Agenda of Franklin Local Board

Franklin Local Board

28 June 2016

Franklin Quick Response: Round Five, 2015/2016

File No.: CP2016/12238

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to request approval for a grant application received for Franklin Local Board Quick Response Grants: Round Five 2015/2016. The local board is required to fund, part-fund or decline this application.

Executive summary

1. The Franklin Local Board had set a community grants budget of $90,000.00 for the 2015/2016 financial year.

2. Franklin Local board grant allocation in quick response rounds one to four and local grants rounds one and two have fully allocated the community grants budget. However $17,888 has been identified in the table below from Franklin local board locally driven initiatives (LDI) combined grants budget, to allocate to applications received in Franklin Quick Response: Round Five 2015/16.

LDI budget line	Amount	Allocated to date	Balance remaining
World war	$25,000	$26,241	$0
School pools	$25,000	$20,726	$4,274
Local community grants	$90,000	$106,568.56	-$16,568.56
Local events line items	$93,500	$93,500	$0
Local events contestable	$92,500	$62,317.20	$30,182.80
Total	$326,000	$309,352.76	$17,888.24

3. Additionally it is noted that the total amount allocated for the Franklin Quick Response: Round Three 2015/16, at the 22 March 2016 Franklin Local Board meeting was $7,656.00 not $5656 as stated in the minutes. Therefore it is recommended that resolution number FR/2016/51 be amended to reflect the $7,656 allocated.

4. Quick Response Round Five received 13 applications which are requesting a total of $70,672.00.

5. In addition to applications received in Quick Response Round Five, one multi-board application was received requesting a total of $10,000.00. The local board also differed four applications received in Local Grants Round Two 2015/2016 at its 24 May 2016 meeting, to the Quick Response Round Five (FR/2016/87). It is recommended that the local board choose to fund, part-fund or decline these four applications.

Recommendation/s

a) That the Franklin Local Board considers the applications listed in table one, two and three below and agree to fund, part-fund or decline the quick response round three grant application.

Table One: Franklin Local Board Quick Response Round Five applications:

Number	Applicant	Focus	Project	Total Requested	Eligible/ Ineligible
502	Franklin Justices of the Peace Association	Community	A contribution towards Franklin Justices of the Peace Association venue hire cost.	$2,000.00	Eligible
504	Waiuku Family Support Network	Community	Towards Waiuku Family Support Trust for advertising and brochure printing costs.	$1,567.00	Eligible
510	Broomfields Residents Asssociation	Community	Towards Broomfields Residents Association for the purchase of 20 possum traps and 40 rat traps and trap consumables for 12 months.	$2,000.00	Eligible
511	Papakura and Franklin Blue Light	Community	Towards Papakura and Franklin Blue Light for the cost of two nights youth camp and activities.	$3,000.00	Eligible however, the amount requested exceeds the maximum amount per grant
501	Pukekohe Hill School	Environment	Towards Pukekohe Hill School garden for purchase of plants, mulch and signage.	$1,018.00	Eligible
505	BMevents Elite Touch League	Events	Towards BMevents Elite Touch League for venue hire cost (Ecolite stadium) for five Sundays.	$44,000.00	Eligible however, the amount requested exceeds the maximum amount per grant
515	Brindle Sports Group (BSG) Events	Events	Towards BSG Events 2017 Beachlands Kids Triathlon for the timing company costs and finishing medals.	$2,000.00	Eligible
516	Franklin Young Mariners	Events	A contribution towards Franklin Young Mariners for cost of hosting the young Mariners of New Zealand National Regatta, 2017.	$2,000.00	Eligible
517	Mr Michael D White	Events	Towards Clevedon Village Market for provision of an “Eftpos” and cash out service.	$3,690.00	Eligible however the amount requested exceeds the maximum amount per grant
520	The Evangelical Alliance Relief Fund	Events	Towards Tear Fund Poverty Cycle event for traffic management costs.	$4,150.00	Eligible, however the amount requested exceeds the maximum amount per grant
513	Ararimu 150th anniversary history book sub- committee of Ararimu Residents and Ratepayers	Historic Heritage	Towards the subcommittee of Ararimu Residents and Ratepayers for costs of printing the Ararimu 150^th anniversary history book.	$2,000.00	Eligible
509	Waiuku Golf and Squash Club Incorporated.	Sport and recreation	Towards Waiuku Golf and Squash Club Inc.for the purchase and delivery of top soil.	$1,500.00	Eligible
512	Counties Manukau Maori Rugby League Culture & Sports Association Incorporated	Sport and recreation	A contribution towards Counties Manukau Maori Rugby League Culture & Sports Association Incorporated for health and safety at the tournament, Gala Day and sports trial day.	$1,747.00	Eligible
			Total	$70,672.00

Table two: Deferred applications from Local Grants: Round Two

Number	Applicant	Focus	Project	Total Requested	Eligible/ Ineligible
203	Rajesh Prasad	Environment	Towards fencing costs along the stream to stock proof the area for planting.	$5,500.00	Eligible
216	Pete Watt	Environment	Towards fencing costs to stock proof the planting area and timber costs to install a small walkway for accessibility and maintenance.	$4,350.00	Eligible
244	Trent Archer	Environment	Towards the material costs to complete the permanent fencing of wetland, waterways and erosion prone banks in tributaries of the Wairoa River.	$7,176.00	Eligible
234	The Ararimu Residents and Ratepayers Association Inc.	Sport and recreation	A contribution towards the Ararimu Community pool for a heat pump.	$5,000.00	Eligible
			Total:	$22,026.00

Table three: Multi-board application

Number

Applicant

Focus

Project

Total Requested

Eligible/

Ineligible

LG1613-216

Age Concern Counties Manukau Inc.

Community

Counselling Services for Older Adults.

$10,000.00

Eligible

Total:

$10,000.00

b) That the Franklin Local Board amends resolution number FR/2016/51, made on 22 March 2016, so that the total in the Grants/Declines column is altered from $5,656 to $7,656 to reflect the actual amount allocated.

Comments

6. 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 2015/16 and the Franklin Local Board adopted its amended grants programme on 26 May 2015 under Resolution Number FR/2015/77 and by urgent decision on 25 August 2015 (Attachment A).

7. 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.

8. The Franklin Local Board will operate five quick response rounds for this financial year.

9. 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 also conducted a series of public workshops in local board areas, which have been attended by approximately 1000 people across the Auckland region.

10. The Franklin Local Board had set a community grants budget of $90,000.00 for the 2015/2016 financial year.

11. Franklin Local board grant allocation in quick response rounds one to four and local grants rounds one and two have fully allocated the community grants budget. However $17,888 has been identified in the table below from Franklin local board locally driven initiatives (LDI) combined grants budget, to allocate to applications received in Franklin Quick Response: Round Five 2015/16.

LDI budget line	Amount	Allocated to date	Balance remaining
World war	$25,000	$26,241	$0
School pools	$25,000	$20,726	$4,274
Local community grants	$90,000	$106,568.56	-$16,568.56
Local events line items	$93,500	$93,500	$0
Local events contestable	$92,500	$62,317.20	$30,182.80
Total	$326,000	$309,352.76	$17,888.24

12. Additionally it is noted that the total amount allocated for the Franklin Quick Response: Round Three 2015/16, at the 22 March 2016 Franklin Local Board meeting was $7,656.00 not $5,656.00 as stated in the minutes. Therefore it is recommended that resolution number FR/2016/51 be amended to reflect the $7,656 allocated.

13. Quick Response Round Five received 13 applications which are requesting a total of $70,672.00.

14. In addition to applications received in Quick Response Round Five, one multi-board application was received requesting a total of $10,000.00. The local board also differed four applications received in Local Grants Round Two 2015/2016 at its 24 May 2016 meeting, to the Quick Response Round Five (FR/2016/87). It is recommended that the local board choose to fund, part-fund or decline these four applications.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

15. Local boards are responsible for the decision-making and allocation of local board community grants. The Franklin 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.

16. The board is requested to note that section 50 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

17. 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

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

19. Following the Franklin Local Board allocating funding for quick response round four grants, Commercial and Finance staff will notify the applicants of the local board decision and issue funding agreements in accordance with the local board resolutions.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Franklin Local Board grants programme 2015/2016	13
b View	Franklin Quick Response Round Five 2015/2016 application summaries	17

Signatories

Authors

Daylyn D'Mello - Environmental and Community Grants Advisor

Authorisers

Marion Davies - Community Grants Operations Manager

Jennifer Rose - Operations Support Manager

Sue O'Gorman - Relationship Manager

Franklin Local Board

28 June 2016

Allocation of 2015/2016 Locally Driven Initiatives Operational Budget

File No.: CP2016/11017

Purpose

1. To allocate the balance of remaining funding from the local board’s 2015/2016 locally driven initiatives (LDI) operational expenditure budget (opex).

Executive summary

2. Franklin Local Board has an LDI opex budget of $1.432m for the 2015/16 financial year.

3. This includes funding for council activities to deliver work programmes, a community response fund of $103,000 which can be allocated to any local board initiatives during the year and funding for community grants totalling $186,000.

4. At its 24 May 2016 meeting, the board noted by resolution it’s unspent 2015/16 LDI operational expenditure budgets and requested staff to identify options for reallocation of these budgets (resolution FR/2016/93).

5. Following are the board’s unspent opex budgets for 2015/16:

Fund type	Amount $
Remaining funding from 2015/16 work programmes Arts initiatives	20,000
Parks, sport and recreation opportunities	52,000
Community identity and heritage	17,000
Community safety initiatives	12,000
Revitalisation of town centres	40,000
Heritage and tourism	10,000
Youth forum	3,524
Work programmes total	154,524
Remaining balance community response fund	6,284
Remaining balance community grants (quick response round 5 still to be allocated)	17,888*
Total available for reallocation	178,696

*Round 5 of quick response grants is being considered as another item on this agenda and may change the balance available for reallocation.

6. It is recommended that the board revokes resolution FR/2016/95 made on 24 May 2016 reallocating an opex underspend of $31,373.50 to its local grants round two budget line as there is now further information on the final underspend available, which means the resolution is superseded.

7. In order allocate the balance of the funding, the board gave direction to run a contestable funding round for community groups to apply for grants. Applications were invited and the funding round closed on 10 June 2016. Twenty-six applications were received totalling approximately $375,000, including three late applications received out of time.

8. The board is now being asked to decide which projects to grant funding to in order to allocate the remaining operational budget.

9. Any unallocated operational budget at year end will be classed as savings and will not be carried forward to the board’s 2016/17 budget.

Recommendation/s

a) That the Franklin Local Board considers the following applications for community funding from the local board’s locally driven initiatives operational budget and agrees to fund, part-fund or decline them:

Project	Details	Cost $	Grant/ decline
# 1 Pukekohe Netball Centre - toilet block provision	Upgrade to existing toilet block adjacent to current building for Pukekohe Netball Club. Five new toilets, partitions, four basin sink, block wall, iron roof, clear light, continuation of walkway, electrical work and internal plumbing, interior finishing (painting, vinyl).	106,373
# 2 Beachlands Community Trust – administration costs	Request funding to cover purchase of printer, toner, laminator, laminating pouches and attendance of two staff on first aid course.	1,408.24
# 3 Waiuku Golf and Squash Club - walking track maintenance	Weekly mowing/weedeating of the 3 km walking track around the perimeter of the golf course which is available for community use and access, includes two hours per week mowing.	9,880
# 4 Waiuku Business and Development Association (WBDA) - CCTV upgrade	CCTV upgrade for Waiuku town centre, to provide a safe environment for the community and safeguard the town centre and facilities. Total cost of project is $67k, the WBDA hopes to fund $20k and is asking for funding of $15k towards the upgrade.	15,000
# 5 Clevedon Tennis Club -court rebuild and lighting upgrade	Replacement of the sub base, court surface, and drainage work for the five existing courts and the upgrade of existing court lighting	50,000
# 6 Karaka Sports Park - carpark repairs	Supply of aggregate (nine truck and trailer loads) to resurface temporary carpark	5,123.25
# 7 Clevedon and Districts Historical Society - launch of ‘Voices of Belonging’ a history book of Clevedon – Te Wairoa	Costs associated with the book launch to be held on 27 August 2016 – includes hall hire, EPTPOS hire, sound system hire and security	1,890
# 8 Pohutukawa Coast Crime Watch Patrol Charitable Trust - install automatic number plate recognition road cameras on the Pohutukawa Coast	Funding required towards Stage 1 - purchase and installation of number plate recognition road cameras at the Whitford Village roundabout	2,000
# 9 Waiuku Family Support Network -equipment purchase	Purchase of a chest freezer, two laptops and a printer for their office	1,382
# 10 Waiuku Museum -development of a Waiuku street scene	Construction of a street scene within the Museum that includes a general goods store, newspaper office, jewellery and china store, shoemakers store and a barber and tobacconist shop	5,000
# 11 Mercy Missions Trust - installation of raised garden beds	Supply of 2-4 raised, covered gardens to increase food production to needy families	2,000
# 12 Awhitu Landcare - pest control programme	Purchase of replacement bait stations, gas traps, chew cards, possum dough, bait, mustelid traps, lures and baits, and cost of labour	13,300
# 13 Franklin Family Support Services -purchase of electronic whiteboard	Purchase of electronic whiteboard with mobile stand and printer for their meeting room that is made available to community groups	2,000
# 14 Wairoa River Landcare Group -community planting days and school potting bees	Purchase of materials such as nursery supplies, trees, potting mix and smaller student planting spades for their community planting days and school potting bees	6,000
# 15 Counties Baseball -fencing and installation of a permanent backstop	Install a permanent backstop to provide protection to players and spectators and eliminate safety risk each time the temporary backstop is erected and taken down before and after games	Either 14,000
	Fencing of the entire baseball field to provide a safe, secure environment for players and other users of the fields	Or 50,000
# 16 Ararimu 150th Anniversary History Book Committee (sub-committee of Ararimu Residents & Ratepayers Assn) - history of Ararimu publication	Book publication printing costs – history of Ararimu.	8,385
# 17 Pukekohe Association Football Club Inc - soccer field drainage improvements	Undertake work to improve the drainage on the soccer fields on the John Street side of Bledisloe Park Pukekohe	$88,515
# 18 Theresa Hill and Mary-Ruth Doole fencing and planting programme on their land to preserve the environment	Cost of fencing the waterway/swamp area, waterway drain clearing, spot spraying, purchase of plants, possum and weed control for first year, and labour costs for land on the Awhitu Peninsula.	6,000
# 19 Puni School PTA - Franklin Multicultural Festival March 2017	Hireage costs for a stage, marquee and sound system for the Franklin multicultural festival being held in March 2017	6,500
# 20 Mauku School - native bush extension and redevelopment of a play area	Cost of new trees and shrubs for native bush extension	1,100
	Cost of framing timber, posts, nails, chain, webbing, concrete and apparatus for the redeveloped play area	2,100
# 21 Well Women Franklin introduction of a second weekly peer support group session	Fee to provide two trained facilitators to run a second weekly evening peer support group up to the end of 2016, for mothers struggling to cope with mental health issues	3,500
# 22 Clevedon Community and Business Association 2016 Santa Parade	To cover the cost of traffic management and event insurance for the parade	2,815
# 23 Rerenga Tahi Charitable Trust – group based Te Reo sessions	Provide support and assistance in planning and delivering a framework for progression, and allow continuity of Te Reo that will benefit the communities’ consultation. This will be delivered through an interactive group based setting within an 8 week period.	2,000
# 24 (late) Marama Hou Ministries Trust – pizza oven and holiday programme	Add a feature to the Hamilton Estate community gardens by building a wood fired pizza oven in the community gardens - cost $2,250 Provide funding for the Waiuku Hamilton Estate community holiday programme for bus trips, sports equipment, art resources, cinema and white water rafting entry fees – total $3,400.	5,650
# 25 (late) Waiuku Waterfront & Reserves Management Committee – continue the harbour walkway	Continue the 1.6km walkway around the Waiuku harbor. Background work was completed under Franklin District Council.	10,000
# 26 (late) Hunua Ararimu Paparimu Valley Residents’ Assoc – beautification project for Hunua Triangle	Project is focused on land at junction of Hunua and Heald Roads, known as the “Hunua Junction”. Residents have assisted with initial mowing, weed spraying and spreading mulch. Next stage of project involves final weed spray, final spread of mulch, purchase and planting of bulbs and other plants. Amount requested is for mulch to be supplied and delivered.	4,140

b) That the Franklin Local Board revokes resolution FR/2016/95 made on 24 May 2016, due to a subsequent change to the balance of unspent funds:

That the Franklin Local Board reallocate $31,373.50 from the 2015/2016 Locally Driven Initiatives operational expenditure budget underspend to the 2015/2016 Franklin Local Grants round two budget line.

Comments

10. Franklin Local Board has an LDI opex budget of $1.432m for the 2015/16 financial year.

11. This includes the following types of funding:

· operational funding for council activities to deliver work programmes

· a community response fund of $103,000 which can be allocated to any local board initiatives during the year

· funding for community grants totalling $186,000.

12. At its 24 May 2016 meeting, the board noted by resolution it’s unspent 2015/16 LDI opex budget and requested staff to identify options for reallocation of these budgets (resolution FR/2016/93).

13. Following are the board’s unspent opex budgets for 2015/16:

Fund type	Amount $
Remaining funding from 2015/16 work programmes Arts initiatives	20,000
Parks, sport and recreation opportunities	52,000
Community identity and heritage	17,000
Community safety initiatives	12,000
Revitalisation of town centres	40,000
Heritage and tourism	10,000
Youth forum	3,524
Work programmes total	154,524
Remaining balance community response fund	6,284
Remaining balance community grants (quick response round 5 still to be allocated)	17,888*
Total available for reallocation	178,696

*Round 5 of quick response grants is being considered as another item on this agenda and may change the balance available for reallocation.

14. It is recommended that the board revokes resolution FR/2016/95 made on 24 May 2016 reallocating the opex underspend to its local grants round two budget line as follows:

“That the Franklin Local Board reallocate $31,373.50 from the 2015/2016 Locally Driven Initiatives operational expenditure budget underspend to the 2015/2016 Franklin Local Grants round two budget line.”

There is now further information on the final underspend available, which means the above resolution is superseded.

15. In order to allocate the balance of the funding, the board gave direction to run a contestable funding round for community groups to apply for grants. Applications were invited and the funding round closed on 10 June 2016. Twenty-six applications were received totalling approximately $375,000, including three late applications received out of time.

16. Following is an analysis of the funding applications received:

Project	Cost $	Details	Staff comments
# 1 Pukekohe Netball Centre - toilet block provision	106,373	Upgrade to existing toilet block adjacent to current building for Pukekohe Netball Club. Five new toilets, partitions, four basin sink, block wall, iron roof, clear light, continuation of walkway, electrical work and internal plumbing, interior finishing (painting, vinyl).	The project includes a 6m x 3.5m storage area (block walls with roller door, three aluminium windows, two florescent lights). It also includes connection to utility services (waste water, electricity etc). The project identified in the list of priorities at the recent workshop on the Franklin Sport and Active Recreation Plan was toilets, rather than storage. The club advises that on a Saturday, the existing cricket toilets are used all day by players before and after games and during breaks between games by spectators and umpires. They are also used during tournaments and training. Providing five new toilets is not increasing capacity, it is retaining the current level of toilet provision for netball players/umpires/spectators (less one toilet). Pros Identified as a high priority project by the board at a workshop on 10 May. The toilets are needed to ensure there is adequate provision following demolition of the cricket club toilets which are located adjacent to the netball courts. Cons The project includes a storage area and storage has not been identified as a project the board should consider. The proposed new toilets will be located within the Pukekohe Netball Centre’s leased area. They are not “public toilets” and the lease covers what access the club is required to provide to the public. No need has been identified for public toilets in this part of the park. The reserve management plan makes provision for the removal of the cricket building off the park Resource consent won’t be required for the toilets because the building will be under 50m². Building consent – will be required.
# 2 Beachlands Community Trust – administration costs	1,408.24	Request funding to cover purchase of printer, toner, laminator, laminating pouches and attendance of two staff on first aid course.
# 3 Waiuku Golf and Squash Club - walking track maintenance	9,880	Weekly mowing/weedeating of the 3 km walking track around the perimeter of the golf course which is available for community use and access, includes two hours per week mowing.	The club’s lease requires public access within the rules of the club (i.e. they are expected to allow those who act reasonably access to the land during club hours). The club is also allowed to restrict access for up to 40 days per year. The lease requires the maintenance of the grounds, including the mowing. The board granted the club $750 for maintenance spray in a replanted area in November 2015.
# 4 Waiuku Business and Development Association (WBDA) - CCTV upgrade	15,000	CCTV upgrade for Waiuku town centre, to provide a safe environment for the community and safeguard the town centre and facilities. Total cost of project is $67k, the WBDA hopes to fund $20k and is asking for funding of $15k towards the upgrade.	In February 2013, the board funded four CCTV cameras in the 2012/13 year for the King Street, Kentish Hotel area at a cost of $16,229.31 noting any further costs were to be the responsibility of the business association. The current level of Business Improvement District (BID) funding will not cover upgrades to the hardware in question. The new hardware appears to meet requirements and comment has been passed by council staff to the BID to assist them in an appropriate purchase. The 2016/17 Arts, Community and Events work programme includes looking at CCTV across Franklin. The proposed review is to identify the board’s role in CCTV after the current monitoring contract has expired. The review will look at camera ownership and monitoring, building more community/BID capacity to manage CCTV; and improve local security response options. No budget has been provided in the 2016/17 work programme for hardware or upgrades (other than operational repairs etc) as this would require capital budget.
# 5 Clevedon Tennis Club -court rebuild and lighting upgrade	50,000	Replacement of the sub base, court surface, and drainage work for the five existing courts and the upgrade of existing court lighting	The club’s lease expires next year but they are working with staff on extending their lease, with a view to increase their footprint. This work would be within the terms of their current lease. There are some existing issues with the court surface (from slumping) and drainage. The club’s current lease does not include a clause where they must allow public access. The club could be asked to let the public used the courts as a condition of the funding. Most clubs do allow some sort of public use of the courts, often it is for a small fee or donation. This just allows for the fact that the club maintains the courts and the members pay fees for this. New lease templates include a clause to allow the public reasonable use of a leased area, and a new template will be used if a decision is made to renew the lease next year. Seems to be a well-run club with a lot of local interest. Currently running very successful youth programmes. Would need to be conditional on obtaining Land Owner Approval
# 6 Karaka Sports Park - carpark repairs	5,123.25	Supply of aggregate (nine truck and trailer loads) to resurface temporary carpark	Would allow for some additional parking on site until master plan is approved by the board and agreed by all other user groups. Would need to be conditional on obtaining Land Owner Approval
# 7 Clevedon and Districts Historical Society - launch of ‘Voices of Belonging’ a history book of Clevedon – Te Wairoa	1,890	Costs associated with the book launch to be held on 27 August 2016 – includes hall hire, EPTPOS hire, sound system hire and security	Aligned to the board’s proud, safe and healthy communities outcome in the local board plan, which includes a key achievement: ‘celebrate our heritage and protect it for future generations’. This initiative also supports the 2016/17 Arts, Culture and Events work programme for heritage and identity, to strengthen the visibility of heritage and identity in the community. The board declined a funding application from the club for $5,000 in October 2015 for publication of the book but advised it would consider supporting a launch event. Clevedon Historical Society is well established in Franklin.
# 8 Pohutukawa Coast Crime Watch Patrol Charitable Trust - install automatic number plate recognition road cameras on the Pohutukawa Coast	2,000	Funding required towards Stage 1 - purchase and installation of number plate recognition road cameras at the Whitford Village roundabout	This would require Auckland Transport (AT) approval and a monitoring and maintenance plan – awaiting information from AT. Community Empowerment Unit advisors note that information from number plate recognition cameras will have little value if there is no police patrol nearby to respond speedily to the information. Feedback from Inspector Wendy Spiller, NZ Police: Fully support this project that has raised nearly all the money through local contributions to have an ANPR set up in the area. It will be housed at the Beachlands Police Community Base and be under Police control. This location but it is a real no brainer to have an ANPR at this site, as there is huge growth and there is only one way in and one way out.
# 9 Waiuku Family Support Network -equipment purchase	1,382	Purchase of a chest freezer, two laptops and a printer for their office	This funding would support them to be more effective (laptops and printer) and provide support for families (assuming the freezer is for food for local families). Waiuku Family Support is a well-established local service providing day to day support for families. The board granted funding of $1,580 to the group in September 2015 for website design and window stencilling. A funding application for programme delivery (salaries) was declined by the board in May 2016 as it was low priority for community funding.
# 10 Waiuku Museum -development of a Waiuku street scene	5,000	Construction of a street scene within the Museum that includes a general goods store, newspaper office, jewellery and china store, shoemakers store and a barber and tobacconist shop	Aligned to the board’s proud, safe and healthy communities outcome in the local board plan, which includes a key achievement: ‘celebrate our heritage and protect it for future generations’. This initiative also supports the 2016/17 Arts, Culture and Events work programme for heritage and identity, to strengthen the visibility of heritage and identity in the community. Waiuku Museum Society is a well-established, stable organisation.
# 11 Mercy Missions Trust - installation of raised garden beds	2,000	Supply of 2-4 raised, covered gardens to increase food production to needy families	Aligned to the board’s proud, safe and healthy communities outcome in the local board plan, which includes a key achievement to ‘support community groups to be effective and contribute to the community’. Mercy Mission Trust is well established in Franklin located in Drury
# 12 Awhitu Landcare - pest control programme	13,300	Purchase of replacement bait stations, gas traps, chew cards, possum dough, bait, mustelid traps, lures and baits, and cost of labour	Advice from Biosecurity Advisor: Supportive of the group to receive a grant with the requirement that they work with him on its expenditure to make sure they spend it in line with appropriate methodology and procedures. They are a really proactive group with big goals and dreams and this programme, with council assistance, has led to dramatic reductions in pest levels throughout Awhitu.
# 13 Franklin Family Support Services -purchase of electronic whiteboard	2,000	Purchase of electronic whiteboard with mobile stand and printer for their meeting room that is made available to community groups	The board granted funding of $5,000 to the organisation in October 2015 towards annual accommodation costs, and $1,691 in March 2016 for a projector and screen in their meeting room.
# 14 Wairoa River Landcare Group -community planting days and school potting bees	6,000	Purchase of materials such as nursery supplies, trees, potting mix and smaller student planting spades for their community planting days and school potting bees	The board declined a funding application for $16,250 in October 2015 towards the cost of nursery supplies and requested findings from the management plan to be provided. The board also declined a funding application for $962 for potting mix and professional educator fees for plant propagation in March 2016 and advised there were alternative funding sources available.
# 15 Counties Baseball -fencing and installation of a permanent backstop	Either 14,000	Install a permanent backstop to provide protection to players and spectators and eliminate safety risk each time the temporary backstop is erected and taken down before and after games	Baseball facilities have not been identified as a project in the draft Franklin Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plan. The board declined a funding application from the club for $4,799 in October 2015 for baseball equipment as it had limited community benefit.
	Or 50,000	Fencing of the entire baseball field to provide a safe, secure environment for players and other users of the fields	The baseball club has 15 members, as reported by the club on an online survey. Parks staff advice that this option is supported.
# 16 Ararimu 150th Anniversary History Book Committee (sub-committee of Ararimu Residents & Ratepayers Assn) - history of Ararimu publication	8,385	Book publication printing costs – history of Ararimu.	Aligned to the board’s proud, safe and healthy communities outcome in the local board plan, which includes a key achievement: ‘celebrate our heritage and protect it for future generations’. This initiative also supports the 2016/17 Arts, Culture and Events work programme for heritage and identity, to strengthen the visibility of heritage and identity in the community. This group has applied for funding of $2,000 through Round 5 of the board’s quick response community funding.
# 17 Pukekohe Association Football Club Inc - soccer field drainage improvements	Amount not stipulated. - to be provided after the closing date	Undertake work to improve the drainage on the soccer fields on the John Street side of Bledisloe Park Pukekohe	An upgrade to whole park is being looked at via growth funding, this work would provisionally be planned in the financial year 2018/19, and implemented in 2020/21. Staff advise that a whole park approach is needed rather than one specific area being done in isolation.
# 18 Theresa Hill and Mary-Ruth Doole fencing and planting programme on their land to preserve the environment	6,000	Cost of fencing the waterway/swamp area, waterway drain clearing, spot spraying, purchase of plants, possum and weed control for first year, and labour costs for land on the Awhitu Peninsula.	Council’s Community Grants Policy gives the following guidelines regarding allocating grants to individuals: Individuals and groups with no formal legal structure may apply for grants of up to $1,000 through the local grants programmes, except where individual local boards have specifically stated otherwise. Applicants in this category seeking grants over $1,000 would need to either: · Nominate an ‘umbrella’ organisation which has agreed to receive and administer the grant on their behalf – the umbrella organisation would be legally accountable to Auckland Council for the expenditure of the grant; OR · Apply to have the funding released retrospectively, i.e. as reimbursement for pre-approved expenses after the project or activity has been satisfactorily completed.
# 19 Puni School PTA - Franklin Multicultural Festival March 2017	6,500	Hireage costs for a stage, marquee and sound system for the Franklin multicultural festival being held in March 2017	The board granted funding of $2,000 in November 2015 for the Franklin Multicultural Festival held in April 2016. This application is for the March 2017 festival.
# 20 Mauku School - native bush extension and redevelopment of a play area	1,100	Cost of new trees and shrubs for native bush extension	Aligns with priorities in local grants programme for environmental funding – to “encourage initiatives that ….preserve the beauty of our environment”.
	2,100	Cost of framing timber, posts, nails, chain, webbing, concrete and apparatus for the redeveloped play area	Aligns with priorities in local grants programme for community funding to “support community groups to be effective and contribute to the community, particularly in shaping and developing their areas to be better and safer places.” The board granted funding of $500 to the school in March 2016 towards the Mauku Fun Run for event expenses.
# 21 Well Women Franklin introduction of a second weekly peer support group session	3,500	Fee to provide two trained facilitators to run a second weekly evening peer support group up to the end of 2016, for mothers struggling to cope with mental health issues	The local board grants programme includes salaries as a low priority for funding.
# 22 Clevedon Community and Business Association 2016 Santa Parade	2,815	To cover the cost of traffic management and event insurance for the parade
# 23 Rerenga Tahi Charitable Trust – group based Te Reo sessions	2,000	Provide support and assistance in planning and delivering a framework for progression, and allow continuity of Te Reo that will benefit the communities’ consultation. This will be delivered through an interactive group based setting within an 8 week period.
# 24 (late) Marama Hou Ministries Trust – pizza oven and holiday programme	5,650	Add a feature to the Hamilton Estate community gardens by building a wood fired pizza oven in the community gardens - cost $2,250 Provide funding for the Waiuku Hamilton Estate community holiday programme for bus trips, sports equipment, art resources, cinema and white water rafting entry fees – total $3,400.	Marama Hou will be contributing $500 to the project. Waiuku Lions donate wood and advice. In December 2015, the board funded further development of the Waiuku community gardens through the purchase of garden equipment and running two community events from its 2015/16 Community Development, Arts and Culture work programme budget of $3,000.
# 25 (late) Waiuku Waterfront & Reserves Management Committee – continue the harbour walkway	10,000	Continue the 1.6km walkway around the Waiuku harbour. Background work was completed under Franklin District Council.	The board has proposed $25,000 in its Greenways project in the 2016/17 work programme. The next priority area for the project is Waiuku.
# 26 (late) Hunua Ararimu Paparimu Valley Residents’ Assoc – beautification project for Hunua Triangle	4,140	Project is focused on land at junction of Hunua and Heald Roads, known as the “Hunua Junction”. Residents have assisted with initial mowing, weed spraying and spreading mulch. Next stage of project involves final weed spray, final spread of mulch, purchase and planting of bulbs and other plants. Amount requested is for mulch to be supplied and delivered and includes GST.	Group has been given a license to occupy the land. Board previously funded $35,000 from its parks capex budget for the establishment of a playground on the village green.

17. The board is now being asked to decide which projects to grant funding to in order to allocate the remaining operational budget.

18. Any unallocated operational budget at year end will be classed as savings and will not be carried forward to the board’s 2016/17 budget.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

19. The local board is the decision maker. These proposals have been discussed in a board workshop held on 21 June. Decisions made will be based on the direction given by the local board at the workshop and advice from relevant departmental staff.

Māori impact statement

20. No specific impacts for Maori have been identified.

Implementation

21. Once approved, the funding will be paid to community groups as grants, with a funding agreement for both parties including accountability requirements for successful applicants.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors	Jane Cain - Local Board Advisor
Authorisers	Sue O'Gorman - Relationship Manager

Franklin Local Board

28 June 2016

Franklin 2016/2017 Local Economic Development Programme

File No.: CP2016/12100

Purpose

1. To approve the Franklin local economic development programme for the 2016/17 financial year.

Executive summary

2. This report introduces the proposed 2016/17 financial year local economic development work programme for the Franklin Local Board.

3. The proposed work programme comprises support for the Young Enterprise Scheme, supporting development of a relationship between Franklin and the Tongzhou District of Beijing, contributing to a feasibility study of the Hunua Cycle Trail and an audit and development of a strategy for short stay accommodation in the Franklin district.

4. The total value of the Local Economic Development programme is $42,500.

5. The board is being asked to approve the 2016/17 local economic development programme.

Recommendation/s

a) That the Franklin Local Board approves Local Economic Development Work Programme 2016/2017 programme (Attachment A).

Comments

Background

6. The 2016/2017 local economic development programme has been developed having regard to the Local Board’s priorities for local economic development set out in the Local Board Plan (2014) and the Franklin Local Economic Development Action Plan.

7. The proposed Local Economic Development (LED) programme comprises the following activities.

Support for the Young Enterprise Scheme ($ 1,500)

8. The Young Enterprise Scheme (YES) provides a practical, hands on experience for young people to develop and execute a business idea.

9. The funding from the local board is new spend and will contribute to the regional Young Enterprise Scheme to enable three high schools in Franklin (Pukekohe High, Wesley College and Waiuku College) to participate in the Dragons Den and regional events.

10. In 2015 the Dragons Den and Regional Awards events were held in five sub-regional locations: North, West, Central, South and East Auckland. However, the success of the programme and the resulting growth has resulted in substantially increased event costs. Each event is now required to cater for approximately 3-400 students, plus teachers, business mentors and supporters. The cost of venue hire and the associated cost of delivering these events amounts to approximately $5,000 per event. In total, this equates to approximately $50,000 (5x Dragon’s Den and 5x Regional Awards) to run the programme on a sub-regional basis.

11. Due to the rising costs, Auckland Tourism Events and Economic Development (ATEED) has had to centralise these events into one centralised Dragon’s Den event in May 2016 and one Regional event in October 2016.

12. Initial feedback from schools and the local community has been that they perceive considerable value in the delivery of the events at the local (sub-regional) level - in terms of the connections built between schools, and with the businesses. Therefore in order to respond to the feedback ATEED is seeking Local Board support to deliver an expanded programme of events being held in five sub-regional locations, and respond to the feedback that has been received.

13. Auckland employers and tertiary institutions have also been asked and are contributing both financially and ‘in kind’ in support of YES.

14. A contribution is also sought from local boards where there are schools participating in the YES. The amount of support requested has been worked out using a formula of $500 per school in the local board area. It ranges from $500 to $3,500 per local board. The Franklin Local Board is being asked to contribute $1,500 to the YES for three high schools (Pukekohe High, Wesley College and Waiuku College).

Tongzhou partnership ($6,000)

15. The Foreign Office of Tongzhou District have expressed interest in a collaborative relationship with Franklin Local Board following the visit of a small Tongzhou delegation to Franklin in April 2016. Tongzhou is a district on the fringe of Beijing that shares some of the issues Franklin is facing in transitioning from a semi-rural area through to a more urban environment.

16. A provisional invitation has been made by Tongzhou Deputy Mayor to a small delegation from Franklin to visit in 2016/17. This will require Franklin Local Board to cover travel expenses (Auckland to Beijing) for up to 3 delegates. Once there the Tongzhou local government will cover the costs of hosting the delegation.

17. Any other delegates such as Franklin based business representatives will need to cover their own travel expenses.

18. The core benefit of visiting Tongzhou is to build the bilateral relationship and trust between the two districts. The Franklin delegation should include local businesses to establish the connections with their counterparts in Tongzhou to further explore trade opportunities. After discussions with the Tongzhou Foreign Office the following types of activity and benefit have been proposed:

International trade opportunities

19. The Franklin delegation could include a few leading local business people to explore opportunities and be matched / introduced to relevant counterparts in Tongzhou. Local businesses would be required to fund their own visit.

20. Once the relationship has been established, an annual trade event could also be established where both districts can display each other products / services in the counterpart’s public facilities (i.e. library, community venue).

21. Pukekohe Vegetable Growers Association and the Franklin food sector work led by ATEED could promote Franklin’s produce for example.

Trade, tourism and cultural exchange opportunities

22. A bi-annual cultural expo sponsored by the two districts could be held in their counterpart district.

· Franklin tourism group could actively promote local tourism sites and experiences to residents in Tongzhou.

· Tongzhou has an arts district in Songzhuang. Each year Tongzhou district council sponsor a number of artists to spend a few month abroad as their sabbatical. Franklin could be one of its destinations.

Civic learning opportunities

23. During the visit to Tongzhou, Franklin Local Board has the opportunity to learn from Tongzhou’s experience in transitioning to a more urban form:

· Town planning, large infrastructure project management, urban expansion, green space management, storm water and sewerage, air pollution control.

· Public service performance measurement

· Public service provision including local community centres, archives, libraries, local parks

· Environmental management

International education exchange

24. Tongzhou is keen to have a student exchange programme where a group of secondary students will represent their own district in a visit Franklin/Tongzhou each year. As well as benefiting the students taking part this provides another opportunity to showcase Franklin to an international audience.

Hosting and showcasing Franklin

25. A reciprocal hosting of a Tongzhou delegation the following year would require covering the costs of accommodating the delegation from Tongzhou for 3-4 days and any activities planned for them.

26. The delegation from Tongzhou can include business people and tour operators who can make links with Franklin businesses and be show the opportunities there are to do business with / or visit Franklin.

27. Hosting a delegation the following year could cost $10,000 to $20,000 depending on the length of visit and programme of activities.

Tripartite arrangement

28. Tongzhou is open to the idea of tripartite arrangement. Tongzhou has a friendly district relationship with a district in Seoul, South Korea. There might be potential opportunities of setting up a tripartite arrangement over the longer term. This would extend the opportunity to promote Franklin to another potential market.

Hunua cycle trail feasibility ($25,000)

29. Tourism development is a key focus of the Franklin Local Board Plan under its ‘Thriving Local Economy’ outcome. In addition, as Franklin grows there is a need for need more outdoor space for everyone to enjoy.

30. The Hunua Cycle trail is a long term, significant project for the eastern side of the Franklin District and will provide a facility attractive to visitors from within Auckland and from farther afield. The project will open up the Hunua Ranges to cyclists, providing economic development opportunities in Franklin.

31. ATEED have been involved in a number of initial discussions on this project and there is support across a number of stakeholders.

32. Stage 1 to develop the trail routes has recently been funded and is underway. This will confirm a route and outline funding requirements and sources and timelines.

33. Stage 2 will be an Economic Impact Assessment that will progress the development of the trail to the next stage. Experience from Thames-Coromandel is that this stage will cost around $50,000 which is beyond what ATEED are able to provide for this initiative.

34. Franklin Local Board can help this project go ahead by contributing some of the cost of the impact assessment. The assessment will look specifically at the benefits that Franklin will experience from the opening up of the Hunua Ranges to visitors and identify any actions that the local board and local businesses and tourism operators can take to maximise the benefits to Franklin.

35. Beyond this seed funding, national funding will be required to take develop the project fully. Central government has recently announced a fund of $25 million for expanding or connecting Great Rides in New Zealand so communities can benefit from visitors spending more time on trails, as well as linking visitors to regional tourist destinations.

Short stay facilities audit and strategy ($10,000)

36. This project is to undertake a Franklin-wide assessment of motor campervan / camping facilities to identify if there is a need to provide additional facilities or improve existing facilities to encourage more visitors to overnight in the district.

37. It will look at how well different sectors of the market (e.g. families, trampers and cyclists with different facility requirements) and different types of accommodation (tents, caravans, motorhomes etc.) are catered for. It will also consider what the future needs of the district might be based on planned developments in the tourism sector.

38. The project will undertake a stocktake of existing provision, do a gap analysis, propose options for strategic development of further facilities and advise on implementation. Opportunities to provide additional accommodation in Franklin during the World Masters games in 2017 will also be considered as a means of attracting some of the many visitors to that event to the district.

39. The project will also identify any potential risks from the development and promotion of the area as a place to stay such as from problem freedom campers that other local authorities have experienced.

40. It is proposed an external contractor with tourism sector expertise is contracted to carry out the work. The precise scope of the work can be discussed with the local board at a workshop.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

41. The work programme identified in this report has been developed to align with the Local board Plan and the Local Economic Development Action Plan.

42. Both the 2014 Franklin Local Board Plan and the Franklin Local Economic Development Action Plan include a focus on encouraging visitors to spend more time in Franklin as a destination by promoting and linking local attractions, events and heritage. Both the Hunua Cycle Trail and Short Stay strategy support the development of tourism in Franklin. The employment prospects of Franklin’s young people is also a focus. Support for the Young Enterprise Scheme provides another tangible and hands on way that Young People can understand business and prepare for work.

43. The opportunity for the Tongzhou collaboration has arisen separately to local board planning. However there are synergies between activities proposed and the Local Board Plan and Local Economic Development Action Plan with regards providing the opportunity for Franklin’s key sectors to tap in to overseas markets and grow. There are opportunities there for horticulture, food and beverage, tourism, infrastructure and educational exchange. In addition there is the potential for civic learning around the two districts shared experience of urban growth.

44. The proposed LED programme was presented to the Local Board at the 17 May 2016 workshop.

45. Further details on the benefits to Franklin of the Tongzhou partnership and the Hunua Cycle Trail investment were requested. These are provided above.

Māori impact statement

46. There are no specific impacts for Māori resulting from the YES project. The Young Enterprise Scheme is open to all year 12 and 13 students in participating schools.

47. There no specific impacts on Māori in relation to the Tongzhou partnership project, although Māori owned businesses and Māori cultural tourism operators could benefit from the opportunities to make links with the Chinese market.

48. There are potential impacts on Māori in relation to the short stay facilities audit and strategy, particularly where consideration of any additional new provision is made. Engagement with mana whenua will be included as a key output for whomever is awarded the contract to carry out the work.

49. There are potential impacts on Māori in relation to the Hunua Cycle Trail project. Ngai Tai ki Tamaki, Ngati Paoa and Ngati Whanaunga have been and will continue to be engaged throughout the entire development of the project to ensure Māori interests in the initiative are fully incorporated.

Implementation

50. Following approval by the local board the Local Economic Development team at ATEED will begin to implement the programme as approved by the local board. Where there is a need further scoping of activities will be undertaken and presented back to the local board as required.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Franklin ATEED Work Programme 2016/2017	101

Signatories

Authors

Jonathan Sudworth - Local Economic Development Advisor

Authorisers

Paul Robinson - Manager Local Economic Growth – ATEED

Sue O'Gorman - Relationship Manager

Franklin Local Board

28 June 2016

Sport and Recreation Investment - Community Access Scheme guidelines and future allocation of residual legacy Hillary Commission Community Sport Fund

File No.: CP2016/11716

Purpose

1. To obtain local board feedback on the draft Sport and Recreation Community Access Scheme guidelines and the future allocation of the residual legacy Hillary Commission Community Sport Fund.

Executive summary

2. Auckland Council inherited 14 operational funding agreements and residual Hillary Commission Community Sport funding that contributed to sport and recreation outcomes. 11 of the funding agreements, and the Hillary Commission funding were deemed out of scope of the Community Grants Policy 2014.

3. At the Parks, Recreation and Sport Committee meeting on 18 November 2015, draft Community Access Scheme guidelines and options for the use of the residual $2.5m Hillary Commission Community Sport Fund were considered. Both were approved for sector and local board consultation.

4. The purpose of the Community Access Scheme is to leverage access to non-council facilities to support increased levels of sport and recreation participation and reduce inequities of access to opportunities.

5. This report provides background and overview of the draft Community Access Scheme guidelines (the Guidelines) (Attachment A), and options for the use of the residual Hillary Commission funding.

6. This report requests local board feedback on the draft Guidelines and the use of the residual Hillary Commission funding.

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board:

a) provides feedback on the draft Community Access Scheme guidelines for the Governing Body to consider.

b) support the allocation of the residual $2.5m Hillary Commission Community Sport Fund toward the implementation of the Sport and Recreation Community Access Scheme with a priority given to identified need in the legacy Waitakere ($1.1M) and Auckland City ($1.39M) Council areas.

Comments

Draft Community Access Scheme

7. Auckland Council supports sport and recreation in a number of ways including through the provision of facilities and open space, delivering programmes and sector investment.

8. Council’s region-wide investment programme in sport and recreation supports the implementation of the Auckland Sport and Recreation Strategic Action Plan (ASARSAP) to encourage Aucklanders to be more active more often. The investment programme consists of the Regional Sport and Recreation Grants Programme, Region Wide Strategic Partnership Grants and the Community Access Scheme (Attachment B). Additionally many local boards invest in sport and recreation organisations that provide outcomes aligned to their local board outcomes. The 29 July 2015 Parks, Recreation and Sport Committee approved a regional sport and recreation work programme that included the development of strategic region wide guidelines for the allocation of sport and recreation grants outside the scope of the Council Grants Policy including community access/operating grants and the residual Hillary Commission fund.

9. Following an October workshop the draft Guidelines were approved at the 18 November Parks, Recreation and Sport Committee meeting for local board consultation.

10. An update was provided to the 23 November Local Board Chairs Forum and workshops were held with all local boards that have existing funding relationships.

11. The proposed Community Access Scheme provides guidance for the existing 11 legacy arrangements and a framework to address identified gaps and future needs. The draft Community Access Scheme is primarily targeting regional gaps in sport and recreation facility provision and/or improving equity of access through local solutions. For organisations to be eligible they must identify a solution to meet an identified need in the Sport Facility Investment Plan (currently under development) and/or Community Facility Network Plan.

12. The Community Access Scheme will enable council to move investment in response to highest need/demand and invest on a three yearly cycle aligned to the Long-term Plan. Like the Sports Field Capacity Development programme this is a region-wide scheme allocated locally.

13. Investment will be made in facilities to:

· fill a specific sport gap as identified in the Sport Facility Investment Plan

· optimise and increase the use of existing facilities

· support the start-up phase of multisport facilities

Existing community access funding agreements

14. The 11 existing community access funding agreements were reviewed against the draft Guidelines to determine eligibility and strategic alignment. Staff will ensure those that are no longer eligible or do not align with the principles of the draft Guidelines, are supported through other mechanisms.

15. Given the timing of the Guidelines approval and the need to give certainty for the next financial year, on 26 April, the Parks, Recreation and Sport Committee approved the existing community access agreements be continued for the 2016/2017 financial year via the General Manager PSR report with the exception of one reallocation.

16. The following table illustrates current approved investment for the 2016/2017 financial year

Table 1.
Investment Area	Who	Amount
Asset based term grant – community access	Sovereign Stadium Mairangi Bay School/community/council partnership	$58k p.a.
Asset based term grant – community access	Avondale College School/community/council partnership	$17k p.a.
Asset based term grant – community access	Tamaki Recreation Centre School/community/council partnership	$100k p.a.
Asset based term grant – community access	ASB Stadium School/community/council partnership	$80k p.a.
Asset based term grant – community access	Waiheke Recreation Centre School/community/council partnership	$75k p.a.
Asset based term grant – community access	North Harbour Netball (reallocation from Hato Petera College)	$28k p.a.
Asset based term grant – operational support	Te Puru Community Charitable Trust Operational support	$340k p.a.
Asset based term grant – operational support	Papatoetoe Sports Community & Charitable Trust (Kolmar) Operational support	$100k p.a.
Asset based term grant – operational support	Dacre Park Cost-equity – contribution to field maintenance	$17k p.a.
Asset based term grant – operational support	Auckland Netball Sport-equity – contribution to facility maintenance	$150k p.a.
Asset based term grant – operational support	Manukau Tennis Centre Sport-equity – contribution to facility maintenance	$41k p.a.
Total		$1.006m

Update on Community Access Grants for Franklin Local Board:

Te Puru Community Charitable Trust

17. The Te Puru Community Centre is located at Te Puru Park between Maraetai and Beachlands. Council has provided an operational grant to the Te Puru Community Charitable Trust since 2005. In return for this funding, the trust provides community access to its facilities which include an indoor sports hall, clubrooms and studio while also delivering local sport and recreation opportunities and programmes.

18. Funding for the centre aligns with the community access guidelines and the centre is viewed as part of the community facilities network.

Future use of Hillary Commission Funding

19. In June 2002, Sport and Recreation New Zealand (SPARC, now Sport NZ) ceased the annual funding through the Community Sport Fund. The fund was administered through territorial local authorities and supported sport and recreation projects and initiatives.

20. The fund was allocated to councils on a population based approach and was distributed to the community through a combination of contestable grants and loans.

21. Following the end of the Community Sport Fund, SPARC advised councils that any remaining Community Sport funding held or returned via loan repayments could be allocated in a manner consistent with the desired outcomes of the fund.

22. Prior to Auckland Council, councils took a varied approach with most using remaining funds for capital projects or allocated in grants to sport and recreation groups.

23. At amalgamation Waitakere ($1.1 million) and Auckland City Council ($1.39 million) had remaining Community Sport Funds due in the most part to their approach of funding low interest loans to sport clubs which have since been repaid.

24. Four options for the future use of the residual Hillary Commission fund were discussed at the Parks Recreation and Sport Committee workshops on 17 June 2015 and 14 October 2015 and subsequently approved for local board consultation at the 18 November 2015 meeting. Further analysis of these four options is outlined in Attachment C.

· Develop a new contestable grants programme either regional or aligned to legacy Waitakere and Auckland City areas. A new contestable grants programme could be established. It could provide a wider criteria for achieving sport and recreation outcomes including facility or capital, and operational and programme related funding. It would need to be considered how this would fit with the regional and local grants programme including the new local discretionary capital fund.

· Allocate as part of the new Community Grants Policy (CGP) Regional Sport & Recreation Grants Programme. The new regional sport and recreation grants programme that has been established as part of the Community Grants Policy (CGP) has a budget of $508K per annum. This funding could be split across the first three years and added to the current budget, for distribution against the criteria in the CGP.

· Allocate towards the implementation of Auckland Sport and Recreation Strategic Action Plan (ASARSAP) priority initiatives with potential to target legacy Waitakere and Auckland City areas. The funding could be used to deliver on some of the focus areas of ASARSAP, for example, addressing inequity in sport and recreation support, sustainability of sport work programme, and the Sport Facility Network Plan implementation. Progress and outcomes would be reported via ASARSAP annual reporting.

· Allocate as part of a proposed Sport and Recreation Community Access Scheme to address inequities across sport and recreation either across Auckland or in the legacy Waitakere and Auckland City areas. This would increase the budget available to support community access to non-council facilities in areas of demand and provide operational support to new or existing sport and recreation facilities, including multisport hubs, for example, supporting netball hubs, and incentivising new multisport/co-location. This is a big gap area for sport and recreation funding support and would support and increase the sustainability of sport and recreation facility provision.

25. Allocating the funds to the Community Access Scheme is identified as the preferred option. It will add to existing funding over say a five year period, and provide support for community access to non-council facilities in areas of high demand, establishment of operational support to new sport and recreation facilities, including multisport hubs and support code specific sports hubs. This is a gap in sport and recreation funding and supports the sustainability of sport and recreation provision.

26. Including the residual Hillary Commission fund in the Community Access Scheme would provide further funding to leverage access to non-council facilities to support increased levels of sport and recreation participation and reduce inequities of access to opportunities. It is proposed that the Hillary Commission funding be allocated over a five year period and priority be given to identified need in the legacy Waitakere and Auckland City Council areas.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

27. Local Boards were consulted during the development of the Auckland Sport and Recreation Strategic Action Plan (ASARSAP) which sets out how the priorities and strategic directions of the Auckland Plan will be put into action. This community access scheme implements these plans.

28. Local boards with facilities that have existing community access agreements have been engaged in on-going dialogue with staff about potential future change in agreements since amalgamation. Workshops have been held with the directly affected local boards on the draft Guidelines and their impact on the existing funding agreements.

29. The three West Local boards have expressed a view that the residual Hillary Commission funds from legacy Waitakere City Council should be retained and distributed for the benefit of the West community.

30. Central Local boards have informally expressed a view that the residual Hillary Commission funds from Auckland City Council should be retained and distributed for the benefit of the legacy Auckland City Council community.

Māori impact statement

31. The ASARSAP includes actions focusing on improving the health and well-being of Māori. Initiative 3.7 – Partner with regional Māori sports organisations to identify opportunities to increase participation by Maori in recreation and sport activities, including programmes in Te Reo, Māori settings and cultural activities.

32. ASARSAP key initiative 15.2 sets out the task for Te Waka Angamua and partners to lead the development of Te Whai Oranga – the Māori Sport and Recreation Plan; this will be reported to the Parks Recreation and Sport Committee in due course. Te Whai Oranga and the ASARSAP will guide delivery of specific programmes that will benefit Māori and improve delivery of against outcomes.

33. The Community Access Scheme will support Auckland Council’s commitment to Māori and support positive outcomes for Māori participation in sport and recreation through investing in eligible organisations that help achieve this objective. Matauranga Māori / Māori knowledge and world views will be respected. We will ensure that we:

· Engage effectively with Māori to identify investment opportunities to increase access

· Provide appropriate capacity building support to those invested in to support increased Maori participation in sport and recreation

Implementation

34. A report will be provided to the Parks, Recreation and Sport Committee in July 2016 seeking approval of the Community Access Scheme guidelines and use of the residual Hillary Commission fund.

35. The existing eligible community access agreements will be reviewed over 2016/2017 to determine appropriate funding amounts and levels of service for 1 July 2017 onwards. Relevant local boards will be involved in this process.

36. Decisions on future community access partnerships will be undertaken through annual plan or long-term plan processes in line with identified gaps in sports network and available budget.

37. Upon resolution from the July Parks, Recreation and Sport Committee staff will work with relevant local boards on the implementation of the residual Hillary Commission funds.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Draft Sport and Recreation Community Access Scheme guidelines	109
b View	Sport and Recreation Investment diagram	113
c View	Options Analysis for residual Hillary Commission fund	115

Signatories

Authors

Ken Maplesden - Team Leader Local Partnerships

Emma Morgan - Principal Advisor Investment Programme

Authorisers

Sharon Rimmer - Manager Sport and Recreation

Mace Ward - General Manager Parks, Sports and Recreation

Sue O'Gorman - Relationship Manager

Franklin Local Board

28 June 2016

Housing for Older People Partnering Proposal

File No.: CP2016/11910

Purpose

1. This report seeks feedback on Auckland Council’s Housing for Older People (HfOP) Partnering Proposal.

Executive summary

2. The council currently owns 1,412 HfOP units spread across 62 sites in the north, south and west of Auckland covering 26 hectares of land. A list of these sites is included in the HfOP Consultation document (Attachment A).

3. In June 2015 the Auckland Development Committee (ADC) resolved to explore how council could deliver the HfOP service through a partnership approach. In December 2015 the ADC endorsed Panuku Development Auckland (Panuku) to proceed with undertaking feasibility work with a preferred partner on the partnering proposal.

4. The partnering proposal, in summary, is for the council to:

· partner with a third-party social housing provider to create a new legal entity in the form of a new community housing provider (CHP). The CHP will have control over the portfolio assets, including responsibility for maintenance and tenancy services through a long-term lease, and will seek access to government subsidies

· delegate to Panuku the authority to work with the third party community housing provider to redevelop the portfolio under a framework arrangement; and

· adopt a new policy on “Housing for Older People partnering” to apply to all decision-making on the proposal

5. This proposal allows the council to benefit from external expertise to:

· improve the quality of housing - the CHP will be able to access the Income-Related Rent Subsidy (IRRS) from central government to help improve and develop the portfolio

· improve tenant satisfaction – more tenants are dissatisfied with the service the council is currently able to provide. Partnering with a third party social housing provider will bring in new expertise into the operations so we can find new innovative and cost effective ways to lift satisfaction and redevelop the portfolio to improve the quality of housing

6. As the HfOP portfolio is a strategic asset under both the LGA 2002 and the council’s Significance and Engagement Policy, the proposal to transfer control of the portfolio triggers a statutory requirement to publicly consult on the proposal, and to amend the Long-term Plan (LTP) 2015-2025 through a special consultative procedure, before the council can agree to adopt the proposal.

7. The Governing Body approved a consultation document at its meeting on 25^th May 2016 which will form the basis of this consultation during the month of June 2016.

8. Local boards are now invited to submit formal feedback on the partnership proposal (Attachment A) and a proposed new policy on HfOP partnering (Attachment B) through business meetings in June and July 2016.

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board:

a) provide feedback on

i. the Housing for Older People Partnering Proposal and

ii. the proposed Housing for Older People Partnering Policy

Comments

9. Auckland Council currently owns 1,412 HfOP units spread across 62 sites in the north, south and west of Auckland covering 26 hectares of land. The portfolio is currently operated by Auckland Council’s Arts, Community and Events (ACE) and Community Facilities departments.

10. In 2013 the government changed how social housing would be delivered in New Zealand by making a number of reforms. This included providing third party social housing providers with an IRRS, which was historically only provided to Housing New Zealand. Councils and council-controlled organisations are still unable to access this subsidy.

11. In June 2015, the Auckland Development Committee (ADC) resolved to explore changing how the council would deliver the HfOP service. It agreed to explore a partnership approach, where the council would partner with a third party social housing provider in the management of the portfolio and to establish a new community housing provider (CHP).

12. The council is committed to maintaining 1,412 units within the HfOP portfolio, as a strategic asset, and may seek to increase the number, subject to further council approval on additional funding and any consultation requirements.

13. In December 2015 the ADC endorsed Panuku Development Auckland (Panuku) to proceed with undertaking feasibility work with the preferred partner on a partnering proposal. Panuku, on behalf of Council, issued a request for proposal and the council currently has a non-binding arrangement with The Selwyn Foundation as the potential third party social housing provider that council may enter into partnership arrangement with.

What Auckland Council is proposing:

14. The council is proposing that it partner with a third party social housing provider to enter into a management agreement over the council’s 1,412 units and delegate Panuku Development Auckland (Panuku) to act on council’s behalf to develop the portfolio.

15. Management agreement:

a) Partner with a third party social housing provider to form a new legal entity, in which the council will have a minority interest. This will be a Community Housing Provider (CHP) to manage the council’s Housing for Older People (HfOP) portfolio.

b) The legal structure of this CHP will likely be in the form of a limited partnership (NZ registered) between Auckland Council and the third-party social housing provider under a framework arrangement.

c) The CHP will have control over the portfolio assets, which includes responsibility for maintenance and tenancy services. Legal ownership will remain with the council.

d) It will include a long-term lease which from an accounting perspective requires a write-off of the assets from the council balance sheet.

e) The CHP will be structured to be able to receive the government’s Income Related Rent Subsidy (IRRS). We are not able to quantify how much will be received under this scheme as the subsidy, which is paid to the housing provider, is based on a percentage of a tenants income. It will reflect the difference between the income related rent and the market rent. It will also only be paid out for future tenants not current tenants.

f) The council will provide a $32.5 million capital grant to the CHP, which is equivalent to the current budget for the portfolio renewal maintenance.

16. Development agreement:

a) Delegate to Panuku, a council-controlled organisation, the authority to act on behalf of Auckland Council to work with the third-party social housing provider to redevelop the portfolio.

b) Panuku, as Auckland Council’s development agency, will provide skills and expertise to support the development of HfOP portfolio.

c) This includes, over time, selling some land and buildings to help fund the improvement of the quality of the HfOP portfolio.

d) The council will provide a $20 million development loan facility which will support the development until sales proceeds can be realised. The sales proceeds will cover repayment of the facility and any associated interest.

17. These will be carried out in accordance with the new policy to be adopted. A representation of this is shown in Attachment A.

Why is Auckland Council proposing this?

18. The proposal allows the council to benefit from external expertise to improve tenant satisfaction and the quality of its social housing. There are a few areas of this portfolio that need improvement.

19. To improve the quality of housing:

Currently, the HfOP portfolio has many poor quality units. This is clearly not acceptable for the council or its tenants. By partnering with a third party social housing provider we will be able to ensure over time that:

a) the portfolio can benefit from new external funding from the government, through access to the IRRS

b) the portfolio will be upgraded and new housing developed to reflect modern standards

c) the portfolio will become more connected to public transport and other necessary services.

20. To improve tenant satisfaction:

More and more tenants are dissatisfied with the service the council is currently able to provide, as shown in Graph 1. This is unlikely to improve without some change to how we provide the service. Partnering with a third party social housing provider will improve our tenant satisfaction by:

a) adding new expertise into the operations of the service so we can find new innovative, cost effective ways of lifting satisfaction.

b) redeveloping the portfolio to improve the quality of housing, giving our tenants a better quality of life.

Graph 1: Long-term Plan 2015-2025, Level of Service Measure:
Tenant satisfaction over time

Title: Graph 1: Long-term Plan 2015-25, Level of Service Measure: Tenant satisfaction over time. - Description: This graph shows how this proposal is projected to improve tenant satisfaction over time, as outlined in the council's Long-term Plan.

How does the proposal compare with other options?

21. The council has been developing the HfOP partnership model proposal since April 2015. The options were developed on the basis that the council has opted to continue to provide housing for older people. Three main practical options (including the proposal) are explained in the following table. Other options identified by the council are listed in the Supporting Information but have not been considered as reasonably practical options at this stage.

Option	Service level impact	Rates impact	Debt impact	Achieves the council’s objectives?	Advantages	Disadvantages
Status Quo: Continue to manage and develop the housing without external support.	Actual tenant satisfaction levels are at 64 per cent which is well under the target average of 75 per cent. This means the council will be increasingly unlikely to meet its targets over time.	No impact – however tenant satisfaction levels are unlikely to be met.	No impact – however tenant satisfaction levels are unlikely to be met.	· Does not grow the community housing sector. · Does not improve quality of housing. · Does not access non ratepayer funding.	· The council retains full control over the assets. · No costs associated with change.	· Does not address the falling tenant satisfaction. · Reliant on rates funding.
Sell or gift portfolio to a CHP: Sell or gift the units and land to an existing CHP with conditions to ensure the provision of social housing remains.	Tenant satisfaction will likely decrease, as it will be difficult for the council to control the quality of housing.	Neutral to slightly positive The sales proceeds would depend on the conditions placed on the sale. Depending on the conditions placed this could significantly reduce the proceeds from the sale.	Slightly positive to negative The debt impact would depend on whether the council would still provide the capital grant for improvements to the housing, and any other conditions placed on the sale.	Partly. The council is no longer responsible for providing 1,412 housing for older people units. But, this may grow the wider community housing sector.	· The council no longer has any risk for operating the portfolio. · This may grow the wider community housing sector.	· The council will have no ownership or control over the units. · Long term provision of the service is not guaranteed. · The council would not own land and buildings as assets.
The proposal (partnering with a third-party housing provider under management and development agreements)	Tenant satisfaction will increase, as the council will be able to rely on new expertise from the third party social housing provider, unlock access to government funding and can redevelop the portfolio to improve quality.	Negligible to slightly negative	Negative (Debt increases by $48.4 million for the management agreement and a further potential $20 million for the development loan facility).	Yes. The proposal aims to increase tenant satisfaction to targeted levels.	· Allows for an improvement of the quality of housing. · Unlocks access to government funding.	· The council will lose some control over the units. · Requires monitoring of an external entity. · Development could cause disruption for tenants.

Proposed Housing for Older People Partnering Policy

22. In order to include this change in the current Long-term Plan (LTP) 2015-2025, a new enabling policy will need to be adopted.

23. This policy sets key decision making criteria that are designed to ensure that the council will maintain or improve the quality of housing and tenant satisfaction without overly exposing the council to financial impacts and risk, through:

· general decision making on the council’s HfOP portfolio

· the management of the HfOP portfolio by the new CHP

· the arrangements for the possible redevelopment and/or sale of parts of the HfOP portfolio

A copy of the proposed policy is included in Attachment B.

Requirement to consult

24. The HfOP portfolio is considered a strategic asset under both the Local Government Act (LGA) 2002 and the council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. Any proposal to transfer control or ownership of a strategic asset(s) triggers a statutory requirement to publicly consult and to provide for it in the long-term plan.

25. In order to include this in the current Long-term Plan (LTP) 2015-2025, a new enabling policy will need to be adopted.

26. Public consultation in June and feedback from local boards will inform the Governing Body’s decision on the partnership proposal and the proposed new policy on HfOP partnering.

Public consultation

27. A consultation document (Attachment A) and supporting information has been approved by the Governing Body and will be used to consult with the public regarding the proposal to transfer control of the HfOP portfolio to a CHP and redevelop the current housing units.

28. The consultation document lists the advantages and disadvantages of the proposal as well as the two key alternatives in page 8. The assumptions underlying the proposal, including risks and details on the options analysis, are set out in the supporting information in pages 53, 54 and 56.

29. The consultation document also provides three main options that have been identified for the delivery of the council’s HfOP service, with the preferred option being the partnership proposal.

30. The public consultation period is 1 June 2016 – 1 July 2016.

31. The consultation document was delivered to 1,412 units, local board offices, service centres and libraries before 1 June 2016.

32. The consultation document includes a feedback form which is expected to be the primary mechanism Aucklanders will use to provide their feedback on this consultation. The feedback form is also made available online, in local board offices, service centres and libraries. Feedback forms can be submitted via freepost, email or completed online.

33. There are various Have Your Say (HYS) events planned across the region. The locations were picked so that they are easily accessible for HfOP tenants to attend. These events are listed below for your perusal:

Venue	Date	Time
Takapuna Library	7 June 2016 (Tuesday)	9am – 1pm
Devonport Library	8 June 2016 (Wednesday)	9am – 1pm
Northcote Library	9 June 2016 (Thursday)	11am – 3pm
Glenfield Library	10 June 2016 (Friday)	10am – 11am
New Lynn War Memorial Library	14 June 2016 (Tuesday)	9am – 1pm
Titirangi Library	15 June 2016 (Wednesday)	11am – 3pm
Waitakere Central Library	16 June 2016 (Thursday)	9am – 1pm
Te Atatu Peninsula Community Centre	17 June 2016 (Friday)	2pm – 3pm
Mangere Town Centre Library	21 June 2016 (Tuesday)	9am – 1pm
Sir Edmund Hillary Library, Papakura	22 June 2016 (Wednesday)	9am – 1pm
Pukekohe Library	23 June 2016 (Thursday)	9am – 11am
Waiuku Library	23 June 2016 (Thursday)	12pm – 2pm
Otara Senior Citizens’ Club	24 June 2016 (Friday)	10am – 11am

34. Public feedback will also be collected at HYS events scheduled from 7 to 24 June 2016. The primary purpose of these events is for elected members or delegates to listen to the views of Aucklanders. Staff will ensure public feedback is accurately recorded.

35. The role of elected members (and delegates) at these events is to listen and to provide members of the public with an opportunity to provide their views verbally.

36. Staff recommend that delegations are made to councillors, local board members and staff to hear feedback. This is to ensure there is a sufficient number of people able to have spoken interaction with public.

37. Staff will be in contact with tenants to coordinate logistics to ensure that they have the opportunity to attend the HYS events.

38. The ShapeAuckland website will be the digital hub for the HfOP communications and engagement campaign. There are a variety of ways in which digital and social media channels will be used to support the communications campaign.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

39. Local board members have received updates through quarterly performance reports, on the region-wide initiative led by Panuku to investigate options to partner with community housing providers to manage and develop the HfOP portfolio.

40. A briefing for local board members was held on this initiative on 30 November 2015.

41. Local board members were updated in May 2016 through a memo outlining the consultation process as well as invitations to attend Have Your Say events to hear public feedback.

42. Local boards are now invited to submit formal feedback through business meetings in June and July 2016.

43. The report to be presented to the Governing Body at its meeting on 28 July 2016 will include all feedback received from local boards. Feedback from the local boards will inform the Governing Body decision on this matter.

Māori impact statement

44. The new CHP will have a role in giving effect to outcomes directed by the council’s Māori Responsiveness Framework. This includes recognition and protection of Māori rights and interests within Tāmaki Makaurau and addressing and contributing to the needs and aspirations of Māori. In order to do this, throughout the development of this proposal various Māori groups have been consulted with. To progress this engagement Panuku has established a Mana Whenua Governance Group comprising four senior representatives of Mana Whenua, plus senior representatives of Panuku and the preferred partner.

Implementation

45. A report containing consultation feedback and advice on adopting the HfOP Partnering Policy to amend the LTP 2015-2025 and a delegation to Panuku to carry out the partnering arrangement will be presented to the Governing Body at the meeting on 28 July 2016.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Consultation document	125
b View	Housing for Older People Partnering Policy	153

Signatories

Authors

Kat Teirney - Team Leader – Community Facilities, South

Authorisers

Graham Bodman - General Manager Arts, Community and Events

Karen Lyons - Manager Local Board Services

Sue O'Gorman - Relationship Manager

Franklin Local Board

28 June 2016

Draft 2016 Elected Members’ Expenses Policy

File No.: CP2016/12053

Purpose

1. To seek the views of the Manurewa Local Board on the draft 2016 Auckland Council Elected Members’ Expenses Policy.

Executive summary

2. Each electoral term, the Remuneration Authority requires all councils to adopt an expenses policy and forward the adopted policy to the Remuneration Authority for its approval.

3. The expense policy provides the rules for elected members’ reimbursement for expenses they incur whilst performing their duties.

4. The governing body last adopted an expenses policy in July 2014. The Remuneration Authority has requested the council’s policy for July 2016 – June 2019. The governing body will be asked to adopt the 2016 policy at their 21July Finance and Performance Committee meeting.

5. Staff have reviewed the operation of the current policy and have updated the policy to:

· have clear principles of what is considered appropriate elected member expenditure

· remove the duplication of Remuneration Authority allowance tables

· replace complicated travel, development and conference attendance approvals with a ‘one up’ approach that requires senior elected member or senior staff approval.

6. The amended policy is attached. In addition to the substantive changes, the language and presentation of the policy have been updated to make it more accessible.

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board:

a) provides comments on the draft 2016 Elected Members’ Expense Policy to the governing body.

Comments

7. The Remuneration Authority (the Authority) sets remuneration for elected positions in local government annually. It also sets the rules for reimbursement of costs met by members in undertaking their duties.

8. In its determination, the Authority details some work-related expenses for elected members:

· the maximum allowances payable by councils to elected members for certain activities, such as transport and communications

· The criteria for and amounts payable to, elected members sitting on resource consent hearings.

9. Additionally, the Authority determines the nature of reimbursements made to elected members for costs undertaken on council business.

10. The Authority requires each council to adopt an expenses policy. The current policy was last approved in July 2014. It is necessary to review and update the policy prior to sending it to the Authority for approval.

11. The Auckland Council Elected Members’ Expenses Policy (the policy) sets out the council’s rules under which elected members may be reimbursed or paid allowances for personal costs that arise in the course of council business.

12. In the draft policy, general travel, accommodation and insurance claim rules have been retained. The continued requirement for a business case for international travel and the publication of all elected member expenditure will ensure transparency. Staff will continue to support the elected members with the required paperwork. The proposed changes relate to the authorisation of expenditure and the introduction of the council’s Elected Member Development Programme.

Substantive changes

Professional development and attendance at conferences

13. The new policy includes provisions related to the 2016-2019 Elected Member Development Programme. Professional development included in the core professional development programme will be pre-authorised. This means that elected members will not be required to provide a business case for development or attendance at conferences that are covered by the l development programme.

14. Pre-authorisation is subject to the principles of the policy. The funds must be budgeted for and authorised by the appropriate senior manager.

15. If elected members want to undertake l development activities outside the elected members’ core l development programme, a written request must be made to the Manager Democracy Service or the Manager Local Board Services.

Domestic travel approval

16. Changes have been made to approvals. The draft policy reflects a ‘one up’ approach that requires senior elected member or senior staff approval.

17. Currently elected members are required to seek authorisation from a senior staff member and either the Mayor, the Deputy Mayor, the chair of a committee of the whole or the chair of their local board.

18. To make authorisations more efficient the draft policy has been amended to allow the Governance Director or the Manager Democracy Services to authorise travel and sundry expense claims for governing body members.

19. For local board members, the draft policy has been amended with the Governance Director proposed as the approver for local board members and chairpersons.

International travel approval

20. For international travel for the Mayor and the Deputy Mayor, in addition to the Chief Executive, the Chair of the Finance and Performance Committee has been added as an approver. This gives additional flexibility for approval if the Chair of the Audit and Risk Committee is not available at that time.

21. For all other elected members the draft policy proposes that the Mayor or Deputy Mayor or the Chair of the Risk and Audit Committee or the Chair of the Finance and Performance Committee and the Chief Executive or the Governance Director are the approvers.

22. For sundry expense claims following international travel, the draft policy has been amended to allow the Chief Executive or the Governance Director to authorise the Mayor and the Deputy Mayor claims; the Governance Director or Manager Democracy Services to authorise governing body member claims; and the Governance Director or the Manager Local Board Services to authorise local board member claims.

23. The probity check to this approach is threefold:

· the trip must meet the principles of the policy

· it must be authorised by a senior elected member or senior staff member (a ‘one up’ authorisation) and

· all expenditure incurred by elected members on council business continues to be published.

24. The new approvals are in the table below. Changes are underlined.

Table 1. Changes to approvals

Item	Proposed	Previous term
Approvals for domestic travel outside of Auckland – Mayor	No change	· The Chair of the Audit and Risk Committee · or the Chair of the Finance and Performance Committee
Approvals for domestic travel outside of Auckland – Deputy Mayor	· The Mayor or · The Chair of the Audit and Risk Committee or the Chair of the Finance and Performance	· The Mayor · or the Chair of a Committee of the Whole
Approvals for domestic travel outside of Auckland – councillors	The Governance Director or the Manager Democracy Services	· The Deputy Mayor · or the Chair of a Committee of the Whole
Approvals for domestic travel outside of Auckland – local board Chair	The Governance Director or the Manager Local Board Services	· Governance Director · and report to business meeting
Approvals for domestic travel outside of Auckland – local board members	The Governance Director or the Manager Local Board Services	· The Local Board Chair · and report to business meeting
Approvals for international travel - Mayor	· A business case and both: · The Chair of the Audit and Risk Committee or the Chair of the Finance and Performance Committee · And the Chief Executive	A business case and both: · the Chair of the Audit and Risk Committee · and the Chief Executive
Approvals for international travel– Deputy Mayor	· A business case and both: · The Chair of the Audit and Risk Committee or the Chair of the Finance and Performance Committee · And the Chief Executive	A business case and Both: · the Mayor or the Chair of a Committee of the Whole · and the Chief Executive
Approvals for international travel – Governing Body members	· A business case and both: · The Mayor or the Deputy Mayor or the Chair of the Audit and Risk Committee or the Chair of the Finance and Performance Committee · And the Chief Executive or Governance Director	A business case and Both: · the Mayor or the Deputy Mayor · and the Chief Executive or the Director Governance
Approvals for international travel – local board members	· A business case and both: · The Mayor or the Deputy Mayor or the Chair of the Audit and Risk Committee or the Chair of the Finance and Performance Committee · And the Chief Executive or Governance Director	A business case and Both: · Endorsement by the Local Board · then approval by the Chief Executive or the Director Governance If urgent approval is needed: · Endorsement by the Chair · then approval by the Chief Executive or the Director Governance · then retrospective endorsement by the Local Board
Development programmes and conferences	Pre-approved, subject to the cost falling within the annual professional development budget	Various authorisation depending on the role of the requester
Hosting official visitors	If necessary, budget holder approval	Personal expenditure can be reimbursed

25. Other changes have been made throughout the policy to update, clarify or align the policy with current good practice. In addition the language and presentation of the policy have been updated to make it more accessible.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

26. This report is seeking local board views.

Māori impact statement

27. This policy is a requirement of the Remuneration Authority. It is for internal use and does not have specific implications for Māori.

Implementation

28. The Elected Members’ Expenses Policy will come into force once approved by the Remuneration Authority. This is expected to be in July 2016.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Draft Auckland Council Elected Members’ Expense Policy 2016	165

Signatories

Authors

Jo Iles, Business Hub Manager, Democracy Services

Authorisers

Marguerite Delbet - Manager Democracy Services

Louise Lennane - Principal Advisor

Sue O'Gorman - Relationship Manager

Franklin Local Board

28 June 2016

Auckland Transport Update – June 2016

File No.: CP2016/00933

Purpose

1. Providing an update on transport matters for the information of the Franklin Local Board and a register of transport.

Executive Summary

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

3. In particular, this report provides information on:

· Franklin Local Board’s transport capital fund

· Pukekohe station update

· Pine Harbour ferry patronage

· Update on proposed bus stops, Pukekohe and Waiuku new bus routes

· Requested road stopping, Pukekohe town square.

Recommendation/s

a) That the Franklin Local Board notes the updates in the ‘Auckland Transport Update – June 2016’ and the attached issues register.

b) That the Franklin Local Board approves project #466 Pedestrian advisory signage, Pukekohe town centre, for construction to be funded from the Local Board Transport Capital Fund based on the firm estimate of cost of $6,000.

Discussion

Franklin Items

A1. Local board transport capital fund (LBTCF)

4. The Franklin Local Board’s funding allocation under the LBTCF is currently $434,966 per annum.

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

ID#

Project Description

Progress/Current Status

083

Pukekohe East Road-Mill Road/Harrisville Road intersection, Bombay/Pukekohe – installation of variable 70 km/h rural intersection activated warning signage (RIAWS)

· FEC estimate of $67,000

· On 26-Nov-13, the Board gave construction approval for the project based on the FEC of $67,000.

· Waikato District Council and AT have both approved the variable speed limit on their respective sides of the road. The NZTA has indicated that the proposal can proceed.

· Installation is programmed for the week beginning 20-Jun-16. A site walkover for all parties involved is planned for the same week.

· Any cost overrun above the FEC will be borne by AT’s minor road safety improvement budget.

074

Third View Avenue, Beachlands – install 300m of new kerb and channel between Sunkist Bay Road and Cherrie Road (both sides)

· FEC estimate of $230,000

· On 15-Apr-14, the Board gave approval to proceed with construction.

· All construction and remedial work is complete except for some ponding outside #16 Third View Ave (point 0).

· Final costs will be reported when the now-agreed stormwater contribution from AC Stormwater is received. It is expected that the LBTCF share of the project will be $230,000 and the Auckland Council share $87,000 – for a total contract sum of $317,000.

349

Pacific Street new footpath, Waiuku

· Revised ROC of $147,500

· On 26-Aug-14, the Board gave approval to proceed with construction.

· On 16-Jun-15, the Board approved the expansion of the project to further include road stormwater work, new kerb and channel, and land purchase, and approved construction based on the revised ROC subject to consultation with the affected landowner.

· Consultation has been completed on a revised design not including land purchase and the landowner has accepted the design.

· Construction was delayed until the start of June due to the weather. Completion is expected by the end of June (weather dependent).

248

Hunua pedestrian facility

· FEC estimate of $54,000

· On 9-Dec-14, the Board gave approval to proceed with construction, based on the FEC of $54,000. TCC approval for the project was received on 11-Sep-15.

· Construction was completed in April.

· Final costs to be reported.

443

Upgrade of Beachlands town centre gardens

· ROC estimate of $105,000

· The ROC estimate for the upgrade (developed in conjunction with AC Parks) is $105,000. There could be a safety issue regarding the setback of the proposed retaining wall to the kerb face, normally this should at least be 500mm. Resource consent would be required, as would an arborist during certain parts of construction.

· On 24-Nov-15, the Board approved the project for detailed design and costing.

· AT is working with the Board’s Strategic Broker who is currently working with the community to programme a workshop to gather their input on the design in the first half of July.

· A workshop will then be scheduled to discuss the outcomes from the local consultation and present designs for the Board to consider.

458

Second View Avenue, Beachlands – installation of new kerb and channel between Wakelin and Bell Roads (both sides)

· SW component estimate $42,000

· LBTCF FEC estimate $355,000

· The ROC estimate for the project of $382,000 included a significant amount of storm water (SW) infrastructure. AC SW has not yet been approached regarding infrastructure or the need for rain gardens but the SW component of the project (approx $42k) could potentially be funded by AC.

· On 24-Nov-15, the Board approved the project for detailed design and costing.

· On 22-Mar-16, the Board approved construction based on the FEC of $355,000 and the design tabled at the meeting.

· The price negotiated with the contractor is currently being reviewed and is undergoing internal approval process.

459

Kitchener Road angle parking upgrade, Waiuku

· ROC estimate of $106,000

· On 29-Sep-15, the Board gave approval to proceed with construction based on the ROC of $106,000.

· On 15-Dec-15, the Board approved a design for the proposed works. On 4-Mar-16 an urgent decision by the Board approved a design amendment to include a batter slope in place of the original retaining wall, and wooden steps up through the middle.

· Construction is complete with only line marking changes remaining to be installed, which is expected by mid-June.

· Final costs to be reported.

466

Pedestrian advisory signage and markings at ‘informal crossings’, Pukekohe town centre

· ROC of $7,500 for the 3 main crossing points (Edinburgh St at each side of King St, and Hall St at King St intersection)

· FEC estimate of $6,000

· Each crossing point will require two new signs on two new poles at an estimated cost of $2,500 per crossing point (which includes reinstatement of the footpath).

· The Board’s transport portfolio leader referred the matter of design suggestions for new signage to the Town Centre Revitalisation Committee (TCRC) for consideration.

· The TCRC considered suggested designs, wording and size and provided feedback.

· A quote has been received from the roading maintenance contractor for the supply and installation of signs measuring 300x300mm, and the FEC is $6,000.

· A recommendation seeking construction approval has been supplied for the Board’s consideration.

479

Waiuku pavers replacement project – Stage 1

· Updated FEC of $241,408

· On 24-Nov-15, the Board approved this new project for construction based on a FEC of $182,900.

· On 15-Dec-15, the Board confirmed the extent of the town centre area to be replaced with ceramic pavers during stage 1, and the colour and pattern of pavers to be used.

· On 23-Feb-16 an updated FEC of $241,408 was reported to the Board, which approved the increased budget allocation.

· The ceramic pavers initially supplied ex-China were the incorrect colour, requiring a further order and resulting in an 8-week delay.

· The correct pavers arrived in May and installation began on 30-May-16.

· The project is progressing well and is scheduled to be completed by 8-Jul-16.

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

Franklin Local Board transport capital fund summary:

*Total funding available (across 5 FYs – 2012/13 to 2016/17)*	$2,174,830
Completed projects reporting actual costs (Second View Ave kerb and channel; Patumahoe/Waiuku/Attewell investigation; Pukekohe station overbridge; Ardmore School footpath; Harris St bench; Pukeoware School signs; Waiuku pavers clean/seal upgrade; Third View Ave kerb and channel projects x1; Awhitu flag lighting; Tobin St car park lighting; Kaiwaka Rd footpath; Whitford bus interchange)	-$831,681
Projects approved for construction based on ROCs or FECs (Mill/Harrisville RIAWS; Third View Ave kerb and channel projects x1; Pacific St footpath; Hunua pedestrian facility; Kitchener Road angle parking upgrade; Waiuku pavers replacement – stage 1; Second View Ave kerb and channel)	-$1,200,008
Projects with ROCs approved for detailed design and costing phase (Beachlands town centre gardens)	-$105,000
Project seeking construction approval (Pukekohe pedestrian advisory signage at 3 sites)	-$6,000
Funding still available to allocate	$32,141

A2. Pukekohe station update

7. The scope of works for this project is a bus/rail interchange, park and ride, new station overbridge with lifts (noting there is no specific station upgrade included in the project) and improvements to the Custom Street, Harris Street and Manukau Road intersections. This will cater for the new bus network with bus services exiting Custom Street onto Manukau Road.

8. The project is currently progressing according to programme:

· The detailed design for the full interchange is under final review

· The design for the bus shelter has completed developed design and now progressing to detailed design

· Stage 1 works are currently being tendered. This includes the bus turnaround and the intersection works

· The project costs have increased following the investigation stage, with the estimated construction project cost now at $15.4m including contingencies

· The budget for construction has been approved by the NZTA and Auckland Transport has allocated funding for 2016/17 to deliver

· Resource Consents and the Outline Plan of Works have been submitted and awaiting final approval

· Works and design continue to be coordinated with the Pukekohe Town Centre Revitalisation Committee’s Manukau Road upgrade project

· A blessing prior to stage 1 is being planned for early July, subject to agreement with Mana Whenua

· A sod turning event is planned for early September 2016

· Auckland Transport has submitted a proposal to Auckland Council to leave one vehicle entrance (to the staff car park) open on Custom Street and is awaiting Council’s response

· Auckland Council’s Parks arborist has verbally accepted Auckland Transport’s footpath proposal on Custom Street and alongside the Pohutukawa trees

· Auckland Transport is speaking with the owner of 99 Manukau Road regarding the need to remove all non-authorised parking in the road corridor

· Land purchases on the corner of Harris and Manukau Roads (for historic encroachment) and at 4 Manukau Road are still under negotiation

· A procurement plan for stage 2 is being prepared.

9. It is still expected to have an interim interchange in place to align with the upcoming new bus network in October 2016.

A3. Pine Harbour ferry patronage

10. With the additional ferry services introduced at Pine Harbour on 29 February, at the Franklin Local Board’s May business meeting the Board requested patronage data for the Pine Harbour ferry both before and after the increase in services. The Board also expressed particular interest in the patronage of Friday night sailings.

11. The table below, in the first row, records patronage by month for the three months before and then after the new timetable was introduced on 29 February. The second row of the table records the patronage for the same six months a year earlier, while the third row records the growth.

	December	January	February	March	April	May
2015/16	11,472	10,227	11,637	14,881	14,713	15,609
2014/15	8,640	10,324	11,073	14,455	11,183	12,922
Growth	33%	-1%	5%	3%	32%	21%

12. The new Friday night services have been doing well, with the 21:10 ex-Auckland carrying an average of 20 people while the 23:10 has carried an average of 33.

Date	21:10	23:10
Friday 4 March 2016	26	23
Friday 11 March 2016	17	46
Friday 18 March 2016	28	34
Friday 1 April 2016	9	40
Friday 8 April 2016	22	15
Friday 15 April 2016	24	15
Friday 22 April 2016	15	26
Friday 29 April 2016	13	32
Friday 6 May 2016	23	41
Friday 13 May 2016	26	36
Friday 20 May 2016	24	44
Friday 27 May 2016	19	44

A4. Update on proposed bus stops, Pukekohe and Waiuku new bus routes

13. Following earlier consultation on over 50 proposed new or upgraded bus stops in Pukekohe and Waiuku in support of the new bus network expected to be implemented by the end of October, as of 3 June the physical works on 31 bus stops had been completed.

14. Amended designs for a further 10 bus stops are expected to be ready for consultation in the first two weeks of July.

15. Should consultation on those further stops proceed well, it is estimated they will be submitted to Auckland Transport’s Traffic Control Committee for approval in August and constructed in September.

A5. Requested road stopping, Pukekohe town square

16. At the May business meeting, the Franklin Local Board passed the following resolution:

Resolution number FR/2016/90

b. That the Franklin Local Board requests Auckland Transport initiate a road stopping proposal to formally stop that part of Roulston Street (Hall Street), Pukekohe, comprising the Pukekohe town square to avoid management and maintenance issues which have arisen due to part of the town square being legal road controlled by Auckland Transport and part reserve controlled by Auckland Council and the board is consulted during the road stopping process.

17. Officers are in discussions over progressing the Board’s request. In the interim, general information on the road stopping process is supplied below for the Board’s information.

18. "Road stopping" is the term given to changing land with the legal status of road to a freehold title. Auckland Transport uses the under the Local Government Act 1974 to effect road stoppings.

19. Only immediate adjoining landowners can apply to stop a road, and applications are likely to be declined unless the prior written consent of all other adjoining landowners is obtained, and service/utility authorities if any of their utilities are affected.

20. The road stopping application process is as follows:

Step 1 – Initial enquiry. Make an initial enquiry to Auckland Transport to see if the area of road is no longer required for transport purposes.

Step 2 – Submit a formal application. If the initial enquiry is confirmed by Auckland Transport, then a formal application can be submitted. Also required with the application is signed consent from adjoining landowners, signed consents from utility providers (if any of their utilities are affected, and a non-refundable deposit of $1000 (incl. GST).

Step 3 – Approval process:

· Auckland Transport and Auckland Council consult about future use of the legal road to establish whether there is any reason it cannot be stopped and what, if any, conditions are required

· A survey plan of the affected land area to be amalgamated with the applicant’s land is prepared (at the applicant’s cost)

· Valuation of the land arranged (at the applicant’s cost)

· Auckland Transport’s Board supports or declines the request to initiate the road stopping process

· If the road is in a rural area, consent from the Minister of Land Information New Zealand is required.

· Notices of Closure are advertised in the New Zealand Herald, at the applicant’s cost (provides opportunity for objections)

· Notice is affixed to the site announcing the proposed stopping until the objection period closes (40 days)

· If objections are received, the matter can be referred to the Environment Court. Auckland Transport will not take proceedings to the Environment Court, which means the process is halted

· If no objections are received, Auckland Transport places a notice in the New Zealand Herald declaring that the road is stopped

· Auckland Transport obtains a registered valuation of the property to offer to the applicant. If the applicant agrees to purchase at the valuation sum, settlement is reached. If the applicant refuses to purchase the land, they will still have to meet all costs incurred up to that date.

21. Please note there is no guarantee that applications will progress through all the stages of the process and that the road will be stopped.

A6. Consultation documents on proposed improvements

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

23. At the conclusion of consultation, Auckland Transport considers the various consultation responses received and determines whether to proceed further with the project as consulted on, or proceed with an amended proposal if changes are considered necessary.

24. Proposed traffic controls and ‘No Stopping At All Times’ (NSAAT) parking restrictions, Tawhiti Road and Tomairangi Crescent, Pukekohe – the developer of a new residential subdivision at 188 Jutland Road, Pukekohe, is required by resource consent to install intersection ‘Give Way’ traffic controls and NSAAT parking restrictions within the new subdivision, as shown on the plan at Attachment A. The ‘Give Way’ controls proposed at the Te Manaki Street/Tawhiti Road intersection are in anticipation of Tawhiti Road being continued (as part of a further stage of the development) to form a cross intersection, hence the controls on both Te Manaki Street approaches.

25. The Franklin Local Board provided feedback in support of the proposal.

26. Proposed safety barrier, Kingseat Road, Kingseat – Auckland Transport previously carried out a crash reduction study on Kingseat Road between Costello Road and Linwood Road. As a result of the study, safety barriers are proposed to replace the existing sight rails east of the McKenzie Road roundabout to provide increased safety in case of vehicles losing control at that location, as shown on the plan at Attachment B.

27. The Franklin Local Board provided feedback on the proposal, raising no issues.

28. Proposed road signs and markings and barriers, Hunua Road, Hunua – due to the number of loss of control crashes that occurred along the route over a five-year period, Auckland Transport undertook a Crash Reduction Study along Hunua Road between Settlement Road and Hays Creek Road and is proposing a number of improvements to increase safety along this route. The proposed improvements include improving the location, size and placement of warning signage along the route and on approaches to curves, installing new road markings to improve road delineation around curves, and installing new safety barriers within the gorge. Due to the length of the route involved, the detailed plans have not been included due to size considerations.

29. The Franklin Local Board provided feedback in support of the proposal, and particularly the new safety barriers proposed.

30. Proposed NSAAT parking restrictions and parking bays, Victoria Street West, Pukekohe – following concerns raised by the Franklin Local Board after the construction of the subdivision at 246 Victoria Street West, Auckland Transport has required the developer to install additional NSAAT parking restrictions and recessed parking bays on Victoria Street West, as shown on the plan at Attachment C.

31. The Franklin Local Board provided feedback on the proposal, accepting the necessity for the NSAATs to improve safety while objecting to the planning decision that resulted in the original road width being narrowed.

General Information Items

B1. Public Transport Patronage

32. The summary patronage performance for April 2016 is presented below:

33. Auckland public transport patronage totalled 82,154,363 passenger boardings for the 12 months to April 2016, an increase of +0.9% on the 12 months to March 2016 and an increase of 3,755,252 (4.8%) on the 12 months to April 2015. April 2016 monthly patronage was 7,024,652, an increase of 738,606 boardings or +11.7% on April 2015, normalised to ~ +7.3% once adjustments are made to take into account special event patronage and the number of business and weekend days in the month.

34. Rapid and Frequent services totalled 30,991,249 passenger boardings for the 12 months to April 2016, an increase of +0.4% on the 12 months to March 2016. Rapid and Frequent services patronage for April 2016 was 2,710,359, an increase of 442,962 boardings or +19.5% on April 2015.

35. Train services totalled 16,237,912 passenger boardings for the 12 months to April 2016, an increase of +2.3% on the 12 months to March 2016 and +19.9% on the 12 months to April 2015. Patronage for April 2016 was 1,494,764, an increase of 360,247 boardings or +31.8% on April 2015, normalised to ~ +25.1%.

36. Bus services totalled 60,115,335 passenger boardings for the 12 months to April 2016, an increase of +0.6% on the 12 months to March 2016 and +1.2% on the 12 months to April 2015. Bus services patronage for April 2016 was 5,007,121, an increase of 332,484 boardings or +7.1% on April 2015, normalised to ~ +3.0%.

37. Ferry services totalled 5,801,116 passenger boardings for the 12 months to April 2016, an increase of +0.8% on the 12 months to March 2016 and +6.1% on the 12 months to April 2015. Ferry services patronage for April 2016 was 522,767, an increase of 45,875 boardings or +9.6% on April 2015, normalised to ~ +7.2%.

38. The proportion of all trips utilising AT HOP was 74.2% in April 2016 (Rail 78.8%, Bus 77.8%, Ferry 26.5%); down from 74.5% in March 2016.

Media Releases

C1. Pilot community driver mentoring programme in Helensville

39. Auckland Transport, Police and OutWest Youth are working to get more young drivers in the South Kaipara to restricted driver’s licence stage, by launching a pilot programme modelled on the NZTA’s Community Driver Mentor Programme which aims to get more young people through the driver licensing system.

40. The programme looks to support young drivers, who are at a higher risk of crashes than any other age group, by removing barriers like isolation, and lack of access to a suitable vehicle or dedicated driver mentors.

41. Auckland Transport is using a decommissioned automatic fleet car for the programme and is very pleased to be supporting the community-based initiative to improve the safety of young drivers.

42. A large number of people wanted to be among the ten chosen for the pilot programme. Those selected candidates must have completed an Auckland Transport Learner Licence course and passed their learner license test. Once selected the candidates were matched with volunteer driving mentors.

43. The ten candidates on the programme will receive up to 30 hours of training with an initial AA assessment. Then they will be assessed after every ten mentoring sessions and before sitting their restricted test.

44. The programme aims to open up social and economic opportunities for youth in the area and hopefully encourage their peers, who remain sitting on learner licences, to advance to their restricted licence.

C2. SuperGold swap to AT HOP

45. From 1 July this year, SuperGold cardholders will need an AT HOP card with a SuperGold concession loaded on to the card to continue enjoying their SuperGold public transport concession in Auckland.

46. In 2015, the Ministry of Transport reviewed the SuperGold card free public transport scheme. According to the Ministry of Transport, in financial year 2015-2016, the cost of the SuperGold scheme is estimated to be $28 million. A key change announced resulting from the review is that from 1 July 2016, SuperGold cardholders will need to use smartcards, where available (such as the AT HOP card in the Auckland region), to access the free travel through the scheme.

47. The switch to an AT HOP card with a SuperGold concession presents a number of benefits to seniors. AT HOP card benefits include:

· Ease of use (customers can board a bus by tagging-on, reducing queues and helping improve bus punctuality)

· Travel before 9 am on weekdays can be done using AT HOP so no need to carry cash

· Travel before 9 am will cost at least 20% less when paying with an AT HOP card when compared to single trip cash fares (excludes SkyBus, NiteRider and Waiheke ferry services)

· No need to wait in queues to purchase paper tickets from a ticket office, ticket machine or the bus driver

· Credit on an AT HOP card enables the purchase of paper tickets for other passengers if needed.

48. Switching SuperGold public transport use to the AT HOP card will also reduce improper use of the SuperGold concession and enable improved planning of public transport services making the scheme more sustainable, thereby reducing taxpayer and ratepayer costs.

49. Seniors using public transport in Auckland who do not yet have an AT HOP card will need to purchase one by 30 June, at a cost of $15 (the AT HOP card costs $10 and must have a minimum of $5 credit loaded onto it at the time of purchase). The $10 card purchase price is non-refundable.

50. Auckland Transport is working with the Ministry of Transport and directly with seniors’ advocacy groups to make the process as easy as possible for seniors. Auckland Transport is making an information pack available to all SuperGold cardholders, advising seniors of the changes and explaining how to purchase an AT HOP card and load it with a SuperGold concession.

51. SuperGold card users purchasing an AT HOP card from 9 May will be issued with a specially designed, distinctive gold AT HOP card. However, existing blue AT HOP cards loaded with a SuperGold concession will continue to be accepted after 1 July 2016. Auckland Transport will be in contact with blue AT HOP card SuperGold concession holders to advise the process to swap out their blue AT HOP card for a gold AT HOP card free of charge after 1 July 2016.

52. Auckland has 180,000 SuperGold cardholders (growing at 7,000 per year). SuperGold public transport benefits in Auckland will not change at this time. Customers will continue to receive free public transport on eligible services after 9.00am on weekdays and all day on weekends and public holidays. This includes all train services, selected bus and ferry services (including services to Waiheke Island). The website noted below includes a complete list of services that provide free SuperGold public transport.

53. Those seniors who do not yet have an AT HOP card should visit www.at.govt.nz/supergold for more information or call 0800 AT Gold (0800 28 4653) to request an information pack.

C3. The build is on for the City Rail Link

54. Auckland’s top transport priority took a major step forward on Thursday 2 June with the ground-breaking ceremony for the City Rail Link (CRL), when Mayor Len Brown, Auckland Transport chairman Dr Lester Levy, the Prime Minister and the Minister of Transport officially marked the start of the construction.

55. Once completed, the $2.5 billion project will mean more frequent trains across the network and more direct services to the city centre. Auckland Transport will be able to grow the present rail network to reach an average better than one train every 10 minutes at peak for most stations.

56. Auckland will grow by more than 700,000 people in the next 30 years and the CRL, coupled with bus improvements and major investment in other infrastructure such as roads and highways, is seen as the only way to keep Auckland moving.

57. The CRL also has transport benefits for large parts of Auckland, including road users, as making public transport a better travel choice will ease pressure on roads for those who need to use them.

58. During the past decade, rail patronage has increased from three million trips a year to 16 million but further growth of the rail system, including increases to train frequency, is constrained by its dead end at Britomart, which limits the entire network’s capacity. The CRL will join up the rail network, allowing trains to run both ways through Britomart and doubling the number of trains.

59. Key CRL facts include:

· The CRL will use twin 3.4 km long tunnels up to 42m below the city streets. It is estimated to take five and a half years to build at a cost of $2.5 billion when inflated to 2024 costs

· Two new underground stations at Aotea (11m deep) and Karangahape Road (33m deep) and a re-developed Mount Eden Station

· Cut and cover construction along Albert Street and at Eden Terrace

· Most of the twin 3.4 km long tunnels will be built with a tunnel boring machine

· 7.5m diameter tunnel boring machine (about half the size of the one used at Waterview)

· About one million cubic metres of spoil – more than Waterview because of station excavations

· 88 subterranean properties affected by tunnels.

60. Benefits to the Auckland economy from CRL include:

· A successful Auckland is pivotal to New Zealand’s future economic development, with GDP per capita 30-50% higher than other parts of the country. Auckland provides about a third of New Zealand’s GDP

· Improved accessibility, particularly to the city centre, is the key to Auckland’s economic growth. By 2041, the city centre will account for 30% of the region’s GDP

· Transport is critical to shape urban form and lead economic development. Cities with efficient transport systems are more productive than dispersed places. Significant economic gains can be made from transport investment that improves access for people into areas of high employment density

· Cities form and people choose to work in them because they are more productive due to scale and proximity. The availability of a skilled and educated workforce attracts high value-added businesses

· There are a number of economic benefits from businesses and a skilled workforce being close together in city centres. These agglomeration benefits drive higher productivity and wages, making successful city centres increasingly important to a country’s economy

· Auckland is New Zealand’s commercial capital; home to more than 60% of the top 200 companies. Auckland accounts for over 34% of NZ jobs, most in the urban areas, while Wellington, Hamilton and Tauranga combined, account for 13% of jobs

· The city centre is the hub of Auckland’s economy with 1 in 6 employees working there and up to 16,000 employees per square km. City centre workers earn 27% more than the average for Auckland

· Major construction projects, such as the CRL, usually create increased economic benefits by employing people and spending with local businesses.

61. For full details on the CRL see: https://at.govt.nz/projects-roadworks/city-rail-link/

Issues Register

62. The regular monthly issues register is Attachment D to this report.

Consideration

Local Board Views

63. The Board’s views will be incorporated during consultation on any proposed schemes.

Implementation Issues

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

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Plan of proposed traffic controls and ‘No Stopping At All Times’ parking restrictions, Tawhiti Road and Tomairangi Crescent, Pukekohe	191
b View	Plan of proposed safety barrier, Kingseat Road, Kingseat	193
c View	Plan of proposed ‘No Stopping At All Times’ parking restrictions and parking bays, Victoria Street West, Pukekohe	195
d View	Issues Register – Franklin Local Board – June 2016	197

Signatories

Authors

Jenni Wild – Elected Member Relationship Manager (South), Auckland Transport

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon – Elected Member Relationship Team Manager, AT

Sue O'Gorman - Relationship Manager

Franklin Local Board

28 June 2016

New Road Name Approval for a residential subdivision naming four roads for a subdivision at 75 Valley Road, Pukekohe

File No.: CP2016/10446

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to seek approval from the Franklin Local Board, for the naming of four new roads as a result of the residential subdivision at 75 Valley Road, Pukekohe.

Executive summary

2. 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 naming for the Auckland Council.

3. Following assessment against the road naming criteria, four of the six names put forward by the Applicant for two new roads; being “Lisle Farm Drive” “Cumbria Farm Drive”, “Crossbanks Close” and “Lisle Place” were determined to meet the road naming guideline criteria.

4. The development of the subdivision involves the extension of two existing roads. It is considered appropriate to retain the name of “Twomey Drive” for the section of the road north of the roundabout intersection with Road 1 and “Anselmi Ridge Road” for the small section of new road south of the roundabout intersection.

5. Mana Whenua were invited to provide feedback and suggestions. Ngati Tamaoho has put forward “Koropupu” for consideration for a main road into the development (Road 1).

6. The names “Lisle Farm Drive”, “Cumbria Farm Drive”, “Crossbanks Close” and “Lisle Place” proposed by the Applicant and “Koropupu Drive” proposed by Ngati Tamaho are to be considered for approval by the Local Board, along with an extension to the existing “Twomey Drive” and “Anselmi Ridge Road”.

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board, pursuant to section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974, considers for approval the naming of new roads created by way of subdivision at 75 Valley Road, Pukekohe:

a) For Road 1: “Lisle Farm Drive”, noting that “Cumbria Farm Drive” and “Koropupu Drive” also meet the road naming criteria

b) For Road 2: “Crossbanks Close”, noting that “Lisle Place” also meets the road naming criteria (should Lisle Farm Drive not be approved).

c) An extension to “Twomey Drive” and “Anselmi Ridge Road”

Comments

7. The Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines allowed that where a new 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 Local Board’s approval.

8. Four roads require naming in a new subdivision off Valley Road as part of the Ryman development. Resource consent for this subdivision was applied for and granted (R/JSL/2014/798).

9. The Applicant has proposed the following names for consideration for the four roads created off Valley Road, Pukekohe:

Road 1:

Preference	Proposed New Road Name	Meaning
Preferred Name	Lisle Farm Drive	This name acknowledges Mr Norman Lisle and the Lisle family who owned and farmed the subject site for over 60 years and is well known within the Pukekohe community. The applicant has sought and received approval from the Lisle family for use of the name.
First Alternative	Ravenstonedale Drive	Ravenstonedale is a village in northern England from which the descendants of the Lisle family migrated to New Zealand.
Second Alternative	Cumbria Farm Drive	“Cumbria Farm” is a reference to the county in the United Kingdom the Lisle family migrated to New Zealand from.

Road 2:

Preference	Proposed New Road Name	Meaning
Preferred Name	Ravenstonedale Close	Ravenstonedale is a village in northern England from which the descendants of the Lisle family migrated to New Zealand.
First Alternative	Crossbanks Close	“Crossbanks” reflects the name of the farm owned by the descendants of the Lisle Farm in Ravenstonedale..
Second Alternative	Lisle Place	“Lisle” acknowledges Mr Norman Lisle and the Lisle family who owned and farmed the subject site for over 60 years and is well known within the Pukekohe community. The applicant has sought and received approval from the Lisle family for use of the name.

Road 3:

Preference	Proposed New Road Name	Comment
Preferred Name	Twomey Drive	The development of the subdivision involves a road running north to south through the centre of the subject site. It is considered appropriate to retain the name of “Twomey Drive” for the section of the road north of the roundabout intersection with Road 1

Road 4:

Preference	Proposed New Road Name	Comment
Preferred Name	Anselmi Ridge Road	The development of the subdivision involves a small section of new road south of the roundabout intersection. It is considered appropriate to retain the name “Anselmi Ridge Road” for this section of road.

10. Ngati Tamaoho has proposed the following names for consideration for a main road into the 75 Valley Road development. In this respect, the main road is Road 1:

Preference	Proposed New Road Name	Meaning
Preferred Name	Koropupu Drive	“Koropupu” acknowledges the ancient puna/springs located in the area. Koropupu means “to bubble forth or up”.

Figure One: Location and Layout of new Roads

11. 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)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974, to Local Boards.

Assessment

12. The Applicant’s proposed road names have been assessed against the criteria set out in the Auckland Council road naming guidelines.

Road 1

13. The Applicant’s preferred name for Road 1, ‘Lisle Farm Drive” is appropriate because it complies with all the criteria of the road naming guidelines. The Applicant’s first alternative name does not meet the criteria of the road naming guidelines because a “Stonedale Close” already exists in the Auckland (specifically Franklin) area. The second alternative name for Road 1 “Cumbria Farm Drive” complies with all the criteria of the road naming guidelines. Although there is already a “Cumbrian Place” in Auckland, there is deemed to be sufficient differentiation to “Cumbria Farm”.

14. Ngati Tamaoho have proposed the name “Koropupu Drive”. This name meets all of the road naming guideline criteria.

15. The proposed suffix “Drive” is appropriate in this circumstance, as it is a wide main roadway without many cross-streets.

Road 2

16. The Applicant’s preferred name for Road 2, “Ravenstonedale Close” does not comply with the criteria of the road naming guidelines as the name “Ravenstonedale´ is too long to comply with the provision requiring that short roads be given short names and an existing “Stonedale Drive” is within the same postcode as the road. The Applicant’s first and second preferences “Crossbanks Close” and “Lisle Place” are appropriate as they comply with all of the criteria of the road naming guidelines. However, it should be noted that should Road 1 be named “Lisle Farm Drive, “Lisle Place” would no long be an eligible name for Road 2.

17. The proposed suffix “Close” is appropriate in this circumstance, as it is a short enclosed roadway.

Road 3

18. It is considered appropriate to retain the name “Twomey Drive” for the section of the new road north of the roundabout intersection with Road 1. There will be no physical separation between the existing alignment of “Twomey Drive” and the new road once construction is completed. The extension of “Twomey Drive” will be in line with street numbering requirements.

Road 4

19. It is considered appropriate to retain the name “Anselmi Ridge Road” for the section of the new road sought of the roundabout intersection with Road 1. The extension of “Anselmi Ridge Road” will be in line with street numbering requirements.

Consideration

Significance of Decision

20. The decision sought from the Franklin 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

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

Consultation

22. Feedback was sought from Ngai Tai ki Tamaki, Ngati Tamaoho, Ngati Te Ata Waiohua, Ngati Paoa, Ngati Whanaunga, Ngati Maru, Ngati Tamatera, Te Patukirikiri and Waikato. Te Ahiwaru – Te Waiohua confirmed they would defer to Ngatu Tamaoho. Ngai Tai ki Tamaki deferred to local iwi. No other responses have been received.

23. The Applicant advised that consultation occurred with iwi in relation to the development of the subdivision in 2014. Ngati Tamaoho sought to undertake a cultural impact assessment of the proposal, with all other iwi deferring to Ngati Tamaoho. In November 2015, the applicant undertook further engagement with Ngati Tamaoho in relation to road naming. Ngati Tamaoho suggested the names “Rawhiti” and “Koropupu”. On learning that “Rawhiti” could not be considered due to a number of roads with that name already in existence, “Koropupu” has been put forward for consideration.

24. NZ Post has advised that there are no issues from a postal perspective with the Applicant or Ngati Tamaoho suggestions, excepting the name “Ravenstonedale Close” which was inappropriate given that “Stonedale Drive” is an existing road name within the same post code area.

Financial and Resourcing Implications

25. The cost of processing the approval of the proposed new road name and any installation of road name signage is recoverable in accordance with Council’s Administrative Charges.

Legal and Legislative Implications

26. The decision sought from the Franklin Local Board for this report is not considered to have any legal or legislative implications.

Implementation

27. The Resource Consenting Team is involved in ensuring that appropriate road name signage will be installed accordingly once an approval is obtained for the new road name.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Virginia Loh - Resource Consents Administrator

Authorisers

Ian Smallburn - General Manager Resource Consents

Sue O'Gorman - Relationship Manager

Franklin Local Board

28 June 2016

New Road Name Approval for the residential subdivision by Spinnaker Bay Limited at 285 Ara-Kotinga, Whitford

File No.: CP2016/11094

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to seek approval from the Franklin Local Board, for a new road name for a road created by way of subdivision at 285 Ara-Kotinga, Whitford.

Executive summary

3. Following assessment against the road naming criteria, the road names ‘Solway Road’ (Applicant’s preferred road name), ‘Solway Ridge Road’, ‘Solway Park Road’, ‘Whitford Forest Road’ and ‘Skyline Road’ were determined to meet the road naming policy criteria.

4. Local iwi groups were consulted and there were no objections to the proposed names.

5. The name ‘Solway Road’, proposed by the Applicant and the alternate names ‘Solway Ridge Road’, ‘Solway Park Road’, ‘Whitford Forest Road’ and ‘Skyline Road’ are considered for approval by the Local Board.

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board, pursuant to section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974, considers for the approval, the road name ‘Solway Road’, proposed by the Applicant, for the new road created by way of subdivision at 285 Ara-Kotinga, Whitford while noting that ‘Solway Ridge Road’, ‘Solway Park Road’, ‘Whitford Forest Road’ and ‘Skyline Road’ also meet the road naming criteria.

Comments

6. The Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines allowed that where a new 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 Council’s approval.

7. Consent has been granted under resource consent number 43118 for the subdivision at 285 Ara-Kotinga, Whitford, as shown on the scheme plan below. The subdivision includes on road to vest, for which a name is required. Refer to Figure One for the location of the road to be named.

The Applicant has proposed the following names for consideration for the road created as part of the development at 285 Ara-Kotinga.

Preference	Proposed New Road Name	Meaning
Preferred Name	Solway Road	Solway means way of the sun (to reflect the sunny aspect of the new sites)
First Alternative	Solway Ridge Road	The sections closest to Ara Kotinga are known as Solway Park (also see meaning for Solway)
Second Alternative	Solway Park Road	The sections at the northern end of the road to best are known as Solway Ridge (also see meaning for Solway)
Third Alternative	Whitford Forest Road	The new road leads to the edge of Whitford Forest which is located adjacent to the eastern boundary of the site.
Fourth Alternative	Skyline Road	Skyline reflects the location of the new road climbing up to the ridgeline at the north eastern corner of the site.

Figure One: Location and Layout of new Road highlighted in pink

Decision Making

8. 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)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974, to Local Boards.

Assessment

9. The Applicant’s proposed road names have been assessed against the criteria set out in the Auckland Council road naming guidelines;

10. The Applicant’s preferred name ‘Solway Road’ meets all the criteria of the road naming guidelines. It is also noted that the alternate names proposed ‘Solway Ridge Road’, ‘Solway Park Road’, ‘Whitford Forest Road’ and ‘Skyline Road’ also comply with the criteria.

11. The applicant’s chosen suffix “View” is not considered appropriate as it is not a road suffix. The suffix “Road” is more appropriate in this circumstance for the new road name as it is an open roadway.

12. As the Applicant’s preferred name ‘Solway Road’ meets the criteria, it is recommended for consideration for approval while noting that the alternate names proposed ‘Solway Ridge Road’, ‘Solway Park Road’, ‘Whitford Forest Road’ and ‘Skyline Road’ are also appropriate as they comply with all the criteria of the road naming guidelines.

Consideration

Significance of Decision

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

Maori impact statement

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

Consultation

15. Feedback was requested from the relevant iwi on 13^th April 2016 and 13 May 2016. Two responses were received as follows:

• Ngaati Whanaunga advised by phone that a fee would be charged for input which the developer declined.

• Makaura Marae Maori Trust deferred to Ngaitai ki Tamaki and Ngaati Whaatua ki Orakei.

16. Consultation was undertaken with NZ Post, who has approved the suggested names.

Financial and Resourcing Implications

17. The cost of processing the approval of the proposed new road name and any installation of road name signage is recoverable in accordance with Council’s Administrative Charges.

Legal and Legislative Implications

18. The decision sought from the Franklin Local Board for this report is not considered to have any legal or legislative implications.

Implementation

19. The Resource Consenting Team is involved in ensuring that appropriate road name signage will be installed accordingly once an approval is obtained for the new road name.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Virginia Loh - Resource Consents Administrator

Authorisers

Ian Smallburn - General Manager Resource Consents

Sue O'Gorman - Relationship Manager

Chairperson	Andrew Baker
Deputy Chairperson	Jill Naysmith
Members	Malcolm Bell
	Alan Cole
	Brendon Crompton
	Angela Fulljames
	Sarah Higgins
	Murray Kay
	Dr Lyn Murphy

Preference	Proposed New Private Way Name	Meaning
Preferred Name	Trosk Place	Trosk is the name of the developer. In addition, Trosk is the mythical warrior who fought his whole life to provide for the young. He wanted a place to rest and where better than this tranquil area in Waiuku. Trosk appears in a series of books and “World of Warcraft”.
First Alternative	Remy Rise	Remy Rise is suggested because a young baby by the name of Remy took his first steps and became the first child to walk this concrete private way.
Second Alternative	Tiware Rise	An historical expert has advised that the water catchment near Brights Road was known as Tiware. Hence the name Tiware.

9. Preference	Proposed New Private Way Name	Meaning
Preferred Name	Bob Evans Way	This name is called after the applicant’s departed grandfather who originally owned and lived on the property for his whole life. The Evans family have been pioneers in this district and came out from England by the ship Bombay in 1865. This property has been in the Evans ownership since settlement and Bob was a longstanding stalwart in the Bombay community throughout his life.
First Alternative	Bob Phoebe Way	Phoebe was Bob’s late wife and the applicant’s grandmother. However she was not an original settler in the area.
Second Alternative	Evans Kimberley Way	As above. This is the surname of Bob and maiden name of Phoebe.

Authors	Anthea Clarke - Democracy Advisor
Authorisers	Sue O'Gorman - Relationship Manager