Agenda of Upper Harbour Local Board

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

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

1 Welcome

2 Apologies

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

3 Declaration of Interest

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

4 Confirmation of Minutes

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Tuesday, 26 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 Upper Harbour Local Board. This means that details relating to deputations can be included in the published agenda. Total speaking time per deputation is ten minutes or as resolved by the meeting.

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

9 Public Forum

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

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

10 Extraordinary Business

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

11 Notices of Motion

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

Upper Harbour Local Board

10 May 2016

Panuku Development Auckland local board six-monthly update 1 July to 31 December 2015

File No.: CP2016/00203

Purpose

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

Executive Summary

2. Panuku Development Auckland was established in September 2015 as a result of the merger of two council controlled organisations – 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 they 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. They use their skills, knowledge and connections to bring land and resources together to create the best outcome for Aucklanders.

6. 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 Upper Harbour 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 Upper Harbour Local Board:

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

Comments

Strategy and Engagement Directorate

9. This directorate helps the organisation articulate vision through a strategic framework and performance monitoring to help Panuku achieve progress on its purpose and objectives. This directorate identifies opportunities for Panuku to add value through the use of council’s considerable property assets. With shareholder approval, we shape opportunities into mandates to act and help bring everyone on the journey with best practise communication and marketing. This directorate is comprised of four teams:

Governance Relationships

10. Establishing, developing and augmenting relationships with key stakeholders is an important part of Panuku’s role. Based on the belief that effective collaboration will regularly out-perform individual or siloed approaches Panuku has invested resource, time and people to developing genuine relationships.

11. Sitting within the Strategy and Engagement Directorate, the Governance Relationships Team leads and guides engagement across the organization, focusing significantly on developing an effective relationship with central government. There is also a team within this directorate dedicated exclusively to Stakeholder and Community Engagement work.

12. This directorate guides the way Panuku engages with individuals, communities and groups of interest (see Attachment A).

13. Panuku is committed to engaging regularly with key stakeholders to ensure that urban renewal in Auckland takes place in a collaborative way. The key stakeholders we have been working with since transition include:

· councillors – A key priority for Panuku was to engage early and be proactive in our involvement with councillors. Collaboration on a broad range of issues is essential to ensure a sense of shared outcomes.

· local boards – Panuku is developing collaborative partnerships with all boards. The nature of our baseline engagement is outlined in the Panuku Board approved Local Board Engagement Plan (see Attachment B). We will also develop detailed protocols with the various boards where Panuku will initially focus its long term urban renewal role.

· iwi – Panuku is a steward and developer of land on behalf of the Auckland Council and the population of Tāmaki Makaurau. Tāmaki Makaurau mana whenua are the indigenous Māori population and acknowledged kaitiaki of the land. Panuku acknowledges through the principles of Te Tiriti o Waitangi and the importance of land to Māori, that our particular relationship with these 19 iwi is therefore one of partnership in management and development of this essential element.

· central government – Whilst existing relationships are strong, there is still a need to ensure more cohesive coordination with central government across the wider council family. We will amongst other things, identify key priorities for Panuku and the relevant government agencies with whom relationships need to be developed and maintained to enable those priorities to be successfully progressed.

Strategic Planning

14. The Strategic Planning Team is responsible for setting the strategic vision and direction, preparing Panuku strategies, policies and standards and ensuring integration with and inputting to council policy processes.

15. Preparation of High Level Project Plans (HLPPs) for the locations that Panuku is responsible is led by this team. HLPPs have input from across Panuku including Placeshaping, Development, and Engagement. They set out the vision and outcomes, urban design opportunities and issues, the key sites and how they might be redeveloped to support transformation, as well as the project timeline, milestones, resources and budget. HLPPs have been completed for Takapuna and Northcote and have commenced for Manukau and Onehunga.

16. There are a number of other locations within the overall Panuku work programme that will also require a HLPP. A rolling programme of locations has now been approved by the Panuku Board. The extent and content of each HLPP will be calibrated having regard to the complexity, stage and respective needs of each location. In some areas HLPPs will be simple term sheets detailing the what, why and how of the project plan, in others large comprehensive framework documents requiring additional external resourcing to complete.

17. The team also provides research and business information that informs decision making and provides a robust framework for assessing wider opportunities and analysing the implications of strategic/non-financial objectives.

Portfolio Strategy

Optimisation

18. The 2015 Long-term Plan process reflects a desire of council to materially reduce or slow down expenditure and unlock value from assets no longer required or which are sub-optimal for service purposes. In response to this, prior to the establishment of Panuku, ACPL developed a new method of dealing with service property, called optimisation.

19. Asset optimisation deals with service property. It is self-funding, it maximises efficiencies from service assets, and maintains levels of service whilst releasing property for sale or development. A key element of optimisation is that the sale proceeds are locally reinvested to advance approved projects and activities on a cost neutral basis. It does not include the Auckland Transport portfolio. Panuku continues to advance this programme of work. This includes the development of a cross-council project to coordinate and execute asset sales and optimisation.

20. Work also continues on the progression and investigation of a number of optimisation pilots.

Portfolio Review and Rationalisation

Overview

21. Panuku is required to undertake ongoing rationalisation of the council’s non-service assets. This includes identifying properties from within council’s portfolio that may be suitable for potential sale and development if appropriate. Panuku has a particular focus on achieving housing and urban renewal outcomes. Identifying potential sale properties contributes to the Auckland Plan focus of accommodating the significant growth projected for the region over the coming decades, by providing the council with an efficient use of capital and prioritisation of funds to achieve its activities and projects.

Performance

22. July 2015 to June 2016 Target

UNIT	TARGET	ACHIEVED	COMMENTS
Portfolio Review	$40m disposal recommendations	$25,100,000 as at 31 December 2015	These recommendations include $24,000,000 of sites that are identified for development projects.

23. In setting future disposal targets Panuku is working closely with the council and Auckland Transport to identify potentially surplus properties.

24. 2016/2017 Target

UNIT	TARGET	COMMENTS
Portfolio Review	$45m gross value recommended for sale	This target includes disposal recommendations and sales for sites that are identified for housing development and urban renewal projects

Process

25. Once identified as a potential sale candidate a property is taken through a multi-stage Rationalisation Process. The agreed process includes engagement with: the council, CCOs, local board and mana whenua. This is followed by Panuku Board approval, engagement with local ward and the Independent Māori Statutory Board and finally a governing body decision.

Under review

26. Properties currently under review for future use opportunities via the Rationalisation Process in the Upper Harbour Local Board area are listed below. The list includes any properties that may have recently been approved for sale or development and sale by the governing body.

PROPERTY	DETAILS
Clear Water Cove – West Harbour / Westpark Marina	Discussion ongoing with lessee regarding future development options for this site. Progressing through rationalisation process with view to potential sale of ground lease. Initial local board feedback has indicated support for the proposal provided community access to the marina is not jeopardised. The local board additionally noted desire for public car parking facilities and concern about boat repairs taking place at the marina. Panuku is working through legal and transport issues. A report will be provided to the Upper Harbour Local Board in due course to seek its formal response.
11 Scott Road, Hobsonville	Four hectare site that Ministry of Education seek to acquire for use as a school site. This property did not go through the standard rationalisation process due to Ministry of Education timeframes, but substantial planning work had previously been undertaken for Hobsonville and there were no identified council service uses for this site. Approved for disposal by the governing body in December 2015.
61-117 Clark Road, Hobsonville	7641m² site acquired by Waitakere City Council in 2004 for an undefined public work. 3400m² proposed for park. Balance of site proposed for disposal to Hobsonville Land Company to enable housing. Rationalisation process commenced in December 2015. Expression of interest received from Auckland Transport stating that nearby roading layout is to be reconsidered and any proposed disposal needs to take account of this. Local board and iwi engagement to be undertaken in 2016.

Place Shaping Directorate

27. The Place Shaping Directorate includes Project Design, Planning and Consents, Place Making and Sustainability teams. This Directorate translates the vision and objectives of HLPPs into integrated and implementable Framework Plans that ensure the achievement of high quality redevelopment design outcomes and optimise commercial opportunities whilst balancing economic, social, cultural and environment considerations.

28. There are currently no Place Shaping initiatives taking place in the Upper Harbour Local Board area.

Development Directorate

29. This directorate is responsible for the successful delivery of redevelopment projects. It works across the organisation, with partners and stakeholders over the life of projects. It also champion’s best practice project delivery, to achieve best value outcomes, within defined cost, time and quality parameters.

30. Panuku is contributing commercial input into approximately 54 region wide council-driven renewal and housing supply initiatives. Involvement extends from provision of initial feasibility advice through to implementation, with projects ranging in size from $415k to in excess of $100million.

31. Panuku is extending on this work to play a much stronger role in urban development through greater scale, enhanced capability and the ability to partner with others. We have a key role in helping deliver the council priority of quality urban living and have the mandate to deal with the challenge of Auckland’s rapid growth through renewal and investment.

32. The roles and responsibilities of Panuku are customised to each specific project initiative and location. A few are of a high custodial nature associated with urban renewal and are known as Transform projects. Some have a more facilitative role where investment or use of existing council assets aids development in the short to medium term and these are known as Unlock and Support projects.

33. Panuku already works closely with the local boards on Panuku-led developments to ensure we give effect to the local boards’ place-shaping role. Engagement undertaken by Panuku will in some areas be of a much broader scope, with the potential for involvement in master-planning activities for significant land areas.

34. A high level update on development activities in the Upper Harbour area is outlined in points below.

35. Westpark Marina – Panuku met with the Marina Operator in December to set out councils’ required outcomes from any potential disposal including several for Auckland Transport. The Marina Operator proposed changes to the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan and submitted evidence on 10 February. The outcome of the PAUP submission Hearing will form the basis for further discussions.

36. Hobsonville Point: The Airfields – In November 2015 the Auckland Development Committee agreed that the Council will not proceed with the ATEED proposal to develop a screen precinct at Hobsonville, and resolved the 14/6 Masterplan (14ha Residential and up to 6ha Mixed Use) be adopted and Panuku be allowed to proceed immediately with the development. Key roading infrastructure is currently underway, with a conditional agreement agreed with a third party to acquire and develop Stage 1 of the Airfields.

Portfolio Management Directorate

37. The Portfolio Management Directorate is responsible for the management and performance of the property portfolio including land, buildings, marina and place assets. This directorate also provides a range of property services and advice including asset development and renewal, statutory processes, acquisitions and disposals. There are five teams sitting within this Directorate.

Property Portfolio

38. Effective from the 1 September 2015 the property management portfolios previously managed by Auckland Council Property portfolio and Waterfront Auckland merged and became the Panuku Development Auckland portfolio.

39. Panuku Development Auckland manages property owned by the council and Auckland Transport that are not currently needed for service or infrastructure purposes. These are properties that are not immediately required for delivery of a council service or infrastructure development but are being held for use in a planned future project such as road construction, the expansion of parks or development of future town centres. In addition the property also manages land and buildings within the former Waterfront Auckland portfolio. These properties are held pending further development within the Waterfront area.

40. The property portfolio comprises 1341 properties containing 961 leases as at the 31 December 2015. The current portfolio includes vacant land, industrial buildings, warehouses, retail shops, cafes, offices, medical centres and a large portfolio of residential rental homes.

41. Within the former Waterfront Auckland portfolio is a further 43 properties containing 94 leases.

42. The return on the property portfolio for the period ending 31 December 2015 was above budget with a net surplus to the council and Auckland Transport shareholders of $3.6m ahead of budget. The return on ex Waterfront Auckland properties for the period ending 31 December was $500K below budget.

43. The average monthly tenantable occupancy rate for the 6 month period is more than 97% which is above the SOI target of 95%.

44. Panuku Development Auckland currently manages 24 commercial and residential properties within the Upper Harbour Local Board area.

Business Interests

45. Panuku also optimises the commercial return from assets it manages on council’s behalf. This comprises two forestry enterprises, two landfills and four quarries. There are currently no managed business interests in the Upper Harbour Local Board area.

Acquisitions and Disposals

Acquisitions

46. Eight properties were purchased for open space purposes around the region at a value of $23.6m, and 11 properties have been purchased for storm water purposes at a value of $1.2m.

Disposals

47. To the end of December 2015 the Disposals Team has achieved $6.57m of unconditional net sales against the 2015/16 disposals target of $30.0m for the year. A further $31m of net unconditional sales could be achieved by the end of the financial year from the sale of 15 properties, with 2 properties accounting for $27.0m of the $31.0m forecast.

48. 11 Scott Road – Panuku is negotiating the sale of land to Ministry of Education for a primary school.

Consideration

Māori Impact Statement

49. Whatungarongaro te tangata, toitū te whenua. Through our collaborative partnership approach, Panuku works with Māori towards: joint strategic outcomes; enabling commercial investment, including partnership in commercial and housing opportunities; contribution the urban fabric through recognition of Māori cultural footprint in design, respect for the environment and broader social outcomes; guiding the nature of our working practice when we embed Māori values in our business at a strategic and operational level. A Goals and Actions Plan outline for this work is published on the Panuku website as part of our Māori Engagement Framework 28 October 2015.

Local context

50. There are twelve iwi with mana whenua interests in the Upper Harbour Local Board area. Panuku has been engaging with these groups in respect of potential disposals and development sites in the Upper Harbour Local Board area over the past three years.

51. As planning progresses for future Panuku led development in Upper Harbour Panuku will work in collaboration with kaitiaki officers from these tribes towards best care for land and people within our area of influence. This work is understood to enable protection of waahi tapu and the optimum health of the mauri (life force) of the natural environment.

52. We additionally seek opportunities to partner with mana whenua iwi and hapū and other Maori organisations on developments.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

53. This report is for the Upper Harbour Local Board’s information.

54. Panuku requests that all feedback and/or queries you have relating to a property in your board area be directed in the first instance to localboard@developmentauckland.co.nz. Alternatively please contact Toni Giacon, Team Leader Stakeholder and Community Engagement on 021 227 9463.

Implementation

55. There are no implementation issues.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Framework of strategic documents	27
b View	Local Board Engagement Plan	29

Signatories

Authors

Sven Mol - Engagement Coordinator

Authorisers

Toni Giacon - Team Leader Stakeholder and Community Engagement

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Upper Harbour Local Board

10 May 2016

Divestment recommendation report - 61-117 Clark Road, Hobsonville

File No.: CP2016/06111

Purpose

1. This report seeks endorsement from the Upper Harbour Local Board for Panuku Development Auckland (Panuku) to recommend to the governing body that approximately 4,300m²of the council owned property located at 61-117 Clark Road, Hobsonville, be utilised for housing and urban renewal purposes.

Executive Summary

2. 61-117 Clark Road is a 7,641m²council owned site. It is proposed that approximately 3,400m² of this site remains in council ownership as a reserve. The balance of the site forms two parcels of land that cumulatively comprise approximately 4,300m² (subject to survey). It is proposed that these two parcels of land be utilised for housing and urban renewal purposes.

3. The rationalisation process for the subject parts of this site commenced in December 2015. Consultation with council, council-controlled organisations (CCO’s), iwi authorities and the Upper Harbour Local Board has now taken place. No alternative service uses have been identified for the subject parts of this site, and the feedback received has been supportive of the proposed divestment. The Upper Harbour Local Board has provided informal feedback that it is supportive of the proposal for this site.

4. A resolution approving the proposal for 61-117 Clark Road is required from the Finance and Performance Committee before housing and urban renewal options can be progressed.

Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) endorse Panuku Development Auckland’s recommendation to the Finance and Performance Committee for approximately 4,300m² of 61-117 Clark Road, Hobsonville, comprised of an estate in fee simple described as Lot 1 Deposited Plan 308781, contained in computer freehold register 34081, to be used for urban renewal and housing.

Comments

5. Panuku and the Corporate Finance and Property team are working jointly on a comprehensive review of council’s property portfolio. One of the outcomes of the review process is to identify properties in the council portfolio that are potentially surplus to requirements, and that may be suitable to sell.

6. Once a property has been identified as no longer required for council service purposes, Panuku engages with council and its CCO’s through an expression of interest process, to establish whether the property must be retained for a strategic purpose, or if it is required for a future funded project. Once a property has been internally cleared of any service requirements, Panuku then consults with local boards, ward councillors, mana whenua and the Independent Maori Statutory Board. All recommendations must be approved by the Panuku Board before it makes a final recommendation to Auckland Council’s governing body.

Property information

7. The subject site is a vacant, 7,641m² triangular shaped piece of land located on the corner of Clark Road and Scott Road. It was purchased by the Waitakere City Council from the Crown for an undefined public work. The site was acquired under section 50 of the Public Works Act, meaning that it was transferred from one government department or local authority to another, transferring any obligations under section 40 of the Act from the Crown to the council.

8. The Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan zoning of the site is Mixed Housing Urban. The entire site has a 2014 capital value of $900,000.

9. The Hobsonville Point Village Precinct and Buckley B Precinct Masterplan Framework, prepared for the Hobsonville Land Company, proposes using approximately 3,400m² of this site for a future reserve. It envisaged that the balance of the site, being approximately 4,300m², be utilised for intensified housing.

10. The rationalisation process for the subject portions of this site was undertaken to ascertain if they were required for any alternative council purposes, which commenced in December 2015. An expression of interest (EOI) was received from Auckland Transport (AT), stating that the road stopping process needed to be undertaken. Panuku followed up with AT regarding this EOI. AT confirmed that it did not oppose the proposal to use the subject parts of this site for housing and urban renewal purposes, but wanted to ensure any proposed future use is subject to the completion of the road stopping process.

11. The results of the rationalisation process to date indicate that approximately 3,400m² of the subject site is required for future reserve. The balance of the site is not required for alternative council purposes, but is required for urban renewal and housing. As such, Panuku recommends approximately 3,400m² of this site be retained by Auckland Council for future reserve, and approximately 4,300m² of this site be utilised for housing and urban renewal purposes.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

12. Panuku attended a workshop with the Upper Harbour Local Board about this site in February 2016. Upper Harbour Local Board members queried the suitability of using approximately 3,400m² of this site as a future park or reserve, and queried if an alternative site should be acquired for park or reserve purposes. Panuku investigated this and established that the area proposed for future reserve was intentionally selected as it is gives the adjacent church and cemetery line of sight, ensuring that they will not be blocked by housing in the future. It is also well located within the network of 13.8 hectares of land in Hobsonville that is required to be park/open space.

13. This report provides the Upper Harbour Local Board with an opportunity to formalise its views.

Māori impact statement

14. Thirteen mana whenua iwi authorities were contacted regarding the potential sale of 61-117 Clark Road, Hobsonville. The following feedback was received; noting that some feedback received is commercially sensitive and cannot be included in this report.

· Te Runanga o Ngāti Whatua

No site specific feedback received for this site, noting that as per earlier conversations with Te Runanga representatives, it is understood that any cultural significance considerations will be raised at hapū level and that all Ngāti Whatua hapū have been contacted about properties in their rohe (territory).

· Ngāti Whatua o Kaipara

Ngāti Whatua o Kaipara has confirmed they are interested in potentially acquiring the property.

· Ngāti Whatua Ōrākei

Ngāti Whatua Ōrākei has expressed potential commercial interest in this property.

· Te Kawerau a Maki

No feedback received for this site.

· Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki

Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki has drawn attention to their recent settlement and signalled an increased interest in council owned property that may come available for sale in their rohe.

· Ngāti Tamaoho

No feedback received for this site.

· Te ākitai - Waiohua

Te ākitai has expressed potential commercial interest in this property.

· Ngāti Te Ata - Waiohua

No site specific feedback received for this site, however Ngāti Te Ata has expressed general cultural interest across Tāmaki Makaurau. Ngāti Te Ata has potential commercial interest in any council owned land that comes available for sale in their rohe and notes specific association with the south western area of Auckland, focusing around Manukau and the western coastline.

· Ngāti Paoa

Ngāti Paoa has reinforced their desire to be kept in the loop for property disposals.

· Ngaati Whanaunga

No feedback received for this site.

· Ngāti Maru

No feedback received for this site.

· Ngāti Tamatera

No feedback received for this site.

· Te Patukirikiri

No feedback received for this site.

Implementation

15. This site will be presented to the Finance and Performance Committee in June 2016 for decision making regarding divestment.

16. A road stopping process which impacts upon the subject site needs to be undertaken for land that was taken for the formation of Clark Road. The road to be stopped is approximately 5,127m². The fully formed, sealed and in use legal road is approximately 260 metres long.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Images of 61-117 Clark Road, Hobsonville	45

Signatories

Authors

Letitia McColl - Senior Advisor Portfolio Review, Strategy and Engagement, Panuku Development Auckland

Authorisers

Marian Webb - Manager Portfolio Strategy, Strategy and Engagement, Panuku Development Auckland

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Upper Harbour Local Board

10 May 2016

Auckland Transport monthly report - May 2016

File No.: CP2016/08163

Purpose

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

Executive Summary

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

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

· Local Board Transport Capital Fund projects;

· consultation documents on proposed safety improvements;

· local board requests on transport-related matters; and

· media.

Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) receives the Auckland Transport monthly report – May 2016.

Comments

Monthly Overview

4. Auckland Transport attended a workshop on the 19 April to present the Northern Corridor - public consultation plans.

Auckland Transport also attended the AT and Upper Harbour regular transport briefing on 20 April with Local Board Services Advisors.Local Board Transport Capital Fund

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

7. The table below outlines an up-date of progress on the board’s current projects.

ID#	Project Description	Progress/Current Status
480	Gills Road Pedestrian Bridge	· Auckland Transport is in the process of lodging consents for the pedestrian bridge and board walks/footpath. With the changes to the Unitary Plan Auckland Transport are required to submit more consents. This process will take up to two to three months to obtain approval. Once that has been completed AT can confirm the timeline for completion of this Local Board project. Auckland Transport is hoping to start the work August this year.
026	Tauhinu Road Upgrade- Kerb and Channel	· Has now been completed
460	Kyle/Pitoitoi Pedestrian Safety	· Has now been completed

The following table summarises the board’s current allocation and spending of the Local Board Transport Capital Fund.

Consultation documents on proposed safety improvements

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

· proposal to install a new pedestrian refuge island and footpath on Gills Road at its intersection with Living Stream Road, Albany;

· proposal to install new pedestrian crossing facilities at the Apollo Drive and Orbit Drive intersection;

· Rising Parade and Richard Hill Close, Fairview Heights – proposed no stopping at all times restriction, ‘broken yellow lines’ and give way control;

· Hornbill Drive, Fairview Heights - proposed no stopping at all times (NSAAT) lines;

· proposal to install new speed humps on Fernhill Way near the Medallion Drive roundabout; and

· Fairview Avenue, Fairview Heights - proposed no stopping at all times (NSAAT) Restrictions

9. The local board portfolio holders made comments and were generally supportive of what is being proposed above. All comments made by the board will be responded to as part of the final stages before implementation.

Albany Highway North Upgrade update

Project benefits

10. Fulton Hogan Limited has been awarded the contract to deliver the upgrade, which covers a 3.8km stretch of highway from the Schnapper Rock Road/Bush Road intersection in the south, to the Albany Expressway in the north. The work is expected to take up to two and a half years to complete. The highway will more than double in capacity, with a new transit lane in each direction; on and off-road cycle routes and wider footpaths, a new bridge over the Oteha Stream and the replacement of three major roundabouts with signalised intersections.

Night works for April

· road repairs and line marking as required;

· stabilising and chip-sealing on the eastern side of Albany Highway between
452 Albany Highway and Eastbourne Road, weather permitting; and

· stabilising and chipsealing on the western side of Albany Highway between
206 Albany Highway and Schnapper Rock Road, weather permitting.

Looking ahead

· complete all major pavement works between Bush Road and Rosedale Road in April; and

· Days Bridge deck stitch pour, end of April.

Attwood Road, Chatham Avenue - Central Road Markings

11. A request has been received through the local board from the Paremoremo Ratepayers & Residents Association, for AT to investigate installing Central Road Markings on Attwood Road and Chatham Avenue.

Response to board

12. There have been no recorded crashes along Attwood Road and Chatham Avenue in the last 12 months. This is excluding the intersection with Paremoremo Road.

13. As both roads are a ‘no through road’, the majority of the traffic along these roads will be local traffic and their visitors. There will also be traffic due to recreational boating and fishing activities.

14. AT has noted that the required edge marker posts and edge of carriageway markings are due for remarking. The speed limit on these roads is 50km/h, and has the required children walking sign, winding road sign, and a concealed entrances sign too, to further warn motorists of the road layout and hazards ahead.

15. The guidelines advise against introducing the center line road marking for multiple reasons, including, that not having the marking assists in lowering traffic speeds encourages motorists to make their own judgments when driving.

16. Unfortunately at this time AT cannot justify installing center line road markings.

The proposed connection between Gills Road and Oteha Valley Road around Living Streams Road

17. AT has approved the preferred option for a new link road between Gills Road and Oteha Valley Road, originally proposed in May 2012 as part of the overall scheme design.

18. The Notice of Requirement (NOR) was lodged based on this scheme design and was approved in 2012.

19. The project was then put on hold as no funding was allocated to this project in the Long-term Plan. In December 2015, the Local Residential Growth Fund (LRGF) allocated budget towards the Gills Road project, to complete the property purchase. The scheme design was completed approximately three years ago, and hence there is a need to review the scheme design to ensure the validity of the design.

20. The property purchase is anticipated to complete in 2016/17 followed by the funding application to complete the detailed design and construction phases of the project.

21. AT will keep the board updated on progress when there is something to update the board on.

Collins Park to Sunnyview Footpath update

22. AT has instructed our consultant to undertake design work. This repair has been classified as a “structure” repair as it is linked to both a retaining wall and power poles. AT will need to wait until the design is completed, before any commitment can be made to initiating the repair, due to budget constraints.

Proposed no stopping at all times (NSAAT) for Bushlands Park Drive, Albany

23. A request has been received from a concerned resident, through Cr Watson, about the proposed NSAAT outside their property on Bushland Park Drive, Albany.

Response to board

24. AT has reviewed the proposal in light of the concerns raised and have advised the resident that AT will not be painting NSAAT outside their property.

Rosedale Road and Bush Road - phasing of lights

25. At the request of a local board member AT, was asked to look at the phasing of the lights at the intersection of Rosedale and Bush Road due to the lengthy queues during busy periods.

Response to board

26. During peak periods (depending on demand) the left turn movement in question will run predominantly during 2 of 4 phases per cycle. For the week Monday 11April to Friday,
15 April between 7am and 9am, the phase time allowing this movement averaged 49% of the cycle time. For the volume of vehicles, and given Bush Road is the main road phase for this intersection, the phase time is sufficient. The shared left turn/through lane configuration unfortunately does hinder left turning vehicles during one of the phases in the event a stationary vehicle intends on travelling east along Rosedale Road from this lane. The traffic signal system is adaptive and will allocate phase time accordingly where necessary, however the nature of the system is progressive, adapting over several cycles.

27. Unfortunately, AT is unable to change the phasing of the lights, as is explained above.

Mayfair Retirement Village traffic concerns

28. Residents from the Mayfair Retirement Village attended public forum requesting that AT investigate the traffic concerns that are occurring at the village.

Response to board

29. AT has investigated the concerns raised by the residents of the village and AT’s findings are below for your information.

30. The suggestion of introducing a seagull design similar to that at the intersection of Graham Collins Drive and Rosedale Road, is not appropriate for an arterial road such as Oteha Valley Road, with multiple lanes in each direction. Additionally, there is insufficient carriageway width to provide the necessary physical infrastructure to appropriately separate the various traffic movements, while maintaining the existing network capacity. There are no other solutions that can be implemented at this location.

31. The current layout of the road means that right turning vehicles out of Mayfair Village should be turning into the painted flush median before joining the eastbound traffic lane. Alternatively, drivers leaving Mayfair Village are able to use the roundabout at the intersection of Oteha Valley Road and Fields Parade, approximately 500m away, to turn around and head eastbound if desired.

Speed Limit

32. An assessment has been undertaken to determine the need to install electronic speed warning signs along the requested section of Oteha Valley Road. In particular, AT have considered the following factors: reported crashes, traffic speeds, traffic volumes, numbers of heavy vehicles using this street, the topography of the street, the length of the street, and the road status i.e. local road, collector road or arterial road. As a general principle, variable message signs lose their effectiveness the more frequently they are used. NZTA's recommendation is to consider whether the issue could be treated with additional static warning signs before adopting a design solution that uses variable message signage.

33. AT therefore proposes to enhance awareness of and reinforce the speed limit and signage, in the speed limit transition area, before and after the roundabout on Oteha Valley Road, in the vicinity of its intersection with Rising Parade.

34. Additionally, the issues arising from poor driver behaviour, such as speeding, can be effectively addressed through Police enforcement. Therefore, if there are any common trends relating to speeding, such as, individual vehicles, particular time periods or days, when the speeding may be occurring, AT recommend that this information be passed onto the Police. Please be assured that AT will also highlight this issue to the Police at the next liaison meeting.

Refuge Island

35. While AT understand your concerns regarding refuge island installation, there is very limited opportunity to provide an additional pedestrian crossing point in the vicinity of the access due to the road geometry and layout, given there are two lanes travelling in each direction. There has only been one reported crash at this location between 2011 and 2016, which is a particularly low number when taking into consideration the high traffic volumes. It is considered that the introduction of a crossing point would put pedestrians and motorists at a greater risk of a crash occurring, due to the proximity of the intersection to East Coast Road, approximately 150 metres to the east, where vehicles are accelerating away from the traffic signalled intersection.

36. There are pedestrian crossing phases at the signalised intersection of East Coast Road and Oteha Valley Road to facilitate safe crossing movements for pedestrians. As mentioned above, speeding trends should be brought to the attention of the Police and AT will also highlight this at the next Police liaison meeting.

Medallion Drive Extension

37. Preliminary designs have been completed for the Medallion Drive extension. There was a Notice of Requirement (NoR) appeal by the developer as part of the designation process. The Environment Court hearing on the NoR appeal was completed on 26 February, 2016. Resolution of the NoR appeal is required to formally progress the project. The project will be on hold until AT receives the decision from the Court in AT’s favour. AT anticipates receiving the decision from the Court before July 2016.

Upper Harbour Drive and Albany Highway intersection traffic congestion

38. The Greenhithe Residents and Ratepayers group have expressed major concerns about the traffic congestion on Upper Harbour Drive, since the cycle lane has been introduced. The board, along with the two Ward Councillors, request AT investigate options that will reduce the congestion on Upper Harbour Drive.

Update

39. AT will be attending a board workshop at the beginning of May to work through the options that may be identified.

160 Hobsonville Point Road - car parking issues

40. A request has come through the board for AT to investigate the parking issues that are occurring on Hobsonville Point Road.

Update

41. AT is arranging a site meeting with the board and the Commercial Property Manager in May to talk through the parking concerns. In the meantime AT is undertaking more parking occupancy surveys which will enable AT to consult with all shop owners and the building manager owner on possible solutions.

26 and 34 Merewhira Road, Paremoremo – road rutting issues

42. A request has come through the board about significant rutting of the road in between
26 and 34 Merewhira Road, Paremoremo, caused by truck movements along this corridor.

Update

43. AT is investigating this issue and will report back its findings once completed.

Issues pending and closed

ISSUES PENDING

Subject Name

Description

Subject Requested Date

Due Date

Greenhithe Road re-seal works between Churchouse Road and Orwell Road

The Greenhithe Road re-seal works between Churchouse Road and Orwell Road, are currently on hold as AT will not be sealing the road until Watercare has completed installation of their pipe.

April 2016

Early 2017

ISSUES CLOSED
Subject Name	Description	Subject Requested Date	Subject Closed Date
Apollo Drive and Orbit Drive intersection –pedestrian crossings facilities	The board portfolio holders were supportive of what is being proposed.	March 2016	April 2016
Clarks Lane and Hobsonville Road Lights update	Traffic Signals at the corner of Clarks Land and Hobsonville Road were made operational on the 7 March.	February 2016	March 2016
Airport Road, Whenuapai request for maintenance	AT has installed subsoil drains to help deal with the water run-off. The constant potholes are caused by heavy vehicles that use the area as a turn-around or freight swap area. Maintenance request is completed.	March 2016	April 2016
Luckens Road / Marina View Drive / Renoir Street – visibility concerns	AT are unable to justify the installation of broken yellow lines on the bend opposite Renoir Street.	March 2016	April 2016

Media

Transport For Future Housing Areas

44. Draft transport network plans to support future housing and business areas planned for greenfields land in the north west, south and north Auckland are open for public feedback from 15 April.

45. Auckland Council, AT and NZTA have developed the draft preferred transport network plans following technical assessments and earlier public consultation in February and March.

46. A key focus is on increasing access to public transport - with a well-connected rapid transit network at the heart of draft plans for southern Auckland, the north west and Silverdale-Dairy Flat. Another important focus would be new or upgraded roading to improve safety and connections to new growth areas.

47. For Warkworth the focus is to separate through traffic and freight movements from urban areas with the opening of the Ara-Tūhono Pūhoi to Warkworth Road of National Significance (RoNS) and new alternative routes. The network plan also includes a proposal to connect Warkworth and Auckland with a frequent express bus service.

48. Public consultation on the draft transport network for each area will be open for a month until 13 May, with online feedback and public information days.

49. Public information days will be held in Kumeu, Whenuapai, Dairy Flat, Wainui, Warkworth, Pukekohe, Drury, Takanini and Manukau.

West Auckland’s New Connection

50. A new shared path connecting New Lynn to Avondale along the rail corridor will improve local connectivity and create a continuous route into the city from New Lynn. AT has revealed plans for the New Lynn to Avondale Shared Walking and Cycling Path, and is seeking feedback until 15 May 2016.

51. The $17.7m shared path will be one of the most scenic routes in Auckland, following the rail line from New Lynn Station through green spaces to just east of Blockhouse Bay Road. It includes an eye catching bridge near Olympic Park where the path crosses the Whau River.

52. AT’s Cycling and Walking Manager Kathryn King says the 2.9km path will be used by families on the weekend, as well as people travelling to work and study. “It will give people living in the area better travel options and is likely to attract new people to cycling. We know that by investing in shared paths like these, more people cycle, more often.”

53. “It’s such a scenic route as well. Over the summer, there have been lots of families cycling to parks, beaches and local shops throughout Auckland. This shared path will be an attraction in itself, as well as improving connectivity for people living in this part of Auckland. Once completed it will make it easier to walk and cycle to places like Unitec and in the other direction to the New Lynn town centre.”

54. To the east, it links with the Waterview Shared Path which is currently under construction, creating a continuous link from New Lynn all the way to the city centre via the Northwestern Cycleway.

55. It will also connect with the proposed Te Whau Pathway which follows the west side of the Whau River in Avondale. To the west it connects with New Lynn town centre and transport facilities.

56. Funding for the project comes from local funding, the Whau Local Board and the Government through the Urban Cycleways Programme. Auckland Transport, Auckland Council and the NZ Transport Agency, in partnership with the Government, are working on a $200 million programme of cycle improvements in Auckland over the next three years.

57. “It’s great to see one of our flagship projects taking shape,” says Whau Local Board chair Catherine Farmer.

58. “We contributed $2 million to the Whau River Bridge crossing to ensure that it’s twenty minutes by walking, cycling and public transport to everything we need. We welcome feedback on this visionary shared path,” she says.

Grafton Bridge Taxi trial to end

59. AT began a trial in September 2015 allowing taxis 24 hour access to Grafton Bridge to improve links between the city centre and Auckland City Hospital, Starship Children’s Hospital and Newmarket.

60. Several potential risks were identified with the trial including a reduction in cyclist safety and an increase in bus travel times. As a result strict rules were set for taxi drivers along with some monitoring metrics.

61. Despite a focus on educating approved taxi organisations and their drivers, the monitoring highlighted a widespread failure to adhere to the 30km/h speed limit on the bridge and the requirement for taxis not to overtake cyclists on the bridge.

62. These issues were identified as significant concerns at the outset of the trial and a commitment was made to stop the trial if taxi drivers failed to adhere to these conditions.

63. AT has decided to stop the trial and return Grafton Bridge to a bus lane only between the hours of 7am and 7pm. This change is due to be made at the end of this month.

Redoubt Road – Mill Road Corridor upgrade

64. The Redoubt Road – Mill Road upgrade in south Auckland has reached a major milestone, with AT accepting a recommendation by planning commissioners to confirm the land requirements for the project.

65. The upgrade is needed to improve safety and support new housing areas, which will double traffic volumes during the next 10 to 15 years.

66. Independent commissioners recommended in February that the designation for the land be confirmed, along with a number of conditions to manage the effects of the project.

67. They concluded that that upgrading the Redoubt-Mill Road corridor is necessary to relieve existing and forecast congestion, accommodate planned growth, provide for alternative modes of transport, improve traffic safety and improve the transport network’s efficiency.

68. The commissioners found that the effects of the project can be appropriately avoided, remedied or mitigated.

69. Measures to manage the effects include building 17 meter and 23 meter high viaducts above native bush at Puhinui Creek gully and South Mill Road gully, as well as about 22,000 square metres of native planting.

70. AT has accepted the commissioners’ recommendation to designate and the conditions for the project in full.

71. AT Roading Group Manager Andrew Scoggins says submitters have 15 working days to appeal the decision to the Environment Court following being informed by Auckland Council of the decision.

72. Prroject features include:

· Redoubt Road widened to two lanes in each direction between State Highway One and Murphys Road;

· Westbound bus lane along Hollyford Drive and Redoubt Road towards Manukau

· on road cycle lanes on both sides and an off road cycle and foot path for the length of the upgrade;

· replacement of the existing Mill Road with a new arterial with two lanes in each direction between Murphys Road and Popes Road;

· Murphys Road widened to two lanes in each direction between Flat Bush School Road and Redoubt Road;

· Murphys/Redoubt Road intersection realigned and traffic lights added to improve safety;

· 17m and 23m high viaducts at Puhinui Creek gully and South Mill Road gully above native bush;

· widened footpaths on both sides of Redoubt, Mill and Murphys roads with pedestrian crossings at key intersections;

· replacement planting and stream restoration;

· improved stormwater facilities, including new wetlands areas; and

· landscaping of the new road corridor.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

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

Māori impact statement

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

General

75. 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 Long-term Plan documents and there are no legal or legislative implications arising from the activities detailed in this report.

Implementation

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

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Owena Schuster - Elected Member Relationship Manager Auckland Transport

Authorisers

Jonathon Anyon - Manager Elected Member Relationship Unit, Auckland Transport

Eric Perry – Relationship Manager

Upper Harbour Local Board

10 May 2016

New road name approval for the development at 108-116 Totara Road, Whenuapai

File No.: CP2016/08055

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to seek approval from the Upper Harbour Local Board, for three new road names for roads created by way of subdivision at 108-116 Totara Road, Whenuapai.

Executive Summary

1. Auckland Council has road naming guidelines that set out the requirements and criteria for proposed road names. These requirements and criteria have been applied in this situation to ensure consistency of road naming.

2. The applicant, Whenuapai Land Company Limited, in conjunction with Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara and resident iwi, have submitted the following road names in order of preference:

· McCaw Avenue, Maramara Avenue or Kotukutuku Avenue for Road No 1;

· Spriggs Lane, Bomber Lane or Kaapia Lane for Road No 3; and

· Huarakau Road, Kaapia Road or Maramara Road for Road No 4

3. Auckland Council’s road naming criteria typically requires that road names reflect:

· a historical or ancestral linkage to an area;

· a particular landscape, environmental or biodiversity feature; or

· an existing (or introduce) thematic identity in an area.

The criteria also encourage the use of Māori names. Names also need to be easily identifiable and intuitively clear, thus minimising confusion.

4. All of the proposed road names are deemed to meet the criteria and are acceptable to NZ Post.

5. The road naming criteria suggests that the road type could be referred to as a Road, Avenue, Place, Lane or Close. The applicant’s preferred road type for Road 1 is Avenue, Road 3 is Lane and Road 4 is Road.

6. Therefore, the following road names are put forward for consideration of the Upper Harbour Local Board:

· McCaw Avenue, Maramara Avenue or Kotukutuku Avenue for Road No 1;

· Spriggs Lane, Bomber Lane or Kaapia Lane for Road No 3;

· Huarakau Road, Kaapia Road or Maramara Road for Road No 4

Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) pursuant to Section 319(1)(j), of the Local Government Act 1974, considers for approval the proposed road names for the new roads constructed within the subdivision being undertaken by Whenuapai Land Company Limited at 108-116 Totara Road, Whenuapai:

i. McCaw Avenue, Maramara Avenue or Kotukutuku Avenue for Road No 1;

ii. Spriggs Lane, Bomber Lane or Kaapia Lane for Road No 3;

iii. Huarakau Road, Kaapia Road or Maramara Road for Road No 4

for the new roads constructed within the subdivision being undertaken by Whenuapai Land Company Limited at 108-116 Totara Road, Whenuapai.

Comments

7. According to the Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines, where a new public or private road needs to be named as a result of a subdivision or development, the subdivider/developer shall be given the opportunity of suggesting their preferred new road name for the board’s approval.

8. Local iwi were consulted and responses were received from Tame Te Rangi and Lucille Rutherford advising that Ngati Whatua and Ngati Tamaoho will defer their interests to Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara and the resident iwi respectively.

9. Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara advised that consultation was held with Rewiti Marae on 28 October 2015. The applicant received correspondence suggesting the use of ‘Huarakau’, ‘Maramara’, ‘Kopuru’, ‘Kaapia’ and ‘Kotukutuku’.

10. The applicant and iwi have proposed the road names listed in the table below, in order of preference.

Proposed new road name	Meaning	Road naming criteria
Road 1 McCaw Avenue (Preferred)	All Black Captain	Meets criteria - suggested by developer to celebrate the Rugby World Cup victory 2015
Maramara Avenue	Chip or splinter, continues the timber/tree theme in area	Meets criteria – thematic to area (trees)
Kotukutuku Road	Name of an inlet of the Waitemata Harbour in Whenuapai	Meets criteria – local feature
Road 3 Spriggs Lane (Preferred)	Lilley Mary Spriggs was the name of the original land owner	Meets criteria – historical significance
Bomber Lane	Refers to airplanes that flew from Whenuapai airfield	Meets criteria - historical significance
Kaapia Lane	Gum; relates to kauri gum	Meets criteria – relates to kauri gum found historically in the area, as well as thematic (trees)
Road 4 Huarakau Road (Preferred)	Cone; refers to the totara cone	Meets criteria – thematic to area (trees)
Kaapia Road	Gum; relates to kauri gum	Meets criteria – relates to kauri gum found historically in the area, as well as thematic (trees)
Maramara Road	Chip or splinter, continues the timber/tree theme in area	Meets criteria – thematic to area (trees)

11. A map showing the location of the roads is shown below.

Assessment

12. Auckland Council’s road naming criteria typically requires that road names reflect a historical or ancestral linkage to an area or a particular landscape, environmental or biodiversity feature, or reflect an existing (or introduce) thematic identity in an area. The criteria also encourage the use of Māori names. Names also need to be easily identifiable and intuitively clear, thus minimising confusion.

13. The applicant’s proposed road names have been assessed against the criteria set out in the Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines.

14. Following assessment against the road naming criteria, the road names are deemed to meet the assessment criteria.

15. All of the proposed names are acceptable to NZ Post.

16. The road naming criteria suggests that the road type could be referred to as a Road, Avenue, Place, Lane or Close. The applicants preferred road type for Road 1 is Avenue, Road 3 is Lane and Road 4 is Road, therefore the proposed road type name meets the criteria.

17. Therefore, the following road names are put forward for consideration of the Upper Harbour Local Board:

· McCaw Avenue, Maramara Avenue or Kotukutuku Avenue for Road No 1;

· Spriggs Lane, Bomber Lane or Kaapia Lane for Road No 3; and

· Huarakau Road, Kaapia Road or Maramara Road for Road No 4.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

18. The Auckland Council, by way of the Auckland Council Long-term Plan 2012-2022, allocated the responsibility for the naming of new roads, pursuant to Section 319(1)9j) of the Local Government Act 1974, to local boards. A decision is sought from the local board in this report.

19. The decision sought from the Upper Harbour Local Board for this report does not trigger any significant policy and is not considered to have any immediate impact on the community.

Māori impact statement

20. The decision sought from the Upper Harbour Local Board on this report is linked to the Auckland Plan Outcome, “A Māori identity that is Auckland’s point of difference in the world”. The use of Māori names for roads, buildings and other public places is an opportunity to publicly demonstrate Māori identity.

21. Local iwi groups were consulted and responses were received from Tame Te Rangi and Lucille Rutherford advising that Ngāti Whātua and Ngāti Tamaoho will defer their interests to Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara and the resident Iwi respectively. Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara advised that consultation was held with Rewiti Marae on 28 October 2015.

Implementation

22. The Western Consenting Subdivision team will ensure that the appropriate road name signage will be installed by the applicant at their full cost, once an approval is obtained for the new road name and prior to the completion of the subdivision.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Andrew Foley - Subdivision Advisor

Authorisers

Ian Smallburn - General Manager Resource Consents

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Upper Harbour Local Board

10 May 2016

Rescind road name and new road name approval for the development at 108-116 Totara Road, Whenuapai

File No.: CP2016/08115

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is for the Upper Harbour Local Board to rescind the approved road name ‘Kakano Road’, and consider approving a change of road name.

Executive Summary

2. There has been a residential development at 108-116 Totara Road, Whenuapai (SUB2014-1324) which has required the approval of road names. The Upper Harbour Local Board approved the road name ‘Kakano Road’ on 14 July, 2015 (resolution number UH/2015/105 and ‘road number 2’ in map below).

3. However at the new Westgate Town Centre, after consultation with mana whenua, it was found that this same name has been approved within the new Westgate roading network by the Henderson-Massey Local Board on 2 October 2014 (resolution number HM/2014/171).

4. After discussion with the developer, Whenuapai Land Company Limited, they have agreed to rename their road from ‘Kakano Road” to ‘Kopuru Road’, ‘Kotukutuku Road’ or ‘Maramara Avenue’, given the extensive consultation that was undertaken with the Development Programme Office (formerly known as the City Transformation Unit), iwi and the landowner at the Westgate road development. These proposed changes by the Development Programme Office are recommended for board approval.

5. Auckland Council has road naming guidelines that set out the requirements and criteria of the Council for proposed road names. These requirements and criteria have been applied in this situation to ensure consistency of road.

6. The applicant, Whenuapai Land Company Limited, in conjunction with Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara and resident iwi, have submitted the following road names, in order of preference:

· Kopuru Road (preferred), Kotukutuku Road (first alternative) and Maramara Avenue (second alternative).

7. Auckland Council’s road naming criteria typically requires that road names reflect:

· a historical or ancestral linkage to an area;

· a particular landscape, environmental or biodiversity feature; or

· an existing (or introduce a) thematic identity in an area.

The criteria also encourage the use of Maori names. Names also need to be easily identifiable and intuitively clear, thus minimising confusion.

8. All of the proposed names are acceptable to NZ Post.

9. The road naming criteria suggests that the road type could be referred to as an Avenue, Drive, Road or Street. The applicant’s preferred road types are Road and Avenue, therefore the proposed road type meets the criteria.

10. Following assessment against the road naming criteria, it is recommended that the road name ‘Kakano Road’ be replaced with ‘Kopuru Road’, ‘Kotukutuku Road’ or ‘Maramara Avenue’.

11. These proposed changes by the Development Programme Office (formerly known as the City Transformation unit) are recommended to the board for approval.

Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) rescind the approved road name of “Kakano Road” made in resolution UH/2015/105 on 14 July 2015.

b) consider for approval, pursuant to Section 319(1)(j), of the Local Government Act 1974, a road name change, ‘Kakano Road’ in Whenuapai to ‘Kopuru Road’, ‘Kotukutuku Road’ or ‘Maramara Avenue’.

Comments

12. According to the Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines, where a new public or private road needs to be named as a result of a subdivision or development, the subdivider/developer shall be given the opportunity of suggesting their preferred new road name for the board’s approval.

13. Local iwi groups were consulted and responses were received from Tame Te Rangi and Lucille Rutherford advising that Ngāti Whātua and Ngāti Tamaoho will defer their interests to Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara and the resident Iwi respectively.

14. Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara advised that consultation was held with Rewiti Marae on 28 October 2015. The applicant received correspondence suggesting the use of ‘Kopuru’, ‘Maramara’ and ‘Kotukutuku’.

15. The applicant and iwi have proposed the road names listed in the table below, in order of preference.

Proposed new road name	Meaning	Road naming criteria
Kopuru Road (Preferred)	Sweet smelling moss that grows on trees	Meets criteria – thematic to area (trees)
Maramara Avenue	Chip or splinter, continues the timber/tree theme in area	Meets criteria – thematic to area (trees)
Kotukutuku Road	Name of an inlet of the Waitemata Harbour in Whenuapai	Meets criteria – local feature

16. A map showing the location of the Road 2 (previously approved with the name ‘Kakano Road’) is shown below.

Assessment

17. Auckland Council’s road naming criteria typically requires that road names reflect a historical or ancestral linkage to an area or a particular landscape, environmental or biodiversity feature, or reflect an existing (or introduce a) thematic identity in an area. The criteria also encourage the use of Māori names. Names also need to be easily identifiable and intuitively clear, thus minimising confusion.

18. The applicant’s proposed road names have been assessed against the criteria set out in the Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines.

19. Following assessment against the road naming criteria, the road names are deemed to meet the assessment criteria.

20. All of the proposed names are acceptable to NZ Post.

21. The road naming criteria suggests that the road type could be referred to as an Avenue, Drive, Road or Street. The applicants preferred road type is Road, therefore the proposed road type meets the criteria.

22. Therefore the road names, Kopuru Road (preferred), Kotukutuku Road (first alternative) and Maramara Avenue (second alternative) are put forward for consideration by the Upper Harbour Local Board.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

23. The Auckland Council, by way of the Auckland Council Long-term Plan 2012-2022, allocated the responsibility for the naming of new roads, pursuant to Section 319(1)9j) of the Local Government Act 1974, to local boards. A decision is sought from the local board in this report.

24. The decision sought from the Upper Harbour Local Board for this report does not trigger any significant policy and is not considered to have any immediate impact on the community.

Māori impact statement

25. The decision sought from the Upper Harbour Local Board on this report is linked to the Auckland Plan Outcome, “A Māori identity that is Auckland’s point of difference in the World”. The use of Māori names for roads, buildings and other public places is an opportunity to publicly demonstrate Maori identity.

26. Local iwi groups were consulted and responses were received from Tame Te Rangi and Lucille Rutherford advising that Ngati Whatua and Ngati Tamaoho will defer their interests to Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara and the resident Iwi respectively. Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara advised that consultation would be held with Rewiti Marae on 28 October 2015.

Implementation

27. The Western Consenting Subdivision team will ensure that the appropriate road name signage will be installed by the applicant at their full cost, once an approval is obtained for the new road name and prior to the completion of the subdivision.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Andrew Foley - Subdivision Advisor

Authorisers

Ian Smallburn - General Manager Resource Consents

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

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

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

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