Agenda of Waiheke Local Board

Waiheke Local Board

28 April 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 Wardale Limited - Phil Wardale 5

9 Public Forum 6

10 Extraordinary Business 6

11 Notices of Motion 6

12 Notice of Motion - Local decision-making and visitor growth 7

13 Councillor's Update 13

14 Auckland Transport - April 2016 15

15 Panuku Development Auckland Local Board Six-Monthly Update 1 July to 31 December 2015 23

16 Locally Driven Initiatives projects - Capex budget 47

17 Annual Locally Driven Initiative budget negotiation for 2016/17 57

18 Annual Plan - 2016/2017 59

19 Matiatia Planning 87

20 Request to consider the options for use of a boatshed on Waikopou Bay Esplanade Reserve 91

21 Urgent Decision Report - Waitakere Ranges, Great Barrier and Waiheke Local Boards shared practice workshop 107

22 Progress Report Essentially Waiheke 125

23 Central Facility Partnership Joint Advocacy Positions 133

24 Governance Forward Work Programme 137

25 Reports requested/pending 141

26 List of resource consents 149

27 Waiheke Local Board Workshop Record of Proceedings 157

28 Inward Correspondence 169

29 Chairperson's Report 177

30 Consideration of Extraordinary Items

1 Welcome

Kua uru mai a hau kaha, a hau maia, a hau ora, a hau nui,

Ki runga, ki raro, ki roto, ki waho

Rire, rire hau…pai marire

Translation (non-literal) - Rama Ormsby

Let the winds bring us inspiration from beyond,

Invigorate us with determination and courage to achieve our aspirations for abundance and sustainability

Bring the calm, bring all things good, bring peace….good peace.

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 Waiheke Local Board:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Thursday, 24 March 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 Waiheke 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 Wardale Limited - Phil Wardale

Executive Summary

1. Phil Wardale of Wardale Limited was in attendance to speak to the board about possible marina development on the island.

Recommendation/s

That the Waiheke Local Board:

a) Thanks Phil Wardale for his 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.

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

10 Extraordinary Business

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

11 Notices of Motion

Please refer to Item 12.

Waiheke Local Board

28 April 2016

Notice of Motion - Local decision-making and visitor growth

File No.: CP2016/06937

1. In accordance with Standing Order 3.11.1, the following Notice of Motion has been received from Board Chair Paul Walden for inclusion on the agenda for the Waiheke Local Board meeting being held on Thursday, 28 April 2016:

Recommendation/s

That the Waiheke Local Board:

a) Request the Governing Body review local decision-making responsibility in line with the principle of subsidiarity as outlined within the Local Government Act, including decisions within the roading corridor and other local place-shaping activities and strategic visioning projects involving CCOs.

b) Request Auckland Transport commence a road stopping process for the road reserve located on The Strand, Onetangi, and the resulting parcel of land classified as local purpose public utility reserve and the existing toilet block asset be managed by Local and Sports Parks department.

c) Request the Governing Body and ATEED prepare a business case to assess visitor demand on Waiheke and plan for the necessary budgets required to accommodate the additional demands which visitors place on infrastructure, services and facilities on the island.

Comments

Background

2. In December 2015 the Waiheke Local Board became aware of a consent application for works at 27b Pah Road which involves a crossing permit over an area of road reserve on The Strand, Onetangi which contains public toilets (refer Attachment A).

3. The board received no notification of the consent at the time, however it is anticipated they will have opportunity to provide feedback formally in the near future.

4. The function of this parcel of land is aligned with being a local purpose reserve, rather than a road corridor. It serves no roading function at all. This is an unusual parcel of land and there is no clear reason for it to be classified as road reserve.

5. Currently the Parks team have no oversight or responsibility of this parcel of land or the public toilet, nor is there the ability to forecast or respond to infrastructure growth demands.

6. The board provided feedback to the consent planner that creation of a road crossing on the road reserve would compromise the asset and restrict future development.

7. They also noted that in circumstances such as this, where there is a council facility on road reserve, they would expect that that road be stopped and the parcel of land be reclassified to a (for example) local purpose public utility reserve.

8. This would ensure that the status of the land is aligned with its use and the toilet is managed by the appropriate council department with sufficient AMP budget. This will also result in responsibility for the amenity resting with the local board, as per the decision-making table, and the facility could be developed as required.

9. This issue highlights an area the board have been advocating for to the Governing Body regarding decision-making responsibility.

Decision-making responsibility

10. Auckland Transport’s role as defined in the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 does not have them providing for toilets and public amenity infrastructure in the road corridor. They have no growth forecast, targets or any other planning considerations for these assets.

11. The allocation of decision-making responsibility under the act outlines responsibility for council activities and stipulates that non-regulatory decision-making should be exercised by local boards unless an Auckland-wide decision will better promote the well-being of the communities across Auckland.

12. The governing body and locals boards can also be delegated decision-making responsibilities from Auckland Transport. There are currently no delegations in place.

13. The board advocated during the LTP that the principle of subsidiarity should guide delegations within the roading corridor and that this should be a local board decision-making responsibility. This has not yet been considered formally by the Governing Body.

14. The board have prepared a submission to the Local Government Commission concerning the translating of current decision making responsibilities into action due to the lack of resources and/or understanding of the governance model and the board's role in local place-shaping activities and local strategic visioning.

15. This submission is on hold while awaiting legal advice which has not been forthcoming.

Future visitor growth

16. The board have been attempting to obtain figures on visitor growth following promotion of Waiheke as Auckland’s premium visitor attraction.

17. It has been difficult to obtain actual visitor numbers from ferry operators due to purported commercial sensitivity; however figures now being obtained for from ATEED and AT indicate Waiheke is accommodating 1.5m+ visitors per year and this is expected to increase.

18. What is clear is that there is huge tourism growth evident and forecast, however there is no structured means to consider or respond to infrastructure growth demands.

19. Our local facilities are struggling to cope with demand during peak periods. The board receives regular complaints from constituents about overloaded toilet facilities, rubbish and public transport issues.

20. The Waiheke Local Board Plan outlines the board’s aspirations in regards to tourism on the island. This is primarily about managing the population increase in a way which benefits Waiheke without compromising local lifestyle or the environment.

21. The board have advocated strongly to the Governing Body during the LTP process to assess demand and plan for the growing visitor pressure. Discretionary funding the board allocated to support increased service levels during peak times was taken as savings during the LTP process.

22. It has been difficult to obtain actual visitor numbers from ferry operators due to purported commercial sensitivity. However credit card data obtained shows clear growth of 44% increase in visitor spending between 2013-2015.

Conclusion

23. The board requests the Governing Body review local decision-making responsibility in line with the principle of subsidiarity as outlined within the Local Government Act, including decisions within the roading corridor and other local place-shaping activities and strategic visioning projects involving CCOs.

24. The board requests Auckland Transport commence a road stopping process for the road reserve located on The Strand, Onetangi, and the resulting parcel of land classified as local purpose public utility reserve and the existing toilet block asset be managed by Local and Sports Parks department.

25. The board appreciates the economic benefits of tourism but wants to see safeguards for the environment in place to protect what is special about Waiheke and more regional funding to meet the costs of additional demands which visitors place on infrastructure, services and facilities on the island.

Signed by Paul Walden, Local Board Chair

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	The Strand, Onetangi	11

Signatories

Authors	Janine Geddes - Local Board Advisor
Authorisers	John Nash - Senior Local Board Advisor

Waiheke Local Board

28 April 2016

Auckland Transport - April 2016

File No.: CP2016/07089

Purpose

1. The purpose of the report is to respond to local board requests on transport-related matters and to provide information to Elected Members about Auckland Transport activities in the local board area.

Executive Summary

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

Recommendation/s

That the Waiheke Local Board:

a) Receives the Auckland Transport Report – April 2016.

Comments

Monthly Overview

Bus patronage

3. Auckland Transport does not currently have the mechanisms set up to supply daily records, however can supply a monthly record of bus usage, with the following limitations:

· Fullers monthly pass holders get bus travel included

· There are a number of tourist passes that include bus travel

· As a result there is a risk that the bus drivers may not always record boardings (even with best intentions) and this could be worse during the very busy periods.

· These limitations are likely to change once simplified fares are introduced.

Recorded Bus Patronage for Waiheke Bus Company

March 2016 Patronage = 77,405

For historical bus patronage tracking, please refer to attachment A.

Ferry patronage

4. Information for ferry services patronage arriving or departing from Matiatia and Kennedy Point is only available on a monthly basis and is not split down by arrivals or departures.

Recorded ferry patronage

March 2016 Patronage:

Matiatia – 233,138

Kennedy Point – 47,607

For historical ferry patronage tracking, please refer to attachment B.

Berm Planting Guidelines

5. In 2015 AT received feedback on the draft guidelines for ‘Private Planting in the Road Corridor’ from the Waiheke Local Board and 18 other local boards. This feedback was assessed with a view to taking into account as much as possible. A new draft of the guidelines is awaiting formal AT signoff with a final version of the guidelines likely to be available soon.

Local Board Transport Fund

6. The Waiheke Local Board’s funding allocation under the LBTCF is currently $200,000 per annum. The Board has $848,998 allocated of their Local Board Transport Fund, including $48,998 from the 2016/17 allocation..

7. 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):

Waiheke Local Board Transport Capital Fund Financial Summary

Total Funds Available in current political term (Four years including 2012-13)	$ 800,000
Spent to Date on Completed Projects (including money spent on cancelled projects)	$ 358,998
Committed to date on projects approved for design and/or construction	$ 490,000	50%	Percentage of these committments spent to date.
Total budget left that needs to be allocated to new projects and spent by the end of the current political term.	-$ 48,998	The four year budget (and some from 2016-17) is already allocated. No more projects need to be approved.

Total of Projects assessed to a Rough Order of Cost (ROC) stage but not approved by the LB.	$ -
Funds available from the next political term (2016-17)	$ 151,002	This is the unallocated balance of the 2016-17 Waiheke LBTCF budget.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

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

Māori impact statement

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

Implementation

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

11. The activities detailed in this report do not trigger the Significance Policy. All programmes and activities are within budget/in line with the council’s annual plan and LTP documents and there are no legal or legislative implications arising from the activities detailed in this report.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Bus Patronage	19
b View	Ferry Passanger numbers	21

Signatories

Authors	Sophie McGhee - Democracry Advisor
Authorisers	John Nash - Senior Local Board Advisor

Waiheke Local Board

28 April 2016

Panuku Development Auckland Local Board Six-Monthly Update 1 July to 31 December 2015

File No.: CP2016/00205

Purpose

1. To give the Waiheke Local Board an overview of Panuku Development Auckland. The report also notes any major issues, projects and activities within the Local Board area for the six months 1 July to 31 December 2015.

Executive Summary

2. Panuku Development Auckland (Panuku) was established in September 2015 as a result of the merger of two CCOs – Waterfront Auckland and Auckland Council Property Limited (ACPL).

3. Panuku helps to rejuvenate parts of Auckland – from small projects that refresh a site or building, to major transformations of town centres or neighbourhoods.

4. Comprised of five Directorates, Panuku manages around $1 billion of council’s property portfolio, which we continuously review to find smart ways to generate income for the region, grow the portfolio or release land or property that can be better used by others.

5. Panuku works with government, iwi, not-for-profit and private organisations. We use our skills, knowledge and connections to bring land and resources together to create the best outcome for Aucklanders.

6. The attached report provides an overview of how Panuku is structured. The report gives a flavour of what each Directorate is responsible for and drills down to team level, explaining roles and responsibilities across the organisation.

7. The report also provides an update of major issues, projects and activities relevant for the Waiheke Local Board for the six months July – December 2015

8. Attachments to this six-monthly update include: Framework of Strategic Documents (Attachment A) and the Local Board Engagement Plan (Attachment B).

Recommendation/s

That the Waiheke Local Board:

a) receive the Panuku Development Auckland Local Board Six-Monthly update 1 July to 31 December 2015.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Panuku Development Auckland Local Board Six-Monthly Update 1 July to 31 December 2015	25
b View	Attachment A: Framework of Strategic Documents	33
c View	Attachment B: Local Board Engagement Plan	35

Signatories

Authors

Sven Mol - Engagement Coordinator

Authorisers

Toni Giacon - Team Leader Stakeholder and Community Engagement

Judith Webster - Relationship Manager

Waiheke Local Board

28 April 2016

Locally Driven Initiatives projects - Capex budget

File No.: CP2016/06321

Purpose

1. To seek approval from the Waiheke Local Board to allocate budget to Locally Driven Initiatives (LDI) capex projects.

Executive Summary

LDI Capex

2. On 7 May 2015 the Budget Committee approved a new locally delivered capex fund with the following parameters:

i. the fund may be managed as a three year amount

ii. local boards may use the fund to build council owned assets, add to an existing council funded renewal or new capital project, work in partnership with an external provider or seed fund a community project.

3. The LDI capex was established to ensure locally important projects are given appropriate priority. It is envisaged that the fund will be used for projects that provide local improvement that would not otherwise receive funding.

4. The Waiheke Local Board has $200,000 LDI capex budget per year to allocate to local capital projects.

5. To date the board has allocated $55,060 from this budget to the following projects:

Project	Budget
Supply of drinking water in four Waiheke Parks	$30,000
Waiheke Sports Club Courts Upgrade	$10,060
Santa Lucia refurbishment for park installation (Community Shed project)	$5,000
Quick response fund (for minor projects needing quick approval)	$10,000

6. The Hauraki Gulf Islands Parks advisor has identified the following projects for possible allocation from the LDI capex budget:

Project	Budget
Matiatia – Vineyards – Oneroa walking trail - Stage 1 - Cost of design and Stage 1	$15,000
Matiatia – Vineyards – Oneroa walking trail Stage 2 and 3 - construction and installation of all signs	$9,256
Tennis volley wall	$5,000
Total:	$29,256

7. This report seeks the board’s approval to allocate funding to these projects and confirm a board spokesperson/s for each approved project.

Recommendation/s

That the Waiheke Local Board:

a) Approves the following projects from the board’s LDI capex budget and confirms the project spokesperson/s:

Project	Budget	Spokesperson
Matiatia – Vineyards – Oneroa walking trail - Stage 1 - Cost of design and Stage 1	$15,000
Matiatia – Vineyards – Oneroa walking trail Stage 2 and 3 - construction and installation of all signs	$9,256
Tennis volley wall	$5,000

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Matiatia Vineyards Oneroa walking trial - signage	49
b View	Tennis volley wall proposal	53
c View	Tennis volley wall Aerial	55

Signatories

Authors	Janine Geddes - Local Board Advisor
Authorisers	John Nash - Senior Local Board Advisor

Waiheke Local Board

28 April 2016

Project Name:

Matiatia – Vineyards – Oneroa walking trail

Local Board :

Waiheke Island

Project Initiator :

Gary Wilton

New

Report Date :

4 April 2016

Renewal

Park name :

Church Bay Esplanade Reserve, ACPL land at Matiatia and easement over Water-right gully, road reserve in the Matiatia, Oneroa and Church Bay areas.

Site Picture:

Outcome Sought :

Visitors to Waiheke who want to walk between Matiatia, Oneroa and the vineyards on Nick Johnstone Drive and Church Bay Road can easily find and follow an easy continuous trail which leads them to their destination.

Project Description :

· To create a continuous walking trail by linking existing tracks and open space and providing signage and promotion which encourages people to walk between Matiatia, the vineyards and Oneroa

Project Deliverables:

Design:

Recommend style, location and content of signage to create a continuous walking trail by linking existing tracks and open space and providing signage and promotion which encourages people to walk between Matiatia, the vineyards and Oneroa

Construction/installation:

Stage 1: Directional signage necessary to enable people to find their way between the wharf and Nick Johnstone Drive via water right gully

Stage 2: Additional signage between Church Bay Road and Oneroa,

Stage 3:Church Bay Road and Mako Street

Linked projects:

· Te Ara Hura seeks to help people discover the Real Waiheke by making it easier to walk between destinations. It has a system of bollards with directional information which is aimed at walkers. These bollards are already in use on the tracks and back roads of Waiheke Island.

Project dependencies

· Ideally the project will be delivered at the same time as the upgraded track through Te Atawhai Whenua - the Forest and Bird Reserve which runs alongside Ocean View Road. One signage system should be able to cover all walking routes between Alison Park and Matiatia Wharf.

· Working in partnership with the two vineyards in the area will be key to the success of the walkway. If they feel ownership and are confident in the track and the signage system they will promote it.

Potential Project Issues, Risks or Hazards:

· It can be difficult to get messages in front of people on Matiatia Wharf

· It is not possible to install signage in the ground in the Esplanade Reserve or the Panuku land behind it.

· Permission from Auckland Transport will be required for any signs in the road verge.

Any supplementary Project Information:

Directional bollard used for Te Ara Hura walkway

Potential stakeholders

Mudbrick Vineyard

Cable Bay Vineyard

Auckland Transport (Wharf, Road corridor)

Ngati Paoa (urupa area at foreshore)

Panuku – The Bay site behind reserve

Forest and Bird

Estimated Cost:

Cost of design and Stage 1 = $15,000

Cost of Stage 2 and Stage 3 construction and installation $9,256

Total cost $24,256

The Gateway process will apply to stand alone projects valued $250k and over

Project management documents

Is there a concept plan? NO

Is a Business Case required? NO

Project/Budget ID:

(Identify potential sources of funding and timeframe)

Funding source:	2016	2017	2018
LTP
Growth
LDI CAPEX	Stage 1 - $15,000 Stage 2 - $9256
LDI OPEX
Mayoral Discretionary funding
Other (identify)
CONS OPEX

Assets created:

Assets created		LSP Owner
Buildings
Coastal assets
Furniture & equipment	Signage x 5-10	Park ranger HGI
Paving & hard surfaces
Play spaces
Courts
Sports fields
Toilet & changing room
Structures
Roads & car parks
Utilities
Green assets
Trees

Waiheke Local Board

28 April 2016

To: Waiheke Community Board

From: Waiheke Tennis Club

5 April 2016

Re: Request for support for the building of a tennis volley wall at Rangihoua Sports park.

We had a hope that funds for the design, consents and build would be available from unspent surplus from another project in the sports park. We looked at a free standing wall with its own concrete pad which might have been possible within the estimate given. Sadly that money has not eventuated and we have begun our discussions again from the viewpoint of looking for the most economical and simple but adequate design.

Purpose and value of having a volley wall at the tennis courts at Rangihoua Sports Park

A practice wall is an invaluable asset to any tennis facility where players of all ages are learning the game. We have up to children attending Saturday morning tennis lessons at the courts run by our local professional tennis coach, Marilyn Lawrence, plus two junior teams who train with her on Thursday evenings. During their sessions she spends considerable time developing, correcting and practising the young players basic strokes by delivering balls to them to hit. All these beginners and young players would get a huge benefit from hitting a ball against a volley wall to consolidate the skills they learn in their lessons and coaching sessions.

Adult members of the club have access to the club's ball machine which is useful for practicing basic strokes but has the limitations. The player not seeing the ball until until it is delivered from the machine which creates a less than natural rhythm in the practice and the machine is not good when the balls are damp. However it is the best we have at the moment. It is old, mechanical and driven by a rechargeable battery so is not freely available to the young or to the general public and accessable only to key holders who are the club's management committee. On the other hand a volley wall is freely available to anyone regardless of age or club membership who wishes to practice basic strokes on their own at times when the courts are lightly used. The player needs only one or two balls and not the whole basketful that is required by the machine and in coaching sessions thus reducing the disturbance to play on the adjacent court.

In short, a volley wall will serve both the public (children and adults) and club members both junior and senior who wish to practice tennis strokes on their own. At present there is no such facility on the island.

Our Request.

Our request is for approval in principle for the building of such a wall at the courts and for funding to cover the intitial design, consents and pricing. This would get us through the first planning phase and put us in a position where we could apply to funding bodies for the construction.

After thorough discussion the Tennis Club Committee have agreed that the preferred position for the wall is in the western end of the courts and constructed to replace a section of the cyclone netting of the surrounding fence. The practicing player would stand inside the enclosure on the south end of court 1. Other options would require their own concrete pad in front of the wall and this would be expected to double the total cost and is not considered necessary at this time.

The wall would have to be designed by a registered engineer to with stand wind loadings and changes to the water content of the ground. We have an indication that the design cost would be close to but not more than $2000. We would also like to have a cost estimate from a quantity surveyor before seeking quotes for building. I have no idea about the cost or requirement s of resource and building consents. Our request is for funding for these items sot that the plans, consents, pricing estimates and quotes could be submitted to funding agencies for the cost of the build.

Our preferred response to this request would be to be granted the costs up to a maximum of perhaps $5000 in the expectation that we would not have to draw down the whole amount.

Bill Kinghorn,

President,

Waiheke Tennis Club.

kinghorn@paradise.net.nz

3728724

0276233786

Waiheke Local Board

28 April 2016

Annual Locally Driven Initiative budget negotiation for 2016/17

File No.: CP2016/06433

Purpose

This paper is to formalise the request for additional funding from the Governing Body for the Waiheke Locally Driven Initiative Budget for 2016/17 as stated in the Local Board Funding Policy adopted in August 2014.

Executive Summary

1. The Locally Driven Initiatives Budget for Waiheke is based on historic legacy council budgets, which does not take into account the level and change of support now provided to Local Boards.

2. In 2015/16 the Community Development, Arts and Culture Department (now Arts, Community and Events) allocated overhead costs to Local Boards based on staff costs that related to delivery of local programmes.

3. With the introduction of the ‘Empowered Communities model” and resulting new roles, the overhead has been re-calculated. For Waiheke, there has been an increase of $29,472, which represents 4.2% of their 2015/16 LDI Funding.

4. These costs should be treated in the same manner as the asset-based overhead costs as they relate to staff salaries for which the board has no discretion. Due to the LDI opex calculation including funding for community overheads, this remain non-discretionary until such time as the funding policy allocation is re-visited as there is no additional funding identified in Year 2 of the LTP.

5. Given the significant impact this increase has on the level of LDI funding available to the Waiheke Local Board for local initiatives, this paper advises the Waiheke Local Board to exercise its right of negotiation and request an increase of $29,472 to the 2016/17 LDI Fund as part of the annual negotiation process.

Recommendation/s

That the Waiheke Local Board:

a) requests additional Locally Driven Initiative funding of $29,472 to offset the additional costs imposed under the empowered communities model overhead calculation on the basis that the board’s LDI funding is fixed and adversely impacted by this increase.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Jane Koch - Lead Financial Advisor

Authorisers

John Nash - Senior Local Board Advisor

Christine Watson - Manager Financial Advisory Services - Local Boards

Waiheke Local Board

28 April 2016

Annual Plan - 2016/2017

File No.: CP2016/06724

Purpose

1. This report requests that the Waiheke Local Board:

a) makes decisions on:

i. final LDI budgets by activity, within funding envelopes

ii. key advocacy issues

b) provides any feedback on regional issues, including:

i. the Uniform Annual General Charge (UAGC)

ii. the Interim Transport Levy (ITL)

iii. Māori land rates

iv. rates for farm/lifestyle properties over 50 hectares

c) makes recommendations to the governing body on other financial matters such as:

i. any new/amended Business Improvement District (BID) targeted rates

ii. any new/amended local targeted rate proposals

iii. proposed LDI capital projects outside local boards’ decision-making responsibility.

Executive Summary

2. This report seeks input from local boards on a range of annual plan related matters, including LDI, advocacy, regional financial policy issues and other rate proposals.

3. Local board views on these matters will be considered in discussions between the local boards and the Finance and Performance Committee on 6 and 9 May; and by the governing body prior to adopting the Annual Plan 2016/2017.

Recommendation/s

That the Waiheke Local Board:

a) makes decisions on final 2016/2017 LDI budgets by activity, within funding envelopes as per attachment A

b) agrees key advocacy issues as per attachment B

c) provides any views it may have on regional financial policy issues

d) recommends the Governing Body approve the deferral of the board’s local proposal to support development of a new swimming pool utilising discretionary funds.

e) recommends $32,000 of 2015/2016 LDI opex to be deferred

Comments

LDI

4. Local boards are requested to agree the level of funding for each group of activity. This funding is further allocated to specific projects and services detailed in the work programmes.

5. As part of the funding policy, local boards can resolve to defer those projects that are funded by the LDI where there was an agreed scope and cost but have not been delivered. The Local Board may wish to resolve 2015/2016 projects that meet the criteria for deferral to 2016/2017.

6. Key information of the funding of each activity and the LDI funded projects that meet the criteria for deferral is provided in Attachment A.

Advocacy issues

7. Local boards resolved on their key advocacy issues in November 2015, for discussions with the Finance and Performance Committee and consultation. Since then, relevant council departments and Council Controlled Organisations have provided local boards with advice on the current position of each advocacy issue, and any next steps. This information was provided to local boards in April 2016, as part of a broader information pack, to consider at their workshops, and is also attached to this report for information (see Attachment B).

8. Local boards consulted on their local advocacy issues in February and March 2016. The results from the consultation have been analysed and summarised, and provided to the local boards. This has been attached to this report for information (see Attachment C).

9. In light of this information, the Local Board may now wish to agree any advocacy priorities for discussion with the Finance and Performance Committee on 6 and 9 May.

Regional issues

10. Local boards provided feedback on regional financial policy issues (in November 2015) which were going for consultation. The results from the consultation have been analysed and summarised, and provided to local boards (see Attachment C).

11. The Local Board may wish to provide further feedback on these issues for consideration by the Finance and Performance Committee.

Local targeted rate and BID targeted rate proposals

12. Local boards are required to agree any new BID and local targeted rate proposals (noting that any new local targeted rates and/or BIDs must have been consulted on before they can be implemented).

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

13. Local board decisions and feedback is being sought in this report.

14. Local boards play an important role in the development of the annual plan, and provide views and information at key stages as council continues through the annual plan process.

Māori impact statement

15. Many local board decisions are of importance to and impact on Māori. Local board agreements and the annual plan are important tools that enable and can demonstrate council’s responsiveness to Māori. Local board plans, which were developed in 2014 through engagement with the community including Māori, form the basis of local priorities.There is a need to continue to build relationships between local boards and iwi, and where relevant the wider Māori community. Ongoing conversations will assist local boards and Māori to understand each other’s priorities and issues. This in turn can influence and encourage Māori participation in council’s decision-making processes.

Implementation

16. Feedback from the local boards will be summarised and provided in full to the Finance and Performance Committee and governing body for consideration and adopting the Annual Plan 2016/2017.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	LDI Opex and Capex	63
b View	Waiheke Advocacy	67
c View	Feedback report	77

Signatories

Authors

Jane Koch - Lead Financial Advisor

Authorisers

Karen Lyons - Manager Local Board Services

Christine Watson, Manager Financial Advisory Services – Local Boards

Waiheke Local Board

28 April 2016

Matiatia Planning

File No.: CP2016/06481

Purpose

1. Seeking the board’s approval for the Matiatia planning project scope, deliverables, reporting arrangements, approvals, timeframes and budget.

Executive Summary

2. At its meeting held Thursday, 25 February 2016, the Waiheke Local Board resolved as follows:

a) allocate up to $50,000 Locally Driven Initiatives (LDI) budget to contract Direction Matiatia to lead a comprehensive strategic plan for Matiatia in partnership with the community, the council and mana whenua.

b) delegate board Chair Walden and Board Members Treadwell and Brown to work with Direction Matiatia to confirm project scope, deliverables, reporting arrangements, approvals, timeframes and budget, and report back to the board.

c) note the plan will be developed in discussion with officers from Auckland Transport, Panuku Development Auckland, Auckland Tourism Events and Economic Development (ATEED), Local & Sports Parks, Plans and Places and the Community Empowerment Unit.

3. This report is in response to resolution b) and outlines project scope, deliverables, reporting arrangements, approvals, timeframes and budget, for the board’s approval.

Recommendation/s

That the Waiheke Local Board:

a) Approve the project scope, deliverables, reporting arrangements, approvals, timeframes and budget as outlined within this report.

b) Appoint Board Chair Walden and Board members Treadwell and Brown as the Local Board Matiatia Subcommittee.

Comments

4. The board has a priority within their 2014 Local Board Plan to lead a comprehensive strategic plan for Matiatia in partnership with the community, the council and mana whenua.

5. The board recognises the Matiatia Directional Plan (approved 2009) as the current planning framework for Matiatia and would like to see this developed into an integrated plan including transport, economic, environmental and cultural considerations.

6. At its February 2016 meeting, the board approved funding to contract Direction Matiatia to lead a comprehensive strategic plan for Matiatia in partnership with the community, the council and mana whenua.

7. The board requested Chair Walden and Board Members Treadwell and Brown work with Direction Matiatia to confirm project scope, deliverables, reporting arrangements, approvals, timeframes and budget, and report back to the board.

8. This report outlines the proposed project details for the board’s approval.

Objective

9. The purpose of the Matiatia planning project is to prepare a comprehensive Strategic Plan for the sustainable management and development of Auckland Council owned land (including Auckland Transport and Panuku Development Auckland managed land) at Matiatia which reflects the aspirations of the Waiheke community and also respects the interests and rights of mana whenua for the future use of that land.

10. The Strategic Plan is to contain short, medium and long term priorities for the sustainable management and development of the land at Matiatia.

Tasks

11. In order to achieve the above objective, the project tasks will include:

a) Initial Literature Search/Information Compilation

b) Review of Plans/Documents

c) Prepare a new Draft Strategic Plan for Matiatia

d) Test new Draft Plan with Local Board Matiatia Subcommittee

e) Public Consultation on New Draft Strategic Plan

f) Develop Final Draft of New Strategic Plan

Deliverables and time frames

12. Phase 1 – Initial Literature Search/Information Compilation:

· Key base document – the current 2009 Matiatia Directional Plan and the community agreed principles underpinning it.

· Other plans/documents of Auckland Council and CCOs relevant to Matiatia.

· Relevant research/submissions presented to the Environment Court on the marina.

· Other relevant plans /documents of community groups or individuals on Matiatia.

Timeframe – 2 weeks

13. Phase 2 – Review of Plans/Documents

· Completely review the Matiatia Directional Plan against developments in planning, planning legislation, the environment, the emergence of Auckland Council and its CCOs, the Environment Court’s decision on the proposed marina at Matiatia since the Plan’s development and also taking into account the other plans /documents identified under Phase1.

· Undertake such discussions or meetings deemed necessary with organisations and individuals regarding their plans/documents to identify or clarify land planning and usage issues.

· Liaise with the Essentially Waiheke Working Group to establish its findings to date relevant to strategic planning at Matiatia.

· Preparation of a progress report to the Local Board which summarises work carried out, including information gathered to date, key focus areas, and further work required to complete Phase 3 of the project.

Timeframe – 6 weeks

14.
Phase 3 – Prepare a new Draft Strategic Plan for Matiatia

· Drawing on the outcomes of Phases 1 and 2 prepare a new draft Strategic plan with the application of professional expertise in: planning, landscape architecture, heritage preservation, environment, public transport, roading and parking, recreation and tourism etc.

· Develop a list of professional experts who could be directly engaged or made available through the auspices of Auckland Council and its CCOs. Involvement of mana whenua and cultural experts is essential in this Phase.

· The draft plan would also identify short, medium and long term priorities for Council/Board planning and budgeting purposes for testing in Phases 4 and 5.

Timeframe – 5 weeks

15. Phase 4 – Test New Draft Plan with Local Board Subcommittee

· Prior to public consultation, discuss the new draft strategic plan with the Subcommittee as to how meets the Local Board’s project outcome. This is a ‘no surprises’ procedure. This step would be via the Project Management Committee in the first instance.

Timeframe – 1 week

16. Phase 5 – Public Consultation on New Draft Strategic Plan

· Consult the Waiheke community, interested stakeholder groups, Auckland Council and its CCOs, mana whenua etc, on the new draft strategic plan for Matiatia using ‘good practice’ community consultation procedures.

· A set of agreed protocols between the Local Board and the Project Management Committee will govern publicity and media statements relating to the project. These will also need to meet Auckland Council requirements.

· The local board Communications Advisor and Engagement Advisor are to be consulted with and kept informed of all communications and engagement activities.

Timeframe – 10 weeks

17. Phase 6 – Develop Final Draft of New Strategic Plan

· Summarise and analyse submissions, discussions and views received on the new draft strategic plan from Phase 5.

· Amend and improve the draft strategic plan taking into account those submissions, views and discussion points considered necessary and relevant.

· Present the final draft of the new strategic plan to the Subcommittee for consideration and subsequent referral to the Local Board for adoption (with or without change) and inclusion in the Auckland Council’s planning regime. This step would also be via the Project Management Committee in the first instance.

Timeframe – 8 weeks

18. NB: The timeframe alongside each Phase is indicative at this stage and possibly needs more refinement. There could be some overlap between some of the Phases and the weeks involved may not be consecutive.

Waiheke Local Board decision points:

19. Phase 2 - Approve progress report – June 2016 Local Board business meeting

20. Phase 4 - Approve draft Strategic Plan for consultation – August 2016 Local Board business meeting

21. Phase 6 - Present final draft of the new Strategic Plan – December 2016 Local Board business meeting

22. The Supplier (or delegated project manager) will meet regularly (at least monthly) with the Local Board Matiatia Subcommittee and Local Board Services staff to discuss any key issues or to seek Local Board guidance.

Timeframe

23. The project is estimated to be completed by 16 December 2016 however this will be confirmed during Phase 1 and Phase 2.

24. Any changes to the scope of the project not involving budget to be approved by the Local Board Matiatia Subcommittee (Board Chair Paul Walden and Board members Beatle Treadwell and Shirin Brown). Significant changes to the scope of the project involving budget will require the approval of the Waiheke Local Board.

Payment

25. A total payment of $50,000.00 (excluding GST) will be paid in progress payments to Direction Matiatia. The total includes $45,000 project costs and $5,000 contingency and expenses.

26. The council will release progress payments on successful delivery of the above phases (up to a total of $45,000).

27. Any budget remaining unallocated at the conclusion of the Matiatia Planning Project may be reallocated to other Matiatia related projects with the approval of the Local Board Matiatia Subcommittee.

Local Board views and implications

28. The board have a priority outcome within their 2014 Local Board Plan to complete a strategic plan for Matiatia. The Local Board Agreement includes $50,000 FY16 LDI budget and $100,000 forecast for FY17 LDI budget to implement the Matiatia Gateway masterplan.

29. The board’s role in local planning and development includes local place-shaping activities and local strategic visioning as per the allocation of decision-making table. Decision-making responsibility for Matiatia sits with Auckland Transport, Panuku Development Ltd and the Governing Body. The board are advocating for decision-making for the Matiatia area.

Māori impact statement

30. Ngati Paoa as mana whenua are considered a key stakeholder and will be involved in all stages of the project.

Implementation

31. Following approval of the report recommendations officers will liaise with Direction Matiatia to finalise the funding agreement and the Matiatia planning project will progress as outlined.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors	Janine Geddes - Local Board Advisor
Authorisers	John Nash - Senior Local Board Advisor

Waiheke Local Board

28 April 2016

Request to consider the options for use of a boatshed on Waikopou Bay Esplanade Reserve

File No.: CP2016/06847

Purpose

1. To consider the options for use of a boatshed on Waikopou Bay Esplanade Reserve.

Executive Summary

2. Auckland Council has been approached by a representative of a potential purchaser of 520 Cowes Bay Road, - a coastal property that includes a villa by the beach at Waikopou Bay. The potential purchaser wishes to know the process for, and likelihood of, formalising private use of a boatshed in the neighbouring esplanade reserve.

3. This report seeks an indication of the board’s preference in advance of a formal request from the new owner of 520 Cowes Bay Road. It also offers an opportunity to consider how the boatshed could be used by the public or community groups.

4. Auckland Council’s approach in these situations is to only formalise encroachments in exceptional circumstances.

5. Ngati Paoa does not support the request.

Recommendation/s

That the Waiheke Local Board:

a) decline the request for formalisation of private use of the boatshed on Waikopou Bay Esplanade Reserve.

b) delegate management of the building to local parks (parks) and request that parks exclude private use until any legal agreement or other process for future management of the building is completed. .

c) consider Option 3 - the allocation of funding to a concept plan (cost approx. $10,000) which would make recommendations for the development of the reserve as a whole.

Comments

6. The owners of 520 Cowes Bay Road have historically used and maintained a boatshed on the neighbouring esplanade reserve. Appendices 1 – 5 Boatshed in Waikopou Bay Esplanade Reserve has aerial photos, site survey, description and photographs of the boatshed. Potential purchasers of the property have asked for an indication of the process and likelihood of formalising the use of the boatshed.

Process

7. The process would include the following steps:

d) Investigation and reporting by parks to enable the board to decide if they support private use of the boatshed – this report summarises this investigation;

e) If the board supports private use, then parks, the board and legal services would advise on options for formalisation. This would most likely be in the form of a licence or easement;

f) If the board agrees this approach, Council would then give the purchaser an indication of its preferred approach, but cannot proceed with formalisation until the property ownership of 520 Cowes Bay Road passes to the new owner;

g) The process of legally formalising the use would then require council to carry out and consider the results of public notification and iwi consultation before making a final decision.

8. Waikopou Bay is one of only four places in the eastern part of Waiheke (between Orapiu and Onetangi) with public access to the coast.

9. The reserve is a 500m long strip of 20m wide esplanade. It is reached either by boat or by walking access from Cowes Bay Road through ‘Mac’s Track’ - an easement over a steep driveway 1km long.

Waikopou Bay Esplanade Reserve

10. The reserve is a nominally 20m wide esplanade reserve stretching 500m along the eastern coastline of Waiheke Island south of Man O’ War Bay. It has two distinct areas. South of the boatshed it is steeply sloping, with a number of pine trees, weeds and some regenerating bush. It contains a wide grass driveway which leads to the beach and is dominated by the private houses immediately behind. The boundaries with private property are not clear. The main use of this area is for walking access from the end of the right of way from Cowes Bay Road to the beach.

11. North of the boatshed is largely steep coastal regenerating forest. There is a small picnic area, which used to house a gas barbecue. There is a 250m coastal walkway leading north to the beach at Karipaka Bay. This area of coast offers good low tide access around the rocks as far as Man O’War Bay.

12. Public use is mostly walkers using the right of way from Cowes Bay Road and either returning the same way or continuing to Man O’War Bay at low tide. There is also use from boaties who are encouraged to come ashore by the council sign at the picnic site.

13. The boatshed, the driveway across the reserve and the proximity (less than 5m from the reserve) of the villa on 520 Cowes Bay Road give the impression that this area is privately owned, which, without clear signage, will inhibit public use.

14. The boatshed is of basic plywood construction, approx. 30 – 40m2 and in good condition. The boatshed appears to have been totally rebuilt (presumably by the previous owner of 520 Cowes Bay Road) sometime in the last ten years. It is used primarily for storage. There is no safety issue from the boat shed as it stands. It probably has a life span of around 25 years.

15. The remote location of the reserve makes it difficult to monitor modification and use of the boatshed and the reserve.

Formalisation of private use of public land

16. The occupation of public land by a building for private use meets Auckland Council’s definition of encroachment. Auckland Council’s practice note on encroachments states that the formalisation of encroachments should only be recommended in exceptional circumstances including:

h) Where it is necessary for public safety.

i) Where there are significant public benefits to be gained.

j) Where there is evidence of historic council decisions

k) Practicalities and costs significantly outweigh benefits

l) Equity with resolutions of similar encroachments in the past 12 months

17. The formalisation of private use of the boatshed at Waikopou Bay does not appear to meet any of these criteria.

Options

18. There are a number of options for the board to consider, including:

m) Option 1 - Status quo - do nothing, allowing the existing private use to continue without formalisation.

n) Option 2 - To formalise (and therefore manage) private use of the building through a lease or licence for the owners of 520 Cowes Bay Road.

o) Option 3 - To request and fund a concept plan which would make recommendations for the development of the reserve as a whole.

p) Option 4 - To request officers to investigate management of the building for public use – for example as a shelter or for back country camping, potentially as part of the Hauraki Gulf kayak trail.

q) Option 5 - to seek expressions of interest from not for profit and/or public groups in leasing the boatshed for community purposes.

r) Option 6 - to remove the building, returning the area to native bush.

19. The advantages and disadvantages of these options are outlined in Appendix 6 – Options for boatshed in Waikopou Bay Esplanade Reserve.

20. In each of these cases except option 1, the board will also need to decide whether to allow continued use by the owner of 520 Cowes Bay Road or to take over management of the building and exclude private use until any legal agreement or other process for future management of the building is completed. .

Local Board views and implications

21. The process of the council agreeing to this request involves (in practice) the council agreeing that part of its land can be used by a third party (without disposing of property). On that basis: where the proposed agreement relates to a local park, the local board has been allocated responsibility for these decisions.

22. Under the Local Board Delegations Protocols, the decision to grant landowner approval can be delegated to staff, provided that the local board portfolio holder (elected member) is consulted. This decision can still be referred back to the local board, at the portfolio holder’s request.

Māori impact statement

23. Ngati Paoa are mana whenua for Waiheke Island. Ngati Paoa do not generally support private use of public space. If the building is to be retained, their preference is for it to be used for community and cultural purposes.

Implementation

24. If formalisation is approved, this may take the form of a lease or licence in tandem with an encumbrance on the title of 520 Cowes Bay Road. If the board agree to consider funding a concept plan, the next stage will be to workshop a Project Information Form with the board’s parks spokespersons to define scope and deliverables from the plan.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Appendix 6 - Options assesment	95
b View	Appendices 1-5 - Boatshed at Waikopou Bay Esplanade Reserve	101

Signatories

Authors

Gary Wilton - Parks Adviser Hauraki Gulf Islands

Authorisers

Mark Bowater - Manager Parks

John Nash - Senior Local Board Advisor

Waiheke Local Board

28 April 2016

Urgent Decision Report - Waitakere Ranges, Great Barrier and Waiheke Local Boards shared practice workshop

File No.: CP2016/07342

Purpose

1. To advise the Waiheke Local Board of a decision made under the urgent decision process.

Executive Summary

2. Waitākere Ranges Local Board is hosting a joint two day shared practise and site visit workshop with Great Barrier, and Waiheke local board members on the 29^th and 30^th of April 2016 based at Piha Valley Lodge Ltd, 38 Glenesk Road, Piha.

3. It has been agreed that the costs for this workshop will be split evenly between the three Local Boards.

4. An urgent decision was made on 13 April 2016 to approve the rough costings associated with the workshop as follows (attachment A)

“That the Waiheke Local Board:

a) approve any related elected member expenses for attending the Waitākere Ranges, Great Barrier, and Waiheke Local Board’s shared practice workshop be provided for in line with the latest Auckland Council’s Elected Members’ Expense Policy 2014.

b) approve the rough cost of $1220 for the Waiheke Local Board members to attend the Waitākere Ranges, Great Barrier, and Waiheke Local Board’s shared practice workshop, noting this budget will be from the Local Board expenses budget

CARRIED”

Recommendation/s

That the Waiheke Local Board:

a) Notes the urgent decision made on 13 April 2016 as follows;

“That the Waiheke Local Board:

b) approve any related elected member expenses for attending the Waitākere Ranges, Great Barrier, and Waiheke Local Board’s shared practice workshop be provided for in line with the latest Auckland Council’s Elected Members’ Expense Policy 2014.

c) approve the rough cost of $1220 for the Waiheke Local Board members to attend the Waitākere Ranges, Great Barrier, and Waiheke Local Board’s shared practice workshop, noting this budget will be from the Local Board expenses budget

CARRIED”

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Signed urgent decision	109
b View	Waitakere Ranges Shared Practice Workshop Report	111
c View	Waitakere Ranges Local Board Plan 2014 - key initiatives	113
d View	Waiheke Local Board Plan 2014 - Key initiatives	117
e View	Great Barrier Local Board Plan 2014 - key initiatives	121

Signatories

Authors	Sophie McGhee - Democracry Advisor
Authorisers	John Nash - Senior Local Board Advisor

Waiheke Local Board

28 April 2016

Central Facility Partnership Joint Advocacy Positions

File No.: CP2016/07146

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to seek agreement from each of the seven central Local Boards, who are members of the Central Facility Partnership Committee, to develop joint advocacy positions on the future re-instatement of the Central Facility Partnership Fund.

Executive Summary

2. In round figures, since 2010, the Central Facility Partnership Committee has allocated $10 million, which was leveraged to provide community projects to a total value of $45m. This community-led approach was consistent with the empowered communities’ philosophy. With the establishment of the $10M Locally Driven Initiatives (LDI) Capex Fund as part of the 2015-2025 long-term plan the Central Facility Partnership Fund ceased

3. Following agreement by Waitemata, Orakei, Albert-Eden, Puketapapa, Maungakiekie-Tamaki, Waiheke and Great Barrier Local Boards it was agreed to re-establish the Central Facility Partnership Committee.

4. A key purpose of the re-established Central Facility Partnership Committee as outlined in the Terms of Reference is to provide governance and oversight of approved partnership projects and feasibility studies; and develop and articulate joint facility-based advocacy positions and programmes.

5. A report was considered by the Committee on the 14th March 2016, which provided the members with an update on what advocacy positions had been taken to date by each central local board and identified upcoming opportunities to establish and present joint advocacy positions.

6. It was considered that a consistent approach, across the seven central local boards would create a stronger advocacy position on the re-instatement of the Central Facility Partnership Fund.

7. The Committee agreed to develop joint advocacy positions that reflect the purpose and agreed terms of reference of the Committee and support the reinstatement of a similar fund. This wording could then be used by each local board to inform their advocacy discussions through the annual budget process.

8. In April 2016 input from Local Boards will be sought on a range of annual plan related matters, including advocacy positions. Local boards will then have an opportunity to agree any advocacy priorities for discussion with the Finance and Performance Committee on 6 and 9 May.

9. This report is seeking the local board to consider the inclusion of proposed joint advocacy positions as part of the boards individual advocacy positions.

Recommendation/s

That the Waiheke Local Board:

a) Note that since 2010, the Central Facilities Partnership Committee has allocated $10 million, which was leveraged to provide community projects with a total value of $45m. This community-led approach was consistent with the empowered communities’ philosophy.

b) Note that with the establishment of the $10M Locally Driven Initiatives (LDI) Capex Fund as part of the 2015-2025 long-term plan the Central Facility Partnership Fund was ceased

c) Agree to include in the boards key advocacy issues the proposed joint advocacy positions:

i) Request the Governing Body to re-instate a sub-regional fund similar to the Central Facility Partnership Fund

ii) Requests the approval for the Central Facility Partnership Committee to undertake under its governance responsibilities the ability to re-invest funds, up to the value of current commitments, in the event of a current facility partnership commitment failing to crystallise

d) Agree to include as part of the Local Boards individual achievement reports the inclusion of the collective outcomes of the central Facilities Partnership Committee

Comments

10. Since 2010, the Central Facilities Partnership Committee has allocated $10 million, which was leveraged to provide community projects with a total value of $45 million. This community led approach is consistent with the empowered communities’ philosophy.

11. On 3 August 2015 members of the previous Central Facilities Partnership Committee held a workshop chaired by Waitematā Local Board and Committee Chair, Shale Chambers. Whilst the primary function of the Committee was agreed to be one of governance over existing approved projects and feasibility studies it was also recognised that a re-established Committee would provide a good vehicle for developing joint advocacy around community partnership issues and opportunities, which is reflected in the agreed Terms of Reference of the Committee.

12. Central boards represented at the workshop also held a collective view that the success of the fund, as evidenced by the ratio of Auckland Council’s contribution (approx. $10M) to the total value of the projects completed (approx. $45M) warranted advocacy around re-establishing the fund in the future.

13. In November 2015 all central Local Boards resolved and then a number discussed with the Finance and Performance Committee, as part of the annual plan discussions, selected advocacy positions.

14. A review of the advocacy positions taken by each central local board, which are related to the purpose of the Central Facilities Partnership Committee has been undertaken to provide an overview of what current advocacy positions have been made.

15. Three central local boards to date have included an advocacy position which requests the Governing Body to re-instate the Central Facilities Partnership Fund.

16. Two local boards included this advocacy position in their presentation to the Finance and Performance Committee in November 2015.

Local Board	Advocacy Position	Advocacy Description	Advocated to Finance & Performance Committee in November
Waitematā	Central Facilities Partnership Fund Re-instate the Central Facilities Partnership Fund	Since 2010 the Central Facilities Partnership Committee allocated $10 million which was leveraged to provide community projects with a total value of $45m. This community led approach is consistent with the empowered communities’ philosophy. With the establishment of the $10m Local Board Discretionary Capex Fund , the Central Facility Partnership Fund has now ceased	Yes
Orakei	Central Facilities Partnership Fund	Since 2010, the Central Facility Partnership Committee allocated $10 million which was leveraged to provide community projects with a total value of $45m. This community-led approach was consistent with the empowered communities’ philosophy. With the establishment of the $10m Locally Driven Initiatives (LDI) Capex Fund, the Central Facility Partnership Fund has now ceased. The Board requests that a sub-regional fund similar to the Central Facility Partnership be reinstated.	No
Albert Eden	Central Facilities Partnership Fund Re-instate the Central Facilities Partnership Fund	Since 2010, the Central facilities Partnership Committee allocated $10 million which was leveraged to provide community projects with a total value of $45 million. This community-led approach was consistent with the empowered communities’ philosophy. With the establishment of the $10m LDI Capital Expenditure (CAPEX) Fund, the Central Facility Partnership Fund has now ceased.	Yes
Puketapapa	N/A	N/A	No
Maungakiekie-Tamaki	N/A	N/A	No
Waiheke	N/A	N/A	No
Great Barrier	N/A	N/A	No

17. There is now an opportunity to achieve a collective approach across the central local boards as part of the upcoming annual budget process.

18. The Committee agreed in March 2016 to develop and propose to the member Local Boards joint advocacy positions, which reflect the purpose and agreed terms of reference of the committee and supports the reinstatement of a similar fund as the Central Facility Partnership Fund.

a) Requests the re-instatement of a sub-regional fund similar to the Central Facility Partnership Fund

b) Requests approval for the Central Facility Partnership Committee to undertake under its governance responsibilities the ability to re-invest funds, up to the value of current commitments, in the event of a current Central Facility Partnership commitment failing to crystalise.

19. The committee also requested that Local Boards individually include within their individual achievement reports the collective outcomes that have been created as a result of the central Facilities Partnership Committee as a way of highlighting the success to date of this ceased fund.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

20. Individually each central local board has agreed to the Terms of Reference for the re-established Central Facility Partnerships Committee.

21. The Terms of Reference states as a key purpose of the Committee is to develop and articulate joint facility-based advocacy positions and programmes

Māori impact statement

22. The Central Facilities Partnership scheme is a general programme that supports facilities which are accessible to a wide range of groups including Maori.

Implementation

23. As part of the annual plan process Local Boards will be considering and finalising their advocacy positions in April 2016.

24. Further discussions between local boards and the Finance and Performance Committee on advocacy maters will be undertaken on the 6^th and 9^th May 2016.

25. These meetings provide further opportunity to articulate any agreed joint advocacy positions at these times.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Trina Thompson - Senior Local Board Advisor - Waitemata

Authorisers

Karen Lyons - Manager Local Board Services

John Nash - Senior Local Board Advisor