Agenda of Waitematā Local Board

Waitematā Local Board

08 March 2016

ITEM TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE

1 Welcome 5

2 Apologies 5

3 Declaration of Interest 5

4 Confirmation of Minutes 5

5 Leave of Absence 5

6 Acknowledgements 5

7 Petitions 5

8 Deputations 5

8.1 Gary Holmes – Uptown Business Association 5

9 Public Forum 6

9.1 Ruth Sliedrecht - Healthy Auckland Together 6

10 Extraordinary Business 6

11 Notices of Motion 7

12 Councillor's Report 9

13 Waitemata Local Board Performance Report for the six months ending December 2015 11

14 Temporary Alcohol Ban for the Auckland City Limits Concert 65

15 March 2016 Quarterly report of the Youth Advisory Panel Waitematā representative of the Waitematā Local Board 75

16 Pioneer Women's and Ellen Melville Hall and Freyberg Square Upgrade 79

17 Auckland Transport Report - March 2016 91

18 Pembridge House 31 Princes Street, Auckland Central – Application for Commercial Lease to The University of Auckland 97

19 Regional Facilities Auckland Second Quarter Report 2015-2016 101

20 Approval of Conference - Financial Governance 201 - Wellington (LGNZ) 121

21 Submission to the New Marine Protected Areas Act: Consultation Document 123

22 Draft Business Improvement District Policy (2016) – local board feedback 129

23 Waitemata Local Board Feedback to the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme Review 271

24 Feedback on the Draft Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group Plan 275

25 Community Led Small Build Programme 345

26 Chairperson's Report 351

27 Deputy Chair Report 353

28 Board Members' Reports 363

29 Governance Forward Work Programme 385

30 Waitemata Local Board Workshop Notes 389

31 Reports Requested/Pending 399

32 Consideration of Extraordinary Items

1 Welcome

2 Apologies

At the close of the agenda no apologies had been received.

3 Declaration of Interest

Members are reminded of the need to be vigilant to stand aside from decision making when a conflict arises between their role as a member and any private or other external interest they might have.

4 Confirmation of Minutes

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Tuesday, 9 February 2016, 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 Waitematā 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 Gary Holmes – Uptown Business Association

Purpose

1. Gary Holmes and other members of the Uptown Business Association will speak to the board regarding the issues currently being experienced in and around the public car parking area by the Water care water tanks at the top of Symonds Street/ New North Road/ Mount Eden Road.

Recommendation/s

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a) Thanks Gary Holmes and the other members of the Uptown Business Association for their attendance and presentation.

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 Ruth Sliedrecht - Healthy Auckland Together

Purpose

1. Ruth Sliedrecht will be in attendance to speak to the board regarding a programme they have called Healthy Auckland Together. Healthy Auckland Together is a coalition of 21 organisations that are working together to change policy, infrastructure design and planning so that our environments can encourage physical activity and good nutrition.

Recommendation/s

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a) Thanks Ruth for her attendance and presentation.

10 Extraordinary Business

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

11 Notices of Motion

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

Waitematā Local Board

08 March 2016

Waitemata Local Board Performance Report for the six months ending December 2015

File No.: CP2016/02483

Purpose

1. To update the Waitemata Local Board members on progress towards their objectives for the year from 1 July 2015 to 30 June 2016 as set out in the Local Board agreement.

Executive Summary

2. A financial performance report is presented to the local boards for the accounting quarters ending September, December, March and June.

3. Auckland Council departments also present quarterly performance reports to the local boards

4. To improve overall performance reporting the Financial Advisory Services – Local Boards team produces a combined quarterly financial report and department report

5. The attached report contains the following reports this quarter

· Local Community Services including Libraries

· Local Environmental Management

· Local Sports Parks and Recreation

· Local Board Financial Performance

Recommendation/s

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a) Receive the Performance Report for the Waitemata Local Board for the financial quarter ended December 2015

b) ATEED Performance Report for six months

Comments

6. In consultation with local boards this report provides the elected members with an overview of local activities from council departments for discussion.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

7. The report is presented to the Waitemata Local Board members at a workshop prior to the business meeting.

Māori impact statement

8. Maori, as stakeholders in the council, are affected and have an interest in any report of the local board financials. However, this financial performance report does not impact specific outcomes or activities. As such, the content of this report has no particular benefit to, or adverse effect on Maori.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Waitemata Local Board Performance Report for the six months ending December 2015	13
b View	ATEED Performance Report for six months	53

Signatories

Authors

Audrey Gan - Lead Financial Advisor Local Boards

Authorisers

Christine Watson - Manager Financial Advisory Services - Local Boards

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Waitematā Local Board

08 March 2016

Temporary Alcohol Ban for the Auckland City Limits Concert

File No.: CP2016/02551

Purpose

1. To seek a decision about making a temporary alcohol ban for the Auckland City Limits Concert, to be held at Western Springs Stadium on the 19 March 2016.

Executive Summary

2. The New Zealand Police have requested that the council make a temporary alcohol ban around the Western Springs Stadium for the Auckland City Limits concert scheduled for Saturday 19 March 2016.

3. Auckland Tourism, Events and Economic Development (ATEED) is responsible for overseeing this major event.

4. Temporary alcohol bans prohibit the consumption or possession of alcohol in specified areas for specified times. Alcohol bans are enforced by the New Zealand Police. The Police consider that temporary alcohol bans significantly assist in reducing alcohol-related harm during large-scale events.

5. The Council can make a temporary alcohol ban under the Auckland Council Alcohol Control Bylaw 2014. Local boards have the delegation under the bylaw to make temporary alcohol bans for local areas.

6. In deciding whether to make a temporary alcohol ban, the council must be satisfied that:

· there is evidence of crime or disorder caused or made worse by the consumption of alcohol in public places

· the alcohol ban is proportionate and can be justified as a reasonable limitation on people's rights and freedoms.

7. Staff recommend that the Waitematā Local Board make the alcohol ban by passing a resolution. Staff consider making this ban meets the decision making requirements. It will enable the Police to deal with intoxicated people and reduce crime or disorder associated with alcohol consumption both before and after the concert.

Recommendation/s

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a) make a temporary alcohol ban, pursuant to the Auckland Council Alcohol Control Bylaw 2014, to operate from 6am Saturday 19 March 2016 to 6am Sunday 20 March 2016 in the area marked in Attachment A to this report and described as follows:

· Western Springs Lakeside, Western Springs Outer Fields, Bullock Track, Stadium Road, Motions Road, Old Mill Road, West View Road, Sherwood Avenue, Stanmore Road, Francis Street, Wilton Street, Castle Street, Browning Street, Selbourne Street, Firth Road, Surrey Crescent, Gilbert Avenue, Sefton Avenue, Ivanhoe Road, Clifford Road, Wexford Road, Shirley Road, Tay Road, Tuarangi Road, Barrington Road, Rona Road, Herringson Avenue, and that part of Great North Road between Motions Road and Bond Street.

Comments

Background

8. The Auckland City Limits Concert will be held at Western Springs Stadium on the 19 March 2016. This is the first time the event has been held in Auckland.

9. There is no current alcohol ban in the area surrounding Western Springs Stadium. The nearest alcohol ban is a permanent 24 hours a day, 7 days a week alcohol ban in the Grey Lynn Town Centre (see Attachment B).

10. Temporary alcohol bans can be used to prohibit the consumption or possession of alcohol in specified areas for specified times (e.g. for events).

11. Alcohol bans are enforced by the New Zealand Police. Under the Local Government (Alcohol Ban Breaches) Regulations 2013, the penalty for breaching an alcohol ban is an infringement fee of $250. The Police have the powers of search, seizure and arrest for the specified times and places that a ban applies. The Police consider that temporary alcohol bans significantly assist in reducing alcohol-related harm during large-scale events.

Request for temporary alcohol ban

12. The Police have requested a temporary alcohol ban in the area to operate from 6am Saturday 19 March 2016 until 6am Sunday 20 March 2016 (see Attachment C). Discussions between Manager Event Operations at ATEED and the police has refined the area of the temporary alcohol ban to the following areas:

Making temporary alcohol bans

13. The council can make a temporary alcohol ban under the Auckland Council Alcohol Control Bylaw 2014. Decision-making under this bylaw for this area is delegated to the Waitematā Local Board. The board may pass a resolution to make a temporary alcohol ban pursuant to the Auckland Council Alcohol Control Bylaw.

14. In determining whether to make a temporary alcohol ban, the Waitematā Local Board must be satisfied that:

· there is evidence of crime or disorder caused or made worse by the consumption of alcohol in public places

· the alcohol ban is proportionate and can be justified as a reasonable limitation on people's rights and freedoms.

Decision

15. The police and Auckland Tourism, Events and Economic Development have recorded evidence of crime and disorder at similar major events including the Lantern Festival at Albert Park and the Coca-Cola Christmas in the Park event at the Auckland Domain. Issues have included assault and other aggressive behaviours. The police have used temporary alcohol bans to successfully reduce crime and disorder at major events, including for the recent ACDC and Eminem concerts at Western Springs Stadium.

16. Council staff consider the temporary alcohol ban requested to be a reasonable limitation on people's rights and freedoms due to the following factors:

· the areas covered by the ban would be clearly defined

· the short duration of the ban

· the improved perceptions of safety that people feel when Police are monitoring this type of event.

Risks

17. If the temporary alcohol ban is not implemented, there will likely be additional disruption to local residents, although this would only be for a short duration. Police may have to wait for issues to escalate, before intervening than they otherwise would if they were able to enforce an alcohol ban.

18. In order to meet event timelines, the decision cannot be postponed as the event will occur before the next local board meeting.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

19. The Waitematā Local Board previously supported the New Zealand Police request for temporary alcohol bans for the annual Christmas in the Park and previous AC/DC concert at Western Springs Stadium.

20. There are no implications for the local board associated with this decision.

Māori impact statement

21. Managing alcohol related harm associated with events increases opportunities for health and wellbeing, which is consistent with the outcomes of the Māori Plan for Tāmaki Makaurau. Iwi have been consulted widely on the use of alcohol ban and have previously been supportive.

Implementation

22. ATEED will be heavily involved in the implementation of the alcohol ban. Its proposed alcohol management strategy for the Auckland City Limits concert on 19 March includes:

· standard Auckland Council signage to inform of the alcohol control area. This will be in English and Te Reo and will contain the dates and times the temporary alcohol ban will be in force

· involving the police in the event planning and having sufficient resource to enforce the temporary alcohol ban

· advising the Waitematā Local Board of the type and conditions for on-site alcohol licenses granted for this concert

· asking Auckland Council alcohol licensing inspectors to visit all licensed premises in the temporary alcohol control area prior to the concert

· signage for off-license premises advising of the temporary alcohol ban being supplied to premises inside the temporary alcohol ban area

· advising ticket holders of the conditions of entry, public transport options, parking restrictions and the temporary alcohol ban areas prior to the event

· sending a notification letter to all local businesses and residents informing them of the temporary ban area dates and times.

23. The costs associated with implementing the temporary alcohol ban will be covered by Auckland Stadiums. These costs include the statutory requirement of a public notice in either the local paper, the Central Leader, or the New Zealand Herald advising of the temporary alcohol ban, temporary signage, and any other reasonable requirements of the New Zealand Police or the Waitematā Local Board.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Auckland City Limits Concert Temporary Alcohol Ban Area	69
b View	Grey Lynn Town Centre Alcohol Ban	71
c View	Police request for temporary alcohol ban	73

Signatories

Authors

Paul Wilson - Team Leader Bylaws

Michael Sinclair - Manager Social Policy and Bylaws

Authorisers

Kataraina Maki - GM - Community & Social Policy

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Waitematā Local Board

08 March 2016

Pioneer Women's and Ellen Melville Hall and Freyberg Square Upgrade

File No.: CP2016/03134

Purpose

1. To seek endorsement from the Waitemata Local Board for the final design proposal for Pioneer Women’s and Ellen Melville Hall and Freyberg Square upgrade (see attachments B and C) to enable the start of the construction phase and to formally endorse the renaming of the community facility to be called the Ellen Melville Centre.

Executive Summary

2. Auckland Council is undertaking an upgrade of the Pioneer Women’s and Ellen Melville Hall and Freyberg Square upgrade. Consultation on the project opened in September and closed in December 2015. Public consultation on the concept design (see attachment A) showed strong support for the proposal of Freyberg Square and Pioneer Women’s and Ellen Melville building. This included a new pedestrian connection up to the Metropolis terrace and the extension of the shared space on O’Connell Street up Courthouse Lane to the entrance of the Metropolis car park.

3. On 16 December 2015 the ACCAB (Auckland City Centre Advisory Board) resolved that Freyberg Place would retain vehicular access in the short term allowing managed vehicle access through the square, moving from open access towards closed access.

4. A final design has been completed incorporating this decision and public feedback (see attachments B and C).

5. The newly refurbished community facility requires a name for marketing and branding purposes. The ‘Ellen Melville Centre’ has been suggested by the project team in collaboration with the Waitemata Local Board, the National Council of Women of New Zealand and the Melville family.

6. On 24 February 2016, the ACCAB endorsed the final design proposal for Freyberg Square and Ellen Melville Centre and additional funding for the project, from the City Centre Targeted Rate works programme, which will enable the additional works to Courthouse Lane, Metropolis terrace and the strengthening of Freyberg Place for vehicle access to be undertaken.

Recommendation/s

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a) Endorse the final design proposal for Pioneer Women’s and Ellen Melville Hall and Freyberg Square upgrade to enable the start of the construction phase.

b) Endorse the new name of the community facility to be officially called the Ellen Melville Centre whilst retaining the heritage lettering Pioneer Women’s Memorial Hall on the outside of the building.

Comments

7. Council has received 337 pieces of feedback on the Pioneer Women’s and Ellen Melville Hall and Freyberg Square upgrade with strong support being expressed overall for both elements of the project.

8. In response to this formal feedback and workshops with local retailers, Heart of the City and the Auckland City Centre Advisory Board the design has been revised (see attachment B).

9. The final design proposal (see attachments B and C) incorporates all the viable changes that could be made to the consulted concept design as agreed at the 16 December 2015 ACCAB meeting. These changes include the following;

Freyberg Square:

· Freyberg Place to retain vehicular access in the short term allowing managed vehicle access through the square, moving from open access towards fully closed access – as resolved by the ACCAB on 16^th December 2015.

· Timber seating has been incorporated into the terraces and in all accessible areas (ground level, bank level and Metropolis podium level). Back rests and arms included.

· Additional seating incorporated into the shady areas of the site (under trees)

· Tree species and locations have been reviewed and moved to ensure less seed drop on to terrace/seating areas

· Additional cycle racks

· New water fountains

· Improved accessibility to and within the terraces, ensuring all elements of the design can be accessed by all

· New pedestrian link onto Metropolis land confirmed.

· Phoenix Palm trees to remain

· Greater incorporation of the Te Aranga Design Principles through the engagement of an iwi artist/facilitator.

Pioneer Women’s and Ellen Melville Hall:

· Baby changing facilities and showers incorporated into bathrooms

· Prayer water preparation facility incorporated

· Improved wayfinding within the building and outside of the building

· Additional cycle parking

10. On 24 February 2016, the ACCAB endorsed the final design proposal for Freyberg Square and Ellen Melville Centre and additional funding for the project, from the City Centre Targeted Rate works programme, which will enable the additional works to Courthouse Lane, Metropolis terrace and the strengthening of Freyberg Place for vehicle access to be undertaken.

11. Feedback from stakeholders about the length of and confusion with the existing name of the building has resulted in a suggestion to rename and rebrand the community facility to the Ellen Melville Centre. If approved this name will be used for marketing and branding purposes. The name Pioneer Women’s Memorial Hall currently found on the outside of the building will remain. Auckland Council staff will work with the National Council of Women of New Zealand to review and propose names to the Waitemata Local Board of the various spaces within the newly refurbished building after various pioneering New Zealand women. A report with the proposed names will be presented to the Board for a decision prior to the building’s opening. It is recommended that the upstairs hall continue to be named the Pioneer Women’s Hall.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

12. The Waitemata Local Board has been updated through workshops and business meetings on the Pioneer Women’s and Ellen Melville Hall and Freyberg Square final design proposal.

13. To date the project team has received general support for the final design proposal from the Waitemata Local Board (noting their strong opposition to Freyberg Place being open to vehicles) including the work to extend Courthouse Lane and the Metropolis connection which they believe is fundamental to the success of the square.

Māori impact statement

14. Engagement with iwi has occurred through the City Centre Integration mana whenua monthly hui. An iwi artist is collaborating with project artist John Reynolds to develop narratives and how these will manifest in the terraced area. The area of consideration is predominantly the water feature.

15. Mana whenua representatives on the City Centre Integration hui have expressed support for the consulted design proposal which has been driven by the Te Aranga Design principles.

Implementation

16. If approved, an implementation update on the Pioneer Women’s and Ellen Melville Hall and Freyberg Square upgrade will be provided at a future meeting once all the consents are gained and the project has concluded the tendering stage to confirm construction costs and timing.

17. Once the contractor is confirmed discussions regarding the minimisation of construction noise and disruption will be held.

18. It is possible that further funding may be required once construction costs are confirmed, as all figures to date have been based on Quantity Surveyor estimates; however, the project team is undertaking value engineering throughout the design stages to ensure the costs are closely managed.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Publically Consulted Concept Design Plan and 3D image - Freyberg Square and Ellen Melville Centre	83
b View	Final Design Proposal Plan - Freyberg Square and Ellen Melville Centre	85
c View	Ellen Melville Centre - Proposed Floor Plans	87

Signatories

Authors

Lisa Spasic - Senior Project Leader

Authorisers

Ralph Webster - Manager Development Programmes

John Dunshea - General Manager Development Programmes Office

Trina Thompson - Senior Local Board Advisor - Waitemata

Waitematā Local Board

08 March 2016

Auckland Transport Report - March 2016

File No.: CP2016/03416

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to: respond to requests from the Waitematā Local Board on transport-related matters, inform the board on the current status of the board’s Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF), facilitate decisions on proposed and current, LBTCF projects and to provide information to elected members about Auckland Transport (AT) activities.

Executive Summary

2. This report covers matters of specific application and interest to the Waitematā 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.

Recommendation/s

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a) Receives the Auckland Transport Report – March 2016 Report.

Comments

Monthly Overview

3. Auckland Transport attended a workshop on the 2 February 2016 with the Waitematā Board on;

· Quay Street Public Consultation feedback was presented.

· Cycleway concept for Parnell Rd to Tamaki Drive.

4. The monthly catch-up meeting was held on 17 February 2016. Board Member’s Coom and Dempsey were present and received updates on:

· The Ponsonby Road project consultation and proposal.

· Waitemata Cycleways projects.

· Central Rail Link discussion regarding Wynyard Road and Porters Rd.

· The consultation on the “Quay Street” cycling and walking project.

· Berm planting policy.

· Parking fund reserve discussion.

· Local Board transport capital fund projects.

· Current Street improvement project.

· Lourne Street Pocket Park platform.

Local board transport capital fund (LBTCF)

5. The Waitematā Local Board’s funding allocation under the LBTCF is currently $469,789 per annum.

6. The Board’s current LBTCF projects are included in the table below (in which ROC = rough order of costs, and FEC = firm estimate of cost):

ID#

Project Description

Progress/Current Status

216

· Newmarket Rail Station Artwork fencing

· FEC estimate of $5,000

· The Board approved $5,000 towards the project

· Handrail in manufacture, installation planned early/mid 2016

171

420

· Drinking Fountains Programme

· FEC estimate of $65,000

· The Board approved $27,288 for project 171

· Park Rd Grafton, Station Square Newmarket, Three Lamps Ponsonby

· Added in June 2014, Upper Queen St,

· The Board approved $ 37,712 for project 420

· Installation cost only, the funding was for drinking fountains to compliment AC/AT Cycling projects in the city

· Upper Queen St - Delivered

· Carlton Gore Rd - Delivered

· Nelson St - Delivered

· Final costs $27,288 and $12,847 Total $40,135

403

· Waitematā Greenways

· Grey Lynn Park – shared path

· Development of a wider, shared path that supports the Grey Lynn park development plan and the future Waitematā Greenways Route G1 cycle route

· The Board approved $350,000 towards the project

· In progress consultation being planned for the route

426

· Ponsonby Road pedestrian improvements

· Funding to create an improved pedestrian experience, including safety elements and amenity, on Ponsonby Road between Williamson and Franklin Road

· The Board approved $703,000 towards the project

· Design released for public consultation in November 2015

· Board approved work in McKelvie and raised treatments

· Final designs to be presented at workshop on the 1 March 2016

425

· Newmarket Laneways Streetscape improvements

· Funding for concept design development for the Newmarket Laneways Plan.

· Council has allocated $3.5m over the next two financial years to deliver the project

· The Board approved $500,000 towards the project

· Concept designs with expanded scope including York and Kent Streets underway

The Waitematā Local Board’s transport capital fund to date is summarised below.

Waitematā Local Board transport capital fund summary:

*Total funding available (across 4 FYs – 2012/12 to 2015/16)*	$1,879,156
Completed projects reporting actual costs:	$1,639,370
Funding available to be allocated (2012/13 – 2015/16	$216,786
Funding available of which can be brought forward from 2016/17 year	469,789
Funding still available to allocate	$686,575

Consultations

7. Public consultation has been undertaken on the proposals listed in the table below. Should any feedback by the Board wish to be made, the Board may choose to make its feedback through formal resolutions or request further engagement or a submissions analysis to be presented to the Board before a formal board position is made.

Recent Proposals Consulted On
*Proposal*	*Timeframe*
Tamaki Drive Cycleway Options	Closed 26 January 2016
401 – 403 Parnell Rd Vehicle crossing	Closed 26 January 2016
Surry Cres No Stopping Lines	Closed 15 January 2016
o/s 68 Nelson Street parking restriction re Youth Town	Closed 26 February 2016
o/s 143 Nelson Street drop off facility re Youth Town	Closed 26 February 2016
Progressives Ponsonby – Williamson Ave changes	Feedback by 1 March 2016

Quay Street Cycleway

8. Final plans were presented to the Board workshop on the 2 February 2016, contracts have been awarded and the project is to start on the 29 February 2016.

Curran Street / Sarsfield Street Intersection Improvements

9. This project has been reassessed as a potential public transport need, due to the proposed new network currently being consulted on. Board will be updated once a final decision is made regarding the public transport review and if there is a need to carry out further consultation.

Ponsonby Road Pedestrian Improvements

10. Auckland Transport in conjunction, with the Waitemata Local Board sought public feedback on proposed pedestrian improvements along Ponsonby Road, regarding two options, to improve the Ponsonby town centre by making more attractive and pedestrian friendly.

11. Proposed works included new raised tables at eight side streets, a central island on Mackelve Street. The relocation of three and addition of one pedestrian refuges, the relocation of a bus stop and footpath build out of the old indented stop and a net gain of 8 – 14 parking spaces 9depending on the option).

12. Feedback on the proposals was invited from 16 November to 7 December 2015. In total 129 feedback responses was received. 31 via freepost, 94 via online survey, three emails and 1 voice mail.

13. Submitters were asked to rank their support for the options from ‘strongly support’ to ‘strongly oppose’ for each of the two options. Some submitters chose not to enter a response.

14. Both options received more support than opposition and of the two options, option TWO received more support overall, as well as more ‘strongly support’ votes.

15. Eight common themes were identified in the feedback. These were refined to:

· Like proposed works (8 total comments for Option 1; 12 total comments for Option 2)

· Parking (29 total comments for Option 1; 30 total comments for Option 2)

· Cycling safety/facilities (19 total comments for Option1; 30 total comments for Option 2)

· Pedestrian safety/facilities (29 total comments for Option 1; 57 total comments for Option 2)

· Street furniture (7 total comments for Option 1; 13 total comments for Option 2)

· Raised tables (16 total comments for Option 1; 20 total comments for Option 2)

· Kerb buildouts / central island (6 total comments for Option 1; 9 total comments for Option 2)

· Mackelvie Street planting (11 total comments for Option 1; 17 total comments for Option 2)

16. As a result of the feedback received and after discussion with the Board Auckland Transport will adopt Option 2 with some very minor changes to the plantings in Mackelvie Street. Auckland Transport will provide the board with updated plans before closing out consultation.

Media

New Pine Harbour Ferry timetable starts end of February 2016

17. Residents of the Beachlands Maraetai community will benefit from an increased number of Pine Harbour Ferry sailings, including more services to ease congestion during peak times, and late night Friday services to and from the City, when a new timetable is introduced on Monday the 29th of February.

18. The timetable is being implemented after public consultation was held late last year, which confirmed strong local support for the proposed schedule changes.

19. Of the 541 submissions received, 86% of people said that the new timetable would encourage them to use the ferry more often, and 95% of people who don’t currently use the ferry said that the proposed changes would encourage them to give it a go.

20. The results of a separate public survey carried out by the Pohutukawa Coast Community Association were also considered, and have helped influence the final outcome.

21. Auckland Transport Ferry Services is grateful to the community for the high level of feedback and as a result of such have made a number of changes to accommodate public demand where possible.

22. Following public feedback, changes to the timetable that was initially proposed in the consultation include

· pushing back the departure time of the final service leaving Downtown to allow people more flexibility on weeknights.

· later sailings on Friday nights for people staying out in the City.

· modified early afternoon sailings to accommodate parents collecting their children from Beachlands School.

· improved late morning services.

23. In total, the new timetable will provide eight extra services every day between Monday to Thursday, and twelve additional services on a Friday, compared to the current timetable. This is more than a 25% increase in service throughout the week.

24. Information about the new timetable will be available on board the Pine Harbour Ferry and on the Auckland Transport website at least a week before implementation, so people can plan their journeys ahead of time.

25. Auckland Transport believes that from the promising results received in the survey and the changes made as a result of feedback, the new timetable will benefit not only current ferry users, but will also attract new customers. Unfortunately, Auckland Transport were unable to introduce weekend services at this moment in time, but hope to be able to reconsider later this year.

26. The Beachlands Maraetai public transport survey was undertaken between 19 October to 2 November 2015. The additional services are being facilitated by Sealink’s new ferry vessel, Clipper V, which has been operational since December 2015 to allow maintenance works to be completed on the other vessels within the SeaLink fleet.

27. Analysis of the feedback from the survey related to bus services is still underway, and information about the next steps will be announced later this year.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

28. This report is for the Local Board’s information and action as required.

Māori impact statement

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

Implementation

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

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors	Ivan Trethowen – Elected Member Relationship Manager , Auckland Transport
Authorisers	Jonathan Anyon - Elected Member Relationship Team Manager, Auckland Transport

Waitematā Local Board

08 March 2016

Pembridge House 31 Princes Street, Auckland Central – Application for Commercial Lease to The University of Auckland

File No.: CP2016/03322

Purpose

1. To ratify the term of a new commercial lease to The University of Auckland for Pembridge House, 31 Princes Street, Auckland Central.

Executive Summary

2. Pembridge House, built in circa 1876 is a two level listed heritage building owned by Auckland Council. The University of Auckland (‘the University”) has recently approached Auckland Council to lease Pembridge House, 31 Princes Street Auckland Central for an initial term of 10 years plus two 5 year rights of renewal. The total available term will be 20 years.

3. Current discussion with the University involves Auckland Council approving their proposed lease and interior refurbishment for classroom learning purposes. Their refurbishment will require both resource and building consent, with heritage considerations and capabilities resourced from within the University.

Recommendation/s

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a) That the Waitemata Local Board ratify a commercial lease offer is made to the University of Auckland at Pembridge House, 31 Princes Street, Auckland Central, subject to the following terms and conditions:

(i) that an initial lease term of 10 years with two 5 year rights of renewal is agreed;

(ii) the above lease is granted on the condition that the University of Auckland carry out the interior refurbishment works in accordance with the approved plans and consents for the property;

(iii) that the University undertake all refurbishment and seismic strengthening works including obtaining all necessary engineering approvals and heritage consents;

Content

4. Auckland Council has identified that seismic strengthening is needed to be undertaken to the building to bring it to 67% New Building Standard (NBS). Pembridge House was previously estimated at 62% NBS, however this is under review with engineers Fraser Thomas. The minimum the University will accept is 67% NBS when leasing any property for occupation. This is in line with the minimum requirement of central Government occupiers.

5. A lease to the University of Auckland will provide a credible and substantive contribution to the heritage preservation of Pembridge House. The University has its own experience and capabilities when preserving its own heritage portfolio. The University’s resources add to the attraction for entering into a long term lease arrangement.

6. The University, as long term owners and occupiers of property in the vicinity, requires up to 20 year term as a result of the financial commitment they will be making to the building. The precise amount of money cant be quantified until the engineer has scoped the work and it has been through the heritage and consenting processes, however initial indications of cost are in excess of $1 million.

7. Pānuku has the delegation to negotiate commercial lease terms for non-service premises pursuant to the Auckland Improvement Act 1971. However, given the location of the premises in relation to Albert Park, the Waitemata Local Board is seen as an integral stakeholder, and is requested to provide its support to the University’s application before proceeding.

8. In association with the Waitemata Local Board, Councils Heritage Unit is developing guidelines for earthquake prone historic heritage and character buildings with a concept retrofit at 27 Princes Street as an exemplar project. These guidelines and approaches would also apply to Pembridge House.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

9. The Local Board may already be aware of lease interest expressed by the University of Auckland. There are no known implications when supporting a lease to The University of Auckland for relocating the Confucius Institute.

Māori impact statement

10. Pānuku has a comprehensive Iwi engagement process that engages with the 19 key Mana Whenua groups in the Tamaki region on four fronts: identifying cultural significance concerns regarding disposal and development properties, flagging commercial interests, development partnering discussions and engagement around design outcomes for council driven development projects. Pānuku has also undertaken to be part of council’s Maori Responsiveness Plan pilot program. The project’s key output will be an operational document outlining how Pānuku will contribute to council’s strategic and operational commitments to Maori. As there is no real change to the property for use as a place of learning, there has been no Iwi engagement undertaken in respect of the lease application.

Implementation

11. If the Local Board supports above recommendation, Pānuku Development Auckland will proceed with negotiating commercial terms with The University of Auckland for Pembridge House 31 Princes Street, Auckland Central.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Site of Pembridge House	101

Signatories

Authors

Ian Campbell – Property Manager - Pānuku Development Auckland

Reviewer

Pene Jackson - Team Leader Commercial Property Management - Pānuku Development Auckland

Authorisers

Margrit de Man - Property Portfolio Manager - Pānuku Development Auckland

Ian Wheeler - Manager portfolio Directorate - Pānuku Development Auckland

Waitematā Local Board

08 March 2016

Approval of Conference - Financial Governance 201 - Wellington (LGNZ)

File No.: CP2016/03517

Purpose

1. This report informs Local Boards about the Financial Governance 201 Conference hosted by LGNZ in Wellington on 15 April 2016 and invites the board to give approval for Member Vernon Tava to attend.

Executive Summary

2. The Financial Governance 201 is being hosted at the LGNZ office in Wellington on 15 April 2016.

3. Following on from Financial Governance 101, this workshop gives a deeper understanding of reporting requirements, treasury management tools and financial options based on asset information, exploring how they impact on financial decisions.

4. The session will be tailored around actual issues and questions presented by the attendees, using relevant case studies.

Recommendation/s

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a) Approve Member Vernon Tava’s attendance at LGNZ Financial Governance 201 on 15 April 2016 at a cost of $1031.84 (registration fee of $680 plus flight tickets at a maximum price of $351.84), to be funded from the FY15/16 professional development budget.

Comments

5. The Financial Governance 201 is being hosted at the LGNZ office in Wellington on 15 April 2016.

6. The workshop offers an insight on reporting requirements, treasury management tools and financial options based on asset information. It will include discussions on financial governance based on actual cases presented on the day.

7. As Finance Committee portfolio holder and having completed the Financial Governance 101 conference, member Tava would directly benefit from this follow up session, which covers topics such as internal and external financial reporting, treasury choices and funding opportunities and financial options based on asset information. Getting a deeper understanding of debt and rating issues will contribute to improve the Board’s ability to provide feedback on financial-related Council proposals.

Costs

8. The Waitemata Local Board Professional Development budget for the 2015/16 FY is $10,500.00.

9. To date, $1,796.96 has been allocated, leaving a balance of $8703.04.

10. The registration fee for LGNZ Financial Governance 201 is $680 (excl. GST).

11. The return flight to Wellington on April 15 will cost a maximum amount of $351.84, as per quote received from the Travel Coordinator for a flexible rate option.

12. Based on the registration fee and flight ticket for member Tava, a total of $1031.84 would be required.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors	Corina Claps - PA/Liaison Waitemata Local Board
Authorisers	Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Waitematā Local Board

08 March 2016

Draft Business Improvement District Policy (2016) – local board feedback

File No.: CP2016/02629

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to invite local boards to provide formal feedback on the draft Business Improvement District (BID) Policy (2016).

Executive Summary

2. The May 2015 Budget Committee approved a review of the BID policy to be undertaken in collaboration with business improvement districts and local boards. The committee also approved a new service delivery model for Auckland Council’s BID programme team. Both need to be operational by 1 July 2016, as per resolution number BUD/2015/62.

3. The primary objective for reviewing the 2011 policy is to clarify and confirm the roles, responsibilities and accountability required for each of the partner groups that have a key role in delivering the Auckland BID Programme. The review is required, as there will be significant changes to the roles of the different partner groups, as part of the move to the new service delivery model. BID Policy (2016) project scope does not include a review of the principles of having a BID programme.

4. BID programmes are based on Auckland Council collecting a targeted rate for core funding – collected using powers under the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002. They are represented by business associations, which are independent incorporated societies sitting outside Auckland Council. Local boards have the primary relationship with business associations operating BID programmes in their area.

5. The December 2015 Regional Strategy and Policy Committee approved the draft policy for consultation (resolution number REG/2015/103).

6. The BID Policy (2016) includes two separate but linked parts:

· Part 1 – Policy – sets the rules “the what to do”

· Part 2 - Policy Operating Standards – “the how to do”

7. Business associations operating existing BID programmes, local boards and stakeholders have had opportunities to input into the development of BID Policy (2016).

8. Local boards are now being invited to provide formal feedback on a revised draft policy (attachment A the policy and attachment B the operating standards).

9. Feedback from local boards will help shape the further development of BID Policy (2016). It would be, however, particularly useful to get local board views on a number of matters outlined below:

i. Are local boards’ roles and responsibilities clear in respect of BID programmes?

ii. Do you agree that BID programmes below $100k target rate income per annum should (normally) have audited financial accounts every two financial years to reduce costs for smaller BID programmes?

iii. Do you consider that the processes outlined to handle problems, issues and serious concerns are fair to all parties and provide enough clarity?

10. Officers are working to ensure that the policy aligns with Auckland Council’s Māori Responsiveness Framework and are in contact with the Independent Maori Statutory Board to discuss relevant opportunities to leverage the Auckland BID Programme.

Recommendation/s

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a) Provides feedback on the draft Business Improvement District Policy (2016) or,

b) Delegates to the chair and member(s) to provide feedback on the draft Business Improvement District Policy (2016) before the feedback deadline of 31 March 2016.

Comments

BID programmes

11. BID programmes are based on Auckland Council collecting a targeted rate to provide core funding to business associations using powers under the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002. The business associations, which are independent incorporated societies sitting outside Auckland Council, deliver the BID programmes.

12. BID programmes are established to develop local business prosperity and local economic development. They are defined by a partnership agreement between each business association and Auckland Council, in which both parties agree to operate within the BID Policy.

13. Local boards have the primary relationship with business associations operating BID programmes in their area including:

i. As collaboration partners – local boards and business associations have a vested interest in a particular place and share similar goals. Working collaboratively will achieve greater outcomes.

ii. As governors – local boards have significant decision-making responsibly for BID programmes, including recommending to the governing body to strike a BID programme target rate and around BID programme establishments, expansions amalgamations and disputes.

BID Policy (2016)

14. The May 2015 Budget Committee approved a review of the BID policy to be undertaken in collaboration with business improvement districts and local boards. The committee also approved a new service delivery model for the Auckland Council BID programme team. Both need to be operational by 1 July 2016, as per resolution number BUD/2015/62.

15. The primary objective for reviewing the 2011 policy is to clarify and confirm the roles, responsibilities and accountability required for each of the partner groups that have a key role in delivering the Auckland BID Programme. The review is required, as there will be significant changes to the roles of the different partner groups, as part of the move to the new service delivery model. BID Policy (2016) project scope does not include a review of the principles of having a BID programme.

16. The BID Policy (2016) establishes the rules and responsibilities of the Auckland BID Programme. It will replace the Auckland Region Business Improvement District Policy (2011), from the date of adoption by Auckland Council.

17. The BID Policy (2016) includes two separate but linked parts:

· Part 1 – Policy – sets the rules “the what to do”

· Part 2 - Policy Operating Standards – “the how to do”.

18. The December 2015 Regional Strategy and Policy Committee approved the draft policy for consultation (resolution number REG/2015/103). Business associations operating BID programmes were invited to provide feedback on the draft policy by 18 December 2015.

Consultation to date

19. The consultation process commenced in September 2015 and partners and stakeholders have had a number of opportunities to provide feedback.

20. Business associations (operating BID programmes) have been invited to attend a number of workshops in September and November to discuss the key themes for policy change and the draft policy. Sixteen separate written submissions on the draft policy were received by business associations by the 18 December deadline.

21. Key sector and industry groups that are represented in BID programme areas and subject matter experts have been asked for feedback on the draft policy. Feedback has been received from Independent Election Services and The Property Institute.

22. Other stakeholders have indicated that they will provide feedback in the next few weeks. Feedback from stakeholders will be incorporated into the revised draft policy.

Differences between BID Policy 2011 and 2016 and feedback received

23. There are a number of key themes for policy change that have helped shape the development of the draft BID Policy (2016). The themes have been discussed as part of the consultation process with local boards, business associations operating BID programmes and key stakeholders. The table below provides details of the key themes for change between the 2011 and 2016 policies, feedback received and the draft policy response to this feedback.

Key themes for change, feedback received and draft policy response

Key themes for change	Differences between 2011 and 2016	Feedback received and response
Clarify and confirm partner roles	Clearer definitions of the roles of each of the key Auckland BID Programme partners	Feedback: · Business associations concerned about the stated local board delegations Draft policy response: Added wording to clarify the overall intent of these delegations - there should be a focus on creating a collaborative and aspirational relationship between a local board and a business association operating a BID programme · Feedback from local boards and local board services team that some of the draft responsibilities of local board representatives on BID programme boards were not appropriate Draft policy response: Draft roles amended to reflect feedback received.
Accountability - keep full financial audits or proportional relating to size of BID (target rate)	Audits for all BID programmes must report on areas of financial control	Feedback: Business associations were overall in favour of keeping audits. Mixed feedback from local boards - a majority keen to keep audits but others requesting a financial review or proportional requirement to BID programme size. Draft policy response: keep audits but: · BID programmes with target rate income of $100,000 per annum or greater - audits every financial year · BID programmes with a target rate income under $100,000 per annum – audits every two financial years - subject to no serious concerns from previous audit.
Resolution of issues	Clearer definition of issues, concerns and the processes to resolve	Feedback: Concern from a number of business associations that the policy steps too soon into intervention by Auckland Council Draft policy response: Relevant sections in both parts of the policy have been re-written to provide a staged response with a significant number of steps before Auckland Council would consider intervention in the management of the BID programme.
Rating mechanisms -Increasing baseline for new BID programmes	The minimum required for a new BID programme establishment is increased from $50,000 to $120,000 (target rate only)	Feedback: BID programmes were overall in favour of increasing the baseline. Mixed feedback from local boards - some agreed with increasing the minimum but others thought that it would disadvantage smaller and/or less prosperous business areas. Draft policy response: Ideal minimum changed to $120,000 but still with the option to explore new BID programme establishment for proposed target rates less than this on a case-by-case basis (subject to the BID programme proponents meeting establishment criteria outlined in Policy Operating Standards).

Local board feedback on BID Policy (2016)

24. Local boards have provided some feedback at the 19 workshops during September and October 2015 on the key themes of accountability, new BID programme establishment and programme leverage.

25. Local boards are now being asked to provide formal feedback on a revised draft policy (attachment A the policy and attachment B the operating standards).

26. Feedback from local boards will help shape the further development of BID Policy (2016). It would be, however, particularly useful to get local board views on a number of matters outlined below:

i. Are local boards’ roles and responsibilities clear in respect of BID programmes?

ii. Do you agree that BID programmes below $100k target rate income per annum should (normally) have audited financial accounts every two financial years to reduce costs for smaller BID programmes?

iii. Do you consider that the processes outlined to handle problems, issues and serious concerns are fair to all parties and provide enough clarity?

Next steps

27. Feedback from local boards, external stakeholders and any further feedback from business associations (operating BID programmes) will be reviewed by officers and this will help inform the further development of the policy. Officers will then hold a second joint workshop with Regional Strategy and Policy Committee members and local board chairs and/or ED portfolio holders in mid-April, before seeking approval of the final draft version of the policy at the 5 May 2016 committee meeting.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

28. The consultation process commenced in September 2015 and local boards have had a number of opportunities to provide feedback including:

· A memo was sent to local board members and councillors on 16 September 2015 outlining the purpose and proposed process for developing the policy.

· Following the memo, officers provided a briefing to the Local Board Chair’s Forum on 28 September 2015

· During September and October 2015, officers attended 19 local board workshops to seek feedback on the proposed key themes for policy change

· The draft BID Policy (2016) was work-shopped with members of the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee, local board chairs and local board economic development portfolio holders on 5 November 2015. This workshop provided a progress update and outlined the feedback received from both BID programmes and local boards to date

· A second memo was sent to local board members on 1 December 2015, providing an update on the policy development process, attaching the draft BID Policy (2016) and a summary of local board and business association feedback to date.

Māori impact statement

29. Officers are working with Auckland Council’s Te Waka Angamua Department to ensure that the BID Policy (2016) aligns with the Auckland Council’s Māori Responsiveness Framework.

30. Officers are in contact with the Independent Māori Statutory Board to discuss the policy and opportunities to leverage the Auckland BID Programme.

31. Paragraph 1.9 of the BID Policy 2016 (part 1) outlines the potential to leverage the Auckland BID Programme under the new operational model, working initially within Auckland Council to identify potential opportunities. For example, this could include working closely with key stakeholders and business associations to investigate and pilot opportunities to provide assistance to Māori businesses or facilitate Māori economic development.

Implementation

32. The BID (Policy) 2016 and the new BID Programme Team service delivery model are intended to become operational on 1 July 2016.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Draft Business Improvement District (BID) Policy 2016 - Part 1	137
b View	Draft Business Improvement District (BID) Policy 2016 - Part 2	179

Signatories

Authors

Stephen Cavanagh- BID Partnership Advisor

Authorisers

Alastair Cameron - Manager,CCO/External Partnerships team

Karen Lyons - Manager Local Board Services

Waitematā Local Board

08 March 2016

Feedback on the Draft Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group Plan

File No.: CP2016/02762

Purpose

1. To seek local board feedback on the draft Civil Defence and Emergency Management (CDEM) Group Plan 2016 -2021, noting that the draft CDEM Group Plan advocates for each local board to develop local emergency management plans.

Executive Summary

2. Auckland Council is required under the Civil Defence and Emergency Management Act (2002) to develop and review the direction for civil defence and emergency activities within Auckland through a five yearly review of the Civil Defence and Emergency Management (CDEM) Group Plan. The current CDEM Group Plan for Auckland is due to expire in June 2016.

3. A draft Auckland Civil Defence and Emergency Management (CDEM) Group Plan 2016-2021 (draft Group Plan) has been developed for consultation (a copy is appended as Attachment A). The draft Group Plan is primarily centred on community empowerment and resilience across all environments (social, economic, environmental and infrastructure).

4. This report asks the board to provide feedback on the draft Group Plan, with particular reference to the proposal for local boards to champion development of local emergency management plans, and the role of elected members in a civil defence emergency.

Recommendation/s

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a) Provides feedback on the draft Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group Plan 2016-2021, with particular reference to local priorities for emergency management.

Comments

5. The Auckland CDEM Group is a statutory committee of Auckland Council as required under section 12 of the CDEM Act. The CDEM Group has overall responsibility for the provision of CDEM within Auckland. It comprises five elected members of the Auckland Council and a number of co-opted observers from CDEM agencies invited by the committee to attend.

6. The CDEM Group has delegated authority to develop, approve, implement, and monitor the CDEM Group Plan. The purpose of the Group Plan is to enable the effective, efficient and coordinated delivery of CDEM across Auckland while building a resilient Auckland with our communities. All CDEM groups are required every five years to consult on the development of group plans under the CDEM Act (2002). The current Group Plan for Auckland expires at the end of 2016.

7. The draft Group Plan has been developed as a framework for action which will form the basis for more detailed business planning and development of civil defence and emergency management work programmes. The key framework areas for consultation are:

· Knowledge through education

· Volunteer participation

· Emergency Management planning

· Business and organisational resilience

· Strong partnerships

· Response capability and capacity

· Information and communications technologies

· Build Back better

· A safe city

· Research

· Building resilient communities

8. Local boards are well placed to help with leadership, championing resilience and local engagement in their respective communities. The draft Group Plan proposes that this role be formalised through the development of local CDEM plans. It is anticipated that the development of local CDEM plans will provide further opportunity for local boards to determine their role in a civil defence emergency.

9. Actions described in further detail on page 37 of the attached draft Group Plan respond to feedback received from local board workshops that local boards wanted a more formalised, simple mechanism to support their communities in planning and responding to emergencies.

10. Public consultation timelines on the draft Group Plan is from 15 February to 18 April 2016 with significant consultation as part of the Have your Say annual plan events. The final Group Plan is due to be formally adopted by the CDEM Committee in August 2016.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

11. Local board portfolio holders have been briefed on issues relevant to the draft Group Plan and, on their recommendation, workshops were held with 20 of the local boards in October 2015. The results of these workshops helped formulate relevant sections of the draft Group Plan.

12. Local board views on the draft Group Plan are being sought in this report. Subject to consultation, the Group Plan indicates a wider role for local boards in emergency management.

Māori impact statement

13. Māori will have the opportunity to submit on the draft Group Plan during the statutory consultation phase.

14. In addition, the CDEM department are developing a Māori Responsiveness Plan to support a more proactive approach to engaging iwi and mataawaka in emergency management planning.

Implementation

15. The draft Group Plan is to be adopted by the CDEM Committee in August 2016. The Group Plan is also provided to the Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management for review. The flow chart appended as Attachment B to this report provides further information on the process for developing and implementing the Group Plan.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Draft Auckland Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group Plan 2016-2021	281
b View	Process for developing the draft Group Plan	345

Signatories

Authors

Janice Miller – Manager Logistics, Civil Defence and Emergency Management

Authorisers

John Dragicevich – Civil Defence and Emergency Management Manager

Relationship Manager

Karen Lyons – Manager Local Board Services

Waitematā Local Board

08 March 2016

Community Led Small Build Programme

File No.: CP2016/02996

Purpose

1. This report provides an update on the implementation of the Community Led Small Build programme (‘the programme’).

2. This report also requests that Waitematā Local Board delegate to one or more board members to provide the Local Board’s views on new applications to the programme.

3. For Community Led Small Build projects the Waitematā Local Board will have a decision making role in relation to funding of projects or where projects are to be located on land or in a facility that the local board is the land owner or has delegated decision making.

Executive Summary

4. The programme has been developed following feedback from local boards and community groups on the barriers that communities encounter when trying to progress small build projects for themselves.

5. This initiative aims to support community groups who want to deliver assets for their wider community, examples include changing sheds, connecting paths, public art or refurbished kitchens in community halls. The intention is to support projects that are community priorities and community led, as such at least 80% of the funding or resources need to come from the community with no more than 20% from rate payer sources, for example, local boards LDI Capex or business improvement districts.

6. Projects that do not require funding from local boards will also be eligible. In these cases the local board views will be a factor in deciding whether the project is supported through the programme.

7. For all new applications in the Waitematā Local Board area the Board will be asked for their views on whether the project is consistent with the priorities and preferences of the wider community and on the capability of the community group to deliver. A delegation is requested from the Waitematā Local Board to ensure that new applications can be progressed quickly.

8. If the project is planned to be located on land or in a facility that the local board is the land owner or has delegated decision making on, local board consent will be sought through the standard processes and delegation protocols. .

9. When allocating resources council has to balance community led initiatives with their responsibility to all rate payers. For this reason the programme is focused on simple, smaller projects with the majority of funding coming from the community. The criteria are:

· straight forward and standalone projects

· project cost of $250k or less (including valuing in-kind contributions but not including consent fees)

· community contribution (cash or in-kind) of 80% or greater

· the project is agreed between the community group and council staff prior to work commencing (includes technical and health and safety considerations)

· the project creates an asset, usually on land owned or managed by council, that is accessible to the wider community

10. The support provided by council will include a single point of contact in the new Community Facilities department, a toolkit, consent fees generally covered by council and ongoing maintenance of assets vesting with council. Strategic Brokers in the new Community Empowerment team will also play a key role in working with community groups to build capacity.

11. Implementation of the programme is underway starting with a trial of two community led projects, a bike track in Grey Lynn and a bunkhouse in Whangaparaoa.

12. The programme will be rolled out in full once the initial stages of the pilot projects are evaluated in early 2016. The programme will be evaluated after the first year. The community groups involved and local boards will be asked to provide their feedback as part of that evaluation.

Recommendation/s

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a) Receives the update on the Community Led Small Build programme

b) Delegates to [X] to provide the Local Board’s views on new applications for the programme in the Waitematā Local Board area.

Comments

13. The programme is aimed at supporting communities who want to deliver assets of value to their wider community. The types of projects that may receive support include paths, public art, refurbished kitchens in a community hall or changing sheds. The programme is not designed to support ongoing operational activities. For example if the proposed project is to build a new community garden this programme could support the building of the garden beds and paths, but not the ongoing use of the garden.

14. The programme will predominantly support initiatives on land owned or managed by council however there may be exceptions for projects on land owned by others. Accessibility by the wider community will be a key factor in considering these exceptions.

15. Council has to balance enabling community initiatives with ensuring use of council resources is providing value to rate payers across Auckland. Projects supported through this programme will not be assessed using council’s usual prioritisation frameworks, such as asset management plans, and so need to be simple, smaller projects with the majority of funding coming from the community. As outlined in the executive summary these are key considerations in setting the following criteria for the programme:

· straight forward and standalone projects

· project cost of $250k or less (including valuing in-kind contributions but not including consent fees)

· community contribution (cash or in-kind) of 80% or greater

· the project is agreed between the community group and council staff prior to work commencing (includes technical and health and safety considerations)

· the project creates an asset that is accessible to the wider community (fees can be charged to cover costs and the asset can be secured when not in use)

16. Projects that require notification during the resource consents process will not be considered straightforward unless the notification requirements are limited and all affected landowners provide their support. The requirement for the project to be standalone refers to it not being a part of a larger project, as this could add complexity to the consenting process and is likely to take total costs beyond the $250k threshold.

17. Community groups may receive funding for their project from local board discretionary funds, other council funds (such as the Waste Minimisation Innovation Fund) or a Business Improvement District, however in total this cannot exceed more than 20% of the project cost.

18. The support provided by council will include:

· A single point of contact in council (a project co-ordinator)

· A toolkit including procurement guidance, health and safety checklists and community engagement guidance.

· Consent fees covered by council

· Ongoing maintenance of assets vesting with council

19. Projects will go through a simplified project management process with 4 phases – Apply and Assess, Planning, Delivery and Asset Handover/Evaluation. Gateway assessments during these phases will cover issues such as health and safety, technical requirements and consistency with regional policy and plans.

20. Implementation of the programme is underway starting with a trial of two community led projects, a bike track in Grey Lynn and a bunkhouse in Whangaparaoa. The Grey Lynn Pump Track is a proposed sealed all weather bike track at the northern end of Grey Lynn Park. The Waitematā Local Board support the project and may provide funding.

21. The bunkhouse is proposed overflow accommodation for the Peter Snell Youth Village. The Hibiscus and Bays Local Board support the project but are not providing funding and the project is on land not owned or managed by council. The Peter Snell Youth Village bunkhouse is being used in the pilot to test a project that is not on council land. Accessibility is an important factor for projects not on council land, a fee to cover costs can be charged and assets can be secured when not in use. The Peter Snell Youth Village provides facilities to schools, youth clubs and holiday programmes and provides an opportunity to test the accessibility criteria.

22. The Community Facilities Department, established through the Services Reshape, will be responsible for delivery of the Community Led Small Build programme going forward. A Community Led Projects Co-ordinator will be appointed to lead this programme and facilitate the appropriate level of support across council for each project.

23. Early in 2016, once the initial stages of the two pilot projects have been assessed, the programme will be rolled out more broadly across all local board areas. The programme will be trialled for a year to assess its effectiveness in assisting community groups to deliver assets of value. Those community groups involved and local boards will be asked to provide their feedback as part of that evaluation.

24. Local boards will play an important role in community led small build projects including:

Developing the idea with the community group, ensuring that the views of the wider community are considered

· Potentially providing up to 20% funding

· Providing input into the assessment of new applications

· Promoting the initiative, encouraging support and volunteers across the wider community

· Launch activities and supporting ongoing use of the asset

25. Local board input is important to ensure that the right community initiatives are supported. In particular the Waitematā Local Board will be asked to comment on whether a proposed project is consistent with the priorities and preferences of the surrounding community as reflected in the Waitematā Local Board Plan. The capacity of the community group to deliver the project is also a factor that local board input may be asked for.

26. A delegation is requested from the Waitematā Local Board to one or more board members to provide input on new applications. The delegation is aimed at speeding up the progress for community groups with new applications by eliminating delay due to meeting schedules.

27. If Waitematā Local Board decide to support a community led small build initiative with funding this needs to be managed through a separate process and formally approved by the Board. However, to reduce the demands on the community group the accountability report (on final delivery of project) could be used both for the local board funding requirements and the programme.

28. Local boards will be provided with regular updates on projects that are receiving support under the programme including an update on which projects are at application stage, planning stage, delivery stage and asset handover/evaluation.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

29. This programme has been developed based on feedback from community groups and local boards that council needs to ‘get out of the way’ for communities who want to deliver small, straightforward initiatives for themselves.

30. An initial proposed approach was presented to Local Board Chairs on 27 July 2015. Local Board Chairs were generally supportive of the approach although questioned whether the $250,000 limit on project cost and 20% funding limit from council were too low. This feedback will be considered when the programme is evaluated after the first year. The applications for support in the first year will provide an indication of whether the current programme design and criteria is effective in supporting community priorities.

Māori impact statement

31. Community groups wanting to improve outcomes for Māori will be able to access this programme. The Community Led Projects Co-ordinator can organise access to expertise within council to support the community group to achieve their goal.

32. Where any aspects of a proposed project are anticipated to have a significant impact on sites of importance to mana whenua, appropriate consultation will follow, led by the Resource Consents team.

Implementation

33. This programme is aligned with the community empowerment model being implemented by council. Strategic Brokers will play an important role in promoting use of the programme and building the capacity and capability of community groups to deliver small build initiatives.

34. The community group leading a project under the programme is responsible for the delivery of the project; however to different degrees they will be reliant on input from council staff. Simple projects will predominantly be delivered by the community group with a low level of reliance on council process. More comprehensive projects will need more project management, technical input and will need to go through the consenting process.

35. Council will endeavour not to cause delay to a Community Led Small Build project over and above the necessary time required for consents, health and safety, legal and procurement processes.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Karen Titulaer - Senior Advisor Strategic Partnerships

Authorisers

Dean Kimpton - Chief Operating Officer

Karen Lyons - Manager Local Board Services

Waitematā Local Board

08 March 2016

Deputy Chair Report

File No.: CP2016/03533

Purpose

1. This report covers my Waitematā Local Board activities from 1 February – 29 February 2016 as Deputy Chair, lead for the Community and Transport portfolios, and Chair of the Grants Committee, and with positions on the Ponsonby Business Association Board and Ponsonby Community Centre Committee and Board liaison for the Parnell Community Centre.

Recommendation/s

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a) Receives the Deputy Chair Report

Portfolio updates

Community Empowerment

Since October 2015 Auckland Council has been in the process of implementing an empowered communities approach to community development. The new operating model involves a shift from Council delivering community development activities, to using community-led development processes. The new approach requires Council’s operational practices to allow more people to participate and for budgets to be devolved to communities as much as possible.

The Board has been supportive of the change in approach and we welcomed our new Strategic Broker Shamila Unka at the end of last year. Shamila will be based part time at the Board’s new offices at 52 Swanson Street.

We have however been concerned to ensure a smooth transition and that none of the local board’s priorities are over looked in the new structure.

The leadership team of the new Community Empowerment Unit led by Christine Olsen met with the central area community development portfolio holders in early February and the whole Unit held a very informative Open Day for all elected representatives on 29 February (photo right of Cr Cathy Casey at the Open Day)

Community development work programme

Priorities of the community development portfolio for 2016 include:

· Review and refresh of the Board’s accessibility plan

· Support for Council’s Homeless Action Plan

· Continuing the upkeep of Waitemata’s community facilities

· Transitioning community centres to 3 yearly agreements

· Supporting the work of the Waitematā Youth Collective and development of a city centre youth hub

· Provision of temporary meeting spaces in the city centre during the Ellen Meville Hall upgrade period

· Child Friendly City Accreditation

· Supporting community empowerment projects such as the community- led design process for 254 Ponsonby Road

Community consultation – Annual budget 2016/17

The Council’s annual consultation on the budget for the following year got underway in mid-February. As part of the process the Board also seeks feedback on our local priorities and new proposals.

Waitematā Local Board key priorities outlined in the consultation material: Based on our 10-year budget, in 2016/2017 we plan to invest $11 million to renew and develop assets in your local board area and $23 million to maintain and operate these assets and provide other local initiatives. This includes:

· renewing existing assets ($2.4 million)

· completing stage two of Myers Park including the improved entranceway at Mayoral Drive and installation of a splash pad ($3.3 million)

· completing the Weona-Westmere coastal walkway ($360,000)

· re-developing Pioneer Women's and Ellen Melville Hall ($3.4 million)

· commencing delivery of a streetscape improvement project from the agreed Newmarket Laneways Plan ($1.4 million)

· delivering the new Fukuoka gardens in Western Springs park ($40,000)

It is proposed the following additional local priorities for 2016/2017 are funded through local discretionary budgets:

· improve the pathways through Western Park and upgrade the Pt Resolution steps to concrete

· install a new pathway through Symonds Street Cemetery to connect Karangahape Road to Grafton Gully cycleway

· increase spend on low carbon initiatives to help Waitematā lower carbon use and become more energy-resilient including the installation of photovoltaics at Grey Lynn Community Centre

· increase the budget for the annual Myers Park festival to provide an even better local event

· investigate the feasibility of establishing a youth hub in the city centre

· install a solar heating solution at Parnell Baths

· continue to put children and young people first and achieve UNICEF Child Friendly City accreditation

· support community-led development and place making such as the open space design for 254 Ponsonby Road and the development of a bicycle pump track at Grey Lynn Park

The Board is also considering allocating budget to change the service levels to increase maintenance of headstones and removal of graffiti at the historic Symonds Street Cemetery.

I’ve raised concerns with the regional consultation team about the poor level of communication to promote local board consultation events and the inaccessibility of the material online.

Fortunately we have a fantastic local board team who have been doing a great job on our behalf working alongside local community groups to arrange consultation events and opportunities to give feedback.

Due to a range of issues with promoting the Annual Budget 2016/17 consultation material the feedback period has been extended to 24 March.

Transport

At our first transport portfolio meeting of the year we discussed a long list of updates with Auckland Transport representatives including:

· Ponsonby Road pedestrian experience project: The proposals for improving Ponsonby Road for people walking were consulted on from from 16 November to 7 December 2015. In total, 129 feedback responses were received with a large majority expressing strong support for the project overall. The results and recommendations for next steps will be reported back on our April agenda.

· Cycleway progress and implementation with Kathryn King, Manager of Walking & Cycling: AT plans to seek feedback in March from Western Bays residents on preferences for making the area more attractive for cycling. We raised the issue of the many outstanding small fixes to the existing cycle way network that we are concerned are getting forgotten with the focus on an extensive capital work programme. It was good to hear that many are underway such as contra- flows for cycling on one way streets including Crummer Road (first included in our Local Board Agreement 2011/12)

· Quay Street update: The design for a two-way separated cycleway on Quay Street leading from Lower Hobson Street, past Princess Wharf to Plumer Street has been confirmed. Completion is expected in May 2017.

· CRL update: Options are being considered for closing the rail crossing on Porters Ave just off New North Road on the boundary of the Waitemata Local Board area. This has an impact on the residents and businesses of Albert – Eden.

· Nelson Street parking: Auckland Transport consulted the transport portfolio before removing the parking on Nelson St between Wellesley and Victoria Streets alongside the cycleway. We didn’t object to the removal as occupancy was low and the poor layout was causing a lot of confusion for drivers. However we did ask AT to actively work with the NZ Police to enforce the speed limit on Nelson St (the parked cars had the benefit of slowing down the traffic).

· Private Planting in Road Corridor: AT’s long awaited berm planting guidelines are expected to come back to Local Boards for comment shortly

· Parking Fund Reserve: Approximately $100k is available to fund car parking. The transport portfolio has asked that a proposal to leverage this fund to develop sites that are in Council ownership while retaining off street car parking be investigated (for example the car park on Pompellier Tce)

· Local Board Transport Capital Fund has $216k available that needs to be allocated by October. The Board is exploring a number of options with Auckland Transport

The Auckland Transport monthly report on our agenda provides updates in more detail.

Street Trees

The gutting of tree protection regulations by the government has highlighted the importance of street trees for providing the many benefits the city receives from a rich green canopy. Unfortunately Auckland Transport has generally been taking a “business as usual” approach to footpath upgrades and renewals so that opportunities to plant trees have been overlooked.

Part of the problem appears to be an institutional resistance to including trees because of the additional operational costs.

Five recent projects have exposed the need for Auckland Transport and Auckland Council to urgently agree on the policy and procedure for the planting of street trees:

· Rose Road road works as a result of the new Countdown supermarket on Williamson Ave – footpath extended without tree pits (photo top)

· Graham St footpath renewal – footpaths reinstated without tree pits (photo below)

· Scotland Street upgrade – plans for greening the footpath build-out are still in discussion

· Parnell Rise/ Parnell Road upgrade – plans for greening the footpath build-out are still in discussion. A tree pit was not originally included in the design because of underground utilities

· The Dylan apartment development on the corner of Great North Road and Harcourt St- footpaths reinstated without tree pits

One piece of good news is that following our advocacy and a series of complaints Auckland Transport and the Council’s arborist were able to agree on the inclusion of 4 new tree pits on the footpath between Rose Road and Williamson Ave (issues regarding the development contribution for undertaking the remedial work and how a giant area of concrete was installed without trees in the first place are still to be resolved).

City Centre Master plan review – first steps towards Vision Zero Auckland

The City Centre Master Plan (CCMP) was published in 2012 with nine outcomes and 36 targets. The Waitematā Local Board contributed to a review of the plan leading to new outcomes and targets being signed off by the Auckland Development Committee on 11 February 2016.

I am really pleased that following a request from the Board Outcome 7 has had the words ‘moving towards zero pedestrian deaths or serious injuries as a result of vehicle collisions’ added. This is a significant contribution to road safety and is the first time the principle of “Vision Zero” has been adopted under Auckland Council.

LGNZ meeting

I attended the Zone 1 meeting in Whangarei on 26 February for Local Government NZ delegates in the Auckland and Northland area.

We received presentations from Malcolm Alexander, CEO of LGNZ and Ernst Zollner, Regional Director of NZTA.

An issue I brought up at the zone meeting was my disappointment and incredulity (shared by many elected representatives) that LGNZ has announced a conference programme with zero female presenters. It is also surprising that a conference on the theme of “place making” appears to offer so little for Local Board members. It highlights to me that LGNZ is still struggling to respond to Auckland’s governance arrangements that established local boards representing more people than Dunedin.

Workshops and meetings

From 1 February – 29 February 2016 I attended:

· Waitematā Local Board workshop on 2 February

· Meeting to discuss the Board’s participation in Neighbours Day

· Auckland Transport meeting with representatives of Franklin Road residents to discuss the planning and timetable for the upgrade that is about to get underway

· Waitematā Local Board business meeting on 9 February in Grey Lynn

· Ponsonby Business Association Board meeting on 10 February

· Waitematā Local Board workshop on 11 February

· Draft domain master plan open day on 13 February (see Attachment A)

· Waitematā Local Board workshop on 16 February

· Monthly Transport portfolio catch up on 17 February

· Community portfolio meeting on 18 February

· Community Empowerment Unit and Local Board Central Cluster Portfolio Holder meeting on 18 February to meet the new leadership team of the Unit

· Waitematā Local Board workshop on 23 February

· Annual Budget 2016/17 consultation meetings:

- Western Bays Community Group AGM and presentation

- Grey Lynn Residents Association meeting

- Parnell Community Committee meeting

- Inner City Network meeting

· Meeting to discuss the development of the Uptown Business Association brand on 24 February

· Attended the Governing Body extraordinary meeting to discuss the “out of scope” Unitary Plan zoning proposals

· Richmond Rovers Community meeting on 24 February to discuss the club’s alcohol licence with local residents

· BID policy workshop with representatives from Ponsonby Business Association and Parnell Inc

· LGNZ zone 1 meeting on 26 February in Whangarei

· Community Empowerment Unit’s open day on 29 February

Events and functions

From 1 February – 29 February 2016 I attended:

· Associates breakfast – urban design, cycling and transport discussion on 4 February at Scarecrow café

· Joined the anti- TPPA protest on 4 February

· Attended the Waitangi celebrations at Takaparawha as a zero waste volunteer with Christopher Dempsey on 6 February

· Go by Bike Day pit stop on the Lightpath on 9 February

· Phantom of the Opera at the invitation of ATEED on 11 February

· The Book of Everything at Q Theatre at the invitation of Silo Theatre on 12 February

· Rock in Grey Lynn Park on 13 February (free music in parks event)

· Polo at Sky Theatre at the invitation of the Auckland Theatre Company

· The Big Gay Out in Coyle Park on 14 February

· Elected representatives and Local Board staff lunch time ride for the Auckland Bike Challenge on 18 February (photo below)

· Auckland Philharmonia Grand Opening concert at the Auckland Town Hall on 18 February at the invitation of APO

· Lantern Festival opening function at Auckland Museum on 19 February

· Opening of Parnell Trust’s new offices in the Jubilee building, Parnell on 23 February

· Grey Lynn Business Association networking drinks

· Blessing for the Board’s new offices at 52 Swanson Street on 25 February

· The Board supported Myers Park Medley on 27 February (photo right)

· Official party at the Citizenship ceremony in the Town Hall on 29 February

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Domain masterplan	363

Signatories

Authors	Sophie McGhee - Democracry Advisor
Authorisers	Victoria Villaraza - Senior Local Board Advisor

Waitematā Local Board

08 March 2016

A people friendly premier park for Auckland

My post on the draft Auckland Domain Master plan currently out for consultation

The grand Auckland War Memorial Museum sits in the city’s premier park, the Auckland Domain. You would expect the Domain and Museum to be easily accessible, a pleasure to visit on foot or bike with strong transport connections for tourists and locals. I therefore find it almost shocking the extent to which vehicles are prioritised to the detriment of everything else. Footpaths are missing on all the main roads, there is no legible walking access to the entrance of the museum and the Domain is severed from the city centre by a hostile motorway. Tourists are left bewildered and lost when they try to walk from the city centre to the Museum.

I’ve heard the Domain described as Auckland’s second biggest car park. This might make it a great place to drive to and through but also works to diminish the experience for everyone who just wants to visit. It also encourages a huge amount of non-Domain visitor parking (up to 75% of parking is taken up by commuters )

Many of the issues are highlighted in this Transport Blog post –Why can’t you walk to the Domain (illuminated further in all the comments)

I think part of the reason why the Domain is so lacking in safe walking and cycling connections is due to the fact Auckland City was historically governed by people who predominantly lived in the Eastern suburbs and enjoyed the Domain as a thoroughfare by car to the city centre or a place to drive to for sporting activities. They would not have seen any political mileage in championing a more people- friendly Domain.

Things started to improve after the formation of the Super City in 2010. With the support of the Waitematā Local Board, Auckland Transport installed speed tables, a down hill cycle lane and improved crossing points on Domain Drive as part of package of safety initiatives. The Board adopted the following advocacy position in 2012:

Auckland Transport to improve walking and cycling access to and around the Domain, while discouraging commuter parking use of the Domain through:
i) Implementation of a parking scheme for the Domain that works to discourage commuter parking (e.g. through pricing)
ii) Improving walking and cycling options
iii) Contribute to the development of a Masterplan for the Domain (to be led by Auckland Council).

The idea for a Domain masterplan progressed slowly due to the unique governance arrangements for the park that splits the decision making between the Governing body and Waitematā Local Board. Once a joint Auckland Domain committee was established in February 2015 (Chair, Shale Chambers, members Vernon Tava and Rob Thomas represent the Board on the Committee) a draft plan was able to be finalised for public feedback.

The Error! Hyperlink reference not valid. released in early February 2016, is a twenty-year aspiration for how the park can develop and consolidate its position as Auckland’s premier park. It responds to issues and pressure points as well as coordinating projects and work streams impacting the Auckland Domain.

I haven’t been directly involved with the development of the draft but I’m pleased to see a variety of proposals that will greatly improve the connections for all visitors to the Domain. The proposals will also improve access to those needing to drive and open up more parking for Domain users. Headlines on the draft have focused on the walking and cycling proposals but there are also a range of other initiatives in the draft that will contribute to making the Domain worthy of its premier park status.

A series of Council videos about the Domain are worth a watch.

The feedback period has been extended until 24 March 2016. Feedback form online

Draft Domain Masterplan – Transport blog post

Auckland Domain to be more pedestrian friendly, Stuff

Auckland Domain development – roads to be closed, NZ Herald

Chairperson	Shale Chambers
Deputy Chairperson	Pippa Coom
Members	Christopher Dempsey
	Greg Moyle
	Vernon Tava
	Rob Thomas
	Deborah Yates

No.	Title	Page
a View	Workshop Proceedings 2 February 2016	393
b View	Workshop Proceedings 11 February 2016	395
c View	Workshop Proceedings 16 February 2016	397
d View	Workshop Proceedings 23 February 2016	399

Item	Topic	Lead officer	Notes
1	Inorganics/ illegal dumping	Marcus Braithwaite (Senior Waste Specialist and Organics), Desiree Tukutama (Relationship Advisor)	The officers gave a presentation on the new inorganic collection service and sought feedback from the Board
2	Update on City Centre Integration Projects	Ralph Webster (Development Programme Office Manager), Catherine Edmeades (DPO)	The officers presented the newly formed Development Programme Office and received input from the members
3	Auckland Domain Masterplan	Shyrel Burt	The officer provided an update on the consultation and presented next steps for the plan

Item	Topic	Lead officer	Notes
1	ATEED Economic Development	Chris Lock and John Norman	ATEED officers provided an update to the Board on the implementation of the Waitemata City Fringe Economic Development Plan
2	Ellen Melville and Freyberg Square Update	Lisa Spasic	The officers updated the Board on the progress of the consultation and sought feedback on new designs and plans for the project
3	Adaptive Reuse Heritage Toilets	Ian Reid, Tracy Helleur	The members received an update on the progress to date, including a discussion on each of the sites

Item	Topic	Lead officer	Notes
1	Bimonthly Report	Trina Thompson, Colin Cresswell	The members received a presentation on the Bimonthly report and provided feedback on numerous proposals and projects
2	Waitematā Local Board Performance Report	Audrey Gan, Kat Tierney, Lucia Davies, Rachael Rivera, Debbie Ashton, Mara Bebich, Desiree Tukutama	The officers presented the Performance Report for the second half of 2015 and received input from the Board
3	Waitemata Harbour Crossing – Route Protection Exercise	Sarah Price NZTA), Geoff Haines (NZTA), Rebekah Pokura-Ward (NZTA), Daniel Newcombe (AT)	The members received an update on the progress up to date and had an opportunity to give their views on the project

Authors	Desiree Tukutama - Democracy Advisor
Authorisers	Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager