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, 15 December 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.

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

9 Public Forum

A period of time (approximately 30 minutes) is set aside for members of the public to address the meeting on matters within its delegated authority. A maximum of 3 minutes per item is allowed, following which there may be questions from members.

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

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

09 February 2016

Hobsonville Headquarters approval to proceed to detailed design and consenting

File No.: CP2015/26807

Purpose

1. To seek approval from the Upper Harbour Local Board to progress to developed design, detailed design and consenting for the Hobsonville Headquarters building.

Executive Summary

2. The former Air Force Cadet Forces Headquarters building owned previously by the Hobsonville Land Company is considered suitable, with some internal alterations, for community use. The Long-term Plan (LTP) includes provision of $1.172 million in FY16 for redevelopment of this building.

3. The design brief for the refurbishment of the Headquarters building is for a community hub that provides for community focused activities, services and programmes. It is designed to promote the overall wellbeing and connectedness of the community of Hobsonville Point, and is aligned to the outcomes of the Upper Harbour Local Board Plan.

4. Funding from the board enabled the engagement of Make Architects and the development of four redevelopment options (refer to Attachment A) for the building that respond to the aspirations identified. These options were discussed at a workshop with the board which indicated a general preference for option 3. This option creates larger interior spaces that offer the potential for more flexible use of the facility. An initial quantity surveyor review has indicated that the redevelopment costs of option 3 would be within the budget available.

5. Staff recommend proceeding with the further design work. Once the developed design is completed, this will be discussed with the board prior to the commencement of detailed design work and the necessary consenting.

6. Because of the heritage nature of the building the support of Heritage New Zealand (HNZ) for any redevelopment is crucial, as it would identify potential covenants that could result in redevelopment considerations and costs. Discussions with HNZ are progressing well. Whilst their preference is a land covenant, HNZ have expressed a willingness to discuss alternatives for heritage protection of the buildings.

7. The position of HNZ regarding the Headquarters building has not been formally confirmed, however it is felt that progressing the design phase should continue.

Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) confirm option three developed by Make Architects as the preferred option for the redevelopment of the Hobsonville Headquarters building, as referenced in Attachment A to the agenda report.

b) approve the project progressing to developed design, detailed design and consenting for the Hobsonville Headquarters Building.

c) note the interest of Heritage New Zealand in this project and ongoing staff efforts to finalise the acquisition of the Headquarters building.

Comments

8. The former Air Force Cadet Forces Headquarters building owned previously by the Hobsonville Land Company is considered suitable with some internal alterations for community use. The LTP has provision of $1.172 million in FY16 for redevelopment of this building.

9. Auckland Council has possession of the land under an Access and Occupation Licence (between Auckland Council and Hobsonville Land Company Limited). The Licence commenced on 3 June 2015 and will continue until the Agreement for Sale and Purchase (yet to be concluded) of the land becomes unconditional or is cancelled, whichever is the earlier. If settlement of the sale and purchase of the land has not occurred by 30 June 2016 either party has the right to cancel the Licence.

10. The Licence permits council to use the buildings and car park located on the land and to undertake any works required for the council’s proposed use of the land. In the approved Sunderland Comprehensive Development Plan (CDP) the Headquarters building is identified as a building of heritage value to be retained in the current location.

11. Community consultation was undertaken by the Auckland Council Strategy and Policy Team and identified community aspirations for this building and the neighbouring Sunderland Lounge. These aspirations relating to the Headquarters building include:

· flexible hire spaces;

· space for early childhood activities;

· storage spaces for community groups;

· rooms for various social and support services;

· community hub to meet learn and socialize;

· wide range of facilities and programs for all ages including health, fitness and drop in chill out zone for young people; and

· men’s shed to transfer skills and knowledge to young children.

12. The design brief for the refurbishment of the Headquarters building was for a community hub that provides for community focused activities, services and programmes. It is designed to promote the overall wellbeing and connectedness of the community of Hobsonville Point and is associated to the outcomes of the Upper Harbour Local Board Plan.

13. Funding from the board enabled the engagement of Make Architects and the development of four redevelopment options (refer to Attachment A) for the building that respond to the aspirations identified. These options were discussed at a workshop with the board which indicated a general preference for option 3. This option creates larger interior spaces that offer the potential for more flexible use of the facility. An initial quantity surveyor review has indicated that the redevelopment costs of option 3 would be within the budget available.

14. Because of the heritage nature of the building the support of Heritage New Zealand (HNZ) for any redevelopment is crucial, as it would identify potential covenants that could result in redevelopment considerations and costs. Discussions with HNZ are progressing well.

15. The meeting with HNZ was held on 21 October 2015. It was a positive meeting overall and the HNZ representatives commented that the plans for the Headquarters building appeared reasonable. Whilst their preference is a land covenant, HNZ have expressed a willingness to discuss alternatives for heritage protection of the buildings. Key factors for it is the protection of buildings of national interest and its ongoing involvement in decisions affecting those buildings. It is thought that council could enter into an agreement with HNZ to satisfy both parties’ requirements in this regard and this would pave the way for us to finalise the land acquisition.

16. Another meeting has been requested with HNZ staff at an early date to further discuss council’s proposals for the buildings and alternatives to a land covenant. Any agreement in principle will be subject to formal approval by both HNZ and c ouncil. Panuku Development Auckland have impressed upon HNZ the need for council to conclude the land acquisition without further delay and will seek to confirm timeframes around the resolution of the land covenant issue. It is not likely to be until early 2016 before any agreement is formalised with HNZ.

17. Whilst the position of HNZ regarding the Headquarters building has not been formally confirmed it appears likely that the proposed redevelopment by council will be supported. It is felt that progressing the redevelopment should continue and the next phase of this project involving undertaking of detailed design should be approved.

18. If the board approves progressing option 3 to developed and detailed design, the following timeframe is anticipated for project delivery:

Engagement of architect and completion of developed design	December 2015
Completion of detailed design	April 2016
Consenting and procurement of construction	May 2016
Construction	August 2016

Consideration

Local board views and implications

19. The design options for the redevelopment of the Headquarters building have been work shopped with the board. Once the developed design is completed, this will be discussed with the board prior to the commencement of detailed design work.

Māori impact statement

20. The redevelopment of this facility will enable it to provide programmes and services to all the community including Māori.

Implementation

21. At this stage no implementation issues are identified.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Make Architects four redevelopment options	45

Signatories

Authors

Peter Loud - Team Leader Community Facilities

Authorisers

Graham Bodman - General Manager Arts, Community and Events

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Upper Harbour Local Board

09 February 2016

Auckland Transport Report - February 2016

File No.: CP2016/00674

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 Upper Harbour 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; and

· media.

Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) receives the Auckland Transport Report – February 2016.

Comments

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

5. The table below provides 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:

Dairy Flat Highway to Living Stream Road:

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

· ROC to be confirmed, late February 2016.

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

Living Stream Road to No 219 (already has footpath)

· No ROC required

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)

· Completed.

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.

· McClymonts Road, Albany – Flush median and no stopping at all times (NSAAT) restriction:

As part of a new development in this area, Auckland Transport is proposing to install a flush median and NSAAT broken yellow lines on one side of the road as shown in Attachment A.

· Fields Parade – Kea crossing facility, and no stopping at all times (NSAAT) restriction outside Oteha Valley School:

In order to provide school children with a safer place to cross the road and to allow better traffic flow (especially during school peak hours), Auckland Transport is proposing the following (refer to Attachment B):

· installing a kea crossing facility outside No.80 Fields Parade, to be operated by the school during the school peak period in the morning and afternoons (Monday to Friday);

· installing a give way control on Vincent Place for vehicles turning left into Fields Parade;

· removing the existing clearway sign outside No.84 Fields Parade and replacing it with a no parking restriction between 8.30 – 9.15am, 2.30 – 3.15pm Monday to Friday; and

· installing no stopping at all times broken yellow lines restrictions outside No.80 and 78 Fields Parade.

Media

City Rail Link Starts

7. Preliminary work for Auckland’s largest infrastructure project, the City Rail Link (CRL) started on the 21 December 2015, with a dawn blessing of the work site by mana whenua.

8. About 80 people gathered in the still of the morning on the corner of Victoria and Albert Streets in the central city as kaumatua blessed the worksite between Swanson and Wellesley Streets where the first part of the $2.5 billion project has begun.

9. Auckland Transport believes the start of work was a great milestone for Auckland Transport and the project team.

10. It is believed the day was a celebration, but for most Aucklanders, the first piece of work will be largely invisible. A replacement stormwater pipe will be built under Albert Street so that the existing one can be removed when work on the CRL tunnels starts in the middle of 2016.

11. Those gathered, including Mayor Len Brown, acknowledged that it was a day that Aucklanders have been contemplating for almost a century.

12. The Mayor stated that “In 1923 Railways Minister Gordon Coates gave his support for a city-to-Morningside underground rail line that never happened. In the 1970s, Mayor Sir Dove-Myer Robinson's rapid-rail proposal met a similar fate”.

13. The project team lead would like people to think about how they travel to and through the city when the works start in earnest midway through 2016.

14. Public are urged to use public transport or active modes as the wisest choice; however for those who do not have that option, the use of parking buildings closest to city entry points would be more sensible rather than driving through the city.

Red lights target red light runners

15. Red light runners are being targeted with a new warning system.

16. Auckland Transport has started a trial at two intersections in Remuera to try to stop motorists running the lights.

17. Auckland Transport’s Network Operations and Safety team has commissioned the trial to see whether red light running can be prevented at two closely spaced intersections by putting in red illuminated markers on the road.

18. The lights in the traffic lanes will be linked to the traffic signals and are to warn drivers by showing that the signals have turned red and they must stop.

19. Both Remuera Road/Clonbern Road and Remuera Road/Victoria Ave intersections have traffic signals and are located quite close to each other. The two intersections are within the Remuera town centre and are busy with both traffic and pedestrians.

20. Between 2010 – 2014, a total of twelve crashes have been reported in this area, three involved failing to give way and two were rear end crashes that may have been caused by red light running.

21. There have also been reports of a number of near misses between pedestrians and vehicles. Over the years, safety concerns have been raised by the local community and Remuera businesses, and Auckland Transport hopes this will help deal with the problem.

22. Orakei Local Board member Ken Baguley is welcoming the trial, saying “This is a cost effective way to get the message to motorists that the lights ahead are red.”

23. The trial is scheduled to last until the end of September 2016. Auckland Transport will undertake the evaluation of the trial and report to the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA).

24. Auckland Transport will conduct traffic analysis during the trial, together with input from the public, to determine whether the lights in the road have improved the safety of the intersections.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

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

Maori impact statement

26. No specific issues with regard to the Maori impact statement are triggered by this report.

General

27. 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

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

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	McClymonts Road drawings	61
b View	Fields Parade Kea Crossing drawings	63

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

09 February 2016

Auckland Transport quarterly update to local boards - 1 October to 31 December 2015

File No.: CP2016/00712

Executive Summary

1. The purpose of this report is to inform local boards about progress on activities undertaken by Auckland Transport (AT) in the three months from 1 October to 31 December 2015, the detail of which is contained within Attachments A to E in this report.

Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) receive the Auckland Transport quarterly update to local boards.

Significant activities during the period under review

Strategy and Planning

2. Transport for Future Urban Growth (TFUG)

Under the new business case approach AT has got approved funding to develop growth-related Programme Business Cases (PBCs) to identify the transport infrastructure needed within the next 30 years for the growth areas identified in Auckland Council's Future Urban Land Supply Strategy. The areas to be assessed are the Northwest, Southern, Northern and Warkworth areas. A multi-disciplinary and cross organisational team has been developed and is currently working from a co-located space on the four areas. Procurement is well advanced and consultant teams are on board with a number of workshops planned in January and February.

3. Central Access Strategy

A Strategic Case was jointly developed by the investment partners, and approved by NZTA in November 2015, agreeing the problems faced for access to the city centre. A PBC is underway to identify and agree a programme of options to address the problems, with a high level costs and benefits analysis.

Public Transport Development

4. Double Decker Network Mitigation works

Each route is in a different project phase. By June 2018, the following routes are planned to be completed:

· Mt Eden (31 March 2016);

· Northern Express 2 (30 Jun 2016);

· Great North (31 March 2017);

· Manukau (30 June 2017);

· Remuera;

· New North; and

· Onewa.

Botany bus route 500 (from Botany Town Centre to Britomart) has been cleared.

5. Public Transport Safety, Security and Amenity

This involves enhancing station safety, security and amenity. Current projects include completion of Ellerslie Station canopies, upgrade to Morningside Level Crossing and electronic gating at Manurewa Station. Programmed activities in various phases on these projects are:

· Ellerslie canopies will be completed January 2016;

· Morningside Level Crossing Improvement construction work planned for April/May 2016 and interim improvements were completed in November 2015; and

· Manurewa gates in early design stage.

6. City Rail Link

Enabling Works Contract 2, construction of pipe jack (services relocation) commenced (Albert Street) on 21 December 2015. Enabling Works Contract 1, Britomart to Lower Albert Street and Contract 2, Lower Albert Street to Wyndham Street, is to commence in May 2016. Main Works: Construction to start in 2018/19 FY subject to funding agreement with Government.

Public Transport Operations

7. Highlights for the quarter

· SuperGold Travel – a competitive tender process for SuperGold funding exempt ferry services from downtown Auckland to Matiatia Wharf, Waiheke – as per Ministry of Transport directive. The tender process resulted in two operators being eligible for SuperGold reimbursements from 1 January 2016. SuperGold card holders conversion onto HOP cards has commenced, for delivery by 1 July 2016. This will mean seniors will be required to use HOP cards to access free public transport SuperGold travel.

· Integrated Fares – just prior to Christmas, Thales delivered the first release of version 7.0 (customer facing enhancements) for Integrated Fares, ready for AT to commence testing. Some minor changes to zone boundaries were also approved to mitigate some passengers who would have had fare increases under integrated fares. Initial testing of version 7.0 has commenced. Integrated fares implementation is targeted for mid-2016. A late February 2016 annual public transport fares review will be implemented as a stepping stone to integrated fares.

· Ferry Improvements – Waiheke Ferry Services: strong growth has been experienced on the route during the year, reaffirming the route as being the most popular on the Auckland ferry network. A local initiative to display interpretative signage at Matiatia was delivered with the Waiheke Local Board in the last quarter, and way-finding signage was updated and replaced at Matiatia as well. Next quarter will see the installation of a purpose-built customer information/ticket office by Explore. Overall patronage to Waiheke has grown over 10% in the last 12 months with the combination of Fullers and Explore services.

Road Design and Development

8. SMART (Southwest Multi-modal Airport Rapid Transit)

Future proofing of the SMART route on the Kirkbride (trench) intersection is progressing together with the infrastructure works by Highway Network Operations of NZTA. This element of the project is expected to be complete in 2022. AT is working with the East West team to ensure the projects are well aligned at the critical points. The indicative business case is being updated for light rail transit and heavy rail. The cycle strategy for the wider Mangere area is also underway.

9. AMETI – Pakuranga Road Busway

This involves provision of a signalised Panmure roundabout, two-lane busway, walking and cycling facilities, Panmure bridge upgrade and upgrades to existing bridge and local roads towards Pakuranga Town Centre. A completion date is subject to the outcome/approval of a revised delivery strategy by the AT Board by February 2016. The Notice of Requirement lodgement is ready to proceed, with lodgement pending the outcomes of cultural mitigation discussion. The expected lodgement date is mid-February 2016.

10. Tamaki Ngapipi Intersection Safety Improvements

This involves installation of traffic lights at the Tamaki Drive/Ngapipi Road intersection to address safety issues. The design aims to encourage shared use by reducing conflict points and maintaining efficient movement through the intersection. The AT Board has approved the preferred option, that allows five Pohutukawa trees to be retained, and this option will be taken forward to consenting and construction. Detailed design is underway to finalise the proposal for consenting.

Services

11. Community and Road Safety Programme

· Delivered alcohol checkpoints in partnership with NZ Police.

· Delivered child restraint checkpoints and Plunket promotions in partnership with NZ Police.

· Delivered safety messages to motorcycle riders regarding high visibility vests and training in Northcote.

· Delivered a targeted social media campaign for high risk young drivers in Henderson.

· Delivered a ‘Train the Trainer’ course to local community and NZ Police for Learners Licence in Henderson.

· Delivered learner and restricted licencing programmes to high risk young drivers in Mangere.

· Delivered a targeted social media campaign for high risk young drivers in Mangere.

· Supporting ACC and NZTA Young Drivers Signature programme in Mangere.

12. Commute Travel Planning

· Unitec Travel Plan – Unitec won the 'think outside the car award for creative excellence' for its cycling programme including installation of 10 covered, student-designed bike racks.

· Waitemata District Health Board was awarded the carpooling award at the AT Commute awards for its carpooling programme.

13. Travel Demand (2015/16 Year)

Transport Choice campaign – ‘Time to cool your love affair with your car' video campaign was promoted for eight weeks primarily via online media and the AT website. Promoted travel choice and encouraged Public Transport, Walking, Cycling, Carpooling and Flexi-working. Over 625,000 views of the videos are recorded – which is a high rate and demonstrates increased awareness.

Road Corridor Delivery

14. The Assets and Maintenance Group is tasked with the responsibility for a wide range of activities within the road corridor. These include but are not limited to:

· the delivery of roading and streetlight maintenance and renewal programmes;

· managing the access, co-ordination and traffic management impacts of activities taking place within the road corridor;

· promoting design innovation and efficiency around how work is carried out on the network; and

· the development of long term asset management plans and modelling which support the decision making process around the management of Auckland’s roading assets.

15. Road Corridor Delivery

· In the 2015/2016 financial year AT is planning to deliver 37.7 km of pavement rehabilitation, 480.1 km of resurfacing (comprising 88.9 km of hotmix and 391.2 km of chip sealing), 75.7 km of footpath renewals and 82.7 km of kerb and channel replacement.

Table 1: Progress against Asset Renewal Targets

· Pavement rehabilitation projects have been completed on Kohimarama Road, Ranui Station Road, Edmonton Road, Robertson Road, Te Irirangi Drive, Ormiston Road, Whitford Road, Glenbrook Road, Linwood Road, Clyde Road, Lakeside Drive, Maygrove Drive, Brigham Creek Road, Mokoia Road, Kahika Road, Diana Drive, Glenmore Road, South Head Road, Waitoki Road, Mahurangi East Road, Hector Sanderson Road and Blind Bay Road. Further projects are underway on College Road, Hunua Road, Roscommon Road, St George Street, Bairds Road and Cavendish Drive.

· Contracts have been awarded to two suppliers for the provision of LED luminaires for the 2015/16 year. In the 2015/16 year approximately 11,000 of the existing 70W HPS lamps on the network will be replaced with LED luminaires and connected to the new central management system. Initially most will be in the central and north contract areas. The LED retrofit programme is being accelerated with the aim of completing the replacement of all the existing 70W HPS lamps by 1 July 2018 so as to maximise the available subsidy from the NZTA.

16. Road Corridor Access

· Monitoring of Temporary Traffic Management (TTM) at work sites is continuing to ensure compliance with the approved traffic management plans and to identify opportunities for improvement. The average percentage of low risk sites for Quarter 2 is 94% (against the target of 90%).

· With an anticipated dip in numbers for December, the Corridor Access Request (CAR) team continues to process around 1,300 applications per month. These requests are for AT operations (inclusive of City Rail Link) and various utility operators to access and maintain the assets sitting within the road corridor. Access is also sought by private operators and individuals who need to access the road network to undertake activities such as private water connections etc.

17. Strategic Asset Management and Systems

· AT inherited an inventory of 117 permanent traffic counting sites across the Auckland region. These comprise inductive loops installed in the road pavement which detect passing vehicles through electro-magnetic induction. The loops provide details of traffic flows by vehicle category. In addition, AT can deploy pneumatic tubes installed across traffic lanes to undertake ad-hoc traffic counts. These are used where there are no permanent loops installed.

· The information generated by the loops provides an ongoing record of traffic growth across Auckland, which is used to inform infrastructure design as well as providing current and trend information for the Auckland traffic and growth models managed by the Auckland Joint Modelling Applications Centre. The output from these models has been used in the development of the Integrated Transport Programme, defining AT’s road hierarchy for One Network Road Classification, and will be used for the Auckland Transport Alignment Project (ATAP).

· During the period October to December inclusive, a total of 493 traffic counts were undertaken using a mixture or permanent sites and pneumatic tubes. Additionally, 57 additional counts were undertaken over the Christmas holiday period to identify recreational traffic flows which may be significant at certain locations. Sixteen of these were on Waiheke and four on Great Barrier Island.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Schedule of activities undertaken for the quarter ending 31 December	71
b View	Travelwise Schools activities broken down by local board	83
c View	Traffic Control Committee decisions broken down by local board	85
d View	Local Board Advocacy Report	87
e View	Local Board Transport Capital Fund Report	89

Signatories

Authors

Various Auckland Transport authors

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon - Elected Member Relationship Team Manager, Auckland Transport

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Upper Harbour Local Board

09 February 2016

Better Urban Planning Issues Paper and Resources Legislation Amendment Bill

File No.: CP2016/00813

Purpose

1. To provide the local board with an opportunity to comment on:

· the Productivity Commission’s inquiry into the system of urban planning in New Zealand as outlined in its ‘Better Urban Planning Issues Paper’, which was released for public comment on 9 December 2015; and

· the Resource Legislation Amendment Bill, which had its first reading on 3 December 2015 and was subsequently referred to central government’s Local Government and Environment Select Committee for consideration.

Executive Summary

2. Council has the opportunity to respond to the Productivity Commission’s (the Commission) enquiry into the system of urban planning in New Zealand, as well as to make a submission on the Resource Legislation Amendment Bill (the Bill) currently under consideration by the Local Government and Environment Select Committee.

3. Although the two pieces of work are discrete and run by different central government agencies, the wider reform of urban planning and resource management provide a common context to these projects. Both work programmes are running on a similar timeframe, therefore Auckland Council has aligned the process to enable responses on both matters, including local board engagement. More detail regarding these programmes is presented in the ‘Comments’ section of this report.

4. The governing body has allocated decision-making responsibility to make submissions to central government on legislation, including official submissions from Auckland Council that incorporates the views of local boards. The Auckland Development Committee (ADC) will be deliberating council’s response to the Issues Paper and its submission, and the Bill at its 10 March 2016 business meeting. As part of that process the ADC will consider local board views to ultimately inform its responses to central government. Local boards are therefore asked to provide formal comment on both topics by 8 March to enable the reporting of local views to ADC at its March meeting.

5. Given the tight timeframes for reply, it is recommended that the local board establish a working party consisting of the Chairperson, the regulatory portfolio lead and the regulatory portfolio associate to develop the board’s position. The board’s feedback will be formally reported to the next available business meeting for retrospective endorsement.

Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) establish a working party consisting of the Chairperson, the regulatory portfolio lead and the regulatory portfolio associate to formulate the board’s feedback on both the Productivity Commission’s ‘Better Urban Planning Issues Paper’ and the Resource Legislation Amendment Bill, noting that:

i) board feedback must be submitted no later than 8 March 2016;

ii) the Auckland Development Committee will be preparing formal responses on behalf of Auckland Council on both matters at its 10 March 2016 business meeting that will include the views of local boards; and

iii) the board’s final position on both topics will be presented for retrospective endorsement to the next available business meeting.

Comments

Better Urban Planning Issues Paper

6. Central government has asked the Productivity Commission (the Commission) to undertake an inquiry into the system of urban planning in New Zealand. The main purpose of the inquiry is “to review New Zealand’s urban planning system and to identify, from first principles, the most appropriate system for allocating land use through this system to support desirable social, economic, environmental and cultural outcomes.”^{^[1]}

7. The inquiry will look beyond the current resource management and planning system to consider fundamentally different ways of delivering urban planning and development. The scope of the inquiry includes the different types of interventions, the funding arrangements, and the governance frameworks that are currently delivered by:

· the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA2002);

· the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA1991);

· the Land Transport Management Act 2003 (LTMA2003); and

· elements of the Building Act 2004, the Reserves Act 1977 and the Conservation Act 1987 that relate to land use.

8. Given the ‘blue skies’ nature of the inquiry, it will not critique previous or ongoing reforms to legislation that make up the urban planning system. However, the inquiry will consider lessons that can be drawn from the current planning system and its implementation in urban areas.

9. The Productivity Commission released a discussion document entitled ‘Better Urban Planning Issues Paper’ (included as Attachment A to this report) on 9 December 2015. The Issues Paper is the first phase of the Commission’s enquiry, which will inform a draft report that will be publically released in July 2016 for further public comment before a final report is due to central government on 30 November 2016.

10. The Issues Paper asks specific questions on the principles for urban planning (refer to ‘summary of questions’ appendix to Issues Paper, p.76-80 of Attachment A) as a basis for generating responses. It is recommended, however, that the local board focus predominantly on particular matters of relevance to the board’s governance role and the Auckland context. The board may wish to consider several of the following questions to help formulate its feedback, namely:

· How could a new model best deal with the complex and dynamic nature of urban environments?

· How does the allocation of responsibilities to local government influence land use regulation and urban planning?

· What allocation of responsibilities to different levels of government would support better urban planning?

· What principles around consultation and public participation should the Commission consider in the design of a new urban planning system?

· What should be the appropriate level of consultation in making land use rules or taking planning decisions?

· How should a new model be designed so as to avoid unnecessary administrative, economic and compliance costs?

· Are there any aspects of the existing planning system worth keeping in a new system?

· What information about environmental outcomes and other urban outcomes would a decision-maker need to make good urban planning decisions?

· How could a future planning system be designed to reflect the differing circumstances and needs of New Zealand cities? Are new or different planning and funding tools needed?

11. Council will most likely provide comment on the draft report once it is forthcoming in July, in addition to providing a response to the Issues Paper. Assuming this is the case, local boards will have another opportunity later in the year to provide further input into the inquiry once the draft report is released.

Resource Legislation Amendment Bill

12. The purpose of the Resource Legislation Amendment Bill (the Bill) is to “create a resource management system that achieves the sustainable management of natural and physical resources in an efficient and equitable way.”^{^[2]} The Bill introduces a range of amendments with three main objectives:

· better alignment and integration across the resource management system;

· proportional and adaptable resource management processes; and

· robust and durable resource management decisions.

13. The publically available departmental disclosure statement for the Bill prepared by the Ministry for the Environment is provided as Attachment B to this report. It brings together in one place a range of information to support and enhance Parliamentary and public scrutiny of the Bill itself. In particular, the disclosure statement identifies:

· the general policy intent of the Bill and other background policy material;

· some of the key quality assurance products and processes used to develop and test the content of the Bill; and

· the presence of certain significant powers or features in the Bill that might be of particular Parliamentary or public interest and warrant explanation.

14. The current package of resource management reform proposals is comprised of over 40 individual proposals aimed at delivering substantive, system-wide improvements to the resource management system. The table below highlights several key proposals within the Bill that the local board may wish to consider when formulating its feedback:

Area

Key matters to note within the Bill

National direction

§ Introduces a new regulation-making power in the RMA1991 to permit specified land uses so as to avoid unreasonable restrictions on land

§ Prohibits and removes council planning provisions that supplicate the functions in, or have the effect of overriding, other legislation or impose unnecessary restrictions on land use for residential development

§ Enables the development of a national planning template to improve the consistency of RMA plans and policy statements, reduces complexity and improves the clarity and user-friendliness of plans

§ Amends sections 30 and 31 of RMA1991 to make it a function of regional councils / territorial authorities to ensure sufficient residential and business development to meet long-term demand

§ Removes the explicit function of regional councils / territorial authorities to manage hazardous substances.

Plan making

Plan making (cont.)

§ Proposes changes to enable a more efficient, flexible and proportionate plan change process; introduces two new planning tracks for territorial authorities:

o streamlined process – provides more flexibility in planning processes and times to allow these to be tailored to specific issues and circumstances

o collaborative process – encourages greater front-end public engagement intended to better reflect community values, reduce litigation costs and avoid lengthy delays

§ Proposes a statutory obligation on territorial authorities to invite iwi to form an iwi participation arrangement to establish engagement expectations when consulting during early stages of plan-making process.

Consenting

§ Introduces greater proportionality in the process of obtaining resource consents by introducing a 10 working day time limit for determining simple applications (‘fast track’), and by allowing territorial authorities to treat certain activities as permitted

§ Makes consent processes more simple and efficient by identifying the parties eligible to be notified of different types of applications by refining the notification regime, and through introducing limits to the scope and content of submissions and subsequent appeals

§ Removes RMA1991 provision found in section 11 that requires subdivision to be expressly provided for in plans; make changes that clarifies the scope of conditions that may be placed on resource consents

§ Proposes a regulation-making power that requires consent authorities to fix the fees for processing certain consent applications and hearing, and the remuneration for hearings panels.

15. In addition to the matters outlined above, the Bill proposes changes to Environment Court processes and the requirements the Court can place on consent authorities, improvements to alignment of processes, and suggested amendments to the Public Works Act 1981 intended to make the land acquisition process and compensation fairer and more efficient. Further detail on these matters can be found within the first four pages of Attachment B.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

16. The governing body has been allocated statutory and decision-making responsibilities under the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 in relation to the regulatory activities of council. The governing body has also been allocated the non-regulatory responsibility to prepare submissions to central government on legislation, including official submissions of Auckland Council that incorporate local board views. This report provides the local board with an opportunity to provide input into submissions to central government regarding potential changes to regulatory policy.

17. The table below outlines how local board views will be canvassed as part of submission development:

Date	Proposed action / relevant information
Early February 2016	§ Circulation of a written briefing on Resource Legislation Amendment Bill to local board members.
17 February	§ Local board chairpersons invited to Auckland Development Committee (ADC) workshop to discuss both pieces of work: o opportunity for local board chairpersons to provide informal input in to the framing of Auckland Council’s response and submission o written briefing on the Bill and supporting material for workshop on the Issues Paper will be shared in advance.
8 March	§ Deadline for formal feedback from local boards § Feedback received by this date will be reported to ADC when it considers council’s response and submission.
10 March	§ ADC meeting to consider response to Issues Paper and submission on the Bill § All formal local board feedback will be attached to council’s final response and submission.

18. Given the tight timeframes for reply, it is recommended that the board establish a working party consisting of the Chairperson, the regulatory portfolio lead and the regulatory portfolio associate to develop the local board’s position. The board’s feedback will be formally reported to the next available business meeting for retrospective endorsement.

Māori impact statement

19. A key goal behind the introduction of the RMA1991 (‘the Act’) was to provide better recognition and protection of Maori interests. In particular, the Act was intended to:

· identify and protect customary rights;

· take into account the values and interests of Maori, including through reflecting the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi in decisions; and

· provide ways and means for Maori interests to be represented in the development of plans and consent applications.^{^[3]}

20. The Act gives effect to these objectives in a number of ways. Sections 6 and 7 of the Act, which lay out issues of national importance and other factors that people exercising powers must have regard to, include requirements to:

· recognise and provide for the relationship of Maori and their culture and traditions with their ancestral lands, water, sites, wahi tapu and other taonga; and

· give particular regard to kaitiakitanga, defined as ‘the exercise of guardianship by the tangata whenua of an area in accordance with tikanga Maori in relation to natural and physical resources, and includes the ethic of stewardship’.

21. The recognition of kaitiakitanga is a particular feature of the current system. It recognises that the many different ways in which land is valued by people can include a kinship relationship, which creates obligations for Maori of guardianship or protection of land.

22. Consultation with tangata whenua is mandatory when developing plans and regional policy statements, and the Act sets out the requirements for consulting with iwi authorities. In preparing plans and policy statements, territorial authorities must take into account planning documents recognised by an iwi authority.

23. Problems with the current consultation arrangements – particularly that iwi tend to be inundated with requests for consultation on minor consents, with the issues of real importance to iwi getting lost – are recognised in the proposed amendment to the RMA1991 allowing for iwi participation arrangements:

“The purpose of an iwi participation arrangement is to provide an opportunity for local authorities and iwi authorities to discuss, agree, and record ways in which tangata whenua may, through iwi authorities, participate in the preparation, change, or review of a policy statement or plan in accordance with the processes set out in Schedule 1 of the Act.”^{^[4]}

24. The proposed amendment will require that, when local authorities start the planning process, they sit down with iwi and come to an agreement about the way in which iwi will be able to be included.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Better Urban Planning discussion document	97
b View	Resource Management Legislation Disclosure Statement	205

Signatories

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

Upper Harbour Local Board

09 February 2016

PDF Creator

Upper Harbour Local Board

09 February 2016

Draft Local Government Election Year Policy for Elected Members

File No.: CP2015/26795

Purpose

1. To provide comments to the governing body on the draft Local Government Election Year Policy for Elected Members.

Executive Summary

2. This report attaches the draft policy which will be considered by the governing body at its meeting on 18 February 2016, along with comments from local boards.

3. The policy applies during an election year, which is the time that some sitting members may be “wearing two hats”. One role is as an elected member, making the decisions of the Auckland Council. The other role is as a candidate for the next elections. The policy sets out how to distinguish between these two roles. The pre-election period (three months prior to the election) is a particularly sensitive period.

4. The draft policy is based on the policy that was presented to local boards and the governing body in 2013 and reflects guidance provided to public sector entities by the State Services Commission and by the Office of the Auditor General (OAG).

5. It has been reformatted to:

· make it clearer it is principle-based;

· remove some of the policy relating to staff conduct, which will be contained in a separate organisational policy for staff; and

· include a ‘Frequently Asked Questions’ section giving additional guidance to common questions that confront elected members.

6. The body of the report provides comments raised by local boards in 2013 and the responses to them as contained in the report to the governing body.

Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) consider its comments on the draft Local Government Election Year Policy for Elected Members, noting that comment is required prior to the Governing Body meeting on 18 February 2016

Comments

7. Previous comments from local boards that were reported to the governing body in 2013, along with responses, are below.

8. Two local boards queried the requirement that elected member bodies do not criticise decisions of other elected member bodies in council publications, and one sought clarification regarding who the arbiter of this is.

· This principle is included on the basis that it is considered inappropriate for different parts of council to be publicly criticising each other’s decisions in council-resourced communications. This principle operates once a decision has been made. Auckland Council’s decision-making process provides several opportunities, prior to a decision being made, for local boards and the governing body to advocate for a particular position. There are no restrictions on elected members’ use of non-council funded news media or publicity, other than the standards of behaviour required by the Code of Conduct.

· The Manager, Communications and Public Affairs, is responsible for ensuring that council-funded publications adhere to council’s policies.

9. One local board expressed a view that the pre-election period was one month too early.

· The pre-election period of three months is defined in the OAG guidelines and applies nationally for all local government elections.

10. One local board requested information on sanctions that will be put in place to ensure elected member candidates adhere to the policies.

· The Election Year Policy now includes a section on breaches of the policy. This is based on a similar section in the Code of Conduct and provides that the chief executive will consider and take appropriate action on a case by case basis in response to complaints about breaches of the policy. This may include involving the electoral officer depending on the nature of the alleged breach.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

11. This report provides an opportunity for the board to record its views on the draft policy.

Māori impact statement

12. The attached policies are for the guidance of all elected members and are of equal relevance to Māori and non-Māori.

Implementation

13. Once adopted, the policies will be forwarded to all elected members.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Draft Local Government Election Year Policy for Elected Members	223

Signatories

Authors

Warwick McNaughton - Principal Advisor - Democracy Services

Authorisers

Marguerite Delbet - Manager Democracy Services

Karen Lyons - Manager Local Board Services

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

[1] Taken from terms of reference establishing Productivity Commission inquiry, which is included in Appendix A of the Better Urban Planning Issues Paper (which is attached to the agenda report as Attachment A).

[2] Taken from Ministry for the Environment website at: http://www.mfe.govt.nz/rma/rma-reforms-and-amendments/about-resource-legislation-amendment-bill-2015.

[3] Gow, L. The Resource Management Act: Origins, context and intentions. Speech to the Resource Management Law Association Conference, Dunedin, 25 September 2014. Taken from p.31 of Better Urban Planning Issues Paper, presented as Attachment A to this report.

[4] Resource Legislation Amendment Bill explanatory note, 2015.

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

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