropriately addressed and to further explore any opportunities for beneficial outcomes.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

46. Watercare staff attended meetings with the Upper Harbour Local Board several times in 2014 and 2015 to discuss the proposed works.

47. Key aspects discussed with the local board and Parks staff have been the need for works within parks, the alternatives considered, the extent and duration of construction activities, and the location and design of permanent above ground features.

48. Board members’ key concerns related to the potential impacts of the proposed Northern Interceptor project in parks, primarily Wainoni Park, and also the implications on the Rosedale WWTP.

Māori impact statement

49. The applicant has consulted with mana whenua that have rohe within the Upper Harbour Local Board area. The consultation process has involved an initial briefing to Watercare’s Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum, and distribution of project information to the Kaitiaki Manager’s Project List, in July 2013. Mana whenua were invited at this time to indicate which projects they have an interest in, and further information was provided to those parties, which was followed by further engagement with those interested parties.

50. Ngāi Tai Ki Tāmaki, Ngāti Maru, and Te Kawerau a Maki have prepared Cultural Impact Assessments (CIA) Reports, and Watercare is now engaging to various extents with 10 mana whenua entities. Ngāti Manuhiri are also in the process of preparing a CIA.

51. The CIAs contained a number of recommendations relating to the project, including:

· accidental discovery protocols if koiwi, taonga or archaeological features are exposed during the proposed works;

· that Watercare will liaise with relevant iwi entities, pertaining to landscape treatments, planting specifications, and the final location and species selection; and

· that iwi will be consulted prior to any final cultural arts design being confirmed

52. Watercare will engage with mana whenua during the implementation of the development to give effect to the recommendations within the CIAs.

Implementation

53. Easements will be granted under Section 48 of the Reserves Act. The power to approve minor easements and rights of ways over parks and reserves has been delegated to Local and Sports Parks Managers, Tier 5. Minor is defined as requests that do not require public notification under the relevant legislation which are unlikely to be of significant public interest. It is considered that notification is not required under the Reserves Act in this instance so the delegation can be activated.

54. Section 48(1) of the Reserves Act requires that the Minister of Conservation give consent to an easement. In June 2013 the Minister gave delegation to local authorities to grant this type of approval (amongst others) and this has been delegated to the Local and Sports Parks Manager.

55. If the local board recommends that the proposal be approved, a report will be prepared to the Local and Sports Parks Manager seeking his approval and consent to the easement acting under delegation from the Minister of Conservation.

56. The construction is programmed to commence in 2017 and be completed in 2020. As built plans with full details shall be provided of all infrastructure installed in the reserves on completion of works, and will be loaded on to Council’s GIS system. An easement agreement will be entered into between Council and Watercare. Any associated costs will be borne by Watercare.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Esplanade Reserve at Squadron Drive	5
b View	Rahui Reserve	5
c View	Wainoni Park	5
d View	Rosedale Park	5

Signatories

Authors

Maylene Barrett - Parks and Open Space Specialist

Authorisers

Lisa Tocker - Manager, Recreation Facilities & Service Delivery Central

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

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Upper Harbour Local Board

15 December 2015

Adoption of the Upper Harbour Draft Greenways Plan

File No.: CP2015/25898

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to present the Draft Upper Harbour Greenways Plan to the Upper Harbour Local Board for adoption.

Executive Summary

2. The development of a walking and cycling track network plan is a priority project identified by the Upper Harbour Local Board, to help achieve its vision and key priorities as outlined in the Local Board Plan.

3. At the business meeting on 24 September 2013, the Upper Harbour Local Board allocated $30,000 of its small local improvement project (SLIPS) budget towards the development of the Upper Harbour Greenways Plan (resolution number UH/2013/210). The proposal was for a high level concept plan to investigate walking and cycling connections across the Upper Harbour Local Board area within parks and on roads, as well as connections to the neighbouring Devonport-Takapuna and Kaipatiki Local Board areas.

4. This report presents the Draft Upper Harbour Greenways Plan to the local board (refer to Attachment A). The plan identifies a network of walking and cycling connections for the Upper Harbour Local Board area. The identification of the network is based on a desktop and field analysis in the form of various maps, site assessments and feedback from internal and external stakeholders. It identifies existing and future connections that make up the Draft Upper Harbour Greenways Plan.

5. Council officers are recommending that the Draft Upper Harbour Greenways Plan be adopted by the Upper Harbour Local Board.

Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) adopt the Upper Harbour Draft Greenway Plan and endorses its staged implementation as recommended in the plan.

Comments

6. Greenways Plans aim to provide cycling and walking connections which are safe and enjoyable, while also improving local ecology and access to recreational opportunities. To achieve this, Greenways may cross existing areas of parkland, and follow street connections between parks. The network typically follows natural landforms such as streams and coasts, as well as man-made features such as streets and motorways.

7. The Upper Harbour Greenways Plan seeks to create a network of greenways that responds to the Upper Harbour Local Board’s unique environment, providing and linking circulation networks that are on land and water.

8. The Upper Harbour Greenways Plan will connect the Upper Harbour Local Board area to wider Auckland, by linking into regional transport networks and neighbouring local board greenways / green network plans.

9. This greenways network will include information and educational material that will provide opportunities for communities to get engaged with their community and environment.

10. Parts of Upper Harbour Local Board area are being developed, and this plan will provide practical direction for the development of greenways in these areas.

The network of greenways will:

· improve walking connections;

· improve cycle connections;

· improve recreation opportunities;

· improve ecological opportunities;

· improve community connections; and

· improve access to streams, rivers and the coast.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

11. The development of a greenways plan has been identified as a key project by the Upper Harbour Local Board in its Local Board Plan. The adoption and implementation of the Draft Upper Harbour Greenway Plan is in line with stated priorities within the Local Board Plan.

12. The Upper Harbour Local Board has actively been involved in the development of the Draft Upper Harbour Greenway Plan.

Māori impact statement

13. 13 iwi associated with the Upper Harbour Local Board area were engaged and asked to provide feedback. At the time of writing two iwi; Ngâti Whâtua o Ôrâkei and Te Kawerau a Maki have responded, provided feedback and expressed interest to be involved during the implementation stages of the Greenways Plan. Mana whenua are supportive of the Upper Harbour Greenways Plan and see it as a crucial component in addressing key policy and cultural concerns regarding biodiversity, public transport, access, education, and community.

Implementation

14. No specific funding has currently been allocated to the implementation stages at time of writing. However, areas and reserves where greenway links have been identified have been prioritised within the scope of the renewals programme. Opportunities also exist to work with Auckland Transport, Watercare and New Zealand Transport Agency to include greenway links as part of future infrastructure projects.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Draft Upper Harbour Greeways Plan	5

Signatories

Authors

Tony Hart - Parks Advisor Upper Harbour

Authorisers

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

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Upper Harbour Local Board

15 December 2015

Approval of Upper Harbour Local Board Community Grants

File No.: CP2015/26374

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to enable the Upper Harbour Local Board to make funding decisions on Upper Harbour Local Board Community Grants to stakeholders.

Executive summary

2. The Upper Harbour Local Board has $276,591 of discretionary operational and $355,230 capital expenditure at its disposal to allocate towards community grants and projects during the 2015/2016 financial year.

3. In October 2015, as part of the local board’s financial planning, the board sought expressions of interest from community and sporting code stakeholders to ascertain their future requirements for both operational and capital funding.

4. Due to the availability of limited funding and wanting to ensure that they maximise the value of their limited funds, the board indicated that the funding would need to be small in nature or be seed funding for larger projects. Community groups and sporting codes were requested to provide a detailed description of the project and how it would benefit the community, as well as providing any applicable quotes for work to be conducted, or enabling the delivery of the project.

5. Nine expressions of interest for funding were considered, requesting a total of $121,022 from the funds available. In addition, the local board identified a number of projects within the local board area that also required funding and these amounted to $138,000.

6. This report provides the local board with the opportunity to consider and allocate funding to community groups, sporting codes and local projects to ensure that the local board budget is expended prior to the end of the financial year in June 2016.

7. The local board has requested that additional work be done with organisations that were unable to provide sufficient detail relating to their projects at this time, which will ensure that all requests have an equal opportunity for consideration.

Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) consider approval of funding for the following projects:

Organisation	Project	Funding Approved	Funding source
Albany CoCo Incorporated	Replacement chairs for the Hall	$1,472	Opex
Albany CoCo Incorporated	Underfloor insulation	$1,595	Opex
Greenhithe Resident and Ratepayer Association	Renovation of the Greenhithe Community Hall	$25,000	Opex
Harbour Badminton	Painting of the outside of the building	$20,000	Opex
Hobsonville West Harbour Resident and Ratepayer Association	Contribution towards Hobsonville Community Hall Insurance	$3,000	Opex
Hobsonville Community Trust	Community noticeboard	$5,500	Opex
North Harbour Softball Association	Slowpitch helmets and catchers masks to assist with the growth of the slowpitch league	$2,855	Opex
Rosedale Pony Club	Repair / replace a roof over the club's storage container	$3,000	Opex
Rosedale Pony Club	Full replacement of the surface of one of the riding arenas	$15,000	Opex
Rosedale Pony Club	The cost of an ambulance for an inter-pony club event	$600	Opex
Tennis Northern	Annual operational grant	$30,000	Opex
Tennis Northern	Replacing guttering along the entire northern aspect of the main building and along the entrance porch-way on the eastern aspect	$10,000	Opex
Whenuapai Resident and Ratepayer Association	Contribution towards hall insurance and operating costs	$3,000	Opex
Local Board Initiative	Sanders Faraway Tree sign	$3,000	Capex
Local Board Initiative	Gills Reserve – 60 metre concrete walkway to link to pedestrian bridge from Hooton Reserve	$7,000	Capex
Local Board Initiative	Albany Domain – work stage 2	$2,000	Opex
Local Board Initiative	Seat at Durbin Park	$3,000	Capex
Local Board Initiative	Metal on the footpaths at Sanders Reserve	$20,000	Capex
Local Board Initiative	Upgrade of playground at Hugh Green Drive to cater for smaller children as well	$60,000	Capex
Local Board Initiative	Additional maintenance of reserve planting	$20,000	Opex
Local Board Initiative	Reprint and redesign of Walking Guide – including new maps	$5,000	Opex
Local Board Initiative	3 on 3 basketball court - Unsworth Heights	$20,000	Capex

Comments

8. In October 2015, as part of the local board’s financial planning, the board sought expressions of interest from community and sporting code stakeholders to ascertain their future requirements for both operational and capital funding.

9. Community groups and sporting codes were requested to provide a detailed description of the project and how it would benefit the community, as well as providing any applicable quotes for work to be conducted, or enabling the delivery of the project (refer to Attachment B).

10. A similar approach was taken by the board in the 2014/2015 financial year in support of community and sporting groups. The aim of the fund was to strengthen the local community by supporting initiatives that provided a community benefit, were equitable and inclusive and beneficial to the residents of the area. The board funded projects or initiatives that gave effect to the priorities in the Upper Harbour Local Board Plan. Priority was given to initiatives that focused on one or more of the following priorities:

· sports or recreation;

· youth;

· families;

· migrants;

· the environment;

· community participation and wellbeing;

· encourage participation or volunteering;

· are innovative;

· are high impact and provide good value for money; and

· improve an existing facility or service provision.

11. The local board also identified a number of projects within the local board area that required funding. The projects amounted to $138,000 and are listed below:

Project	Description	Total cost
Sanders Faraway Tree sign	The local board has a macrocarpa tree carved in situ in the Sanders Reserve. The tree which is interactive and allows for children to play on and in it, is situated quite a distance into the reserve and this sign will inform the community utilising the reserve where to locate the tree.	$3,000
Gills Reserve – 60 metre concrete walkway to link to pedestrian bridge from Hooton Reserve	The board has spent a considerable amount of money on walkway linkages through Hooton Reserve, with the intent of linking Hooton Reserve to Gills Reserve. Now that the walkways in Hooton Reserve have been completed and a pedestrian bridge across the stream near Gills Reserve has been built, the final section of walkway that requires construction is a 60 metre concrete walkway from the pedestrian bridge to the existing concrete walkway within Gills Reserve to create a continuous link.	$7,000
Albany Domain – work stage 2	Trees that are leaning into the Albany House need to be cut back, not only for safety purposes but also to allow for additional light into the building.	$2,000
Seat at Durbin Park	A number of residents, over a number of years, have requested a seat to be placed in Durbin Park in order for parents to sit and supervise their children at play in the playground and park area.	$3,000
Metal on the footpaths at Sanders Reserve	A number of footpaths within Sanders Reserve have metal covering that has washed away with heavy downpours. These paths need to be restored due to safety and aesthetic concerns.	$20,000
Upgrade of playground at Hugh Green Drive to cater for a wider range of age groups.	A playground in Hugh Green Drive currently only caters for older children. A number of requests have been received from residents asking that the playground be upgraded to cater for a wider range of age groups.	$60,000
Additional maintenance of reserve planting	Additional maintenance of existing planted areas not covered in the contract. Set annually to take a targeted prioritised approach, including riparian margins. Seeking $20,000 per annum from the board’s LDI budget.	$20,000
Reprint and redesign of Walking Guide – including new maps	The Upper Harbour Local Board Walking Guide is very popular and the current stock of guides needs to be replenished. The guide however also requires the addition of Sanders Reserve and an update of the comprehensive map of all the reserves to include Sanders Reserve. Dog access and smokefree areas will also be included in the reprint.	$5,000
3 on 3 basketball court - Unsworth Heights	Several residents have requested the installation of a 3 on 3 basketball court in Unsworth Heights Reserve.	$20,000

12. Nine expressions of interest were considered from a wide range of organisations from within and outside the Upper Harbour Local Board area, requesting a total of $121,022. The expressions of interest are as follows:

Organisation	Project	Motivation for funding	Funding requested
Albany CoCo Incorporated	Replacement chairs for the Albany House	20 blue chairs to replace the existing pinkish chairs which are beyond repair. To have a welcoming and professional sense for the community.	$1,472
Albany CoCo Incorporated	Underfloor insulation	The Albany House is not carpeted and winter time is particularly cold. The under-floor insulation will greatly benefit the community and will increase the use of the House.	$1,595
Greenhithe Resident and Ratepayer Association	Renovation of the Greenhithe Community Hall	The Greenhithe Residents Association are planning a major renovation to the Community Hall that will enable use of up to 3 spaces at any one time rather than the current single use. This has become necessary as the demand has meant that the Community Hall, Old School Building, Church Hall and the School Hall are used almost to the maximum in the growing Greenhithe community.	$25,000
Harbour Badminton	Painting of the outside of the building.	The current next 12 months will be important for the badminton facility as it prepares to host the World Masters in 2017.	$20,000
Hobsonville West Harbour Resident and Ratepayer Association	Contribution towards Hobsonville Community Hall Insurance	Application for the $3000.00 contribution towards hall insurance. This allows the Association to maintain the hall hire at rates which are affordable to the community.	$3,000
Hobsonville Community Trust	Community Noticeboard	To be installed for community use at Hobsonville Point Park.	$5,500
North Harbour Softball Association	Slowpitch helmets and catchers masks to assist with the growth of the slowpitch league	North Harbour Softball Association's main goal in their strategic plan is to grow the slowpitch league. This is played Thursday and Friday nights during the summer and on Sundays during the winter. Slowpitch is a team sport for players of all abilities. With the new health and safety reform the Association has had to review its strategic risks and they believe that this now requires the provision of helmets and catchers masks to protect the slowpitch players. Their goal is to attract 20 teams, involving up to 300 players, per competition. The helmets will support this number of players annually.	$2,855
Rosedale Pony Club	Repair / replace a roof over the club's storage container	Whilst Rosedale Pony Club has a limited grazing membership, as there is a limited number of horses that can be kept on site, there are a significant number of what could be classified as non-grazing members who keep their horses and ponies elsewhere and come to the club to ride, teach and exercise their horses in a friendly and safe environment. The club is therefore very much a community facility and it regularly has non-members who visit to use the grounds.	$3,000
Rosedale Pony Club	Full replacement of the surface of one of the riding arenas	This is a cost that the club needs to bear every 10 to 15 years, as the surface deteriorates over time and it becomes a potential health and safety issue for members and visiting riders, which increase each year. The club was hoping that this was a cost which could be deferred for a few more years however it appears that as the usage has increased, so has the wear and tear.	$15,000
Rosedale Pony Club	The cost of an ambulance for an inter-pony club event.	Each year, different clubs around the country host events that are open to all riders (young and old) and Rosedale takes its turn when its members provide a day or weekend event, all on a voluntary basis. These events have become more expensive to run as recent legislation has meant that (where the horses are jumping) the club has to provide medical care and/or an ambulance on site.	$600
Tennis Northern	Annual operational grant	This key sub-regional community sport and recreation facility has an expectation that it will cost approximately $795 per day to keep the centre open for very basic business. $45,000 is allocated, on a 'bare bones' basis to cover repairs and maintenance (R&M) costs. These expenses do not include any capital projects or enable single large scale R&M projects whether planned or unforeseen.	$30,000
Tennis Northern	Replacing guttering along the entire northern aspect of the main building and along the entrance porch-way on the eastern aspect	The Tennis Centre opened its doors in February 2001. The original guttering is still in place. Whilst it was showing signs of deterioration the speed and scale of this accelerated beyond expectation. The complete disintegration now means that it is no longer serving its purpose, and rain simply dumps water onto the wooden deck below during storms. The rusted galvanized aluminum has created shards and flakes which drop to the deck and which conceivably could cause significant injury to a child or adult standing below. Consistent large quantities of cascading water concentrated on certain areas of the deck now mean that the deck is beginning to rot, which in time will lead to another major R&M issue.	$10,000
Whenuapai Resident and Ratepayer Association	Contribution towards Hall insurance and operating costs	Annual application to the local board for the contribution towards hall insurance and operating costs.	$3,000

13. The expressions of interest and supporting material were discussed in depth and considered by the local board at a workshop on 1 December 2015. The local board have requested that additional work be done with organisations that were unable to provide sufficient detail relating to their projects, to ensure that all requests have an equal opportunity for consideration.

Consideration

Local board input and implications

14. The expressions of interest and supporting material were discussed in depth and considered by the local board at a workshop on 1 December 2015. This report gives the local board the opportunity to allocate funding to the community and sporting code stakeholders that raised an expression of interest for funding.

Maori impact statement

15. No particular impacts on Maori communities have been identified.

Implementation

16. Decisions on funding are required at this meeting so that funding agreements can be entered in to before the end of this financial year.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Community funding criteria	5
b View	Letter to stakeholders	5
c View	Expressions of interest and supporting documentation	5

Signatories

Authors	Karen Marais - Local Board Services
Authorisers	Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Upper Harbour Local Board

15 December 2015

Annual Plan 2016/2017 - local consultation content

File No.: CP2015/25875

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 that 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 Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) agree indicative LDI priorities for 2016/2017 (refer to Attachment A in the agenda report).

b) adopt local content for consultation (refer to Attachment B in the agenda report).

c) agree 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 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 at November business meetings.

13. Advocacy discussions between local boards and the Finance and 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	Upper Harbour Local Board Locally Driven Initiatives (LDI)	5
b View	Upper Harbour Local Board consultation material	5

Signatories

Authors

Kate Marsh - Financial Planning Manager - Local Boards

Authorisers

Matthew Walker - GM Financial Strategy and Planning

Karen Lyons - Manager Local Board Services

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Upper Harbour Local Board

15 December 2015

Urgent decision making process for local boards during the 2015 Christmas close down period

File No.: CP2015/24634

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to provide for an urgent decision making process for the Upper Harbour Local Board during the 2015 Christmas close down period.

Executive Summary

2. This report details an alternative process for urgent decisions of the local board on matters that require a decision, where it is not practical to call the full board together and meet the requirement of a quorum. It is recommended that the board delegated decision-making authority to the Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson, or any person acting in these roles, to make urgent decisions on behalf of the board (if deemed necessary and appropriate) during the Christmas close down period from 24 December 2015 to 16 January 2016.

Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) delegate the authority to the Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson, or any person acting in these roles, to make an urgent decision on behalf of the Upper Harbour Local Board during the Christmas close down period from 24 December 2015 to 16 January 2016.

b) note that a number of factors will be considered before approval is given to use the urgent decision making process, such as:

(i) the timing of the next scheduled meeting;

(ii) confirmation that the local board has the delegation to make the decision;

(iii) consideration of the rationale for urgency; and

(iv) the significance of the decision and whether the urgent decision process is appropriate.

c) request all urgent decisions be reported to the next ordinary meeting of the Upper Harbour Local Board.

Discussion

3. In general, an extraordinary meeting is called when an urgent decision is required on matters that cannot wait until the next scheduled ordinary meeting of the local board. At times, such as during the Christmas and New Year period, it is not practical to call the full board together and meet the requirement of a quorum.

4. An alternative to calling for an extraordinary meeting is to delegate decision-making authority to the Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson, or any person acting in these roles, to make the decision on behalf of the board.

5. It should be noted that urgent decisions are different from emergency decisions, which are only made if there is a risk to public health and safety.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

6. This report serves to request local board input.

Maori Impact Statement

7. There are no implementation issues for Maori as a result of applying the recommendations in this report.

General

8. Traditionally, provisional arrangements for decision-making have been made for the Christmas close down period. It is recommended that the Upper Harbour Local Board delegates the authority to the Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson, or any person acting in these roles, to make the decision on behalf of the board.

9. Any request for an urgent decision of the local board must be processed through the Local Board Services department, and the relevant Relationship Manager must endorse the request for an urgent decision before commencing the process.

10. All requests for an urgent decision will be supported by a report stating the nature of the issue, reason for urgency and what decisions or resolutions are required. These reports will comply with the standard approval process and be signed off by both level four and level three managers.

11. A number of factors will be considered before approval is given to use the urgent decision making process, such as:

· the timing of the next scheduled meeting;

· confirmation that the local board has the delegation to make the decision;

· consideration of the rationale for urgency; and

· the significance of the decision and whether the urgent decision process is appropriate.

12. Any decision made by delegation will be reported as an information item to the next ordinary meeting of the local board.

Implementation Issues

13. There are no implementation issues as a result of applying the recommendations in this report.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors	Karen Marais – Senior Local Board Advisor
Authorisers	Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Chairperson	Lisa Whyte
Deputy Chairperson	Brian Neeson, JP
Members	Callum Blair
	John McLean
	Margaret Miles, JP
	Christine Rankin-MacIntyre

Authors	Neda Durdevic - Democracy Advisor
Authorisers	Eric Perry - Relationship Manager