Agenda of Waitākere Ranges Local Board

1 Welcome

2 Apologies

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

3 Declaration of Interest

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

Specifically members are asked to identify any new interests they have not previously disclosed, an interest that might be considered as a conflict of interest with a matter on the agenda.

At its meeting on 28 November 2013, the Waitakere Ranges Local Board resolved (resolution number WTK/2010/5) to record any possible conflicts of interest in a register.

Board Member	Organisation / Position
Sandra Coney	· Waitemata District Health Board – Elected Member · Women’s Health Action Trust – Patron
Neil Henderson	· Portage Trust – Elected Member · West Auckland Trust Services (WATS) Board – Trustee/Director · EcoMatters Environment Trust – Employee
Greg Presland	· Portage Trust – Elected Member · Lopdell House Development Trust – Trustee · Titirangi Residents & Ratepayers Group – Committee Member · Whau Coastal Walkway Environmental Trust – Trustee · Combined Youth Services Trust - Trustee
Steve Tollestrup	· Waitakere Licensing Trust – Elected Member · West Auckland Trust Services (WATS) Board – Trustee/Director · Waitakere Task force on Family Violence – Appointee
Saffron Toms	NIL
Denise Yates	· Friends of Arataki Incorporated – Committee member · EcoMatters Environment Trust – Trustee · Charlotte Museum Trust – Trustee

Member appointments

Board members are appointed to the following bodies. In these appointments the board members represent Auckland Council.

Board Member	Organisation / Position
Sandra Coney	· Friends of Arataki Incorporated – Trustee
Neil Henderson	· Friends of Arataki Incorporated – Trustee · Living Cell Technologies Animal Ethics Committee – Member · Rural Advisory Panel - Member
Saffron Toms	· Ark in the Park – Governance Group Member

4 Confirmation of Minutes

That the Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Thursday, 9 June 2016, including the confidential section, as a true and correct record.

5 Leave of Absence

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

6 Acknowledgements

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

7 Update from Ward Councillors

An opportunity is provided for the Waitakere Ward Councillors to update the board on regional issues they have been involved with since the last meeting.

8 Deputations

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

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

9 Public Forum

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

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

10 Extraordinary Business

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

11 Notices of Motion

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

Waitākere Ranges Local Board

23 June 2016

Auckland Transport Update Report - June 2016

File No.: CP2016/09269

Purpose

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

Executive Summary

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

· Local Board Transport Capital Fund Projects

· Consultation documents on proposed safety improvements

· Local Board requests on transport-related matters

· Media

Recommendation/s

That the Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

a) receive the Auckland Transport Update Report June 2016.

Comments

3. The Waitākere Ranges Local Board Plan 2014 - 2017 provides direction to Auckland Transport on the views and preferences of the local community. It has three main themes, with a number of key initiatives relating to transport and the enhancement of public space along the road corridor.

4. The Waitākere Ranges Heritage Area is protected.

Developing a Road Corridor Design Guide for the Heritage area.

Implementing Local Area Plans (LAPs). The five existing LAPs for Oratia; Henderson Valley-Opanuku; Waiatarua; Muddy Creeks; Te Henga (Bethells Beach) and the Waitākere River Valley have transport related actions for each area.

5. Our Unique natural environments are healthy and restored.

· Implementing the Waitākere Ranges Strategic Weed Management Plan,

6. Public transport, cycling and walking are easy, safe. and connected.

· Support rail electrification and improvements to bus services.

· Work with our communities on a proposal for a connector shuttle service for coastal / rural areas, similar to the Kowhai connection in Warkworth.

· Support the development of park and ride in Glen Eden.

· Working with Auckland Transport to improve the road corridor in Glen Eden.

· Develop a greenways plan for walking and cycling.

· Investigate options for a cycleway from Project Twin Streams pathway to Glen Eden Town Centre.

· Support the development of a cycleway alongside the western rail line.

· Advocate for rural road safety improvements – including sensible speed limits and provisions for walking and cycling.

Monthly Overview

7. Auckland Transport attended the following site meetings and portfolio briefings :

· On 13 April Auckland Transport along with Auckland Council Parks attended a site meeting to walk through the issues around the Swanson Walkway and Candia Road Footpaths.

· On 19 April Auckland Transport along with Auckland Council Parks attended a site meeting to walk through the cycleway routes through Parrs Park (to connect to Sunnyvale Train Station) as part of the Local Board Transport Project.

· On 18 April the regular Transport Portfolio Holder briefing covered proposed and current LBTCF projects, provided information on the Auckland Transport Report and discussed current outstanding issues from the Local Board.

· On 19 April Auckland Transport attended a meeting with the Local Board and residents from the Horsman Road & Goldies Bush area, to discuss the parking and road safety impacts of high numbers of visitors to the DoC reserve, Goldies Bush.

· On 16 May the regular Transport Portfolio Holder briefing covered proposed and current LBTCF projects, provided information on the Auckland Transport Report and discussed current outstanding issues from the Local Board.

· On 16 May Auckland Transport attended the Parau Residents & Ratepayers (R&R) AGM and first meeting, to listen to the concerns of the community in regards to speed and safety on Huia and Cornwallis Roads.

· On the 17 May Auckland Transport and AC Parks gave an update on the Bush Road slip to the Local Board.

· 26 May Auckland Transport presented some recommendations to the Local Board on speeding concerns on Piha Road, Karekare Road and Te Ahuahua Road.

· On the 31 May Auckland Transport and AC Parks presented to the Local Board and the Karekare community groups the options on propping the Pohutukawa Tree.

Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF)

8. The Waitākere Ranges Local Board’s funding allocation under the LBTCF is currently $331,152 per annum.

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

ID#	Project Description	Progress/Current Status
066	· Glen Eden Park and ride streetscape design · Actual $139,000	Completed 2013
359	· Captain Scott Road Streetscape Improvements · ROC $35,000 (Concept Design & consultation only)	· The second stage of the public consultation is now completed. Results/feedback will be reported to the Local Board soon.
362	· Sunnyvale to Oratia Shared Path · ROC $730,000	· Second public engagement is now completed. Results/feedback presented to LB. · Resource Consent will be lodged at the end of June. · Tendering for the physical works is planned in mid-June.
366	· Waitākere Rangers Footpath - Mountain Rd to Opanuku Pipeline track · ROC $600,000	· Construction work is underway and project planned to be complete by the end of June.
441	· West Coast Road Pedestrian & Cyclist safety improvements · ROC $151,760	· Preparation to start consultation on the stage 1 of the proposed shared path connection with the directly affected property owners is underway. · A consultation letter will be drafted and sent to the LB for their approval soon.

10. The Waitākere Ranges Local Board’s transport capital fund to date is summarised below:

RESPONSES AND PROGRESS REPORTS

GOLDIES BUSH - VISITOR IMPACTS FROM PARKING IN HORSMAN ROAD, WAITĀKERE

11. Residents of Horsman Road, Waitākere have contacted the Waitākere Ranges Local Board about parking and road safety impacts from the high numbers of visitors to the DoC Reserve, Goldies Bush.

Response

12. Auckland Transport will be working with the residents of Horsman Road to mitigate the parking issues caused by the visitors coming to Goldies Bush. AT will also be looking at increasing the frequency of maintenance on Horsman Road over the winter period and going into the new year.

ROCK WALL - LITTLE HUIA FOOTBRIDGE

13. This is to inform the Local Board that the rock wall at Little Huia Footbridge is now completed. A picture is attached below:

GLEN EDEN PARK N RIDE - PROGRESS UPDATE

14. For the Local Board’s information. Below is the progress to date and the next steps:

· Main Works contract awarded 28th April.

· Car park construction programme -16 weeks

· Practical Completion Aug 2016

· Final completion mid September 2016

SOUTH TITIRANGI ROAD – DISORDERLY BEHAVIOUR AND BOY RACERS

15. The local residents have complained through the Local Board about young people congregating at the far end of South Titirangi Road and carrying out burnouts, from the boat ramp up South Titirangi Road.

Update

16. In terms of improving the street lighting, Auckland Transport have forwarded this request to the AT Streetlights team to investigate and we are waiting for a response from them.

17. The request for speed calming (speed humps) is one of the most common types of request that AT receives. Given that there are limited funds for this type of project, only roads with significant traffic volume and speeding issues are considered as candidates for speed humps. South Titirangi Road is not a through traffic route, this will generally only be used by the residents of this road and their visitors. Therefore, AT cannot justify the installation of speed humps along South Titirangi Road to address antisocial behaviour and illegal activities, especially as there are a number of other roads in Auckland with significant speeding issues, which are on AT’s speed calming list for prioritisation and funding.

18. In regards to the antisocial behaviour experienced at this location, this issue is considered better addressed through Police enforcement. Auckland Transport has provided all the information to NZ Police for operations to put in place to reduce the antisocial behaviour that is occurring at the far end of South Titirangi Road.

FOOTPATH OR CYCLEWAY - PARAU TO LAINGHOLM

19. A request has come through the Local Board for a footpath/cycleway to be installed connecting Parau to Laingholm.

Update

20. Auckland Transport is investigating this request and will report its findings at the next Local Board meeting.

PARKING REQUEST TO THE AIGA SALEVALASI PRESCHOOL ON CLAYBURN ROAD OR GLENVIEW ROAD, GLEN EDEN.

21. Auckland Transport has received a petition asking to provide staff parking and pick-up/drop-off parking at Aiga Salevalasi Preschool on Clayburn Road or Glenview Road, Glen Eden.

22. As a general rule, Auckland Transport does not provide staff parking to any particular individual, business, or organisation. On-street parking is a valuable public asset, and AT are therefore unable to make any changes solely to meet the needs of a particular individual, business, or organisation. Careful consideration is required when looking at amendments to the parking layout in any given location to ensure that the varied needs of the wider community are met.

23. Parking time restrictions are normally used as a tool to facilitate turnover and manage high parking demand. In addition, parking time restrictions are normally requested by the businesses community in the area so as to cater for the parking needs of the wider community. Time restrictions also allow for the equitable use of the limited available on-street parking. Removing time-restrictions that are currently serving a wider public need and providing staff parking to one particular business can be seen as favouring one particular organisation. Auckland Transport, being a public entity, cannot reserve parking on any part of the road under their jurisdiction for the exclusive use of any staff. One of the strategic themes of Auckland Transport is to promote public transport and therefore “staff parking” does not fit into the strategic objectives of Auckland Transport as an organisation.

24. Due to the limited on-street parking spaces around town centres, Auckland Transport supports the use of alternate travel modes, such as public transport as an alternative to the private vehicle. However, if having a private vehicle is the only travel option available, we suggest that staff can find parking further away in areas that are unrestricted.

25. In regards to the request to provide pick-up and drop-off areas in the immediate vicinity of the kindergarten. Since most parking outside and near the kindergarten is time-managed, Auckland Transport did not notice any long-term parking or parking availability issues. Auckland Transport also note that the existing time restrictions will support pick-up and drop-off activity. Therefore at this stage Auckland Transport will not be considering introducing pick-up and drop-off parking restrictions in the immediate vicinity of the kindergarten.

PROPOSED BUS STOPS – SWANSON ROAD, SWANSON

26. Auckland Transport is proposing a new bus stop outside 716 Swanson Road, Swanson. Auckland Transport sought feedback from property owners and occupiers directly affected by the proposed works specifically in relation to the following:

· any land development proposals or issues that may affect the proposed bus stop location;

· any site-specific safety issues that you think would affect the proposed bus stop changes.

Why are we installing a new bus stop?

27. Auckland Transport is always working to improve the services that are provided to the people of Auckland. Auckland Transport wants a public transport network which is conveniently accessible to residents and businesses. The proposed bus stop outside 716, Swanson Road is being installed to fill a large gap between existing bus stops, and to ensure the distance between bus stops along this route does not exceed Auckland Transport’s minimum standard. This specific location has been selected for the bus stop because:

· Evenly spaced between existing bus stops;

· There is sufficient clear space to accommodate a concrete footpath for passengers to board and alight in a comfortable and expedient manner.

· Cause minimum disruption to the accessibility of surrounding businesses.

What are the proposed changes?

28. To achieve these improved outcomes, Auckland Transport is proposing to install a new bus stop outside 716, Swanson Road. This proposed bus stop will include a bus stop sign, road markings to indicate the location of the bus stops, no stopping yellow lines at both ends of the bus stops, and a concrete hard stand area for the waiting passengers as shown in the plan. What other issues have Auckland Transport considered when selecting this location?

29. Parking - Auckland Transport wants buses to be able to access bus stops quickly and properly so that delays to bus passengers and the general traffic are minimised. Auckland Transport acknowledges that this proposal will result in a loss of six on-street parking spaces. However, the installation of the bus stop road markings and the broken yellow lines either side are necessary to ensure that the bus can safely enter and exit the bus stop. If no broken yellow lines are installed the buses will have trouble entering/exiting the bus stop, and be unable to pull into the kerb properly which would create an unsafe environment for bus passengers to board and exit the bus. Further to this, there is widespread on-street parking available in the surrounding area, which can be utilised by vehicles affected by the parking removal.

30. Visibility from driveways - Auckland Transport wants to make moving around Auckland as easy as possible. Part of that is ensuring that all accesses have good visibility. Currently, on-street parking limits the visibility from the driveways either side of the proposed bus stop. Replacing the on-street parking with a bus stop should, most of the time, improve visibility from these driveways because, generally, buses will only occupy the stop for about 10 to 20 seconds at a time.

31. When will the proposed changes be implemented?

The changes are planned to be implemented in 2017

Local Board Response

32. The Local Board Transport Portfolio holder was supportive of the proposal.

BUS STOP UPGRADE – OUTSIDE NO. 111 GLENDALE ROAD, GLEN EDEN

33. Auckland Transport is proposing to improve the bus stop outside No. 111 Glendale Road.

34. Auckland Transport sought feedback from property owners and occupiers directly affected by the proposed works specifically in relation to the following:

· any land development proposals or issues that may affect the proposed bus stop location;

· any site-specific safety issues that you think would affect the proposed bus stop changes.

Local Board Response

35. The Local Board Transport Portfolio holder was supportive of the proposal.

PARAU RESIDENT & RATEPAYERS TRANSPORT ISSUES – PUBLIC MEETING

36. Auckland Transport, along with Local Board members, attended the Parau R&R AGM and first meeting, to listen to the concerns of the community in regards to speed and safety on Huia and Cornwallis Roads.

Update

37. Auckland Transport is investigating all the issues raised and will report our findings back through the Local Board.

FOOTPATH ISSUE IN VICTORY ROAD, LAINGHOLM

38. The Local Board have received a request for Auckland Transport to investigate the deteriorating condition of the ongoing pavement cracks in the area of Victory Road, generally between Nos 92 and 141.

Update

39. Auckland Transport is investigating the concerns and will report back once completed.

GLENESK ROAD – BROKEN YELLOW LINE REQUEST

40. The Local Board have received a request for Auckland Transport to investigate installing parking restrictions on Glenesk Road, north of Piha Mill Camp.

Response to Local Board

41. Our initial assessment has concluded that a parking restriction would be beneficial on one side of Glenesk Road, north of Piha Mill Camp, to improve accessibility. Therefore AT propose to install a ‘no stopping at all times’ restriction, marked by a broken yellow line at this location.

42. We will undertake consultation shortly to seek feedback from the most affected parties on the proposal. Please note the implementation of the proposed parking restriction will be subject to a number of considerations, including feedback from those consulted.

43. Should the decision be made to proceed with the proposal, prior to the physical implementation of the broken yellow line, Auckland Transport must prepare a report that becomes the legal document to support the restriction. This report must be approved by the Traffic Control Committee for the restrictions to be legal and enforceable. Therefore Auckland Transport do not expect to schedule anything to be marked on the road before the end of September 2016.

WAINAMU CAR PARK AREA PARKING ISSUES, BETHELLS BEACH

44. A request has come through the Local Board for Auckland Transport to investigate the parking issues that are being caused by visitors to Bethells Beach

Response to Local Board

Parking on Yellow Lines

45. Auckland Transport Parking Compliance Manager has advised that since Bethells Beach is not a significantly built up area, the team would only get out there possibly once a week on a patrol, or upon request. Auckland Transport has confirmed that the officers that complete mobile duties in Swanson, will add this area to their regular patrol.

Yellow Lines Covered In Sand And Bank Erosion At 207 Bethells Road

46. Auckland Transport’s Maintenance Team West, have given instructions to the contractor to programme shoulder maintenance to be carried out in the next 8 weeks (expected to be completed by early July).

Overflow Parking Sign And People Parking At Wainamu/Te Henga Car Park

47. These matters were referred to Auckland Council separately, who will respond to the Local Board directly as they are responsible for beach car parks and signage.

REQUEST FOR BROKEN YELLOW LINES ON OTITORI BAY ROAD, TITIRANGI

48. A request has come through the Local Board for Auckland Transport to investigate broken Yellow Lines on Otitori Bay Road, Titirangi

Response to Local Board

49. Auckland Transport has investigated the accessibility issues experienced in the vicinity of number 56 to 58 Otitori Bay Road. At present drivers park on the eastern side of the road at this location. The new road markings are ‘hockey stick’ line-markings. These were recently installed at this location to encourage drivers to park one metre away from driveways, as parked vehicles were causing accessibility issues for an adjacent property. It is unlikely that the new road markings would have generated more parking demand at this location, as these were installed to address the aforementioned access issue.

50. As on-street parking is a valuable community resource and its removal reduces the local amenity, removal of parking is only undertaken where a significant safety or accessibility issue has been identified.

51. Otitori Bay Road is considered a narrow road as parked vehicles on both sides of the road leaves insufficient space for a vehicle to safely travel through. At present drivers only park on the eastern side of the road, leaving sufficient space for another vehicle to pass. While parked vehicles may reduce the traffic flow to a single lane, this has the positive effect of reducing vehicular speeds and encouraging greater care from drivers. Given this, Auckland Transport is unable to justify the removal of parking on one side of the road in the vicinity of number 56 to 58 Otitori Bay Road at this stage.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Owena Schuster - Elected Member Relationship Manager - West, Auckland Transport

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon - Manager Elected Member Relationship Unit, Auckland Transport

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

Waitākere Ranges Local Board

23 June 2016

Auckland Transport Quarterly Report - 01 January - 31 March 2016

File No.: CP2016/09293

Executive Summary

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

Attachments include:

A – Auckland Transport activities

B – Travelwise Schools activities

C – Decisions of the Traffic Control Committee

D – Report against local board advocacy issues.

Recommendation/s

That the Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

a) receive the Auckland Transport Quarterly Report – 01 January – 31 March 2016.

Significant activities during the period under review

Strategy and Planning

Transport for Future Urban Growth (TFUG)

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

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

Central Access Strategy

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

Public Transport (PT) Development

City Rail Link

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

Double Decker Network Mitigation works

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

PT Safety, Security and Amenity

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

PT Facilities Infrastructure Development

Wharf Renewals

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

Bus Infrastructure Improvements

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

PT Operations

Highlights for the quarter

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

Integrated Fares

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

Road Design and Development

SMART (Southwest Multi-modal Airport Rapid Transit)

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

Services

Whangaparaoa Road Dynamic Lane Trial

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

14. The outcome of the survey showed the following:

Positives recognised:

· Improves traffic flow

· Flexible traffic control

· Better use of road space

· Increases road capacity

Concerns raised:

· Confusing

· Accident risk

· Unclear (lane direction) – Need clear signage

· Need to educate

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

Auckland Bike Challenge

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

Personalised Journey Planning for commuters

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

Safer Communities

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

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

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

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

Road Corridor Delivery (RCD)

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

· The Delivery of roading and streetlight maintenance and renewal programmes

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

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

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

Road Corridor Delivery Key Highlights

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

Table 1: Progress against Asset Renewal Targets

Note* data is to February 2016

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

Table 2: Completed Rehabilitation Projects

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

Table 3: Rehabilitation Projects still underway

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

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Auckland Transport activities - Schedule of activities undertaken for the third quarter (2015/16) ending 31 March 2016	21
b View	Travelwise Schools activities - broken down by local board	33
c View	Decisions of the Traffic Control Committee - broken down by local board	35
d View	Report against Local Board Advocacy issues	37

Signatories

Authors

Various Auckland Transport authors

Authorisers

Owena Schuster, Elected Member Relationship Manager, Auckland Transport

Jonathan Anyon, Manager Elected Member Relationship Unit, Auckland Transport

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

Waitākere Ranges Local Board

23 June 2016

Waitākere Ranges Heritage Area transport design guidelines

File No.: CP2016/10444

Purpose

1. To seek the Waitākere Ranges Local Board’s endorsement of the Waitākere Ranges Heritage Area Transport Road Corridor Design Guidelines.

Executive summary

2. The transport design guidelines are identified as a key initiative in the Waitākere Ranges Local Board Plan 2014.

3. Auckland Transport began developing the Waitākere Ranges Heritage Area (WRHA) design guidelines in response to the findings of the first WRHA Monitoring Report (2013). The monitoring report is a statutory document under the Waitākere Ranges Heritage Area Act 2008 which brings together the available information on the current state of the heritage area environment and the progress towards achieving the objectives of the act. The next monitoring report is due in 2018.

4. The monitoring report found that urban-style road corridor design in some locations, along with other council infrastructure, was one of the main adverse effects on landscape character and values in the WRHA. It said:

More awareness is required by council and Auckland Transport of the effects of infrastructure on these landscape values. This may warrant reconsideration of the infrastructure design specifications used in the heritage area.

5. This design guide is intended to provide a set of principles and associated guidance to Auckland Transport designers and project managers to assist them in ensuring that:

· the requirements of the Waitākere Ranges Heritage Area Act, 2008 are met

· all outcomes are appropriate to this significant location

· the built environment remains subservient to the natural and rural landscape.

Recommendation

That the Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

a) endorse the Waitākere Ranges Heritage Area Transport Design Guidelines.

Comments

6. The Waitākere Ranges Heritage Area Design Guidelines cover all works (including routine and emergency maintenance and repairs and upgrades) which have the potential to adversely affect the Act’s objectives or could help to implement them, for example by restoration or enhancement of landscape character. This includes footpaths, kerb and channel and other stormwater management structures, retaining walls/ structures, signage, safety/crash barriers and traffic calming measures. This guide covers the use of vegetation as it impacts on the landscape of the area, but it does not cover operating procedures relating to the management of vegetation and weeds.

AT’s Principles for the Waitākere Ranges Heritage Area

7. In line with the findings of the monitoring report, AT recognises that incremental minor alterations to roads, footpaths, signage and other features within ATs control can cumulatively lead to changes to the character of the area. Careful consideration of these matters can result in positive change that benefits the overall character of the WRHA.

8. In order to ensure that future changes are sympathetic to the area AT have developed a set of principles which together will ensure that the scenic, sightseeing and landscape character of the heritage area; the rural character of the bush, individual identity and character of the villages and low key and understated appearance of the low-density residential development will remain dominant.

Principle 1: To carefully consider whether ‘improvements’ are required for all projects.

Principle 2: Encourage and test innovative approaches and make full use of the flexibility in national regulations, standards and codes of practice to bring forward outcomes that are appropriate to the WRHA.

Principle 3: Do not restrict a scheme to the use of standard urban infrastructure and consider the use of more appropriate alternatives, including bespoke, even if these bring additional capital or operational cost.

Principle 4: For significant projects, form a multidisciplinary project team who are able to ensure understanding and demonstration of all of the design guide Principles.

Principle 5: Ensure that traffic speeds are slowed to be appropriate to the WRHA.

Principle 6: Maintain the existing overall informal character of the road corridors both within villages and the wider WRHA. The retention and restoration of vegetation as green infrastructure is a significant tool and adds both to the informal character and the environmental capacity of the design.

Principle 7: Where possible utilise local materials which sit comfortably within the WRHA.

Principle 8: Signs, lines and street furniture are kept to the minimum needed for safety and intrusive roadside clutter is removed.

Principle 9: Where signs and markings are needed, adapt standard designs or develop new to make them the best possible fit with local surroundings.

Principle 10: Ensure that projects consider the character and ecology of the landscape adjacent to the road.

Consideration

Local board and community views

9. Auckland Transport has engaged with community stakeholders and the Waitākere Ranges Local Board over a period of time to seek direction in developing the draft design guidelines.

10. In September 2015 the draft design guidelines went out for public consultation. Auckland Transport has received a substantial number of comments and mixed feedback from the local community however, the design guide was well supported.

11. Feedback was received from the Local Board and Piha, Laingholm, Waiatarua, Parau Residents and Ratepayer’s groups and Waitākere Ranges Protection Society and also from special interest group, Bike Auckland, as well as internal teams. The following list is a very concise summary of the main themes and comments received:

· Design Guide is overall well supported by everybody

· Design Guide would look better with more photos, better layout, headings etc.

· Re-word all of the Main Principles

· Promote more community engagement

· Suggests new processes, checklists and training

· State the Vegetation Management in more clarity, including weed control

· Address speeding traffic issues and road safety, especially cyclists

· Reduce unnecessary road signs and markings

· Issues with road surfacing materials

· Specify use of local designs and materials.

12. A final version of the design guidelines is presented to the local board to seek endorsement.

Māori impact statement

13. The Waitākere Ranges Heritage Area transport design guidelines are intended to help meet the objectives of the Waitākere Ranges Heritage Area Act 2008, which has embedded within it a recognition of the historical, traditional, and cultural relationships of people, communities, and tangata whenua with the area and their exercise of kaitiakitanga and stewardship. Auckland Transport is seeking to align its design practices to the kaitiakitanga and stewardship role to minimise adverse impacts on the values of the heritage area.

Implementation

14. The guidelines are written in the introduction of the design guide

15. They will form part of the Design Manual which Auckland Transport is collating to replace ATCOP. Expected issue date is around September 2016. Current ATCOP section on vegetation is still in draft so suggests methods of working is with teams on an individual basis, so this new guide helps clarify how to deal with vegetation issues in the Waitākere Ranges.

16. This new Waitākere Design Guide has section on vegetation to refer to and encourages much close work with Council colleagues.

17. Auckland Transport will look to review the Design Guide in 18 months, if deemed necessary.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Waitākere Ranges Heritage Area Transport Guidelines May 16	43

Signatories

Authors

Owena Schuster – Elected Member Relationship Manager , Auckland Transport

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon – Manager Elected Member Relationship Unit, Auckland Transport

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

Waitākere Ranges Local Board

23 June 2016

Waitakere Ranges Local Grants: Round Two 2015/2016

File No.: CP2016/09808

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to present applications received in Waitākere Ranges Local Grants, Round Two 2015/2016. The local board is required to fund, part-fund or decline these applications

Executive summary

2. The Waitākere Ranges Local Board has set a total community grants budget of $23,000 for the 2015/2016 financial year.

3. The May 2016 Waitakere Ranges Local Board business meeting approved the reallocation of $10,500.00 from the local events budget to the community grants budget (WTK/2016/45).

4. A total of $30,357.47 has been allocated under quick response round one, two, three and four as well as local grants round one, leaving a balance of $3,142.03.

5. Eleven applications were received in this round with a total requested of $312,471.00.

Recommendation/s

That the Waitākere Ranges Local Board

a) considers the applications listed in table one and two below and agree to fund, part-fund or decline the local grants, round two applications.

Table One: Waitakere Ranges Local Grants, Round Two Applications 2015/2016

Applicant	Focus	Project	Total Requested	Eligible/ Ineligible
Kelston Girls College	Arts and culture	The ArtWest Exhibition 2016	$10,000	Eligible
Peer Health Development Trust	Community	Waitakere Youth symposium	$7,950	Ineligible Previous accountability outstanding
Laingholm Primary School	Community	The Laingholm Playground Project	$174,958	Eligible
Waitakere WEA trading as WEST:west Auckland Enterprise Skills and Training	Community	WEST Work Ready	$11,760	Eligible
Waitakere WEA trading as WEST:west Auckland Enterprise Skills and Training	Community	WEST Means Business/WRLB	$18,200	Eligible
Sarah Candler	Environment	Towards the construction of steps to access native plant area at 676 South Titirangi Rd	$3,700	Eligible
Waitakere Indian Association	Events	Waitakere Diwali Festival	$15,000	Eligible
Project Litefoot Trust	Environment	LiteClub – Glen Eden Bowling Club	$1,515	Eligible
Martin Stanley	Environment	Maui's Dolphin thermal detection research and protection assessment	$45,060	Eligible
		Total:	$288,143

Table Two: Waitakere Ranges Local Grants, Round Two Multi-Board Applications 2015/2016

Applicant	Focus	Project	Total Requested	Eligible/ Ineligible
Piha Surf Life Saving Club Inc	Community	Operational Costs	$19,328	Eligible
Violence Free Communities (formally Violence Free Waitakere)	Community	Project Co-ordination and support	$5,000	Eligible
		Total:	$24,328

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 2015/2016 and the Waitākere Ranges Local Board adopted its grants programme on 30 April 2015 (see 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 Waitākere Ranges Local Board will operate two local grants and 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 Waitākere Ranges Local Board has set a total community grants budget of $23,000 for the 2015/2016 financial year.

11. The May 2016 Waitakere Ranges Local Board business meeting approved the reallocation of $10,500.00 from the Local Events Fund to the Community Grants budget (WTK/2016/45).

12. A total of $30,357.47 has been allocated under quick response round one, round two, round three and round four as well as local grants round one, leaving a balance of $3,142.03.

13. Eleven applications were received in this round with a total requested of $312,471.00.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

14. Local boards are responsible for the decision-making and allocation of local board community grants. The Waitākere Ranges 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.

15. 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

16. 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

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

18. Following the Waitākere Ranges Local Board allocating funding for quick response round five, 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	Waitakare Ranges Local Board Grants Programme, 2015/2016	69
b View	Waitakere Ranges Local Grant Round Two 2015/2016 application summaries	73

Signatories

Authors

Daylyn D'Mello - Environmental and Community Grants Advisor

Authorisers

Marion Davies - Community Grants Operations Manager

Jennifer Rose - Operations Support Manager

Waitākere Ranges Local Board

23 June 2016

Waitakere Ranges Local Board Quick Response Grants: Round Five 2015/2016

File No.: CP2016/12129

Purpose

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

Executive summary

2. The Waitākere Ranges Local Board has set a total community grants budget of $23,000 for the 2015/2016 financial year.

3. The May 2016 Waitakere Ranges Local Board business meeting approved the reallocation of $10,500.00 from the Local Events Fund to the Community Grants budget (WTK/2016/45).

4. A total of $30,357.47 has been allocated under quick response round one, two, three and four, as well as local grants round one, leaving a balance of $3,142.53.

5. Eleven applications were received in this round with a total requested of $13,878.00.

Recommendation/s

That the Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

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

Table One: Waitakere Ranges Quick Response Round Five Applications 2015/2016

Applicant	Focus	Project	Total Requested	Eligible/ Ineligible
Catherine Mere Tunks	Arts and culture	“Wahine of the Wild West Coast” Performing Arts Concert Series 2016	$1,000	Eligible
Ekarasa Doblanovic	Arts and culture	OneOne	$976	Eligible
Tuilaepa Youth Mentoring Service (TYMS)	Community	TYMS Trades mentoring programmes.	$1,500	Ineligible Previous accountability outstanding
Auckland Sun Club	Community	New Spa Pool Cover	$750	Eligible
Royal New Zealand Plunket Society Waitemata Area Inc.	Community	Titirangi Plunket Playgroup - operational costs	$1,500	Ineligible
Peer Health Development Trust	Community	Rangatahi youth leadership workshops	$1,180	Eligible
Waiatarua Residents and Ratepayers Association Incorporated	Community	Waiatarua Community Hall and Library broadband connectivity project	$1,500	Eligible
Bishop Stream Neighbourhood Garden	Community	Bishop Stream Neighbourhood Garden	$972	Eligible
Waituna Action Group Inc.	Environment	Weed eradication along Little Muddy Creek Walkway.	$1,500	Eligible
Wurlitzer Organ Trust of Auckland	Historic Heritage	The Magic of Music	$1,500	Ineligible Event has already occurred on 9 June 2016
Titirangi Badminton Club Inc	Sports and recreation	Maintenance, chemical wash of court surfaces, exterior roof clean and structural bracing repairs.	$1,500	Eligible
		Total	$13,878

Comments

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 Waitākere Ranges Local Board will operate two local grants and five quick response rounds for this financial year.

10. The Waitākere Ranges Local Board has set a total community grants budget of $23,000 for the 2015/2016 financial year.

11. The May 2016 Waitakere Ranges Local Board business meeting approved the reallocation of $10,500.00 from the Local Events Fund to the Community Grants budget (WTK/2016/45).

12. A total of $30,357.47 has been allocated under quick response round one, two, three and four, as well as local grants round one, leaving a balance of $3,142.53.

13. Eleven applications were received in this round with a total requested of $13,878.00.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

Māori impact statement

16. 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 community grants policy supports the principle of delivering positive outcomes for Maori.

Implementation

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

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Waitakere Ranges Local Board Grants Programme 2015/2016 application summaries	117

Signatories

Authors

Daylyn D'Mello - Environmental and Community Grants Advisor

Authorisers

Marion Davies - Community Grants Operations Manager

Jennifer Rose - Operations Support Manager

Waitākere Ranges Local Board

23 June 2016

Local Board input into the Empowered Communities Approach Progress Update Report

File No.: CP2016/10928

Purpose

1. To provide an opportunity for local boards to formally feedback on the progress and implementation of the Empowered Communities Approach to date.

Executive summary

2. On 4 June 2015, the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee approved the implementation of the Empowered Communities Approach.

3. The Community Empowerment Unit was established to lead and operationalise the Empowered Communities Approach. The unit became operational on 1 October 2015.

4. In March 2016, the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee received its first update on the transition and implementation of the new structure and approach.

5. Local board views are being sought to inform the July 2016 progress update report to the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee.

6. This report provides an opportunity for the local board to formalise its views on progress made to date.

Recommendation/s

That the Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

a) provide its feedback on the progress and implementation of the Empowered Communities Approach to date to inform the July 2016 progress update report to the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee.

Background

7. The Mayor’s Proposal for the Long Term Plan 2015 – 2025 (LTP) included developing an Empowered Communities Approach to the work of Auckland Council and sought changes to the community development function as follows:

· To transition delivery to a more empowered community approach;

· To move away from direct delivery (and therefore save overheads) and fund community groups to deliver more;

· For local boards to play a much more active role by allocating more funding through the boards.

8. The Budget Committee approved the proposal on 7 May 2015. It resolved to:

a) Note that an Empowered Communities approach will be implemented during the 2015/2016 financial year with detail of the proposed Community Development and Safety model to be presented to the Regional Strategy and Policy (RSP) Committee on 4 June 2015;

b) Note that the associated savings target of $1.6 million in 2015/2016 and $2.0 million per annum each year thereafter, until 2025, has been included in the budget and that any necessary review of implementation and related budget can be undertaken as part of the Annual Plan 2016/2017 process.

(Resolution number: BUD/2015/18

9. On 4June 2015, the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee resolved to:

a) Endorse the implementation of the ECA which will result in a new operating model for the Community Development and Safety unit;

b) Request that progress against outcomes, implementation of the structure and operation of the model be reviewed and reported back to the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee in February and July 2016;

c) Endorse that additional funding to deliver locally driven initiatives be considered as part of the 2016/2017 Annual Plan.

(Resolution number: REG/2015/41)

10. The Empowered Communities Approach provides clear strategic direction for a whole of council shift to working in ways that are more empowering of communities.

The approach:

· provides a framework to enable council to deliver services in a more effective and empowering way;

· supports community-led development and builds on the Thriving Communities’ Action Plan Ngā Hāpori Momohi (April 2014);

· involves a shift away from direct service delivery to supporting community-led initiatives, with a view to embedding a new way of working across the council family;

· encourages flexibility to meet the varying requirements of communities and local boards, rather than taking a ‘one size fits all’ approach.

11. The Community Empowerment Unit was established to lead and operationalise the Empowered Communities Approach. The unit became operational on 1 October 2015.

Progress update report

12. In March 2016 the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee received an update on the progress of the implementation of the new structure, the operational model and outcomes of the approach to date. Staff will be presenting a further update to the Committee in July 2016.

13. This report provides an opportunity for the local board to formalise its views on progress to date of the implementation of the approach to inform the July 2016 Regional and Strategy update report.

Three year evaluation

14. The Empowered Communities Approach is being evaluated over a three year period. An evaluation plan is currently being developed.

15. To ensure a good spread of data and input from a variety of viewpoints and experiences (elected members, community groups and staff), the local boards’ views captured during this process will also help inform the baseline and formative phase of the wider three year evaluation.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

16. Local board feedback will help inform the report to the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee in July 2016 on the progress and implementation of the Empowered Communities Approach to date.

17. Local boards are providing feedback on the following questions:

· What do you see working well in the initial stages of the roll out of the Empowered Communities Approach?

· In the future, how would you know that the Empowered Communities Approach is working well in your local board area?

· What has been the impact of transitioning into an Empowered Communities Approach for your local board area?

· What do you see as the key barriers to the implementation and uptake of the Empowered Communities Approach?

· How can the Community Empowerment Unit ensure that the approach is embraced by the whole of council for the betterment of the community?

Māori impact statement

18. The council’s Māori Responsiveness Framework has guided and shaped the Empowered Communities Approach.

19. Te Waka Angamua (TWA) is involved in the cross-council evaluation reference group.

20. The Community Empowerment Unit is also developing more enabling and responsive ways of working with mana whenua, mataawaka, marae and Māori organisations across the region to nurture community-led development initiatives.

Implementation

21. The Empowered Communities Approach will continue to be implemented and evaluated with the model being operational in the 2016 /2017 financial year.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Madelon de Jongh - Senior Policy Advisor

Authorisers

Anna Bray - Policy & Planning Manager - Local Boards

Karen Lyons - Manager Local Board Services

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

Waitākere Ranges Local Board

23 June 2016

Housing for Older People Partnering Proposal

File No.: CP2016/11839

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 Waitākere Ranges 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	157
b View	Housing for Older People Partnering Policy	185

Signatories

Authors

Kat Teirney - Team Leader – Community Facilities, South

Authorisers

Graham Bodman - General Manager Arts, Community and Events

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

Waitākere Ranges Local Board

23 June 2016

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

File No.: CP2016/11310

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 Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

a) provide 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

Future use of Hillary Commission Funding

17. 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.

18. 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.

19. 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.

20. 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.

21. 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.

22. 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.

23. 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.

24. 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

25. 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.

26. 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.

27. 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.

28. 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

29. 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.

30. 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.

31. 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

32. 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.

33. 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.

34. 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.

35. 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	195
b View	Sport and Recreation Investment diagram	199
c View	Options Analysis for residual Hillary Commission fund	201

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

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

Waitākere Ranges Local Board

23 June 2016

Waitākere Ranges Local Board 2016/17 Local Economic Development Programme

File No.: CP2016/11337

Purpose

1. To approve the Waitākere Ranges 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 Waitākere Ranges Local Board.

3. The proposed work programme comprises support for the Young Enterprise Scheme and development of a value proposition for Glen Eden.

4. The total value of the Local Economic Development programme is $20,500.

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

Recommendation/s

That the Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

a) approves 2016/17 local economic development programme as follows:

i) Young Enterprise Scheme ($500)

ii) Development of a Glen Eden Value Proposition ($20,000).

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).

7. The proposed LED programme comprises the following activities.

Support for the Young enterprise Scheme ($ 500)

8. The funding from the local board will contribute to the regional Young Enterprise Scheme to enable one high school in the Waitākere Ranges local board area (Titirangi Rudolph Steiner High School) to participate in the Dragons Den and regional events.

9. 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.

10. Due to the rising costs, ATEED has had to centralise these events into one centralised Dragon’s Den event in May 2016 and one Regional event in October 2016.

11. 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.

12. A contribution is 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 Waitākere Ranges Local Board is being asked to contribute $500 to the YES.

Glen Eden Value Proposition ($20,000)

13. Glen Eden's current retail mix is low value and does little to attract people in to the centre. At the same time electrification of the rail line and improved journey times once the City Rail Link is complete will make Glen Eden a more attractive suburb.

14. This project will develop a Glen Eden value proposition and, working in partnership with the Glen Eden BID, articulate the Glen Eden offer to a range of investors and developers. The aim is to showcase the opportunities that there are for investing or setting up a business in Glen Eden in order to capitalise on the Proposed Unitary Plan zonings and forthcoming road and rail improvements that will make Glen Eden much more readily connected to central Auckland.

15. A strategy for targeting the messages to desired target audiences will also be developed. This may involve the development of a prospectus outlining the opportunities there are for high quality business and investment in Glen Eden.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

16. This project contributes to the delivery of the local board plan outcome ‘Revitalised town centres and urban villages‘ and in particular the desire to revitalise Glen Eden.

17. The proposed LED programme was presented to the Local Board at the 21 April 2016 workshop.

Māori impact statement

18. There are no direct impacts as a result of this report on Māori. The Young Enterprise Scheme is open to all year 12 and 13 students in participating schools. Staff are making contact with Te Kura Kaupapa Maori o Hoani Waititi to ascertain there interest.

19. In implementing the Glen Eden Value Proposition project consideration will be given to the need to work with Mana Whenua Iwi and Mataawaka, including Hoani Waititi Marae, to ensure local Māori cultural identity and interests are reflected in the value proposition.

Implementation

20. 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

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Jonathan Sudworth - Local Economic Development Advisor

Authorisers

Paul Robinson - Manager Local Economic Growth - ATEED

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

Waitākere Ranges Local Board

23 June 2016

Draft 2016 Elected Members’ Expenses Policy

File No.: CP2016/12002

Purpose

1. To seek the views of the Waitākere Ranges 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 Waitākere Ranges 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	211

Signatories

Authors

Jo Iles, Business Hub Manager, Democracy Services

Authorisers

Marguerite Delbet - Manager Democracy Services

Karen Lyons - Manager Local Board Services

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

Comments

9. As outlined in the Health, Safety and Wellbeing report to this committee in March 2016, the overall objectives for 2016 are to:

· have the basics right across the organisation (with business-focused solutions) in line with legislative and audit requirements

· share good practice and lessons learned

· effectively educate, upskill and engage our staff and elected members to build a positive and proactive health, safety and wellbeing culture.

10. Since the March report the strategic goals and key deliverables for health, safety and wellbeing in 2016 have been revised slightly, as a result of further work on the organisational strategy and a health and safety strategic planning day with the Executive Leadership team.

11. The key changes are as follows:

a) The strategic goals for reporting are now split into incident management (reactive reporting) and proactive actions, i.e.:

i. reactive: incident management is executed correctly, with quick responses and reporting and effective corrective actions (and where there is an injury support is provided asap and if it is a notifiable event^{^[1]} it is reported to WorkSafe and investigated).

ii. proactive: lead indicators are separately identified and prioritised such as near-miss reporting, site visits and safety conversations to mitigate the likelihood of incidents/injury occurring in the first place.

b) The wellbeing goals have also been revised and there are now two areas of focus. Overall health and wellbeing will continue to be a priority with increased emphasis on stress, fatigue and mental health and wellbeing. Leadership action on workload, business priorities and flexible work practices is now an additional and stand alone area of focus.

c) Under projects and deliverables, there is an additional action focused on staff and visitor safety, which involves reviewing protocols for customer-facing roles, facilities- based staff and lone workers to address personal safety risks and the sharing of information when threats occur. Some initial work has begun on this already, including reviewing the lessons learned from the shooting at the Ashburton offices of the Ministry of Social Development and reviewing protocols and training already in place in various areas of council and CCOs.

Performance report

12. Key performance metrics as at 30 April 2016 are attached in attachment 1. In summary:

a) Council’s Lost Time Injury Frequency Rate (LTIFR) has increased over the last three months since February 2016. As at 30 April 2016 the LTIFR was 3.86 (indicative) against a target of <2.25. This is a result of increased and more accurate number of injuries resulting in a person not being able to work for a period of time.

b) A total of 20 health and safety monitoring and inspections were reported into VAULT (these were contractor inspections done by Infrastructure and Environmental Services). A total of 60 corrective actions (arising from investigations) were issued in VAULT.

c) Near-miss reporting has decreased in April, reversing the previous upward trend over the past three months. The Health, Safety and Wellbeing team, in partnership with the executive and senior leadership teams, will maintain their attention on reporting and continue to promote a proactive reporting culture. The amount of near-miss reporting is low in an organisation the scale of council.

d) Auckland Council’s Employee Assistance Programme (EAP) bi-monthly dashboard is displaying generally healthy indicators when considering the various change programmes and restructures occurring. The top three work issues staff are accessing the service for are career, relationship with manager and relationship with co-worker. Council is currently above the national average for these three issues, which reinforces the organisation’s focus on addressing workplace stress and fatigue.

e) Manager suggested use of EAP has increased to just below the national average (15.6% vs 16.7%). In 2015 manager referrals to EAP were low and this change is a positive indicator of managers encouraging staff to access support if they need it. Self-referral to EAP continues to be the highest engagement indicator; currently council is slightly higher than the national average at 82% versus 80%. Further information on the wellbeing portfolio is included in the attached performance report (Appendix 1) and included in the key initiatives update on page 8 of this report.

Lost Time Injury Frequency Rate

13. The increase in Council’s overall LTIFR provides a more accurate reflection of incidents. An audit of reported lost time injuries in council’s reporting management system (VAULT) versus ACC data has occurred during February, March and April. The audit has identified additional lost time injuries during March and April. In March there were five additional lost time injuries identified and in April there were four additional lost time injuries identified (over and above those reported in VAULT). These incidents had been reported, however they had not been reported as injuries which resulted in the person needing time off work and therefore potentially needing rehabilitation support and/or a return to work or alternative duties plan.

14. The table below shows the current rolling 12-month lost time injury frequency rate trend and the data beneath the table summarises LTIFR, first aid and medical injuries.

Current LTIFR target <2.25
April 2016 Indicative LTIFR 3.86 The HSW audit of reported medical incidents has uncovered 4 extra LTIs for April and 5 for March. This has increased the LTIFR. The audit will continue and once the final worked hours are known for April this may alter the actual LTIFR for the month.	April 2016 · First aid reported injuries vs 12 month average 74/56.7 · Medical reported injuries vs 12 month average 20/22.3
March 2016 LTIFR indicative vs actual 3.53/3.78
February 2016 LTIFR indicative vs actual 2.98/3.94

15. An increased LTIFR is not ideal, however the audit has provided improved data accuracy on the number of injuries occurring that result in staff needing time off work and therefore increases council’s ability to support staff who have been injured and work with them and their managers to establish an effective return to work programme.

16. The audit has also reinforced the critical importance of improving health and safety reporting at council and the accuracy of reporting across the organisation.

17. In response to this, Council, together with ATEED and Panuku, are reviewing reporting management systems and service specifications to determine which supplier can best meet council requirements. Currently council uses the VAULT system. An improved reporting tool will assist people to report more easily and if Council and a number of CCOs have the same system it will become easier for staff and contractors to report into a similar system.

18. Highlighting and encouraging the importance of near-miss reporting is also an area being addressed by the Health, Safety and Wellbeing team and departmental managers. Thorough near-miss reporting allows council to minimise likely incidents. Key information and messages on near-miss reporting were provided across the region during the recent Chief Operating Officer roadshows.

Rehabilitation

19. The rehabilitation and wellbeing team have been meeting with business units across council to focus on return to work programmes and to help managers get an injured person back to work, on alternate duties if necessary to assist with their recovery.

Information on the six aspects of the due diligence duty

20. Officers of Council (i.e. those in a governance role including elected members, the Chief Executive and potentially other members of the executive leadership team) must exercise a duty of due diligence. There are six aspects to that duty, listed and discussed below. All officers have equal and personal responsibility.

21. To assist elected members in their role as officers the Head of Health, Safety and Wellbeing, the Director of Legal and Risk and the governance division lead team are working together to establish systems that will enable councillors and local board members to have access to relevant information to fulfill their due diligence responsibilities. This includes developing new quality advice guidance to assist staff preparing advice on projects where a health and safety assessment is necessary for decision-making, quarterly performance reporting to the Audit and Risk Committee, Finance and Performance Committee and local boards and information to be included in the elected member induction programme after the 2016 local government election.

22. Staff are also working with the Independent Māori Statutory Board and council’s co-governance entities such as the Maunga Authority, the Parakai Recreation Reserve Board and the Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei Reserves Board to ensure they have information and support to assist them with complying with their PCBU duties (as a Board) and their officer duties (as individual members).

Up to date (1): Acquire and keep up to date with H&S knowledge and H&S matters

23. To comply with the officer’s due diligence duty, it is critical that council’s elected members, chief executive and executive leadership team understand the key elements of the new legislation and regulations.

24. Prior to the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015 coming into force on 4 April 2016 there were three briefings provided for elected members to outline the key elements of the legislation, particularly the role of ‘officers’.

25. The executive leadership team have also been provided with a variety of information, including an initial briefing in the last quarter of 2015, consideration and inclusion of a health and safety business case in the development of the organisational strategy, and a strategic planning day at the end of March.

26. To ensure elected members and senior management are well informed and up to date on health and safety matters further workshops are being planned for May and June. Governing Body and local board workshops will build on the information sessions to date and focus on putting the legislation into practice, including meeting personal obligations as an officer, what is required for day to day decision making and implications for community groups and volunteers.

27. Future reporting to elected members and senior management will include information to help officers keep up to date with their health and safety knowledge. Officers may also undertake their own personal actions to keep their health and safety knowledge up to date.

Understand (2): Understand Council’s operations and the associated hazards and risks

28. Council officers will already have a working visibility of Council business. To ensure that officers have a sufficient visibility of the breadth and variety of Council operations to comply with their due diligence duties, highlighting key activity on council’s operations related to health and safety will be part of regular reporting.

29. It will take time for Council to transition from the previous hazard assessment approach to the more proactive risk-based approach provided for in the new Act. Work is underway across the organisation on reviewing hazard registers, developing business unit/activity risk assessments and then delivering safety risk control plans. Some parts of the organisation have begun risk assessments e.g. City Parks Services and Events. As this work develops, more detailed information will be reported.

30. In the interim an overview of reported hazards and risks is provided in the attached performance report (appendix 1).

31. The Chief Executive and the wider executive leadership team have undertaken some recent site visits both with office-based staff and at council facilities across the region. A health and safety site visit plan for both the Chief Executive (and ELT members) and elected members will be developed over the coming months to provide ongoing opportunities for Council’s officers to experience and better understand Council operations and the health and safety risks in the various parts of the business.

Resources and processes (3): Ensure Council has appropriate resourcing and processes to eliminate or minimise risks to health and safety

32. As part of the organisational strategy a business case for health and safety was developed. It highlighted the need for Council to transition from the previous hazard assessment approach to the more proactive risk-based approach. The business case also considered the level of resourcing for health and safety within the organisation.

33. As noted above, specific work is underway across the organisation to eliminate or minimise risks to health and safety through risk assessments. A key focus is to build capability within the organisation and prioritise those business areas that need particular training and support.

34. In addition, health and safety is an integral part of FY16/17 business planning. Guidance on health and safety objectives has been provided as part of the business planning packs for departments. The operations division, for example, has an objective for all departments in the division to undertake risk assessments and develop a plan of action in response during the 2016-2017 financial year.

Reporting and investigation (4): Ensure Council has appropriate processes for receiving and considering information regarding incidents, hazards and risks and for responding in a timely way to that information

35. Health, safety and wellbeing performance reporting has been improved to assist officers and senior management receive and consider information on incidents, hazards and risks. The current approach has been developed with and approved by the executive leadership team. This includes the structure of the report, and the content including lead and lag indicators.

36. The April 2016 organisation-wide performance report is attached as Appendix 1. From now on department/business unit reports will also be delivered to senior managers to assist their understanding of key metrics for their departments and business areas. This will improve the ability of the organisation to address the specific risks or opportunities in each area i.e. the health, safety and wellbeing priorities in Parks, Sport and Recreation will differ from those in Democracy Services, Libraries and Animal Management.

37. The Health, Safety and Wellbeing and Legal Services teams have reviewed and revised the incident management and notifiable event management plans to ensure Council has processes in place to respond to incidents, hazards and risks. The plans provide clear, step by step guidance on what staff need to do in various situations, including an emergency situation. The plans also specifically include guidance on advising elected members of incidents in their ward/local board area.

38. An executive/senior leadership Health and Safety Committee has now been established. Part of its role will be to review Council-wide critical risks and issues, including investigations of incidents that involve notifiable events and WorkSafe or Police investigations.

39. A fit for purpose safety management system and timely reporting will also be crucial to enable Council to receive and consider information on incidents, hazards and risks. As discussed above, a review of the current system (VAULT) and other suppliers is underway.

Monitor (5): Ensure Council has, and implements, processes for complying with any duty or obligation

40. A crucial aspect of ensuring that council has systems in place for complying with its obligations is the setting of high level policy and strategic direction. The Chief Executive and executive leadership team attended a strategic planning day at the end of March. This included a review of council’s strategic direction for health and safety and confirmation of the current policy position of Health and Safety starts with me – Ka timata te hauora me te aria hauata ki a au.

41. Part of the strategic planning day was also discussion of complying with council’s obligations as a PCBU.^{^[2]}

42. Council’s health and safety policy statement, manual and all documents and procedures connected to these are under review against the new legislation and regulations.

43. Staff awareness of health and safety obligations will contribute to compliance. Health and Safety at Work Act overview seminars have been offered to all staff at seven locations across Council. A total of 384 staff attended the sessions with another 80+ looking to undertake the next round of training offered. Business units with specific risks, e.g. working with asbestos, are ensuring staff will have relevant training aligned to the new regulations and the Chief Engineer and her team have been delivering safety in design training.

44. Council’s Do it Right legislative compliance programme is currently working with some pilot business units to develop legislative compliance business unit plans. Work is underway to incorporate health and safety objectives into these plans.

45. To build the internal capability to support business units with complying with health and safety obligations, members of the Health, Safety and Wellbeing team have recently undertaken Incident Causation Analysis Methodology (ICAM) investigation training and lead auditor training.

46. Effective and supported health and safety representatives also contribute to council complying with its health and safety obligations. A health and safety representative training plan is being developed, which will include roadshows and a representative handbook. Other work includes a review of health and safety committee structure and a toolkit for managers.

Verify (6): Take reasonable steps to verify the provision and use of resources and processes through reviews and audits

47. At regular intervals the Audit & Risk Committee will consider Council’s compliance with its PCBU obligations and Council officers’ compliance with their due diligence duty. That feedback is made by way of recommendation to the Finance and Performance Committee. All officers of Council need to continue to ensure that they keep thorough records of their compliance with their individual due diligence duty.

48. Council will be audited via an ACC Worksafe Safety Management Practices (WSMP) audit in October 2016. This audit will assess council’s compliance against ACC accreditation criteria. Tertiary is the highest level of accreditation. Council currently has secondary level accreditation.

49. Pre-audit assessments will begin across the organisation in May and will be undertaken by an external auditor. The priority for pre-audit are business areas identified in the last audit as needing to improve or areas of high risk activity, such as City Parks Services, Parks, Sport and Recreation, Community Facilities, Licensing and Compliance and Infrastructure and Environmental Services.

50. The pre-audit assessment will provide council with a clear view of current state and direction on where action is needed to meet tertiary accreditation standards. Both the Head of Health, Safety and Wellbeing and the Head of Internal Audit will oversee the ACC WSMP audit programme.

Health, Safety and Wellbeing work programme: delivery to date and priority actions May – June 2016

51. Key initiatives delivered since the last presentation to the March 2016 Audit and Risk Committee include:

a) Good practice (and compliance). Transition to the new legislation. As noted above Health and Safety at Work Act overview seminars for all staff were conducted at seven locations across Council. A total of 384 staff attended the sessions with further sessions to occur. Preparation for the ACC pre-audit assessment.

b) Engagement and due diligence. Continual improvements are being made to the reporting framework for the executive leadership team and elected members. The communications programme is progressing to raise employee engagement and participation, including a review and update on the current health and safety intranet page.

c) Monitoring and reporting. A final draft of incident management and notifiable event management and reporting processes (including notification to WorkSafe NZ of notifiable events) is complete and will be distributed in May. Investigations on an improved or alternative reporting management system are coming to an end with recommendations to follow in May.

d) Wellbeing. A pilot session for psychological health and wellbeing facilitated by EAP was undertaken with a target group in late April. An alternative session facilitated by the Mental Health Foundation took place the first week of May. Further sessions targeting managers will be trialled in May across selected parts of the Council. The goal is to have a number of programme options that address the varying needs of people and business units. The Wellbeing 360 survey began 27 April.

52. The focus for the remainder of this financial year and the start of FY 16/17 will be:

a) pre-audit assessments, starting with City Parks Services and Community Facilities

b) Ongoing staff and elected member training. This training will build on previous training sessions (including the introduction to the legislation sessions for elected members and staff and the safety in design training for staff in relevant parts of the organisation), and focus in more detail on putting the legislation into practice in day to day Council business and decision-making.

c) Contractor management: under the new Act Council owes the same duty to employees of contractors and subcontractors as it does its own employees, because they are all workers pursuant to the Act. Where there are overlapping duties between council and its contractors, all parties must also consult, co-operate and co-ordinate together. New contract terms have already been developed to support council complying with its obligations, and guidance for staff on contractor management is being developed. The council-wide contract management strategy includes a health and safety workstream.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

53. Briefings for elected member, including local boards were provided in preparation for the legislation change on 4 April. Further workshops are planned for later in May and June.

54. This report will be provided to all local boards and a briefing on this report and will take place at the May 2016 local board chairs forum.

Māori impact statement

55. The health, safety and wellbeing of Māori staff, elected and appointed members, volunteers and members of the public is a priority as are the Māori wellbeing priorities identified in Council’ Māori responsiveness framework, Te Toa Takitini work programmes, and other relevant documents.

56. Staff are working with the Independent Māori Statutory Board and Council’s co-governance entities, such as the Maunga Authority, Parakai Recreation Reserve Board and the Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei Reserves Board to ensure they have information and support to comply with their PCBU duties (as a Board) and their officer duties (as individual members).

Waitākere Ranges Local Board

23 June 2016

Governance Forward Work Calendar

File No.: CP2016/12404

Purpose

1. To present to the board with a governance forward work calendar.

Executive Summary

2. This report introduces the governance forward work calendar: a schedule of items that will come before the board at business meetings over the upcoming months. The governance forward work calendar for the board is included in Attachment A.

3. The calendar aims to support local boards’ governance role by:

· ensuring advice on agendas and workshop material is driven by local board priorities

· clarifying what advice is required and when

· clarifying the rationale for reports.

4. The calendar will be updated every month. Each update will be reported back to business meetings and distributed to relevant Council staff. It is recognised that at times items will arise that are not programmed. Board members are welcome to discuss changes to the calendar.

Recommendation/s

That the Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

a) note the updated Governance Forward Work Calendar for June 2016 (attachment A).

Comments

5. Council’s Quality Advice Programme aims to improve the focus, analysis, presentation and timeliness of staff advice to elected representatives. An initiative under this is to develop forward work calendars for governing body committees and local boards. These provide elected members with better visibility of the types of governance tasks they are being asked to undertake and when they are scheduled.

6. Although the document is new, there are no new projects in the governance forward work calendar. The calendar brings together in one schedule reporting on all of the board’s projects and activities previously approved in the local board plan, long-term plan, departmental work programmes and through other board decisions. It includes governing body policies and initiatives that call for a local board response.

7. This initiative is intended to support the boards’ governance role. It will also help staff to support local boards, as an additional tool to manage workloads and track activities across council departments, and it will allow greater transparency for the public.

8. The calendar is arranged in three columns, “Topic”, “Purpose” and “Governance Role”:

· Topic describes the items and may indicate how they fit in with broader processes such as the annual plan

· Purpose indicates the aim of the item, such as formally approving plans or projects, hearing submissions or receiving progress updates

· Governance role is a higher-level categorisation of the work local boards do. Examples of the seven governance categories are tabled on the following page.

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

9. Board members are welcome to discuss changes to the calendar. The calendar will be updated and reported back every month to business meetings. Updates will also be distributed to relevant Council staff.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

10. All local boards are being presented with governance forward work calendars for their consideration.

Māori impact statement

11. The projects and processes referred to in the governance forward work calendar will have a range of implications for Māori which will be considered when the work is reported.

Implementation

12. Staff will review the calendar each month in consultation with board members and will report an updated calendar to the board.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Governance Forward Work Programme Calendar - June 2016	257

Signatories

Authors	Raewyn Curran - Senior Local Board Advisor
Authorisers	Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

Waitākere Ranges Local Board

23 June 2016

Dunes Trust Conference Gisborne 2016 30 march-1 April

Report from Conference –Neil Henderson representing Waitakere Ranges Local Board

At the end of March this year I had the privilege of being able to attend this year’s Dunes Conference, held in Gisborne. Last year it was in Whitianga. I drove down from Auckland the day before the conference opened and thoroughly enjoyed the late summer, early autumnal atmosphere exhibited by the scenery on the way. Outstanding were the regular stands of hawthorne on the roadsides, heavy with bright red berries and in the long approach to Gisborne from Matawhai, many old and stately poplars, just beginning to turn yellow. Easy to imagine you were driving through the South of France rather than rural NZ.

Gisborne is really a long way away from other urban areas in the North Island and enjoys the same sort of relationship with these centers as Perth does with the larger cities on the eastern seaboard of Australia. It is a destination site in itself, not really on the way anywhere and it is easy to forget what an extraordinary rich natural coastline it is the gateway to, particularly its vast kilometres of dune environments, stretching throughout poverty bay and North towards Te Kaka. The various sessions indoors at the conference, held at the Wainui Surf Lifesaving Club, as well as the many opportunities to get out onto some of the beaches, really emphasised the richness of Gisbornes natural coastal environment but also reinforced the sheer scope of the work that will be needed to be undertaken over the following years to protect it from degradation. In this Gisborne’s sand dunes reflect the same problems we currently have to deal with on our Waitakere Ranges coastline but maybe magnify the area by about 100!

Day 1

There was a series of initial presentations in the morning and an slide show by Dr Amber Dunne ,a local , that helped set the scene of Tairawhiti (The East Coast ), ”the coast on which the sun shines”.

Tairawhiti largely consists of unmodified coastal environments and pleasingly the bulk of this is free from built elements. According to MFE, this coastline has the highest priority for protection and preservation.

Amber’s slides revealed the striking range of natural coastal environments available to locals, the rich historical and cultural significance and the many amenity attractions it has to offer. Her slide show also set the scene for how difficult it is to protect this coastline, with perhaps the greatest challenge coming out of how tricky it is to work with a large and dynamic coastal boundary, when in many areas the boundary crosses from the public domain of the beaches into the private property that lies beyond. Unfortunately we understand now that the coastline is a vast and complex system and that it is impossible to divorce what is happening on the beach or as a result of a set of rocky headlands, with what goes on in the dunes, pastures or rivers of the land behind. The requirement to have a more holistic view of the coastline system and an understanding of what is needed to be in place for the system to work properly is a key way forward for the local community, not only in establishing realistic constraints around potential shore line developments but also enabling and encouraging the owners of land behind the dunes to act undertake activities themselves that can enhance the coastlines protection.

The other presentation of the first day that really caught my interest was one by Ian Ruru, who has become something of a master with using drones to explore areas of the coastline. A stirring example of some of this footage from Kopututea,a vast area of Poverty bay foreshore privately owned by the Kopututea trust is available at the following facebook site and is recommended viewing. https://www.facebook.com/kaitiakiapp/videos/584530721701593/

Ian showed us a number of examples where drones have greatly facilitated explorations and studies of dune areas, saving time and money with the clear information they are able to provide. As an example of this, there is the following anecdote he related; The seaward hills in this area are full of Manuka and kanuka regeneration, now home to a flourishing honey industry .There are thousands of hives distributed over vast distances and occasionally rogue beekeepers move clandestine hives into the area, often into private property and it is very time consuming to physically discover and remove these hives. Rogue hives are a problem not just because of trespass issues but any hive entering an area not subject strict rules of hygiene around varoa and other bee diseases could infect and destroy a nearby industry where hives are compliant and healthy. Ian showed us how ,with the use of his drone ,investigators needed only to drive into a general area, release the drone with its live video coverage of the terrain, explore hundreds of hectares of low lying tea tree cover and reveal the rogue hives, all within a couple of hours .I couldn’t help but think there were some great possibilities for utilising this new technology in the Waitakere ranges heritage Area, particularly for survey work on kauri dieback or perhaps on assessments of certain kinds of invasive weed spread.

Later on Day 1, we spent time on the local dune system particularly Wainui beach near the surf club. There Jim Dahm, the doyan of dune restoration, once again came into his own, showing with very clear examples of how effective dune protection can be once coastal landowners “Get it “ and resist the urge to erect barriers and walls to what is natural and in fact inevitable cycle and sand movement.

Day 2

This was all about being in the field and we took to the coastline north of Wainui with vigour.

Kaiaua beach visit.

First stop was an open coast beach with extensive dunes owned by Te Aitanga a Hauiti. We were given an exceptional talk by Alison Waru, the chair of the Kopuatarikihi trust on the renewed restoration focus around the beach environs. This is a very popular beach in the summer, with issues that reminded me very much of the challenges we have with the influx of visitors at our own beaches like bethels and Whatipu. While wanting to continue to provide access to the beach for the public, the beaches guardians are becoming increasingly disenchanted by the impacts of these visitors, especially the freedom campers. Points of contention are increasingly arising the more the Trust implements controls around beach access, particularly in areas they are actively trying to restore.

The next stop was the Uawanui Sustainability project and the Kaitawa estuary. This area sits in Tolaga bay and the ambitious project draws support from the various landowning interests of the Uawa community as well as huge input from the Tolaga bay Area School, who have been recently galvanised by their science teacher to undertake a number of exciting projects that have since received considerable success as well as National coverage. There was much about the project that reminded me of things we have been trying to do in Waitakere for many years as well as the various support programmes we currently enjoy out West like Enviroschools and Waicare. They even have bat monitoring! As part of the school programme, students get out and dirty in the mud of the local estuary conducting shellfish surveys as well as learning to dive on local reefs to assess the ongoing impacts of overfishing. It is sad to say that along big areas of Gisbornes coastline you can travel for miles without finding even a few tua tua and this is simply to do with over fishing of a resource. The school is also very actively involved in a local weed program and they have much the same weed issues to deal with as we have up here. Gazing out from the site of the old ferry crossing behind the school across to the otherside of the stream one could see pampas grass stretching all the way to the base of the Tolaga Bay wharf, still one of the longest wharves in New Zealand. There are big plans to tackle to pampas but as always, lots of blue sky around where the money will come from to do it properly and sustainably. Once again, another problem that we share out West. I remember thinking that it might be fruitful to set up some sort of sister city arrangement between one of our own schools like Woodlands Park, currently doing Enviroschools Gold and the Tolaga Bay Area School. I think there would be great opportunities for learning to have an exchange program down the track.

Day 3

The morning trip was out to the new Coastal walkway built over the Oneroa/Waikanae-Midway beach dunes, just south of Gisborne City. The walkway has a visual artwork layer that tells cultural and historical stories about the area. I think that the design style for this type of interpretation could be similarly implemented on the Whau River walkway currently being constructed near us in Auckland, as well as providing some ideas for interpretation along some of the walkways we are looking towards developing in the Waitakere ranges heritage Area in future years.

Later the group visited the Kopututea Dunes to look at An extensive, natural dune ridge system borders the bay Turanganui a Kiwa/Poverty Bay.

Kopututea Dunes extend from approximately Midway Beach southward to the Waipaoa River mouth. These dunes have a co-management plan between the Kopututea Trust and Gisborne District Council, and are a site of huge significance to local iwi. Kopututea was once a unique coastal spit system prior to the draining of the Awapuni Moana (lagoon). I had to miss this part of the tour because of a brief stomach upset but I was able to return later in the day to the mouth of the Waipaoa River to sit and chat with some fishermen who were trying their hand at catching some of the kahawai that run the gauntlet of their lures. It was a beautiful spot with stunning views out to jagged southern bluffs, the wide sandy dune area littered with a forest of drift wood and the tranquil scene only marred by a single burnt out car, testament to the proximity of this wild place to the rough edges of nearby city of Gisborne. Once again, I felt that we out West, had a lot in common with Tairawhiti.

One final mention about the conference and that was the presentation given by Piha Coastcare on the Whatipu Dunes, as part of the regional Roundup. Members like Pat LaRoche are regular fixtures at the Dunes Conferences and it was very gratifying to see the great set of slides about Whatipu. Most impressive of all was the picture of pingaeo included in the appendix. The other attendees of the Conference couldn’t believe their eyes at how large and vibrant the growth of this plant was dwarfing anything they had seen on their own beaches.

[1] A notifiable event includes death, a serious injury , illness or incident

[2] As outlined above some of council’s strategic goals changed following this session and a review of policy principles is also to be undertaken.

Chairperson	Sandra Coney, QSO
Deputy Chairperson	Denise Yates, JP
Members	Neil Henderson
	Greg Presland
	Steve Tollestrup
	Saffron Toms

Authors	Tua Viliamu - Democracy Advisor
Authorisers	Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau