Agenda of Puketāpapa Local Board

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 Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Thursday, 28 April 2016, including the confidential section, as a true and correct record.

5 Leave of Absence

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

6 Acknowledgements

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

7 Petitions

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

8 Deputations

Standing Order 3.20 provides for deputations. Those applying for deputations are required to give seven working days notice of subject matter and applications are approved by the Chairperson of the Puketāpapa Local Board. This means that details relating to deputations can be included in the published agenda. Total speaking time per deputation is ten minutes or as resolved by the meeting.

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

9 Public Forum

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

9.1 Public Forum - Waiata Epsom Tennis Club

Purpose

1. For Bronwen Barton, secretary, and Craig Bell, club captain, of the Waiata Epsom Tennis Club to present to the Board about the group’s activities in a community lease facility.

Executive Summary

1. A number of groups in the Puketāpapa Local Board area operate out of leasehold community facilities.

2. The Board is keen to have a better understanding of the way these assets are used by community groups.

3. Lessees have been invited to talk to the board about how the group is achieving its goals, touching on some of the challenges and successes.

Recommendations

That the Puketāpapa Local Board thank Bronwen Barton, secretary, and Craig Bell, club captain, of the Waiata Epsom Tennis Club for her verbal presentation and attendance.

9.2 Public Forum - Lynfield Tennis Club

Purpose

1. For Rodney Attwood, President and Club Captain of the Lynfield Tennis Club, to present to the Board about the group’s activities in a community lease facility.

Executive Summary

1. A number of groups in the Puketāpapa Local Board area operate out of leasehold community facilities.

2. The Board is keen to have a better understanding of the way these assets are used by community groups.

3. Lessees have been invited to talk to the board about how the group is achieving its goals, touching on some of the challenges and successes.

Recommendations

That the Puketāpapa Local Board thank Rodney Attwood, President and Club Captain of the Lynfield Tennis Club, for his presentation and attendance.

9.3 Public Forum - Mt Roskill Tennis Club

Purpose

1. For Jackson Perry, club president, and Paul Chandler, committee member, from the Mt Roskill Tennis Club to present to the Board about the group’s activities in a community lease facility.

Executive Summary

1. A number of groups in the Puketāpapa Local Board area operate out of leasehold community facilities.

2. The Board is keen to have a better understanding of the way these assets are used by community groups.

3. Lessees have been invited to talk to the board about how the group is achieving its goals, touching on some of the challenges and successes.

Recommendations

That the Puketāpapa Local Board thank Jackson Perry, club president, and Paul Chandler, committee member, Mt Roskill Tennis Club, for their verbal presentation and attendance.

10 Extraordinary Business

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

11 Notices of Motion

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

Puketāpapa Local Board

26 May 2016

Puketāpapa Local Board Quick Response Grants: Round Five 2015/2016

File No.: CP2016/08424

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to present applications received for round five of the Puketāpapa Local Board Quick Response Grants 2015/2016. The local board is required to fund, part-fund or decline these applications.

Executive Summary

2. The Puketāpapa Local Board has set a total quick response budget of $10,000 for the 2015/2016 financial year.

3. A total of $4,315 was allocated in previous quick response rounds, leaving a remaining balance of $5,685 to allocate for the 2015/2016 financial year.

4. Two applications were received in this round, with a total requested of $1,845

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) consider the applications listed in Table One and agree to fund, part-fund or decline the application in this round.

Table One: Puketāpapa Local Board Round Five Quick Response applications

Application number	Organisation Name	Focus	Project	Total Requested
QR1615-501	Jordan Tahana	Sport and Recreation	11th International Softball Federation Junior Men’s World Softball Championship	$1,500
QR1615-502	Urdu Hindi Cultural Association of New Zealand	Events	Mushaira Night or Musical Symposium	$345
			Total	$1,845

Comments

5. The implementation of the new Community Grants Policy commenced on 1 July 2015. The policy supports each local board to adopt a grants programme for 2015/2016 and the Puketāpapa Local Board adopted its grants programme on 30 April 2015 (see Attachment A).

6. The local board grants programme sets out:

· local board priorities

· lower priorities for funding

· exclusions

· grant types, the number of grant rounds and when these will open and close

· any additional accountability requirements.

7. The Puketāpapa Local Board will operate five quick response rounds and two local grants rounds for this financial year. The fifth quick response round closed on 20 April 2016.

8. The new community grant programmes have been extensively advertised through the new council grant webpage, local board webpages, local board e-newsletters and Facebook pages, council publications, radio, local newspapers and community networks. Staff have conducted a series of public workshops in local board areas, which have been attended by approximately 1000 people across the Auckland region.

9. The Puketāpapa Local Board has set a total quick response budget of $10,000 for the 2015/2016 financial year.

10. A total of $4,305 was allocated in previous quick response rounds, leaving a remaining balance of $5,695 to allocate for the 2015/2016 financial year.

11. Two applications were received in this round, with a total requested of $1,845

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

12. Local boards are responsible for the decision-making and allocation of local board community grants. The Puketāpapa local board is required to fund, part-fund or decline these grant applications against the local board priorities identified in the local board grant programme.

13. The board is requested to note that section 48 of the Community Grants Policy states “We will also provide feedback to unsuccessful grant applicants about why they have been declined, so they will know what they can do to increase their chances of success next time.”

Māori impact statement

14. The provision of community grants provides opportunities for all Aucklanders to undertake projects, programmes, activities that benefit a wider range of individuals and groups, including Maori. As a guide for decision-making, in the allocation of community grants, the new community grants policy supports the principle of delivering positive outcomes for Maori.

Implementation

15. The allocation of grants to community groups is within the adopted Long Term Plan 2015-2025 and local board agreements.

16. Following the Puketāpapa Local Board allocating funding for quick response round five, Commercial and Finance staff will notify the applicant of the local board decision.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Puketapapa Local Board Grants Programme 2015/2016	23
b View	Puketapapa Quick Response, Round Five Application Summaries	27

Signatories

Authors

Fua Winterstein - Community Grants Advisor

Authorisers

Marion Davies - Community Grants Operations Manager

Jennifer Rose - Operations Support Manager

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

26 May 2016

Auckland Transport Report, Puketapapa Local Board, May 2016

File No.: CP2016/09296

Purpose

1. The purpose of the report is to respond to Local Board requests on transport-related matters and to provide information to Elected Members about Auckland Transport (AT) activities in the Local Board area since the last report.

Monthly Overview

2. A portfolio meeting was held on 18 May. Items on the agenda included:

· Cape Horn Road consultation and site visit

· Louvain Street safety matters

3. A workshop was held with the Local Board on May 11, to discuss the central bus route review, consultation and next steps.

4. A walkover of the Mt Roskill Village area was undertaken on 11 May to discuss possible areas for improvement.

5. A workshop is scheduled for 1 June to update the Local Board on the light rail project and Dominion Road.

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) receive the Auckland Transport report for May 2016.

Reporting Back

Consultation

6. Consultations forwarded to the Local Board for comment in the last reporting period include:

· Farrelly Avenue

Matters Raised at the April Board Meeting

Traffic Management Plans

7. For commercial developments AT requires the developer to submit a construction traffic management plan (CTMP) and generally this is also a requirement of the Resource Consents issued by Council.

8. In these AT requires information such as the numbers of truck movements per day and the inbound and outbound routes which AT will review and require changes if it considers those are in the best interests of other road users and will assist in minimising the impacts of heavy vehicles.

9. Depending on the routes and the location of the development AT may also restrict the hours of truck movements, avoiding such activities during the morning and afternoon peak periods particularly on arterial routes. To a degree, AT is relying on the co-operation of the developers and their suppliers as AT not have any rights to restrict truck movements unless these are either over dimensional or over-weight – most deliveries are made in vehicles that are Class 1 and are using roads that are deemed as suitable for Class 1 vehicles. Fortunately most developers are obliging.

10. There are always those who do not submit CTMP’s or comply with them and where AT is advised of these and they are causing problems for other road users AT will visit the sites and advise them, in the nicest possible way, of the issues.

11. Residential developments and even some commercial ones do not require Resource Consents and in these cases AT may not be aware of them and thus there will probably not be a CTMP. However and as above, AT will visit and monitor these sites if they are creating problems. Such problems can be reported to ATs Traffic Management Compliance Team.

Farrelly Avenue Speed Feedback Sign

The proposed sign will be a new sign to the Puketapapa Local Board area.

Grass Berms at 985 Mt Eden Road – Fletchers SHA Development

12. This project was approved by the Development Programme office of Auckland Council and AT provided input into the process. The minimum footpath width at this location is 1.8m, and this footpath complies with that standard.

13. The assessment concluded that a 1.8m wide footpath would be sufficient to cater for expected pedestrian volumes in this particular location. Grass berms are a legitimate use of public space, providing a softer aesthetic as well as a convenient and easily accessible location for buried utility services.

14. Auckland Council has indicated that that the body corporate of the new subdivisions created here will be responsible for the maintenance of the berm on their respective frontages.

Congestion in the Puketapapa Local Board Area and Campbell Road

15. Watercare is doing a major upgrade of its Hunua No4 pipeline which is now affecting Campbell Road. Auckland Transport cannot comment on the effects of this directly but can say that congestion over the whole network has been increasing and has been high over the whole network in March and early April.

HOP Card Use in Puketapapa

16. AT can’t provide information on how many HOP cards there are in the Puketapapa area as not all HOP cards are registered. However it can comment that HOP cards are well used in the local board area.

Reporting Back

White Swan Road and Richardson Road Optimisation

17. Auckland Transport has completed its consultation with businesses in the vicinity of this intersection on the implementation of trial parking bays.

18. These parking bays are expected to be in position by 14 May, 2016.

Resolution PKPPT/2016/19 February 2016 – Cape Horn Road

Request Auckland Transport to carry out a consultation with residents of Cape Horn Road to determine the level of support for the removal of 3 to 4 parks on the eastern side of the road (outside No.4) to remove the bottleneck caused by parking on both sides of the road and report back to our April business meeting.

19. Auckland Transport carried out this consultation in March with affected parties and further feedback was requested from other residents by the Local Board transport portfolio holder. A good response to the consultation was received and the feedback was carefully considered by Auckland Transport’s traffic engineers.

20. Although the majority of the submitters were in favour of the installation of no stopping lines, Auckland Transport traffic engineers have upheld their original decision not to install broken yellow lines on the eastern side of the road.

21. As previously stated, it is considered that a road safety issue will be created if parking is stripped from the eastern side of the road as that will allow vehicles to travel downhill at speed. In the current layout, cars parked at the top end of the road provide a traffic calming effect and cause vehicles to slow down.

22. A site visit to Cape Horn Road with the transport portfolio lead and Auckland Transport officers to further discuss the matter took place on 12 May.

HOP Card Outlet

23. Auckland Transport is anticipating adding another HOP card outlet to the Puketapapa Local Board area this year. This is still subject to commercial negotiation.

Local Board Capital Projects

24. The Puketapapa Local Board has access to the Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF) for the construction of transport related projects in its area. This fund is administered by Auckland Transport. Each year, Local Board’s transport capital fund allocation is $379,117, and this amount can be accumulated within each electoral term.

25. As the electoral term extends beyond the financial year, it is also possible to anticipate the allocation from the first year of the new electoral term. Puketapapa Local Board has resolved to anticipate the first year of 2016-17 Transport Capital Fund budget towards delivery of the Ernie Pinches to Sandringham Road cyclepath.

26. Financials

Current Local Board Capital Projects

Duncumb Street Greenway

27. The Duncumb Street shared path and the traffic calming project on Duke Street are being delivered together. Work started here in late April and is expected to be finished at the end of May.

Fearon Park Pathway

28. This will be managed by Auckland Council Parks.

Ernie Pinches to Wesley Community Centre cycleway

29. Detailed design has started following negotiations and an alternative quotation process. Construction is likely to begin in August - two months later than the original programme due to extra consultation requested by the Local Board in 2015.

Keith Hay Park Lighting Project

30. The ducting, cabling and light pole foundations are due to commence in May to be ready for poles and luminaire arrival in mid-June.

Keith Hay Park Carpark Realignment, Richardson Rd

31. This project has been deferred until after October 2016 and linked to delivery of the southern section of the lighting for Keith Hay Park.

SH20 Seat Project

32. Now that the location for the seat has been confirmed, the project will be handed over to Auckland Council Parks for the seat to be installed.

Auckland Transport News

More train services for the west

33. There will be more trains on the Western Line from Monday, 9 May. Services to and from the west are being increased to meet demand. On weekdays there will now be trains every 10 minutes during peak times, allowing passengers to turn up and go.

34. Trains will operate every 10 minutes Monday to Friday between 0600 and 0900 towards Britomart and from 1430 to 1900 westbound. During the day services will operate every 20 minutes and at other times and on the weekend every 30 minutes.

35. There will also be some minor changes to services on some other lines.

Consideration

Issues Raised by Local Board Members

Location or Name of Issue

Description

AT Response

Albrecht Avenue

The bus stop at Albrecht Avenue number 8887, is not marked out as a bus stop. Cars often park in such a way that the bus has to stay in the middle of the road to pick up passengers. Can this bus stop be properly marked out?

AT responds that it is illegal to park 6m each side of a bus stop sign whether it’s marked or not. Unmarked bus stops need to go through formal processes to be brought up to standard, this includes consultation with neighbours and resolution by the Transport Control Committee.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Consultations on Roading & Parking Changes (May 2016)	37

Signatories

Authors

Lorna Stewart, Elected Member Relationship Manager, Auckland Transport

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon, Manager, Elected Member Relationship Unit, Auckland Transport

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

26 May 2016

Auckland Transport Quarterly Update to Local Boards
For the quarter 1 January to 31 March 2016

File No.: CP2016/09013

Executive Summary

1. The purpose of this report is to inform local boards about progress on activities undertaken by Auckland Transport (AT) in the three months 1 January – 31 March 2016.

Attachments include:

A – Auckland Transport activities

B – Travelwise Schools activities

C – Decisions of the Traffic Control Committee

D – Report against local board advocacy issues.

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) receive Auckland Transport’s quarterly update report for quarter 1 January to 31 March 2016.

Significant activities during the period under review

Strategy and Planning

2. Transport for Future Urban Growth (TFUG)

Under the new business case approach, AT has received approved funding to develop growth related Programme Business Cases (PBCs) to identify the transport infrastructure needed within the next 30 years for the following growth areas identified in Auckland Council's Future Urban Land Supply Strategy: Northwest, Southern, Northern and Warkworth.

A multi-disciplinary and cross organisational team has been established on these four growth areas and is currently working from a co-located space. Councillors, local boards, iwi, developers and other stakeholders have been informed and public consultation has taken place. Sequencing Workshops were scheduled for 22-23 March and the second round of public consultation scheduled from 15 April.

3. Central Access Strategy

A Programme Business Case for the Central Access Plan (Isthmus to City Centre) is jointly being developed with New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) and Auckland Council. It is anticipated that a preferred programme which identifies a series of interventions to resolve growing bus patronage demands against corridor/terminus capacity constraints will be provided to the NZTA Board in May for their approval.

Public Transport (PT) Development

4. City Rail Link

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

5. Double Decker Network Mitigation works

Mitigation works on identified risks for Double decker buses such as building verandas, street furniture, signage, low hanging power/phone lines, service poles, overhanging trees, and low bridge structures to allow the safe passage of double decker buses. Botany route is cleared for double decker bus with some minor works on defects list to be completed. Mt Eden and Northern Express bus routes to be cleared in March 2016.

6. PT Safety, Security and Amenity

An evaluation is underway of the benefits of installing ticket barriers at selected stations on the network to improve safety and security. Current projects include completion of Ellerslie Station canopies, upgrade to Morningside Level Crossing and electronic gating at Manurewa Station. Onboard train digital information screens will commence testing in April.

PT Facilities Infrastructure Development

7. Wharf Renewals

Design is currently underway on a number of urgent wharf renewal project requests received from AT Metro (25th Feb). These are targeted to be completed by 30 June 2016. AT is on track to deliver these.

8. Bus Infrastructure Improvements

AT is still on target to spend the $4.7m budget. A significant number of physical works will be undertaken over May and June.

PT Operations

9. Highlights for the quarter

Rail patronage growth continues at around 20% year-on-year, and the month of March saw more than 1.6 million passenger journeys on the network, the highest month on record. Service delivery has maintained levels of around 95% of services arriving at the destinations on-time. The new operator tender process has been placed on hold, with the current contract with Transdev being conditionally extended for a period of up to 12-24 months, while the impacts on the rail services contract of long term projects such as CRL are assessed.

10. Integrated Fares

The 28 February 2016 annual AT Metro fare review included final fare zone boundary alignment between bus and rail prior to mid-2016 integrated fares implementation, including alignment at Orakei of two zone rail from the CBD with the existing two zone bus and removal of the inner CBD and airport mini-zones. An independent review of the proposed integrated fares product structure and price modelling by Deloitte is nearing completion and will support a final recommendation to the AT Board in April.

Road Design and Development

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

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

Services

12. Whangaparaoa Road Dynamic Lane Trial

In the last quarter, designs for the trial along Whangaparaoa Road (between Red Beach Road and Hibiscus Coast Highway) have been assessed. A driver behaviour survey was undertaken, to understand perceptions of the trial and responses to a simplified scheme using just Light Emitting Diode (LED) in road markings. The purpose of this was to test reactions and guide design requirements for signage and LED requirements. The survey illustrated 21 scenarios with different markings and LED lights along the route (i.e. no signage or overhead lane control arrows were assumed).

The outcome of the survey showed the following:

Positives recognised:

· Improves traffic flow

· Flexible traffic control

· Better use of road space

· Increases road capacity

Concerns raised:

· Confusing

· Accident risk

· Unclear (lane direction) – Need clear signage

· Need to educate

Understanding gained from the driver perception survey and traffic condition surveys will be applied to the design before consultation is undertaken.

13. Auckland Bike Challenge

The Auckland Bike Challenge was undertaken in February encouraging businesses and workplaces to support staff to cycle. The month-long online challenge has had a significant success in encouraging greater uptake of cycling in Auckland. It has been well supported by key stakeholders including Healthy Auckland Together, Auckland Regional Public Health, the Sustainable Business Network and Bike Auckland. A total of 166 workplaces took part, and over 2,860 people registering to ride a bike in February including 600 new cyclists. A total of 23,111 trips were logged amounting to over 329,374 km travelled by bike.

14. Personalised Journey Planning for commuters

Three Personalised Journey Planning (PJP) projects are underway in Kingsland/ Morningside, Hauraki/Belmont and Stonefields residential areas. These are key areas for commuters to the city centre and reflect congested corridors on the network. Residents in each area who currently drive alone in peak times were offered personalised journey planning advice on other suitable modes of transport, and those that commit to trialling a new option are provided with supporting incentives. The goal of these projects is to encourage residents to make a long-term change, supporting modal share changes and reducing morning peak congestion.

15. Safer Communities

The Safer Communities programme is now underway with the Community and Road Safety team working more intensively in high risk communities to increase safe access to active and sustainable transport modes. The Community Transport team has delivered two safer Communities workshops for lead teacher and school management. These workshops were designed to provide information on the new delivery model for high risk communities and were very successful with 21 school attending. This was followed by two lead teacher workshops for the schools outside of the high risk communities.

16. Walking School Bus – Walking School Bus Week 15-19 February

Pedestrian safety is a high priority in the Auckland Region with an upward trend in Deaths and Serious Injuries (DSI) over the past five years. The Walking School Bus (WSB) Programme has an important role in improving pedestrian safety around schools while also reducing morning peak congestion. The Community and Road Safety team developed and delivered the first regional WSBs promotion week for primary schools across the Auckland region. The key objective was to raise awareness of the benefits of the programme and seek more participation from parents and students, as well as highlighting the road safety benefits the programme brings.

Currently, 154 schools in Auckland have WSBs (out of 345 total schools in Auckland with primary aged students) with over 4000 children on WSB routes and more than 1000 volunteers. During WSB Week, more than 4900 students registered to participate in themed days across the week. AMI Insurance sponsored Thursday’s ‘Be Bright Be Seen’ theme day with guest walkers including Jerome Kaino and Police dogs, who walked with WSBs across the region. WSB Week was a great success with positive media promotion including interviews on Radio Live, Stuff.co.nz, and articles in local papers.

17. Road Corridor Delivery (RCD)

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

· The Delivery of roading and streetlight maintenance and renewal programmes

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

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

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

18. RCD Key Highlights

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

Table 1: Progress against Asset Renewal Targets

Note* data is to February 2016

19. The team is 81% of the way through its Pavement Rehabilitation projects. Table 2 following outlines where key projects have been completed.

Table 2: Completed Rehabilitation Projects

20. The following table outlines the key projects which are currently underway and are due for completion in Quarter 4.

Table 3: Rehabilitation Projects still underway

21. Year 5 (2015/16) of the UFB rollout is continuing and planning for Year 6 (2016/17) has already commenced.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Schedule of activities undertaken for the third quarter (2015/16) ending 31 March 2016	45
b View	Travelwise Schools activities broken down by local board	55
c View	Traffic Control Committee Decisions broken down by local board	57
d View	Local Board Advocacy Report	59

Signatories

Authors

Various Auckland Transport authors

Authorisers

Lorna Stewart, Elected Member Relationship Manager, Auckland Transport

Jonathan Anyon, Manager Elected Member Relationship Unit, Auckland Transport

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

26 May 2016

Monte Cecilia Park Updated Concept Plan 2016

File No.: CP2016/06262

Purpose

1. To adopt the revised Monte Cecilia Park Concept Plan dated May 2016 as set out in Attachment 1 to this report.

Executive Summary

2. Monte Cecilia Park was purchased by Auckland City Council and opened in 2004. A master plan was produced in 2007. Additional properties have been purchased around the park since then and this draft concept plan integrates this land into the existing park.

3. Land acquisitions at Hillsborough Road, Korma Road and Mt Albert Road and the Monte Cecilia School are complete. The school buildings have been removed and the demolition of houses is expected to occur from July to October 2016.

4. The updated concept plan aims to improve and raise the profile of the park in a way that fits with its heritage and landscape values. The plan will provide more opportunities for recreational activities and make the park more visible to the public. The plan will incorporate Maori heritage values and the Te Aranga design principles into the park.

5. A draft concept plan was consulted on with the public and Mana Whenua in 2015. The plan was generally well received. Changes were made to the draft concept plan following consultation to take on board the consultation feedback.

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) Adopt the Monte Cecilia Park Concept Plan May 2016 as set out in Attachment 1 to this report.

Comments

Background

6. A master plan for Monte Cecilia Park and confidential plan was endorsed by the former Auckland City Council’s Arts, Culture and Recreation Committee in 2007. The confidential plan identified potential acquisitions around the park, including the properties which have been purchased and settled since 2007. These are 64, 66, 68, 68A Hillsborough Road, 20, 22, 24 26 Korma Road, 595 Mt Albert Road and the Monte Cecilia School.

7. The purpose of acquiring these additional properties was to improve the open space function of Monte Cecilia Park and enhance the associated recreational, heritage and landscape values of the park.

8. Monte Cecilia Park has a long history including occupation by Mana Whenua, early European settlement, including the Pah Homestead and a significant botanical collection. It is important to develop and raise the profile of the park in a way that fits with its heritage and landscape values and expansive open space and views.

9. An updated concept plan has been produced to include these recent land acquisitions and integrate the land into the existing park.

Current works

10. The land acquisitions at Hillsborough Road, Korma Road and Mt Albert Road and the Monte Cecilia School are complete. The houses are to be demolished as part of the acquisition process. The school buildings have been removed and land reinstatement is occurring to provide new recreational opportunities on the site. Resource consent has been granted for the demolition of the houses and reinstatement of the land into open space.

11. Demolition of the houses, in conjunction with the school removal, will enhance sightlines into the park and to the Pah Homestead. The land will make the park more visible to the public, increase passive surveillance from the roads and make the park easier to find and promote.

12. Tenants in the houses owned by Auckland Council were given 90 days’ notice to vacate the properties on 21 March 2016. The removal of houses and re-instatement to grass of the site is expected to occur from July to October 2016.

The Whare

13. The Whare is a large historic wooden building relocated from St John’s College in Tamaki and was used by the Monte Cecilia School. The local board and interest groups in the community would like the Whare retained, restored and utilised as a community facility.

14. A condition rating report on the Whare building has identified numerous issues with the building including the presence of asbestos. Considerable funds will be required to upgrade the building. These funds are not currently available.

15. If refurbishment of the building is some time away, the Whare will need to be boarded-up to prevent the disturbance of asbestos until any works take place. Fencing may also be required to prevent vandalism of the vacant building.

Liston Village

16. Auckland Council has a Public Works Act sale and purchase agreement with the Catholic Diocese to purchase the Liston Village land adjacent to the park. Council does not take possession of the site until the last resident with a right to occupy has vacated their unit.

17. It is unknown when that will occur, but it is reasonable to assume that the property will not come to council’s possession for a number of years. Development of the site will be considered once final settlement occurs.

Development of the Monte Cecilia Park concept plan

18. A draft concept plan was produced for public consultation. This included options for tennis courts, a community garden, a car park at Korma Road and options for the location of a playground and pavilion on the park.

19. A public open day was held on 22 March 2015 to gauge public opinion on the draft concept plan. An on-line survey was open from 18 March until 15 April 2015.

20. The main themes that emerged from the public feedback on the future use and development of the land included:

• Provide opportunities for community use

• Protect and enhance the landscape and vegetation

• Opportunities for recreation and play

21. A meeting with mana whenua was held on 10 July 2015. Feedback at this meeting supported the updated concept plan but also recommended better acknowledgement and incorporation of the wider heritage values of the park and the Te Aranga design principles. Two follow up meetings were arranged to progress this but no mana whenua representatives could attend.

22. The final draft concept plan includes a staff summary of the known heritage values of the park and suggests ways the Te Aranga design principles can be expressed through the updated concept plan. This final draft was sent to Mana Whenua for feedback. No feedback that affects the concept plan was received.

23. Future involvement and collaboration with Mana Whenua at the detailed design stage for projects in the concept plan will provide opportunities to review and further develop the Te Aranga design principles and heritage values.

Changes made to the concept plan following consultation

24. The draft concept plan has been adapted following feedback from the public and mana whenua in the following ways:

Design Item	Recommendation
Pavilion location	Remove - pavilion no longer required due to funding provided for in the LTP
Playground	Option C preferred, next to the Whare
Extend orchard	Retain
Community gardens	Remove - no strong community interest shown during consultation
Tennis courts	Remove – over supply in this local board area
Car parking – Korma Rd	Remove permanent parking. Allow for temporary overflow parking for large events
Temporary car parking – Hillsborough Rd	Retain for overflow parking for large events
Te Aranga Design Principals	Added. To be finalized during detailed design of specific projects
Heritage Values	Added. To be finalized during detailed design of specific projects

Proposed updated concept plan

25. A concept plan has been developed following consultation and is provided in Attachment A.

26. A summary of the concept plan’s features include;

· Central green and loop road west of the Pah Homestead

· New playground west of the Whare

· Incorporation of Maori heritage values and the Te Aranga design principles

· Improved park entrances to provide better visibility into the park

· Preserve view shafts from the park to other important landmarks in the area.

· Reinstate and extend the existing orchard

· Native planting

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

27. Workshops were held with the local board in February and September 2015 to discuss consultation and the findings of the public open day. The parks portfolio holder attended the meeting with mana whenua in July 2015.

28. The local board supported the suggested changes to the draft concept plan following public consultation and agreed to further consultation with mana whenua to address the need for more focus on the heritage values and Te Aranga design principles.

Māori impact statement

29. The Monte Cecilia Park site is culturally significant to Mana Whenua. The concept plan recognizes these heritage values and identifies ways they can be recognised and provided for through the design and development of the park.

30. The parks Maori heritage values and expression of the Te Aranga design principles will be developed during the detailed design phase.

Implementation

31. A rough order of costs for the implementation of the concept plan is being prepared and will help the local board to prioritise funding for the park development.

32. Funding from the local board will be required to implement the Monte Cecilia concept plan. The local board may commit $20,000 capex from their Locally Driven Initiatives fund to initiate the detailed design planning and resource consents at their May 26 meeting.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Monte Cecilia Park Concept Plan May 2016 final draft	65

Signatories

Authors

Jacki Byrd - Parks Advisor - Puketapapa

Authorisers

Mace Ward - General Manager Parks, Sports and Recreation

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

26 May 2016

2015/2016 Puketapapa Local Board Renewals Update

File No.: CP2016/09388

Purpose

1. To finalise remaining projects within the 2015/2016 community facilities renewals programme budget.

Executive Summary

2. This report seeks approval from the local board on priority community facilities renewals projects for 2015/2016 which are proposed as follows:

· The Wheel Friendly Project

· Replacing a lighting controller at the Pah Homestead

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) approve $52,553 for the Wheel Friendly Project as part of the 2015/2016 renewals budget.

b) approve $14,335 for the lighting controller at Pah Homestead as part of the 2015/2016 renewals budget.

Comments

3. The renewals programme is a planned and documented process primarily driven by Strategic Asset Management Plans. Each project is assessed and scored against four key project drivers and then prioritised from a regional programme perspective, spanning several years. The key project drivers are:

· compliance

· strategic fit

· risk mitigation

· benefits

4. As a result of renewal assessments and priorities, budgets applied to each local board will vary from year to year.

5. A capex budget of $404,514 was identified in the Long Term Plan 2015-2025 for CDAC’s (now called ACE) renewals within Puketāpapa Local Board.

6. The following priority projects were identified, approved by the local board and planned for delivery:

Project	Description	ACE Capital Renewals
Mt Roskill War Memorial Hall	Install external doors	$26,135
Various Puketāpapa Buildings	Fire system upgrades as necessary	$100,000
Three Kings Band Room	Construct external deck and storage area	$85,000
Three Kings Tennis	Signage and heating	$10,000
Wesley Centre	Install flashing on parapet walls	$35,000
Wesley Centre	Reception area upgrade	$35,000
Total		$291,135

7. It has since been recognised that a further two projects, as outlined below, are deemed high priority and proposed for consideration by the local board to finalise its 2015/2016 renewals programme:

Project	Description	Budget
Wheel Friendly Project	To enable the following buildings to become wheelchair accessible: · Fickling Centre · Wesley Community Centre · Mt Roskill War Memorial Hall	$52,553
Pah Homestead	Replace lighting controller to enable the lights to be switched on and off, reducing energy and over usage of lights.	$14,332
Total		$66,885

8. No further community facilities renewals projects are proposed for this financial year. It is acknowledged that the original budget was indicative and, in future, renewals work programmes will be agreed with each local board prior to the start of each financial year.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

9. The purpose of this report is to seek local board views and final approval on the proposed renewals programmes.

Māori impact statement

10. The implementation of renewals work improves council’s infrastructure and overall service to the whole community, including Māori.

Implementation

11. These projects will be implemented through the project delivery team as part of the 2015/2016 work programme.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Hannah Alleyne - Senior Programme Planner

Authorisers

Rod Sheridan - General Manager Community Facilities

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

26 May 2016

Local Dog Access Review

File No.: CP2016/09332

Purpose

1. To adopt the Statement of Proposal containing proposed changes to local dog access rules for the Puketāpapa Local Board area and appoint a hearings panel to receive, hear and deliberate on submissions on the Statement of Proposal.

Executive Summary

2. Dog access rules help ensure positive interactions between dogs and people in public places and the protection of wildlife. For non-dog owners this typically relates to dogs not causing a nuisance, and for dog owners being able to enjoy an outing with their dogs.

3. Dog access rules need to be easy to understand to the public. In deciding local dog access rules, local boards may want to consider decisions made to date by other local boards. Simple dog access rules across the region aids in increasing public understanding and enforcement.

4. The board resolved at its 26 November 2015 business meeting to undertake a review of local dog access rules in 2016. As part of the review process, the local board must adopt a Statement of Proposal for public consultation, and consider submissions to the proposal before making a final decision.

5. Staff recommend adopting options that would provide a balance between public safety and comfort and the needs of dog owners that:

· prohibits dog access in certain beach and foreshore areas and creates under control off a leash access in others

· removes existing ambiguous rules.

6. Staff will update the Statement of Proposal where required to reflect the decisions made by the local board.

7. Staff recommend that the local board appoints a panel of the whole to receive, hear and deliberate on submissions and other relevant information, and decide on changes to the local dog access rules.

8. Public consultation is proposed to start in June 2016 to coincide with dog registration. It will run for approximately six weeks. Local Board hearings and deliberations are planned for August, to be completed in time for its decision to be reported to the governing body in September 2016.

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) confirm its intention to propose an amendment as contained in a Statement of Proposal to the Auckland Council Policy on Dogs 2012 pursuant to section 10(8) of the Dog Control Act 1996.

b) adopt the Statement of Proposal in Attachment A and confirm:

i) the areas within Table 6 of the Statement of Proposal (Attachment A) as highly sensitive areas where dogs are prohibited

ii) the time and season rule set out in Table 4 of Statement of Proposal (Attachment A) for use if high use areas are identified

iii) the areas within Table 8 of the Statement of Proposal (Attachment A) as dog friendly areas where dogs are allowed under control off a leash

iv) the areas within Table 9 of the Statement of Proposal (Attachment A) as standard areas where dogs are allowed under control on a leash

v) remove the specific rules for dog exercise areas; picnic and fitness areas.

c) confirm that the proposed local dog access rules contained in the Statement of Proposal (Attachment A):

i) are consistent with the policy, principles, criteria and rules contained in the Auckland Council Policy on Dogs 2012

ii) are in accordance with relevant legislative requirements in particular the Local Government Act 2002 and Dog Control Act 1996.

d) authorise the Manager Social Policy and Bylaws, in consultation with the local board chair, to make any amendments to the Statement of Proposal to reflect decisions made by the local board.

e) authorise the Manager Social Policy and Bylaws to make any minor edits or amendments to the Statement of Proposal to correct any identified errors or typographical edits.

f) appoints a panel of the whole to receive, hear and deliberate on submissions and other relevant information and decide on changes to the local dog access rules.

Background

9. Within the Puketāpapa Local Board area approximately 9 per cent of households have one or more dogs on their properties^{^[1]}.

10. Local boards have the delegated responsibility to review dog access rules for local park, beach and foreshore areas. The following local access rules apply:

· a default under control on a leash dog access rule in all parks not specified as prohibited or off a leash

· a time and season rule on all beach and foreshore

· general rules around significant ecological areas, picnic and fitness apparatus areas

· 11 areas where dogs may be taken under control off a leash.

11. In deciding local dog access rules, local boards may want to consider decisions made to date by other local boards. Simple dog access rules across the region aids in increasing public understanding and enforcement.

12. The governing body has established a standard annual process to assist local boards with the review of local dog access rules as follows:

13. The board resolved at its 26 November 2015 business meeting (PKTPP/2015/251) to undertake a review of local dog access rules.

14. To assist with developing this proposal, the attached Statement of Proposal summarises information gathered from:

· council staff involved in parks, animal management and biodiversity (see Attachment 5 of the Statement of Proposal)

· Māori through hui in March 2015

· two public workshops in March 2016

· residents and visitors through an on-line survey in March 2016.

15. There were 120 respondents to this survey (67 per cent non-dog owners and 33 per cent dog owners). A summary of the results of the survey is contained in Attachment 4 of the Statement of Proposal. The summary covers dog owner and non-dog owner preferences for dog access, people’s comfort around dogs, and the use of local beach and foreshore areas.

Decision-making requirements

16. The decisions required of the board are:

· whether or not to propose any changes,

· to adopt a Statement of Proposal for public consultation (if changes are proposed) and

· to appoint a hearing panel.

17. The local board can also decide to rescind its decision from 26 November 2015 business meeting (PKTPP/2015/251), and postpone the review to a later date.

18. In making a decision on the Statement of Proposal, the local board must be satisfied that any proposed changes comply with a range of statutory, policy and delegated authority requirements. The relevant statutory and policy considerations are set out in Attachment 2 of the Statement of Proposal. They include:

Table 1: Considerations for dog access rules

Considerations
Public safety and comfort	· the need to minimise danger, distress, and nuisance to the community · the need to avoid the inherent danger in allowing dogs to have uncontrolled access to public places that are frequented by children (regardless if children are accompanied by an adult) · the importance of enabling, to the extent that is practicable, the public (including families) to use streets and public places without fear of attack or intimidation by dogs.
Protection of wildlife	· to ensure that dogs are controlled near protected wildlife · to reduce dog owners’ risk of incurring penalty under the Dog Control Act 1996 and the Wildlife Act 1953.
Recreational needs of dogs and their owners	· access to dog walking areas are important for exercise for both the dog and the owner · consider places that are easily accessible and desirable for both the dog and the owner.
Ensure that dog access rules are easy to understand	· consider rules that are practical, enforceable and clear · where appropriate, consider consistency across Auckland.

Comments

Types of areas

19. To enable dog access rules to be easier to understand within the local board area and across Auckland, the following categories are used:

Table 2: Area types

Types	Description	Appropriate dog access rule
Highly sensitive area	A place where the mere presence of a dog can have a negative effect on the area. Examples are ecologically sensitive areas.	Prohibited
High use area	A place that attracts a lot of people at certain times of the day or year to which a time and season is necessary to manage the interactions between dogs and other users. These areas are typical beaches and associated parks.	Time and season
Dog friendly area	A place that is large and suitable for dogs to run and play off a leash.	Under control off a leash
Standard area	A place that does not fall into any of the other three categories.	Under control on a leash

20. A full description if the area types are provided in the Statement of Proposal.

Time and Season

21. No locations have been identified as a high use area. They may be identified during consultation. Options for a time and season rule are provided in the Statement of Proposal for use if high use areas are identified.

22. A time and season rule is proposed to be used in high use areas to better manage the safe interaction between people and dogs through allocating access rules based on time rather than area. This reduces the risk of conflicts between different users by encouraging them to access the area at different times.

23. The Auckland Council Policy on Dogs 2012 introduced a region-wide standard summer beach time and season of 10am and 5pm, Labour Weekend to 1 March.

24. The local board must decide whether or not using the standard times and season is appropriate on local beaches as part of its review. Where an alternative time and season is adopted, approval is required from the Auckland Council Governing Body.

25. It is important to note that the standard only provides a definition of daytime hours and a summer season. Local boards determine any winter times (if required) and the type of dog access (i.e. prohibited, on-leash, off-leash or dog exercise area) for each of these.

26. The following options have been considered within the Statement of Proposal:

Option 1 – Retain the current rules

27. The Dog Management Bylaw (2012) ensures that the former dog access rules for local parks, beaches and foreshores are retained until such a time as the Local Board reviews and amends these. The current rule is shown in the table below.

Table 3: Current Puketāpapa beach and foreshore rules

Summer (Labour Weekend until Easter Monday)
Before 9am	9am to 7pm	After 7pm
Water: Under control off-leash Sand: Under control on-leash	Sand and Water Prohibited	Water: Under control off-leash Sand: Under control on-leash
Winter (Tuesday after Easter Monday until the Friday before Labour Weekend)
Before 10am	10am to 4pm	After 4pm
Sand and water: Under control off-leash	Sand: Under control on-leash Water: Under control off-leash	Sand and water: Under control off-leash

Option 2 – Adopt a time and season definition based on the regional standard and align rules to community preferences

28. The Auckland Council Policy on Dogs 2012 provides a standard definition for time and season for the summer period but does not define the access rules for these times. The access rules presented in this option (see table below) have been developed based on the feedback received from the community to date. A more detailed description of the community’s views is provided in Attachment 4 of the Statement of Proposal.

Table 4: Time and season based on the regional standard and community preferences

Summer (Labour Weekend until 1 March)
Before 10am	10am to 5pm	After 5pm
Under control off a leash	Under control on a leash	Under control on a leash
Winter (1 April until Friday before Labour Weekend)
Before 10am	10am to 5pm	After 5pm
Under control off a leash	Under control on a leash	Under control off a leash

29. The access rules for the summer season and the winter daytime core hours and access rules presented in this option have been developed based on the feedback received from the community to date and all of the evidence gathered through the previous local board dog access reviews.

30. An under control off a leash access rule was considered after 5pm during summer however it did not provide an appropriate level of public safety and comfort as identified by the community preferences between 5pm and 7pm.

Option 3 – Adopt an alternative time and season rule based on evidence to date and community preferences

31. This option proposes an amendment to the standard time and season definition that takes into consideration the feedback received from the community to date and all of the evidence gathered through the previous local board dog access reviews. The access rules presented in this option have also been developed based on the feedback received from the community to date. The alternative time and season rule is shown in the table below.

Table 5: Alternative time and season definition and rules based on community preferences

Summer (Labour Weekend until 31 March)
Before 10am	10am to 7pm	After 7pm
Under control off a leash	Prohibited	Under control off a leash
Winter (1 April until Friday before Labour Weekend)
Before 10am	10am to 4pm	After 4pm
Under control off a leash	Under control on a leash	Under control off a leash

32. If the local board does identify any high use areas through this review, staff recommend adopting Option 3 for the following reasons:

· provides for the comfort of non-dog owners during the core day time hours

· provides for under control off a leash dog access in the morning which has been identified as an important time for dog owners both in the online survey and in previous work undertaken

· provides for the needs of dog owners in the evening (after 7pm) as identified in the online survey

· the use of time and season rules similar to other local board areas will make it easier for visitors and non-resident dog owners to know what time and season access rules apply there.

Identification of locations by category

33. In order to identify which areas would be recommended as highly sensitive, high use, standard and dog friendly areas, staff conducted site visits and obtained advice from parks, biodiversity and biosecurity. In addition community feedback was sought through online survey looking at beach use and the preference for dog access.

34. One area has been identified within Table 6 of the Statement of Proposal as highly sensitive for the protection of wildlife. The beach and foreshore area from Lynfield Cove to Grannys Bay (70 Aldersgate Road).

35. No areas within Council controlled parks or beaches have been identified as being high use areas.

36. A new dog friendly area has been identified in Table 8 of the Statement of Proposal. The beach and foreshore area from Grannys Bay (70 Aldersgate Road) to below 54A Seacliffe Road.

37. The effect of the recommended changes will be to:

· provide a balance between the protection of wildlife and the recreational needs of dog owners by prohibiting dog access on the western beach and foreshore and creating off a leash access on the eastern side

· remove existing ambiguous rules.

Ambiguous dog access rules

38. The following sections address current dog access rules which may be difficult to communicate or enforce. These were rules made prior to the creation of Auckland Council and delegated to the local board to review at its discretion.

Picnic areas and fitness apparatus areas

39. Currently the Puketāpapa Local Board has specific rules that require dogs to be under control on a leash on any area that is developed or marked out as a picnic area or fitness apparatus area. These terms are not currently defined in the bylaw.

40. The following options have been considered within the Statement of Proposal:

Option 1: Retain current rule

Advantages

· no changes to the access rules need to be communicated to the public.

Disadvantages

· there are no local picnic areas that have easily identifiable boundaries or are of a size to justify a specific rule

· the rules are not well known, not widely communicated, not easily communicated nor easily enforced.

Option 2: Remove the current specific rule (recommended option)

Advantages

· simplified rules are easier to understand

· no specific parks were identified which warrant further restrictions due to the existence of picnic facilities

· there are no fitness apparatus areas that warrant dog access rules that are different from the surrounding park rules.

Disadvantages

· new access rules need to be communicated to the general public.

41. Staff recommend removing these specific rules (Option 2). For the following reasons:

· simplified rules are easier to understand

· no specific parks were identified which warrant further restrictions due to the existence of picnic facilities.

Dog exercise areas

42. The term ‘dog exercise area’ has been carried over from previous bylaws and is used to describe ten areas within this local board where dogs can be taken under control off-leash.

43. The policy on dogs provides an Auckland-wide definition for ‘under control off-leash areas’ which refer to a place shared with other users. ‘Designated dog exercise areas’ refer to a place where dog owners are the priority user (i.e. what is often also referred to as a ‘dog park’). The following options have been considered within the Statement of Proposal:

Option 1

Option 2

Advantages

· no changes to the access rules need to be communicated to the public.

Disadvantages

· inconsistent with policy on dogs

· these are shared spaces in terms of the policy on dogs.

Advantages:

· these are shared spaces in terms of the policy on dogs

· most dog owners will continue to be able to take their dog under control off a leash in nine of these spaces.

Disadvantages

· new access rules need to be communicated to the general public

· may be perceived by dog owners as reducing dog access.

44. Staff recommend that option 2 for the following reasons:

· they are shared spaces in terms of the policy on dogs rather than dog priority areas

· with the exception of dangerous dogs, most dog owners will continue to be able to take their dog under control off-leash in nine of these places.

Next steps

45. Staff will update the Statement of Proposal to reflect the options selected by the local board.

46. The Statement of Proposal (together with proposals from other local boards) will be publicly notified for submissions as part of the dog registration process in June 2016 for approximately six weeks.

47. Once submissions close, members of the public will present their views to the hearings panel followed by deliberations to consider both the written and oral submissions. The hearings and deliberations will take place in August.

48. The decision of the local board is reported to Governing Body in September in order for the bylaw to be amended.

Appointment of panel

49. The local board has two options in relation to the hearings panel:

Option 1 – Appoint a panel of three or more members

50. Under this option a hearings panel of three or more members will need to be established to hear and deliberate on the submissions. The hearings panel would then make a recommendation to the local board at their next business meeting to either adopt the recommendations or refer the matter back to the hearings panel for reconsideration. The local board is not able to substitute its decision with that of the hearings panel without rehearing the submissions.

Option 2 – Appoint a panel of the whole board

51. Under this option the whole local board would hear, deliberate and make the decision on the changes to the dog access rules. The decision of the hearings panel would be included in the agenda of the next local board meeting for information purposes only.

52. The following table outlines the advantages and disadvantages of each option:

Table 5: Analysis of options

Option

Advantages and Disadvantages

Option 1 - appoint a panel of three or more members

Advantages

· only the local board members on the hearings panel need to attend the hearings and deliberations.

Disadvantages

· not all members of the local board hear the verbal submissions before making a collective decision on the dog access rules

· if the local board disagrees with the recommendation of the hearings panel, the decision must be referred back to the hearings panel for reconsideration.

Risks

· constraints on the timing of hearings, deliberations and business meetings due to 2016 local government elections

· potential for disagreement between hearings panel and local board on matters that are contested by the general public.

Risk mitigation

· delegate decision making power to the hearings panel or hold an extraordinary local board business meeting to consider recommendation of the hearings panel if currently scheduled local board business meetings do not meet the required time frames.

Option 2 – appoint a panel of the whole board

Advantages

· all members of the local board hear the verbal submissions before making a collective decision on the dog access rules

· a final decision on the dog access rules can be made at the time of the deliberations without the need for a recommendation to be reported back to a local board business meeting

· collective local board responsibility for decisions on dog access rules.

Disadvantages

· greater time commitment required from all local board members to attend the hearings and deliberations.

Risks

· constraints on the timing of hearings, deliberations and business meetings due to 2016 local government elections.

Risk mitigation

· delegate decision making power to hearings panel.

53. Staff recommend the adoption of Option 2 for the following reasons:

· all members of the local board hear the verbal submissions before making a collective decision on the dog access rules

· a final decision on the dog access rules can be made at the time of the deliberations without the need for a recommendation to be reported back to a local board business meeting

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

54. The views of other local boards have not been sought on the Statement of Proposal. In the 2013/14 and 2014/15 reviews, other local boards chose to review their beach and foreshore areas and adjacent parks, high-use parks, generic rules and dog exercise areas.

55. Consistency with other local board dog access rules is also a factor that the Puketāpapa Local Board may want to take into consideration. Staff will provide advice on decisions made by other local boards during the options analysis and deliberations stages of the review.

Māori impact statement

56. Managing dog access in areas of significance to Maori can help achieve outcomes of the Māori Plan for Tāmaki Makaurau. In this instance, no impacts have been identified.

57. Feedback from Mana Whenua representatives at a Hui held in March 2015 related to the ability of iwi to determine dog access on Marae, a focus on control, responsible dog ownership, and ensuring the protection of sensitive ecological areas.

Implementation

58. There are no implementation issues associated with this decision to adopt a Statement of Proposal.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Statement of Proposal	133

Signatories

Authors

Bonnie Apps - Policy Analyst

Justin Walters - Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Kataraina Maki - GM - Community & Social Policy

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

26 May 2016

Alcohol ban on Taumanu Reserve and Seacliffe Road Foreshore Reserve

File No.: CP2015/25290

Purpose

1. To approve the making of an alcohol ban on that part of the Taumanu Reserve that lies within the Puketāpapa Local Board area, and to approve the amendment of the adjoining alcohol ban on Seacliffe Road Foreshore Reserve to align with the Taumanu Reserve alcohol ban.

Executive Summary

2. Local boards have the delegated authority to make alcohol bans within their local board area pursuant to the Auckland Council Alcohol Control Bylaw 2014.

3. Under the legacy Auckland City Council Liquor Control in Public Places Bylaw 2004 a 10pm-8am during daylight savings and 8pm-8am outside daylight savings, seven days a week alcohol ban existed on the former Orpheus Drive Reserve and on Seacliffe Road Foreshore Reserve.

4. Those alcohol bans expired on 31 October 2015.

5. Orpheus Drive Reserve and parts of the adjoining Seacliffe Road Foreshore Reserve have been incorporated into the new Taumanu Reserve. Taumanu Reserve is a new reserve developed as part of the restoration of the Onehunga foreshore.

6. Taumanu Reserve lies within both the Maungakiekie – Tāmaki Local Board and Puketāpapa Local Board areas. Seacliffe Road Foreshore Reserve adjoins Taumanu Reserve and lies wholly within the Puketāpapa Local Board area. See map in Attachment A.

7. The Maungakiekie–Tāmaki Local Board considered the evidence of alcohol related crime and disorder and decided there was sufficient evidence to adopt a 10pm to 7am daylight saving and 7pm to 7am outside daylight saving alcohol ban on that part of Taumanu Reserve within their local board area.

8. The Maungakiekie–Tāmaki Local Board has requested the Puketāpapa Local Board make the same alcohol ban on that part of Taumanu Reserve that lies within the Puketāpapa Local Board area (resolution number MT/2015/164).

9. The request from the Maungakiekie–Tāmaki Local Board has been made to address alcohol related issues occurring in both local board areas. Issues have occurred mainly in the evening, at night and over the weekend. The issues include; frequent breaches of the alcohol ban previously in place resulting in empty alcohol cans and broken bottles littered around the reserve and car park, inappropriate behaviour including abusive language and threatening behaviour towards other users of the reserve.

10. There is currently no alcohol ban on the Puketāpapa Local Board side of the Taumanu Reserve.

11. A daily 7pm to 7am alcohol ban applies on the adjoining Seacliffe Road Foreshore Reserve.

12. Staff recommend the local board consider amending the Seacliffe Road Foreshore Reserve alcohol ban to align with any Taumanu Reserve alcohol ban adopted.

13. Staff have identified two decisions which the Puketāpapa Local Board need to consider:

· Decision 1 whether or not to make a 10pm to 7am daylight saving and 7pm to 7am outside daylight saving alcohol ban on that part of the Taumanu Reserve that lies within the Puketāpapa Local Board area and on Seacliffe Road Foreshore Reserve.

· Decision 2 whether or not to amend the alcohol ban hours on Seacliffe Road Foreshore Reserve to make it consistent with the alcohol ban hours on Taumanu Reserve.

14. Staff recommend that a 10pm to 7am daylight saving and 7pm to 7am outside daylight saving alcohol ban be applied on that part of the Taumanu Reserve that lies within the Puketāpapa Local Board area and on Seacliffe Road Foreshore Reserve. This decision would help address alcohol related crime and disorder on all parts of the reserves and will be consistent with the alcohol ban on the majority of Taumanu Reserve.

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) make a 10pm to 7am daylight saving and 7pm to 7am outside daylight saving alcohol ban pursuant to the Auckland Council Alcohol Control Bylaw 2014 on that part of Taumanu Reserve that lies in the Puketāpapa Local Board area and as shown in Attachment A.

b) amend the daily 7pm to 7am alcohol ban to a 10pm to 7am daylight saving and 7pm to 7am outside daylight saving alcohol ban pursuant to the Auckland Council Alcohol Control Bylaw 2014 on Seacliffe Road Foreshore Reserve and as shown in Attachment A.

c) confirm that the decisions in (a) and (b) are in accordance with relevant requirements of the Local Government Act 2002 and Auckland Council Alcohol Control Bylaw 2014.

Comments

Background

15. The Auckland Council Alcohol Control Bylaw 2014 delegates to local boards the ability to make alcohol bans within its local board area pursuant to the Alcohol Control Bylaw 2014.

16. Taumanu Reserve lies within both the Maungakiekie–Tāmaki Local Board and the Puketāpapa Local Board areas. The majority of the reserve lies in the Maungakiekie – Tāmaki Local Board area.

17. Seacliffe Road Foreshore Reserve lies wholly within the Puketāpapa Local Board area.

18. Taumanu Reserve is a new reserve developed as part of the restoration of the Onehunga foreshore. Taumanu Reserve is a large reserve that encompasses the former Orpheus Drive Reserve and parts of the adjoining Seacliffe Road Foreshore Reserve. See map in attachment A.

19. The area related to Taumanu Reserve and Seacliffe Road Foreshore Reserve is shown in Attachment A.

20. Under the legacy Auckland City Council Liquor Control Bylaw 2004 a 10pm-8am during daylight savings and 8pm-8am outside daylight savings, seven days a week alcohol ban existed on the Orpheus Drive Reserve and Seacliffe Road Foreshore Reserve. Both alcohol bans expired on 31 October 2015.

21. Recent changes to legislation required a review of all alcohol bans against a new, higher threshold. Council undertook a review of all of Auckland councils alcohol bans between December 2014 and October 2015. Relevant findings included:

· the general community view from over 270 submissions in the Puketāpapa Local Board that were supportive of alcohol bans as a means of addressing alcohol related crime and disorder

· community views in submissions received by the Maungakiekie–Tāmaki Local Board also generally supported the use of alcohol bans. Submissions directly relating to Taumanu Reserve can be found in Attachment B

· evidence of alcohol-related crime or disorder relating to Taumanu Reserve occurred mainly at night in the summertime and included alcohol-related litter (including broken glass), offensive litter, public urination, loud noise associated with parties, abandoned vehicles, and physical assault around the reserve, car park and boat ramp

· evidence in oral submissions to the Maungakiekie–Tāmaki Local Board outlining instances of inappropriate behavior including abusive language and threatening other users of the Taumanu Reserve

· evidence in written and oral submissions to the Puketāpapa Local Board outlining instances of alcohol-fuelled parties in coastal reserves commonly associated with vehicle-related crime and disorder and intimidating behaviors, including in Seacliffe Road Foreshore Reserve.

· community focused solutions suggested by residents included better lighting, more signs, restricting access and more rubbish bins.

· It is noted that no direct evidence of alcohol-related crime or disorder for this area was provided by the police.

Previous decisions of the Maungakiekie – Tāmaki Local Board

22. The initial advice from council staff to the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board was to make a new 10pm to 7am daylight saving and 7pm to 7am outside daylight saving alcohol ban on Taumanu Reserve based on the evidence in paragraph 21 above.

23. The Maungakiekie–Tāmaki Local Board resolved to make a 10pm to 7am daylight saving and 7pm to 7am outside daylight saving alcohol ban on that part of Taumanu Reserve that lies within its local board area as follows (see map in Attachment A):

“e) creates a new ban over the area of the new Onehunga Foreshore Restoration Reserve and Orpheus Drive shared use path and incorporating the existing Orpheus Drive Reserve and the portion of the Onehunga Bay Reserve surrounding the Manukau Cruising Club as the panel is of the opinion that sufficient evidence of a high level of harm or disorder associated with alcohol at this location exists, and sets the hours of this ban to 10pm-7am during daylight savings and 7pm-7am outside daylight savings, seven days a week, noting that:

i. the ban at Orpheus Drive Reserve is now included in the Onehunga Foreshore Restoration and Orpheus Drive shared use path ban.”

(resolution number MT/2015/164)

24. There is currently no alcohol ban on the Puketāpapa side of Taumanu Reserve and therefore the local board also resolved to request the Puketāpapa Local Board to make the same alcohol ban:

“j) requests the Puketāpapa Local Board make a 10pm to 7am daylight saving and 7pm to 7am outside daylight saving alcohol ban for the area of the Onehunga Foreshore Restoration Reserve alcohol ban in the Puketāpapa Local Board area (map 50, Attachment C, page 233 of the agenda).”

(resolution number MT/2015/164)

Previous Decisions of the Puketāpapa Local Board

25. Prior to the hearing of oral submissions, the initial advice from council staff to the Puketāpapa Local Board was to allow the alcohol ban on Seacliffe Road Foreshore Reserve to lapse due to insufficient evidence in relation to times and frequency.

26. The Puketāpapa Local Board received additional evidence in oral submissions and resolved to introduce a daily 7pm to 7am alcohol ban based on the evidence in paragraph 21. (PKTAB/2015/6).

Decision making considerations

27. In making decisions on an alcohol ban a local board must be satisfied that it complies with a range of statutory and bylaw requirements. This includes the following requirements outlined in Clause 7(2) of the Alcohol Control Bylaw 2014 (Attachment B):

· evidence that the alcohol ban area has experienced a high level of crime or disorder that can be shown to have been caused or made worse by alcohol consumption in the area

· that the alcohol ban is appropriate and proportionate in the light of the evidence and can be justified as a reasonable limitation on people's rights and freedoms

· consideration of community-focused solutions as an alternative to or to complement an alcohol ban area

· consideration of the views of the police, and owners, occupiers, or persons that council has reason to believe are representative of the interests of owners or occupiers, of premises within the area to which the alcohol ban will apply

· consideration to using one of the following times for consistency:

o 24 hours, 7 days a week (at all times alcohol ban)

o 7.00pm to 7.00am daily (evening alcohol ban)

o 10.00pm to 7.00am daylight saving and 7.00pm to 7.00am outside daylight saving (night time alcohol ban)

o 7.00pm on the day before to 7.00am on the day after any weekend, public holiday or Christmas/New Year holiday period (weekend and holiday alcohol ban).

Options open to the Puketāpapa Local Board

28. There are currently three different alcohol bans relating to the area of Taumanu Reserve and the Seacliffe Road Foreshore Reserve. ( see Attachment A)

29. There are two decisions which the Local Board needs to consider. These are:

· Whether or not to introduce an alcohol ban on the parts of Taumanu Reserve that are part of the Puketāpapa Local Board area, as requested by the Maungakiekie-Tamaki Local Board

· Whether to amend the alcohol ban on the Seacliffe Road Foreshore Reserve to match the rules in place in the parts of the Taumanu Reserve that are within the Puketāpapa Local Board.

30. The following reasonably practicable options have been identified and analysed by staff.

31. Tables 1, 2, and 3 below assess the advantages, disadvantages and risks associated with each option, with particular reference to the decision making criteria in paragraph 28 above.

32. Table one considers the advantages and disadvantages of introducing a new alcohol ban on the part of Taumanu Reserve that lies within the Puketāpapa Local Board.

33. This option would mean that people on the Seacliffe Road Foreshore would be prohibited from drinking 7pm – 7am daily, but the those on Taumanu Reserve would only be restricted to 10pm – 7am during daylight savings and 7pm-7am daily any other time of the year.

Table 1: Adopt a daily 7pm to 7am to 10pm to 7am daylight saving and 7pm to 7am outside daylight saving ban on the portion of Taumanu Reserve that lies within the Puketāpapa Local Board area.

	Analysis
Advantages	This option: · meets the decision making considerations in paragraph 27 above · has sufficient evidence through submissions received by Maungakiekie-Tamaki Local Board of site specific alcohol related crime and disorder, occurring in both local board areas of the Taumanu Reserve. These issues have occurred mainly in the evening, at night and over the weekend. The issues include; frequent breaches of the alcohol ban previously in place resulting in empty alcohol cans and broken bottles littered around the reserve and car park, inappropriate behaviour including abusive language and threatening behaviour towards other users of the reserve. · will provide consistency across the rest of Taumanu Reserve · will help address alcohol related crime and disorder in all parts of the Taumanu reserve · will enable a consistent enforcement regime across the whole of Taumanu reserve · ensures consistent messaging to both residents and visitors within Taumanu Reserve. · is not seen to place unreasonable limitation on people’s rights and freedoms to possess or consume alcohol.
Disadvantages	This option: · has no direct evidence of alcohol related crime and disorder provided by the NZ Police · would be inconsistent with the alcohol ban on Seacliffe Road Foreshore Reserve 7pm-7am daily (depending on the decision of the local board for Seacliffe Road Foreshore Reserve) · Could result in a fragmented enforcement regime across the whole of Taumanu Reserve and Seacliffe Road Foreshore Reserve · Could result in confusing and conflicting messages to both residents and visitors · would not help address alcohol related crime and disorder on all parts of Taumanu Reserve and Seacliffe Road Foreshore Reserve · could cause displacement issues whereby people move from one reserve to another to avoid being in breach of the bylaw (depending on the decision of the local board for Seacliffe Road Foreshore Reserve).
Risks	· There is a risk that the decision to apply an alcohol ban may be challenged in the High Court. This risk is considered to be very low and defendable.
Risk mitigation	· well documented evidence of site specific alcohol related crime and disorder to ensure the new national requirement are met · use the same level of evidence and the same analysis criteria that have been used to adopt other alcohol bans in the area.

34. Table two considers the advantages and disadvantages of amending the existing alcohol ban on Seacliffe Road Foreshore Reserve.

35. This option would mean that if no alcohol ban was placed on the Puketāpapa Local Board portion of the Taumanu Reserve, people on the Taumanu Reserve would be permitted to drink alcohol at all times. Those on Seacliffe Road Foreshore Reserve would not be permitted to drink alcohol during daylight saving hours.

Table 2: Adopt a 10pm to 7am daylight saving and 7pm to 7am outside daylight saving alcohol ban on Seacliffe Road Foreshore Reserve.

	Analysis
Advantages	This option: · meets the decision making considerations in paragraph 27 above · has evidence received through submissions of alcohol related crime and disorder, such as instances of alcohol fuelled parties in coastal reserves including vehicle related crime and disorder and intimidating behaviour in Seacliffe Road Foreshore Reserve. The Local Board felt this was sufficient evidence to originally retain the alcohol ban. · will provide consistency across the majority of the Taumanu Reserve · will help address alcohol related crime and disorder in all parts of the reserve · will enable a consistent enforcement regime across the whole of the reserve · ensures consistent messaging to both residents and visitors · will not place unreasonable limitation on people’s rights and freedoms to possess or consume alcohol.
Disadvantages	This option: · has no direct evidence of alcohol related crime and disorder provided by the NZ Police · depending on the decision of the local board for Taumanu Reserve, could create inconsistencies across the reserves · depending on the decisions of the local board for Taumanu Reserve, could result in fragmented enforcement and confusing and conflicting messages to residents and visitors.
Risks	· There is a risk that the decision to apply an alcohol ban may be challenged in the High Court. This risk is considered to be very low and defendable.
Risk mitigation	· well documented evidence of site specific alcohol related crime and disorder to ensure the new national requirement are met · use the same level of evidence and the same analysis criteria that have been used to adopt other alcohol bans in the area.

36. Table three considers the advantages and disadvantages of not amending the existing alcohol ban on Seacliffe Road Foreshore Reserve.

37. This option would mean that people on the Seacliffe Road Foreshore Reserve would be prohibited from consuming alcohol in the evening but people on the adjoining Taumanu Reserve would (depending on the decision of the local board for Taumanu Reserve) would be able to consume alcohol at any time or until 10pm during daylight saving.

Table 3: Status quo - Do not amend the alcohol ban on Seacliffe Road Foreshore Reserve


Advantages	· No change to status quo based on specific evidence of harm in these areas as determined through the previous Local Board decisions.
Disadvantages	This option: · would be inconsistent with the 10pm to 7am daylight saving and 7pm to 7am outside daylight saving alcohol ban on the majority of Taumanu Reserve · could result in a fragmented enforcement regime across the whole of Taumanu Reserve and Seacliffe Road Foreshore Reserve · could result in confusing and conflicting messages to both residents and visitors · would not help address alcohol related crime and disorder on all parts of Taumanu Reserve and Seacliffe Road Foreshore Reserve · could cause displacement issues whereby people move from one reserve to another to avoid being in breach of the bylaw.
Risks	· There is a high risk that this decision will result in uncertainty in enforcement and messaging
Risk mitigation	· This risk could be mitigated by either the Puketāpapa Local Board adopting option 1, or the Maungakiekie – Tāmaki Local Board amending the alcohol ban on its part of Taumanu Reserve to align with any consistent decision of the Puketāpapa Local Board.

38. The option of removing the Seacliffe Road Foreshore Reserve alcohol ban completely has not been considered as the Local Board already reviewed this alcohol ban and concluded there was sufficient evidence to have an alcohol ban in this area.

Staff recommendation to the Puketāpapa Local Board

39. Staff recommend Puketāpapa Local Board adopt option 1 and option 2, to apply a 10pm to 7am daylight saving and 7pm to 7am outside daylight saving alcohol ban on Seacliffe Road Foreshore Reserve and that part of the Taumanu Reserve that lies within its jurisdiction.

40. This would help address alcohol related crime and disorder in all parts of the reserve and be consistent, ease enforcement, and present a consistent message to both residents and visitors.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

41. The Maungakiekie – Tāmaki Local Board consider a 10pm to 7am daylight saving and 7pm to 7am outside daylight saving alcohol ban on the whole of the Taumanu Reserve is justified, and has requested the Puketāpapa Local Board adopt the same alcohol ban on its portion of the reserve.

42. This would help address alcohol related crime and disorder on all parts of the reserve, ease enforcement, and present a consistent message to both residents and visitors.

Māori impact statement

43. Managing alcohol related harm associated with people consuming alcohol in public places increases opportunities for health and wellbeing, which is consistent with the outcomes of the Māori Plan for Tāmaki Makaurau.

44. Feedback from mana whenua representatives at a hui held in March 2015 supported alcohol bans in principle, and a suggestion that non-regulatory approaches should be considered to help reduce alcohol related harm.

Implementation

45. If the Puketāpapa Local Board decides to make an alcohol ban its portion of Taumanu Reserve and amend the alcohol ban on Seacliffe Road Foreshore Reserve, new signage will be erected, and council’s website will be updated.

46. No action is required if the Puketāpapa Local Board decide not to make an alcohol ban.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Taumanu Reserve Alcohol Ban maps	175
b View	Submissions for Taumanu reserve and associated alcohol ban areas	179
c View	Alcohol Control Byalw 2014, Clause 7(2)	189

Signatories

Authors

Janine Green - Policy Analyst

Paul Wilson - Team Leader Bylaws

Authorisers

Kataraina Maki - GM - Community & Social Policy

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

[1] Figures based on 2013 population and household data and 2016 dog register data.

Chairperson	Julie Fairey
Deputy Chairperson	Harry Doig
Members	David Holm
	Ella Kumar
	Nigel Turnbull
	Michael Wood

Governance role	Examples
Setting direction/priorities/budget	Capex projects, work programmes, annual plan
Local initiatives/specific decisions	Grants, road names, alcohol bans
Input into regional decision-making	Comments on regional bylaws, policies, plans
Oversight and monitoring	Local board agreement, quarterly performance reports, review projects
Accountability to the public	Annual report
Engagement	Community hui, submissions processes
Keeping informed	Briefings, cluster workshops

Authors	Brenda Railey - Democracy Advisor
Authorisers	Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager