Agenda of Puketāpapa Local Board

Puketāpapa Local Board

25 August 2016

Auckland Transport Report, Puketapapa Local Board, August 2016

File No.: CP2016/15735

Purpose

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

Monthly Overview

2. This report seeks a decision on:

· Confirmation or put on hold on the redesign of the Richardson Road carpark and pathway.

· A rough order of costs for a traffic calming project on Gilletta Road.

3. This report informs the local board on the following matters:

· Cape Horn Road – Update

· HOP Card and Super Gold

· Berm Mowing

· Quarterly Reporting

· Local Board Capital Projects

· Customer Services Inquiries

· Mt Roskill Safe Routes scheme update

· Public Transport Fare Changes

· Ian McKinnon Cycleway Project

· Neilson Street Changes

Monthly Overview

4. Two portfolio meetings were held in July, Items discussed were:

· Updates on transport capital projects

· Cape Horn Road

· Mt Roskill Safe Routes Scheme

· Super Gold and HOP

· Bus Patronage

· Pah Road/Manukau Road transit lanes

· Various road safety matters

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) Receive the Auckland Transport Report, Puketapapa Local Board, August 2016.

b) confirms/does not confirm, that savings from the Keith Hay Park lighting project (northern section) be applied to a preliminary design of the Richardson Road carpark realignment and widening of the shared path past the kindergarten.

c) request Auckland Transport to prepare a rough order of costs for a traffic calming project on Gilletta Road, Lynfield.

Consultation

5. No consultations were forwarded to the Local Board for comment in the last reporting period.

Reporting Back

Resolutions PKPPT/2016/19 February 2016 and PKTPP/2016/167 July 2016 – Cape Horn Road, Mt Roskill.

6. Auckland Transport advises that it has relooked at the safety issues highlighted by Board Member Holm and confirmed that additional concerns regarding restricted visibility when approaching the Hillsborough Road intersection do need to be taken into account. As the visibility is not ideal, AT will proceed with the proposal of 18 metres of No Stopping At All Times (NSAAT) restriction on the eastern side of the road in order to mitigate this safety risk.

7. It will provide sufficient inter-visibility between vehicles to potentially avoid any head on collisions between entering and exiting drivers in this area of the road. As the length of the NSAATs is limited to 18 metres, this should not have a marked effect on the speed of vehicles.

8. Auckland Transport will follow this up with an additional consultation letter to submitters explaining the change in stance and the new safety issue that has been identified.

9. As with all road changes, a resolution report with drawings will be prepared for the Transport Control Committee for approval. This process may take up to six months before the changes appear on the road.

PKTPP/2016/167 July 2016– HOP Card

10. The request from the Puketapapa Local Board to extend the “grace period” for gold card users without appropriate HOP cards was forwarded to the public transport team.

11. Auckland Transport can advise that it has proactively extended the grace period for a further two weeks and HOP cards will be required for travel under the SuperGold concession starting on the 14 August.

12. At the end of July, AT was able to report that over 95% of SuperGold travel on public transport was done using an AT HOP card. and as of 3 August there were over 99,000 SuperGold concessions on AT HOP cards. During the week of 1 August through 7 August, 96.4% of public transport trips taken by SuperGold cardholders were made using an AT HOP card.

13. Based on these figures, AT does not have plans to extend the grace period any further. AT is working with public transport operators and AT HOP ticket offices to let customers know when paper tickets will no longer be available.

PKTPP/2016/167 July 2016– Berm Mowing

14. The berm management policy was set out in a report to Auckland Council’s Regional Strategy and Finance Committee in 4 February 2014, entitled grass and vegetation management. Auckland Council now expects most berms in the residential areas to be mowed by residents. The report sets out how the berms in the region are divided for management into Types A, B and C. The specifications of the berm types are appended to this report as Attachment D.

15. The residential berms in the Puketapapa area fall into the Type C specification and are cut six to eight times per year depending on growth rate to keep them within the Type C specification of not exceeding 200mm in height. The Type C berms that are not maintained by the adjoining property owner and meet or exceed the 200mm height are managed by a ‘service cut’ that takes the berm to about 75mm in height. Those berms which are not maintained by the adjoining property owner and that do require the ‘service cut’ will not look as tidy as those that are privately maintained.

16. As the contract cutting of the berms is not based on frequency and is mesh block organised rather than street by street, it is not possible to provide a timetable of when grass berms are being mowed or have been mowed on specific streets.

17. The local board can advise residents complaining about their berms to log a complaint on our website or phone AT’s contact centre on 355 3551. Auckland Transport will enter into discussions with its contractors how this information may be able to be provided going forward.

Quarterly Reporting

18. Local Boards have been telling AT that the quarterly reports are too long and contain too much regional material. Therefore Auckland Transport has decided to trial supplying the material from the Quarterly Report in a different way. Instead of a separate report, the relevant material will be incorporated as an attachment to each local board’s monthly report.

19. Therefore information about the works different Auckland Transport groups have carried out in the local board areas will be available as an attachment to the monthly reports. Going forward, Auckland Transport will be able to supply the Transport Control Committee (TCC) resolutions on a monthly basis as this will make this material much more timely and relevant.

20. The local board advocacy initiatives will be reported on in October and March each year. These changes should help to smooth out the information flow to local boards and ensure the material being reported on, is as timely as possible.

21. In addition to this material, Auckland Transport will circulate the quarterly report we prepare for the Governing body by email to local board chairs and transport portfolio leads. (This report can go on local board agendas if requested and, covers major regional projects, public transport patronage figures, road maintenance activity and financial performance.)

22. The following are attached to this report:

· Attachment A – Report from Auckland Transport departments on what they have done in each local board area over the past quarter

· Attachment B – Report on Travelwise Schools activities

· Attachment C – The Transport Controls Committee report

Local Board Capital Projects

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

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

25. This project is in detailed design and as reported in July, needs input from the local board on proposed tree removals on Sandringham Road Extension. This is the subject of meeting on August 17 between Auckland Council arborist, Auckland Transport and local board members.

26. The figures below are based on the allocated budget for the projects and received invoices. A further invoice for the Keith Hay Park lighting project is expected from Auckland Council Parks which should indicate some savings in the project and see the figure below for the funds available in the next political term, increase.

Financials

Current Transport Capital Projects

Project	Description	Status	Projected Cost
Fearon Park Pathway	A shared path to be constructed through Fearon Park.	This is being managed by Auckland Council Parks. AC Parks advise construction after 30 September 2016.	$190,000
Ernie Pinches to Wesley Community Centre cycleway	A shared walking and cycling path along Sandringham Road extension.	Detailed design is in progress. Awaiting advice on whether tree removal consent is required from AC.	$917,000
Richardson Road carpark realignment project	Redesign of the carpark at Richardson Road to promote better safety for cyclist and walkers accessing Keith Hay Park.	Awaiting confirmation from the local board whether to proceed with the preliminary design.	$30,000
Keith Hay Park Lighting – Southern Section	Continuing the lighting project from the northern section to the southern end of the park past Noton Road carpark to Richardson Road.	Awaiting financial resourcing in the new term.	$170,000 - $180,000

Carpark Redesign Richardson Road

27. At its meeting in May 2015, the Puketapapa Local Board requested that any savings from the Keith Hay Park lighting project (northern section) be applied to a preliminary design of a realignment of the carpark on Richardson Road.

That Puketapapa Local Board confirm the Keith Hay Park lighting project proceed and that the scope of the project be limited to the northern section of the park to Noton Road at this stage and that any savings in this work be allocated to detailed design from the Noton Road carpark through to Richardson Road.

28. The final amount of savings from the Keith Hay Park lighting project (northern section) was not able to be finally quantified at the time of writing as a further invoice from Auckland Council Parks was still outstanding. This saving is expected to be of an order to support financing the plan for the reconfiguration of the carpark on Richardson Road, as above.

29. However it may be prudent for the Puketapapa Local Board to identify budget for the construction of the reconfiguration of the carpark and the widening of the pathway past the kindergarten before committing transport capital funds to the realignment plan.

30. This project would support Puketapapa Local Board’s initiatives to provide safe, well-designed routes for all active modes of transport.

Traffic Calming Project – Gilletta Road, Lynfield

31. Residents of Gilletta Road, Lynfield requested traffic calming be applied in their street as the cul de sac nature of their street with its adjacent park space attracts groups of people indulging in anti-social behaviour and speeding.

32. Auckland Transport investigated and responded that Gilletta Road does not rank highly on its list for traffic calming as the activity on the street is less of a road safety concern and is better described as anti-social behaviour, which is best addressed by the NZ Police.

33. The Puketapapa Local Board may fund traffic management devices through the local board’s transport capital fund and may request Auckland Transport for a rough order of costs to provide a traffic management devices on Gilletta Road, if it so resolves.

34. Should the local board wish to request a rough order of costs for traffic calming on Gilletta Road, Auckland Transport would require a clear idea of the scale and position of interventions the Puketapapa Local Board is seeking and a board-led engagement with the community to confirm community acceptance of the interventions.

35. This project would support Puketapapa’s Local Board Plan outcomes for healthy, safe people and places.

Other Matters

Customer Service Inquiries

36. In July, 425 customer service inquiries were made to Auckland Transport’s contact centre regarding issues in the Puketapapa Local Board area. Of these, 365 cases were resolved, 42 cases were still active on the 1 August, and the rest were either duplicates or rejected (as under AT delegation and referred to Auckland Council) or cancelled later.

Mt Roskill Safe Routes Cycle Scheme Update

37. Good progress was made in July with works requiring full road closure at Winstone Road/ Memorial Ave and those directly outside school gates of Mt Roskill Intermediate and Waikowhai Intermediate schools completed during the school holiday period.

38. The “pick-up and drop off zone” on Somerset Road by the hockey turf has been installed and is now operational. The mid-block signalised crossing on May Road will be commissioned by late August once it is linked to the Auckland Transport Operation Centre for traffic monitoring and synchronised with adjacent signals in the wider network

39. Work has commenced on Stage 3 along Hillsborough Road and Quona Ave and it is expected to be completed by early October. Planning work is underway for the relocation of underground services along McKinnon Street for the new rain gardens. Utilities relocation is likely to start in late August and will take up to six weeks which will be followed by installation of shared path and rain gardens.

Auckland Transport News

Public Transport Fare Changes

40. Auckland Transport is introducing a new zone-based public transport system to make fares simpler. The new Simpler Fares system for all bus and train services starts on 14 August 2016 (excluding SkyBus).

41. The new zone map (Attachment E) has 13 zones and fares will be calculated according to the number of zones travelled through for the entire journey. With an AT HOP card it’s simpler for bus and train journeys, with a single fare being charged for each journey, even if you take several buses or trains to get to your destination.

42. An AT HOP card will facilitate payment for one entire journey from A to B, instead of passengers paying for each bus or train separately. They will tag on and off each bus and train as they do now, but will be charged a single fare at the end of the journey. During a journey passengers can use up to five buses or trains within four hours, with up to 30 minutes transfer time between each trip.

43. This will become increasingly important as Auckland Transport rolls out the New Network for public transport over the next two years, beginning with South Auckland in October 2016. The New Network aims to be much simpler and easier to understand and use. It will be better connected and generally more frequent, and the new fare system will help customers to make the most of it.

44. A new AT HOP child weekend fare is also being introduced, to make weekend family outings by public transport more affordable, along with changes to the AT HOP day pass and three new ferry monthly passes. A child paying with an AT HOP card that has a child concession applied will be able to travel anywhere in Auckland, making up to five bus or train trips over a four hour period, with up to 30 minutes transfer time between each trip allowed, and pay a one-zone fare regardless of how many zones they cross.

45. A new AT HOP day pass costing $18 will also provide unlimited travel until midnight on the day it is first used on all buses and trains plus inner harbour ferry services (except SkyBus services). The inner-harbour ferries are Devonport, Stanley Bay, Bayswater, Northcote Pt and Birkenhead services.

46. The following fare table for buses and trains will apply:

	Adult ATHOP Fare	Child and Accessible AT Hop fare*	Tertiary AT HOP Fare*
CityLink	$0.50	$0.30	$0.40
1 Zone	$1.80	$0.99	$1.28
2 Zone	$3.10	$1.73	$2.31
3 Zone	$4.90	$2.72	$3.59
4 Zone	$6.00	$3.46	$4.52
5 Zone	$7.50	$4.45	$5.80
6 Zone	$8.80	$5.10	$6.70
7 Zone	$10.10	$5.60	$7.50
8 Zone	$11.20	$6.00	$8.20

*Child, Accessible and Tertiary AT HOP fares only apply when paying with an AT HOP card with the relevant concession applied.

LE AT

Visit AT’s website for more information on Simpler Fares, including a map showing the new fare zones: https://at.govt.nz/bus-train-ferry/service-announcements/simpler-fares-from-sunday-14-august/#ZoneMap.

Ian McKinnon Cycleway

47. A new cycleway will cut travel time for the growing number of people cycling into the city centre from west Auckland. Auckland Transport is seeking feedback on plans revealed today for the Ian McKinnon Dr Cycleway which is a two way, on-road cycleway and a shared path through Suffolk Reserve.

48. The aim is to improve the connection for people cycling into the city from the Northwestern Cycleway and Dominion Rd. At the moment, those cycling from the Northwestern Cycleway have to go up to Newton Rd and either cross the road at the lights or do a loop around Piwakawaka St. This brings them on to the south side of Ian McKinnon Drive so they have to cross the road again if they are going to the city.

49. The proposal is to extend the cycleway through Suffolk Reserve and for it to continue as a two way cycleway on the city-side of Ian McKinnon Drive. It will also be helpful for those cycling from Dominion Rd who will be able to continue on Ian McKinnon Drive and then into the city via Lightpath, Grafton Gully or Queen Street.

50. The number of cycle journeys recorded on the Northwestern Cycleway went up almost 50 percent in May 2016 compared with May 2015 and the number of people cycling into the city centre has doubled in three years.

51. Auckland Transport is working with project partners Auckland Council and the Government through the NZ Transport Agency and the Urban Cycleways Programme on a $200m programme of cycle improvements in Auckland from 2015 to 2018.

52. Public feedback for Ian McKinnon Dr Cycleway is open until Monday 29 August. For more: https://at.govt.nz/projects-roadworks/ian-mckinnon-drive-cycleway/.

Neilson Street Changes

53. The public are being given a chance to have their say on changes designed to improve travel times and congestion along Neilson Street in Onehunga. The improvements which include changes to parking in the area are part of the local transport improvements of the East West Connections project and are designed to provide benefits for local road users including freight along Neilson Street.

54. The work involves creating four lanes (increasing from two) on Neilson Street between Alfred Street and Angle Street. The improvements also include new walking and cycling facilities alongside Waikaraka Park. A new footpath and timber boardwalk linking to the existing walkway will make it easier and safer for the community to access the park particularly for sporting activities and the Speedway.

55. Construction is planned to start later this year and be completed by December. The work is part of a wider package of improvements including removing the rail bridge at the end of Neilson Street and replacing it with a new, lowered road.

56. The Southwestern Motorway will also be widened to four lanes in each direction between Neilson Street and Queenstown road to further support traffic growth expected on State Highway 20.

57. For more information visit: at.govt.nz/about-us/have-your-say or www.nzta.govt.nz/east-west

Consideration

Issues Raised by Local Board Members

Location or Name of Issue	Description	AT Response
Seacliffe Road	Concerns raised by local ratepayers group of trucks coming up Seacliffe Road to access Hillsborough Road and speeds on the downhill section of the road and around the corner by the small group of shops.	This issue has been logged. Traffic counts will need to be done to assess the speeds and any heavy traffic. This is still in progress
Freeland Avenue	Request for removal of parking restrictions by the preschool has been supported by the principal. AT to follow up on if this can proceed.	AT’s view is that removing this clearway would make this area around the walk way on Freeland Ave more dangerous for students. Without this clearway the students are likely to cross the road between cars making them less visible to drivers. This could also potentially act as a pickup area which would increase vehicle activity which further increases the danger for students. The original resolution supporting the clearway is dated 21st May 2003.
Griffen Park Road/Hillsborough Road Corner	The community patrol has asked if the left only signage from Griffen Park Road to Hillsborough Rd can be made more obvious please.	AT will increase road marking on Griffen Park Road to reinforce the left turn movement. It will be marked ‘Left Turn Only’, further back from the intersection with Hillsborough Road.
Tory Street	Roskill Retirement Village has asked if the hockey stick parking markings that were added to the exit/entrance on Denny Avenue can also be applied to the village’s exit/entrance on Tory Street.	Logged
Light Phasing at the Maioro Road/Stoddard Road/Richardson Rd area	Traffic coming from Stoddard Road and wanting to turn left into Richardson Road has a limited amount of time or space to get into the left hand lane which causes queueing back to Stoddard Rd.	The lights in this area are managed by JTOC. Changes to this intersection are under consideration to complement the opening of the Waterview tunnels.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Report from Auckland Transport departments on what they have done in each local board area over the past quarter	61
b ⇩	Report on Travelwise Schools activities	73
c ⇩	The Transport Controls Committee report	111
d ⇩	Berm Specificatons	113
e ⇩	Zone Fare Map	115

Signatories

Authors

Lorna Stewart, Elected Member Relationship Manager, Auckland Transport

Authorisers

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

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

25 August 2016

Puketāpapa Local Grants and Quick Response, Round One: 2016/2017

File No.: CP2016/15625

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to present applications received for round one of the Puketāpapa Local Grants and Quick Response 2016/2017. The local board is required to fund, part-fund or decline these applications.

Executive Summary

2. The Puketāpapa Local Board has set a total Community Grants budget of $142,000 for the 2016/2017 financial year. It has indicated that $70,000 should go towards the Strategic Relationship Grant fund, $60,000 ($30,000 each for two rounds) to Local Grants and $12,000 to Quick Response grants ($3,000 each for four rounds)..

3. Ten applications were received for Local Grants round one, with a total requested of $34,777 (see Attachment B). Seven applications were received for Quick Response round one, with a total requested of $6,952 (See Attachment C)

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

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

Table One: Puketāpapa Local Grants, Round One applications

Application number	Focus	Organisation Name	Project	Total Requested
LG1715-110	Arts and culture	Global Lighthouse Trust	Roskill Community Digital Media Project	$2,720
LG1715-102	Community	The Parenting Place - Attitude Youth Division	Attitude life-skills and wellbeing presentations in Puketāpapa schools	$2,097
LG1715-103	Community	Communicare Civilian Maimed Association (CMA) Auckland Incorporated	Hillsborough Communicare Friendship Centre	$1,800
LG1715-104	Community	Earth Action Trust	Setting up of Earth Action student club at university	$4,715
LG1715-106	Community	Problem Gambling Foundation - Asian Family Services	Wellness Recovery Action Plan (WRAP) Programme	$4,800
LG1715-107	Community	PHAB Association Incorporated	PHAB development Workshops	$4,500
LG1715-109	Community	Bhartiya Samaj Charitable Trust	Elder support programme	$6,625
LG1715-111	Community	Roopa Aur Aap Charitable Trust	Victory Over Violence	$1,001
LG1715-108	Events	Eco Matters Environment Trust	EcoWest Festival	$5,019
			Total requested	$33,277

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

Table Two: Puketāpapa Local Grants, Round One Multiboard application

Application number

Focus

Organisation Name

Project

Total

Requested

LG1711-116

Events

OKE Charity

2016 Hubbard’s Head2Head Walk

$1,500

Total requested

$1,500

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

Table Three Puketāpapa Quick Response, Round One applications

Application number	Focus	Organisation Name	Project	Total Requested
QR1715-108	Arts and culture	The Breaks New Zealand Limited	The Breaks New Zealand weekly (break) dance community workshops	$750
QR1715-102	Community	Jannifer Canovas	Towards the “Mummy Up” programme	$1,295
QR1715-105	Community	HIPPY Wesley Puketapapa Charitable Trust	HIPPY Wesley Puketapapa Charitable Trust	$2,000
QR1715-106	Community	Connect the Dots Charitable Trust	Towards the costs of the Make Moments in Puketapapa programme	$675
QR1715-110	Community	Auckland Young Women's Christian Association (YWCA) Incorporated	Towards the costs of the Safe for Life programme	$750
QR1715-104	Events	The James Wallace Arts Trust	Towards the costs of the Community day	$734
QR1715-109	Events	Mt Roskill Baptist Church	Towards the costs of the Light party	$748
			Total requested	$6,952

Comments

4. The Auckland Council Community Grants Policy supports each local board to adopt a grants programme (see Attachment A).

5. 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.

6. The Puketāpapa Local Board will operate four quick response rounds and two local grants rounds for this financial year. The first Local Grants round closed on 8 July 2016 and Quick Response on 22 July 2016.

7. The community grant programmes have been extensively advertised through the council grants webpage, local board webpages, local board e-newsletters, Facebook pages, council publications, radio, and community networks.

8. For the 2016/2017 financial year, the Puketāpapa Local Board indicated that it intends to spend $72,000 of its Community Grants budget on Local Grants and Quick Response grant rounds. It is recommended that the board consider allocating up to 46% of this in this grant round.

9. Ten applications were received for Local Grants round one, with a total requested of $34,777 (see Attachment B). Seven applications were received for Quick Response round one, with a total requested of $6,952 (See Attachment C)

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

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

11. 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.”

12. A summary of each application for local grants round one and quick response round one 2016/2017 is attached (see Attachment B and C).

Māori impact statement

13. 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

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

15. Following the Puketāpapa Local Board allocating funding for Local Grants and Quick Response round one, Commercial and Finance staff will notify the applicant of the local board decision.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Puketapapa Local Board Grants Programme 2016/2017	121
b ⇩	Puketapapa Local Grants Round One 2016/2017 application summaries	127
c ⇩	Puketapapa Quick Response, Round One 2016/2017 application summaries	167

Signatories

Authors

Fua Winterstein - Community Grants Advisor

Authorisers

Marion Davies - Community Grants Operations Manager

Jennifer Rose - Operations Support Manager

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

25 August 2016

Draft Annual Report 2015/2016 - Puketāpapa Local Board report

File No.: CP2016/14701

Purpose

1. This report compares actual activities and performance with the intended activities and level of service set out in the Local Board Agreement 2015/2016. The information is prepared as part of the local board’s accountability to the community for the decisions made throughout the year.

Executive summary

2. The Auckland Council Annual Report 2015/2016 (AR) is currently being prepared and progressed through an external audit process. In late September, the audit is expected to be completed and the final report will be approved and released to the public. The AR will include performance results for each local board.

3. The local board is required to monitor and report on the implementation of the Local Board Agreement for 2015/2016. The requirements for monitoring and reporting are set out in the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009. These requirements include providing comment on actual local activities against the intended level of service, and for the comments to be included in the AR.

4. The 2015/2016 local board agreements formed part of the Long-term Plan 2015-2025 (LTP). The performance measures included in the LTP changed significantly from the previous LTP. This AR is the first time that we are reporting back externally against these new performance measures.

5. The attached report is proposed for approval by the local board. The report includes the following sections:

- Message from the chairperson

- The year in review

- How we performed

- Financial information.

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) note the monitoring and reporting requirements set out in the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 and the draft local board information proposed for the Auckland Council Annual Report 2015/2016.

b) receive the draft local board report to be included in the Auckland Council Annual Report 2015/2016.

c) approve the message from the chairperson, which provides the local board’s comments on local board matters in the Annual Report 2015/2016.

d) delegate authority to the chairperson and deputy chairperson to make typographical changes before submitting for final publication.

Comments

6. The local board is required to monitor and report on the implementation of Local Board Agreement 2015/2016. The requirements for monitoring and reporting are set out in the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009, as follows:

Section 23 monitoring and reporting

(1) Each local board must monitor the implementation of the local board agreement for its local board area.

(2) Each annual report of the Auckland Council must include, in respect of local activities for each local board area, an audited statement that –

i) compares the level of service achieved in relation to the activities with the performance target or targets for the activities (as stated in the local board agreement for that year); and

ii) specifies whether any intended changes to the level of service have been achieved; and

iii) gives reasons for any significant variation between the level of service achieved and the intended level of service.

7. Each local board must comment on the matters included in the Annual Report under subsection (2) in respect of its local board area and the council must include those comments in the Annual Report.

8. This report focuses on the formal reporting referred to in Section 23 above. Attachment A provides the draft local board information for inclusion in the Annual Report 2015/2016. The report contains the following sections:

	Section	Description
a)	Message from the chairperson	Legislative requirement to include commentary from the local board on matters included in the report.
b)	The year in review a. - Financial performance b. - Key achievements c. - Key projects d. - Challenges in our area e. - Looking forward	Snapshot of main areas of interest for the community in the local board area.
c)	How we performed	Legislative requirement to report on performance measure results for each activity, and to provide explanations where targeted levels have not been achieved.
d)	Financial information	Legislative requirement to report on financial performance results compared to LTP budgets, together with explanations about variances.

9. Local board comments on local board matters in the annual report will be included in the Annual Report as part of the message from the chair.

10. The next steps for the draft Annual Report are:

· Audit during August 2016

· Report to the Finance and Performance Committee on 22 September

· Report to the Governing Body for adoption on 29 September

· Release to stock exchanges on 29 September

· Publication on 7 October

· Copies of the Annual Report will be provided to the local board offices, Auckland Council libraries and council service centres.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

11. Local board comments on local board matters in the Annual Report will be included in the Annual Report as part of the message from the chair.

Māori impact statement

12. The Annual Report provides information on how Auckland Council has progressed its agreed priorities in the Long-term Plan over a 12-month period. This includes engagement with Māori, as well as projects that benefit various population groups, including Māori.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Draft 2015/2016 Annual Report	233

Signatories

Authors

David Rose - Lead Financial Advisor

Judy Kerling - PA to Group Financial Controller

Authorisers

Christine Watson- Manager Financial Advisory Services – Local Boards

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

25 August 2016

Panuku Development Auckland Local Board Update 1 January to 30 June 2016

File No.: CP2016/13257

Purpose

1. To give the Puketāpapa Local Board an overview of Panuku Development Auckland. The report also notes any major issues, projects and activities within the Local Board area for the six months 1 January to 30 June 2016.

Background

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

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

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

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

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) note the Panuku Development Auckland Local Board Update 1 January to 30 June 2016.

Local Activities

Portfolio Management

6. Panuku manages property owned by the Council and Auckland Transport (AT) that are not currently needed for service or infrastructure purposes. These are properties that are not immediately required for delivery of a council service or infrastructure development but are being held for use in a planned future project such as road construction, the expansion of parks or development of future town centres.

7. The property portfolio comprises 1447 properties containing 1121 leases as at 30 June 2016. The current portfolio includes vacant land, industrial buildings, warehouses, retail shops, cafes, offices, medical centres and a large portfolio of residential rental homes.

8. The return on the property portfolio for the period ending 30 June 2016 was above budget with a net surplus to the Auckland Council (AC) and AT shareholders of $3.9m ahead of budget.

9. The average monthly tenantable occupancy rate for the six month period is more than 98% which is above the SOI target of 95%.

Properties Managed in Puketāpapa Local Board Area

10. Panuku Development Auckland currently manages 25 commercial and residential properties within the Puketāpapa Local Board area:

Commercial Properties	1
Residential Properties	24
Total Properties Managed	25

Business Interests

11. Panuku also optimises the commercial return from business interests it manages on the Council’s behalf. This comprises two forestry enterprises, two landfills and four quarries.

12. There are currently no managed business interests in the Puketāpapa Local Board area.

Acquisitions and Disposals

Acquisitions

13. 14 properties have been purchased this financial year for open space purposes around the region at a value of $29.5m, and 13 properties have been purchased for storm water purposes at a value of $1.3m.

14. No properties were purchased in the Puketāpapa Local Board area during the reporting period.

Disposals

15. To the financial year end 2015/16 Panuku has achieved $55.5m of unconditional net sales against the 2015/16 disposals target of $50.0m for the year.

16. Three Kings Reserve – Land Exchange: The Independent Hearings Panel (IHP) recommendation on the Unitary Plan was issued on 22 July 2016. The interim decision of the Environment Court in respect of the Three Kings plan change to Operative District plan was released on 29 July 2016. The land exchange agreement is on hold subject to the outcome of these planning processes.

Portfolio Strategy

Portfolio Review and Rationalisation

Overview

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

Performance

18. July 2015 to June 2016 Target

UNIT	TARGET	ACHIEVED	COMMENTS
Portfolio Review	$40m disposal recommendations	$53,436,750 as at 30 June 2016	These recommendations include $38,334,000 of sites that are identified for development projects.

19. Panuku works closely with the Council and AT to identify potentially surplus properties to help achieve disposal targets.

20. July 2016 to June 2017 Target

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

Process

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

Under review

22. Properties currently under review in the Puketāpapa Local Board area are listed below. The list includes any properties that may have recently been approved for sale or development and sale by the governing body.

PROPERTY	DETAILS
30C Gilletta Road, Mt Roskill	Transferred from Auckland Council Property department as non-service. Rationalisation process commenced in June 2014. Auckland Transport submitted expression of interest for site to be retained. Auckland Transport subsequently withdrew expression of interest. Local board workshop was held in April 2016. Panuku awaiting information from Parks before reporting back to the local board.
119A May Road, Mt Roskill	Transferred from Parks Sports and Recreation as non-service. Rationalisation process commenced in December 2015. Expression of interest received from Watercare seeking to investigate if this site is a suitable location for a pump station. Local board workshop was held in April 2016. Panuku liaising with Parks regarding this site.
14 Vagus Place, Royal Oak	Transferred from Parks Sports and Recreation as non-service. Rationalisation process commenced in December 2015. No expressions of interest were received during the internal consultation. Local board workshop was held in April 2016. Panuku liaising with Parks regarding this site.
51 Stamford Park Road, Mt Roskill (part one and two)	Transferred from Community and Social Policy as non-service. Rationalisation process commenced in August 2015. No expressions of interest were received during internal consultation. Local board and iwi feedback was supportive of the proposed divestment. The Regional Strategy and Policy Committee approved the sale of these two parcels of land in July 2016.

Regional Activities

23. The workload of Panuku has increased significantly with framework planning beginning for the Transform project of Manukau, and the Unlock projects of Northcote and Takapuna. Alongside our business as usual, managing these projects means that Panuku carefully balances its resource planning. Henderson is the next centre that Panuku is considering, and work has begun on a high level project plan (HLPP) for Henderson centre.

24. Alongside the development projects, Panuku continues its business as usual activities, including managing the Council’s non-service property disposal and managing the Westhaven Marina.

25. As expected, workload at Panuku is requiring active management as the number of projects in the Panuku work programme increases. Panuku is developing a master programme so it can effectively spread its resources across projects, control the scope of its programme to ensure it can retain a strong focus on delivery, and to identify where it will require extra resourcing moving forward. Where extra resourcing or funding is required for urban regeneration within transform locations, Council has endorsed the principle of Transform Project expenditure being funded from reinvestment of proceeds from properties which are disposed within those locations.

26. Panuku has continued to form strong relationships with stakeholders; with the communities it works within, Local Boards, the Council family and also with the Government. Mana Whenua engagement activities is significant, with monthly meetings held with all Mana Whenua, and regular one-on-one engagement with Iwi.

Highlights

27. The highlights for the last 6 months were:

a) The Auckland Development Committee approved the High Level Project Plan (HLPP) for Manukau as a Transform location.

b) The Auckland Development Committee also approved the HLPP for Northcote and Takapuna as Unlock locations.

c) The Prime Minister Rt Hon John Key and Madam Chang Laiwa, Chair of Fu Wah, turned the ground at the ground-breaking ceremony for the $200 million, 190-room Park Hyatt hotel being built in the Wynyard Quarter.

d) Including the Park Hyatt hotel, 14 developments are currently underway in the transformation of the Wynyard Quarter, with Willis Bond and Precinct progressing through their respective residential and commercial developments.

e) Panuku has been negotiating a joint venture agreement with The Selwyn Foundation to provide a basis for when it becomes the Community Housing Partner for Auckland Council’s Housing for Older People portfolio subject to public consultation process. A HLPP to cover the multi-year redevelopment of the network of village sites is being prepared by Panuku, as is the accountability framework. This is being discussed with The Selwyn Foundation. The HLPP will be presented to the Governing Body in August for approval.

f) The development of the Airfields site at Hobsonville is continuing, with infrastructure being developed, including the building of new roads and water ponds. The 20 hectare Airfields site will provide approximately 400 new homes when it is completed. Panuku has finalised a development agreement with A.V Jennings in April 2016 for the development of Airfields stage 1. The site is 1.6ha which will result in the construction of 102 homes, ten percent being affordable. Panuku is also currently discussing with a potential partner the development of the remainder of the 20 hectare site.

g) Panuku Development Auckland was given delegated authority from Auckland Council’s Finance and Performance Committee in March 2016 to seek private sector investment to redevelop the Civic Administration Building. Panuku has identified a preferred proposal to redevelop the building and surrounding land and is working through the details with the selected developer. If negotiations proceed as hoped, Panuku should be able to enter into a development agreement later in the year. The preferred proposal will meet Council’s heritage and design requirements for this iconic building and does not require a financial contribution from Council. There will be a full public announcement outlining the plans for the building and surrounding land once the development agreement is signed.

Future outlook

28. Over the next few months, Panuku will:

a) Continue to develop Framework Plans for Transform Manukau and progress the Northcote, Takapuna and Henderson, HfOP Unlock projects. As part of this work, Panuku will be defining what affordable housing means in relation to the developments that it works on.

b) Work on the HLPP for the Onehunga Transform project is continuing. Panuku is consulting with the New Zealand Transport Agency about the implications on the HLPP from the East-West project route. It is also working with the Ports of Auckland on the transfer of ownership to Panuku of the Onehunga Port. This means that the formation of the HLPP is taking longer than originally anticipated.

c) Start the HLPP process for Henderson town centre.

d) Continue to work with The Selwyn Foundation on establishing the Community Housing Partner for the Housing joint venture for Older People, and to form a development programme for its housing portfolio.

e) Support the Tamaki Regeneration Company (TRC) to plan and go-to-market process to redevelop the 2,800 social houses that it recently transferred from Crown ownership to TRC. The Council and the Crown are owners of the TRC, and Panuku provides advice to the Council on its shareholder interest. It is working alongside The Treasury (who advise on the Crown’s shareholder interest) to support the go-to-market process which will see the redevelopments which will increase housing from the current 2,800 social houses to 7,500 mixed tenure houses over a 10-15 year period.

f) Oversee the 14 developments currently underway across the Wynyard Quarter. A critical component of this is to work closely with Auckland Transport to ensure that essential roading infrastructure work takes place, and to manage through the impacts of any delays in the AT programme of works on the development programme within the Wynyard Quarter.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

29. This report is for the Puketāpapa Local Board’s information.

30. Panuku requests that all feedback and/or queries you have relating to a property in your Local board area be directed in the first instance to localboard@developmentauckland.co.nz

Māori impact statement

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

32. In June 2016 Panuku progressed the Goals and Actions plan outline into a business wide Māori Responsiveness Action Plan, detailing at an operational level how we will meet our commitments to Maori. We have additionally agreed a Māori Commercial Relationships Action Plan formalising our processes for encouraging Māori commercial relationships with Panuku.

Local context

33. There are 14 iwi with mana whenua interests in the Puketāpapa Local Board area. Panuku has been engaging with these groups in respect of potential disposals and development sites in the Puketāpapa Local Board area over the past three years.

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

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

Implementation

36. There are no implementation issues.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Sven Mol - Stakeholder Relations Coordinator - Panuku Development Auckland

Authorisers

Toni Giacon - Team Leader Stakeholder and Community Engagement

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Comments

7. The site is located, by way of subdivision, at 985 Mount Eden Road, Three Kings, and is legally described as Lot 1 DP 37020.

8. Auckland Council granted a land use resource consent (R/LUC/2015/415) on 27 March 2015 for the construction of 78 residential units with associated plaza area, basement garaging, car parking, infrastructure works and two new roads to vest. A subdivision consent was approved on 8 March 2016 to subdivide around the proposed buildings approved under the land use consent. As part of the subdivision consent, a new road will be created to be vested in Auckland Council and a private accessway will be constructed to service the dwellings proposed. This road naming application relates to road and accessway are identified in figure one. They would, respectively, be constructed at the North-South and East-West local roads, linking Mount Eden Road with the existing Haul Road located to the north of the development site.

9. The Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines allows that where a new road or accessway need to be named as a result of a subdivision or development, the subdivider/developer shall be given the opportunity of suggesting their preferred new road names for the Local Board’s approval. The applicant has the preferred names ‘Kimiora Street’ and ‘Hollowstone Way’ for the road and the accessway, and have suggested ‘Waharoa Street’ and ‘Hauhauterangi Street’, and ‘Besser Way’ and ‘Connelly Way’ as the alternative options.

Figure one: Location of proposed road.

Decision Making

10. The Auckland Council, by way of the Auckland Council Long Term Plan (2012 – 2022), allocated the responsibility for the naming of new roads, pursuant to section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974, to Local Boards.

Assessment

11. The applicants proposed road names have been assessed against the criteria set out in the Auckland Council road naming guidelines. All names adhere to the general principles and objectives. The significance of the proposed names are outlined in the table below.

Preference	Proposed road name	The significance of the proposed road name.
First	Kimiora Street	‘Kimi’ means ‘to seek/search’; ‘ora’ means ‘vitality/sustenance’. The overall meaning is to seek vitality/sustenance. This is considered a relevant name as the new development is likely to bring liveliness/nourishment to the area. In addition to this Hero Potini, the Chair Te Taiao Roopuu of Ngaati Tamaoho Trust, has stated that this name has special significance to Ngaati Tamaoho because of prior whanau connections to the area. ‘Kimiora’ was proposed by Ngaati Tamaoho and is supported by Ngai Tai Ki Tamaki and Ngati Maru. The proposed use of ‘Street’ accurately reflects the type of road being named. The name has been accepted by Land Information New Zealand and New Zealand Post.
Alternative suggestion	Waharoa Street	‘Waharoa’ means ‘Entrance, Gateway, Main Gateway’. This name is considered to be appropriate as the Three Kings SHA is the first stage of the wider Three Kings Development, and from Mt Eden Road forms the entranceway into the development. ‘Waharoa’ was proposed by Te Akitai o Waiohua. The proposed use of ‘Street’ accurately reflects the type of road being named. The name has been accepted by Land Information New Zealand and New Zealand Post.
Alternative suggestions	Hauhauterangi Street	‘Hauhauterangi’ was the Priest of the Tainui waka and refers to the name of the waters of the area. This name is linked to Riukiuta ‘Big King’. This name is considered to be appropriate due to its cultural significance to the area. ‘Hauhauterangi’ was proposed by Ngati Te Ata. The proposed use of ‘Street’ accurately reflects the type of road being named. The name has been accepted by Land Information New Zealand and New Zealand Post.

Preference	Proposed name for the accessway	The significance of the proposed road name.
First	Hollowstone Way	Winstone commenced the manufacture of ‘Hollowstone’ concrete blocks in New Zealand’s first concrete masonry manufacturing plant, in the north-east section of site where the development is located. This name is considered to be appropriate as it reflects the heritage of the area. The proposed use of ‘Way’ accurately reflects the type of road being named. The name has been accepted by Land Information New Zealand and New Zealand Post.
Alternative suggestion	Besser Way	Winstone commenced the manufacture of Hollowstone concrete blocks in New Zealand’s first concrete masonry manufacturing plant, in the north-east section of site where the development is located. These hollowstone concrete blocks were made using a Besser Vibrapac machine. This name is considered to be appropriate as it reflects the heritage of the area. The proposed use of ‘Way’ accurately reflects the type of road being named. The name has been accepted by Land Information New Zealand and New Zealand Post.
Alternative suggestions	Connelly Way	Winstone Ltd purchased the site in 1922 from William Connelly who had acquired the fee simple in May 1884. This name is considered to be appropriate as it reflects the heritage of the area. The proposed use of ‘Way’ accurately reflects the type of road being named. The name has been accepted by Land Information New Zealand and New Zealand Post.

12. As the applicant’s preferred names (Kimiora Street and Hollowstone Way) meets the criteria, it is recommended for the board’s consideration.

Consideration

Significance of Decision

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

Māori impact statement

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

15. The proposed names ‘Kimiora Street’ and ‘Hollowstone Way’ were selected from the list of the names provided by Te Akitai Waiohua, Ngati Tamamaoho, Ngati Maru, Ngatitai ki Tamaki, and Ngati Te Ata.

16. The Applicant has consulted the 8 local iwi listed for the Puketāpapa Local Board Area, advising of the proposed street names and asking for comments and alternative options. No objection was raised or alternative names suggested by any of the 8 local iwi contacted.

Consultation

17. The applicant has spoken with the local iwi groups and has consequently included evidence of meaningful consultation with the names Kimiora Street and Hollowstone Way.

18. New Zealand Post and Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) have commented that the proposed names ‘Kimiora Street’ and ‘Hollowstone Way’ meet their criteria and standards.

Financial and Resourcing Implications

19. The cost of processing the approval of the proposed names is recoverable in accordance with Council’s Administrative Charges. The applicant is responsible for the installation of the road name signage as part of the subdivision.

Legal and Legislative Implications

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

Implementation

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

Puketāpapa Local Board

25 August 2016

Community Places - community centre and venue for hire fees from 1 January 2017

File No.: CP2016/16246

Purpose

1. To approve the Hire Fee Framework fees for venue for hire and community centres for all hirers.

Executive summary

2. Within Auckland Council, local boards are responsible for setting local fees and charges, including those that relate to asset based services such as for community centres and venues for hire. Fees are typically reviewed and agreed on an annual basis as part of finalising the local board annual agreement.

3. There are a number of hirers in the Puketāpapa Local Board area that continue to benefit from substantially subsidised fees (see Attachment A). These hirers’ fees have not yet been aligned to council’s Hire Fee Framework. Previous decisions of the board have applied modest increases to the fees these groups pay. The foregone revenue associated with these lower fees is in the region of $48,206 per annum.

4. Staff have considered three options for fee setting in 2016/2017. Based on their analysis, staff recommend that the full fee be applied to these groups. The two alternative options are not recommended as they do not offer transparent benefits to all members of the community.

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) adopt the 2016/2017 community centre and venue for hire fees for all hirers from 1 January 2017 onwards.

Comments

Background

5. In 2014, Auckland Council adopted the Hire Fee Framework, an operational policy which guides the setting of fees across the network of council operated community centres and venues for hire. Community group operated centres and venues generally determine and administer their own fee schedules and therefore they are not considered in this report.

6. Fees are informed by the performance of three factors which customers told us they value highly; the condition of the facility, the level of amenity provided and the presence of staff on site. The framework includes financial incentives aimed at enabling community outcomes, making more use of off-peak capacity and encouraging regular use of facilities. See Attachment B for an overview of the current fees and charges for Puketāpapa’s community centres and venues for hire.

7. There are a small number of facility users in Puketāpapa who continue to benefit from more favourable fees than other users. These groups have been afforded 30 months to transition to the new rate. Continuing these special arrangements sustains a benefit not available to other members of the community and requires extra administrative effort and cost to recognise and process these exceptions.

8. Of the 27 groups listed in Attachment A, seven groups receive fee benefits calculated at $1000 or more. The total value of the benefit to all 27 groups is $48,206 per year. An outline of the benefits per group and number of attendees’ is shown in the Attachment A.

9. Previous decisions of the board have applied modest increases to the fees these groups pay. The foregone revenue associated with these lower fees is $48,206 per annum. Staff recommend that the full fee be applied to these groups from 1 January 2017.

Options

10. Staff have considered three possible options for community centre and venue for hire fees and these are outlined below.

Option Overview	Advantages	Disadvantages
Option 1 (Recommended): Full fee applied to all groups The full fee would be applied to all groups using Puketāpapa Local Board community venues so that all users pay the same fees.	Enables a clear and transparent process for all users. Enables all Aucklanders to participate within facilities under the same conditions. Easy to administer.	Increased fees for the 27 groups.
Option 2: Status quo The local board is the allocated decision maker for fee setting and can choose to sustain the current level of benefit to groups if it wishes. This would be an investment decision.	Provides an opportunity for the board to identify the particular group/ activity / benefit it wishes to sustain and to target the LDI investment to support it.	Continues to sit outside the Framework by providing a range of fees not available to other local users. Inconsistent – benefiting some and not others. Difficult to administer.
Option 3: Sustain some or all of the more favourable fees by increasing standard fees payable by other regular users In applying the Hire Fee Framework in 2014, the local board identified the priority focus areas to receive the priority rate subsidy of 50%. Other users of the facility pay the standard rate. If the local board chose to increase the fee payable by standard rate customers by 20% it might generate an additional $20,000 revenue per annum. This additional revenue could be reinvested to offset the cost of the more favourable fees to some groups, though it would be insufficient to cover the full value of the benefit to all 27 groups. An outline of these figures is shown in Attachment A.	Provides an opportunity for the board to identify the particular group/ activity / benefit it wishes to sustain and to use differentiated fee setting to underwrite this benefit.	An increase in pricing may mean customers go elsewhere and therefore may not result in increased revenue. Staff currently have too little data on the relationship between pricing and usage in this service to provide a robust forecast. Inconsistent – benefiting some and not others. Difficult to administer.

The Local Board Funding Policy

11. The Local Board Funding Policy provides the mechanism for Local Boards to invest LDI funds to support fees where they deviate from baseline fees and charges recommended by an Asset Based Service (ABS).

12. The amount of budget available to each local board for locally driven initiatives is partially determined by:

· revenue from fees and charges for local asset based services in excess of that projected by the Governing Body where the local board sets higher fees

· minus revenue from fees and charges for local asset based services below that projected by the Governing Body where the local boards sets lower fees.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

13. Staff discussed the fees to be applied in 2016/2017 at a workshop with local board members on 17 February 2016. Some members held the view that the board should continue to provide subsidies to regular hirers on legacy arrangements and increase those rates by 10 per cent on 1 January 2017. An outline increase for regular hirers with special arrangements from 1 January to 30 June 2017 is shown in Attachment A.

14. Puketāpapa Local Board requested that staff investigate and develop a policy for venue hire for delivery of board projects and initiatives by community contractors under the Empowered Communities Approach. This policy already exists under the Hire Fee Framework policy. It allows the local board to discount activities that reflect local board plan priorities.

Māori impact statement

15. The Hire Fee Framework does not specifically target Maori. However, it aims to be clear and transparent to all users and to enable all Aucklanders to participate within facilities, including Maori. None of the 27 groups in question have activity dedicated strictly towards Maori outcomes.

Implementation

16. The recommendation in this report does not trigger the Auckland Council Significance Policy.

17. Confirmed fees for the second part of the 2016 financial year will be communicated to all regular hirers and will be effective from 1 January 2017.

18. Council staff will provide regular updates on the impact of the hire fees and the performance of council-managed community facilities as part of quarterly reporting arrangements.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Analysis of hirers with special arrangements	263
b ⇩	Recommended fee schedule for 2016/2017	265

Signatories

Authors

Peter Matvos - Team leader Venue Hire

Authorisers

Graham Bodman - General Manager Arts, Community and Events

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

25 August 2016

Māori Language Policy

File No.: CP2016/16603

Purpose

1. This report seeks feedback on the attached Māori Language Policy, implementation plan and guidelines.

Executive summary

2. The purpose of the Māori Language Policy is to direct and guide the actions of Auckland Council in relation to the celebration, integration and protection of the Māori language in council business. The Policy provides a practical means for Council to fulfil its commitments and obligations to Māori and articulates that council will work to ensure its policies and actions consider:

· the recognition and protection of Māori rights and interests within Tāmaki Makaurau

· how to address and contribute to the needs and aspirations of Māori

3. The Policy contains principles and conventions to ensure that anyone who receives or uses Auckland Council’s services or contributes to the democratic process has the choice to do so in either Māori or English. The Policy also encourages the use of Māori language in the community.

4. Importantly, the Policy and related implementation plan will inform Auckland Council group protocols and policies on:

· signage and interpretation

· dual-language naming

· road naming

· Communications;

· Meetings and hearings;

· Community engagement.

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) provide feedback on the draft Māori Language Policy and draft Māori Language Implementation Plan 2016-2019 and guidelines, for consideration by the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee at its September meeting.

Consideration

Drivers for the development of the policy

5. The key strategic driver for Auckland Council’s role in the protection and revitalisation of te reo Māori is contained within the Auckland Plan with its bi-lingual vision for the city Te Pai me te Whai Rawa o Tāmaki (the World’s Most Livable City.)

6. The key Auckland Plan outcome relevant to Council and its role in relation to the revitalisation of Te Reo Māori is “A Māori identity that is Auckland’s point of difference in the world”. Without the Māori language, the Māori identity ceases to exist.

7. The emerging strategy - Ngā Reo o Tāmaki Makaurau: Auckland Languages Strategy - being led by COMET Auckland - is also relevant to this work. This proposal for a strategic action plan prepared by COMET with a Languages working group has been received by Auckland Council (May 2015). The Council acknowledged the value of developing an Auckland Languages Strategy and requested staff to work with COMET and identify actions that could come out of the strategy. One of the Auckland Languages strategy’s goals is: Te Reo Māori is strengthened and widely used.

8. The recently reviewed Māori Language Act 2016 released a central Government strategy, Te Rautaki Reo Māori, The Māori Language Strategy 2014, as part of a national response to a deep concern for the health and vitality of the Māori language.

9. The Treaty Audit 2015 by the IMSB recommended the Te Reo Māori Framework and Māori Place names policy be finalised.

10. Overall, there is strong justification strategically, nationally and internationally for the council taking a position to positively contribute to the celebration, protection, integration and revitalisation of the Māori language.

11. The draft Māori Language Policy and the draft Māori Language Implementation Plan 2016 – 2019 sets out to direct and guide the actions of the Council family in relation to Māori language celebration, protection, integration and revitalisation so that councils’ actions are effective, efficient and coordinated.

Background on the development of the policy

12. In 2014 Te Waka Angamua subject matter experts developed a first draft policy and implementation plan.

13. In 2015 -2016 financial year further work was undertaken and the policy principles and conventions were socialised with a mana whenua reference group comprised of Māori knowledge experts, a Rōpū Pūkenga. The principles for celebrating original Māori place names in dual language naming was affirmed with this reference group. The conventions for signage were aligned to the conventions developed by the Tāmaki Collective for the Tūpuna Maunga Authority.

14. In March 2016 the draft policy and draft implementation plan were socialised within the wider Council family including Local Board Services, Democracy Services, IMSB, CCO’s Auckland Transport, Panuku Development , ATEED and COMET, Auckland Libraries, Arts Community Events, Customer Services and Workplace Strategy, By and large there was wide support and buy in for the policy principles, conventions and framework. The feedback on the proposed actions and targets in the implementation plan included concerns raised by Parks Sport and Recreation around potential budget implications and ability to commit. Communications and Engagement staff provided much feedback in to the draft guidelines document. No feedback was received from Local Board Services, Democracy Services Auckland Transport, ATEED and Arts Culture Events.

15. Feedback on the discussion document and draft Policy is being sought from Mana Whenua chairs, Mataāwaka, Rōpu Pūkenga and local boards. A workshop was held with the Puketāpapa Local Board on 27 July 2016.

16. This feedback will be incorporated into the final Policy report which will be presented at the September Regional Strategy and Policy Committee meeting together with a draft implementation plan. It is anticipated the implementation plan will need to be further refined and the committee will be asked to endorse the implementation plan in principle.

Local board views and implications

17. The Policy and related implementation plan has implications on Local Boards regarding:

· signage and interpretation;

· dual-language naming;

· road naming;

· Local board communications;

· Local board meetings and hearings;

· Local board community engagement.

18. This report seeks Local Board views on the draft policy and draft implementation plan and guidelines. This feedback will be incorporated into the final documents and presented to the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee in September for approval.

Māori impact statement

19. Mana whenua recognised by their iwi for their leadership in cultural knowledge have been engaged in the development of the policy principles. They are Hauauru Rawiri (Marutūahu/Ngāti Paoa), Dame Nganeko Minhinnick (Waiohua, Ngāti Te Ata), Haahi Walker (Ngāti Whātua/ Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara), Rahui Papa (Waikato, Te Whakakitenga o Waikato)

20. The principles and conventions are consistent with those developed by the Tāmaki Collective (comprised of 13 mana whenua) for the Tūpuna Māunga Authority

21. It is expected that this policy and implementation plan will give expression to council’s contribution towards celebrating, protecting, integrating and revitalizing Te Reo Māori in Tāmaki Makaurau as part of Auckland’s unique identity.

Implementation

22. The attached implementation plan details the outcomes sought and potential action areas available to council.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	draft Māori Language Policy	271
b ⇩	draft Māori Language Implementation Plan 2016-2019	279
c ⇩	draft Māori Language Guidelines	293

Signatories

Authors

Rama Ormsby | Paewhakatere Iho Kawe Tikanga, Principal Advisor Tikanga

Authorisers

Karen Lyons – Manager Local Board Services

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

25 August 2016

Governance Forward Work Calendar

File No.: CP2016/15736

Purpose

1. To present to the board with a 12 month 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 and workshops over the next 12 months. The governance forward work calendar for your 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 Puketāpapa Local Board note the attached Governance Forward Work Calendar.

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:

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 ⇩	Governance Forward Work Calendar, August 2016	323

Signatories

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

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

			Hourly rate as of 1 July 2016
Facility Category	Facility Name	Room	Sum of Published Peak Standard	Sum of Published Off-Peak Standard
Community Houses and Centres	Roskill Youth Zone	Multipurpose space Music Meeting space	$ 69.00 $ 49.00	$ 55.20 $ 39.20
Venues for hire	Wesley Community Centre	Kotare-Tauhou Room*	$ 34.00	$ 27.20
		Matuku Room	$ 24.00	$ 19.20
		Rakiraki Room *	$ 34.00	$ 27.20
		Tarapunga Room	$ 49.00	$ 39.20
		Timohina Room	$ 49.00	$ 39.20
		Warou Room	$ 24.00	$ 19.20
	Fickling Convention Centre	Hillsborough Room	$ 89.00	$ 71.20
		Lynfield Room	$ 49.00	$ 39.20
		Three Kings Upstairs	$ 24.00	$ 19.20
		Waikowhai Room	$ 49.00	$ 39.20
	Mt Roskill War Memorial Hall	Anzac Room	$ 69.00	$ 55.20
		Freyberg Room	$ 34.00	$ 27.20
	Three Kings Tennis Pavilion		$ 34.00	$ 27.20

Authors	Wendy Kjestrup - Local Board Advisor
Authorisers	Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager