Agenda of Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

28 March 2017

Tāmaki Path Project Progress Update

File No.: CP2017/04195

Purpose

1. To provide an update on the Tāmaki Path Project to the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board and seek approval to progress to the next stage.

Executive summary

2. The Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board approved the Tāmaki Path project to proceed to design and consenting in April 2016. Consultation for the project was endorsed by the local board in August 2016 and carried out between September 2016 and February 2017. This report updates the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board on the feedback from the consultation stage and seeks approval for the next stage of the project.

3. The general feedback from the public consultation was quite supportive of a shared concrete path. However, feedback varies between the sections and details of the survey analysis are provided in the Appendix. The survey also indicated that the path through the reserves will be used for a broad range of activities, including walking, walking dogs, exercise, cycling and enjoying the natural environment and socialising.

4. Based on the consultation feedback and the attached data, this report recommends that the project proceed to detailed design and consenting phase with a three meter wide concrete path with beach shell inclusion to represent the coastal nature of the walkway for all the sections. The exception to this is Section C of the Tāmaki Path where Taniwha Street to Point England Sports fields section is recommended to be placed on hold until the development plan for Point England is complete and the Kiano Place to Taniwha Street section which is recommended as a two meter gravel path.

5. The Tāmaki Path works towards the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board Plan objective for transport that meets the community’s and businesses’ needs along with parks, sports and recreational facilities that promote healthy lifestyles and enhance well-being.

6. The pathway activity of walking and cycling and associated structures including wayfinding and information signs are permitted activities within the two relevant recreation zones, the coastal transition zone and the road zone. Consent may be required for the establishment of impervious surfaces within these zones (and within proximity to the notable trees and significant ecological areas), for works within the significant ecological areas and for establishment of the bridge structure. The full suite of consent requirements and activity status will be confirmed once the width and location of the pathway and materials are finalised.

7. During the consultation of the project, a petition was also received from the Wai-o-taiki Residents Association (WRA). The petition data has not been included in the analysis of the consultation data as this petition raises various issues that are outside the scope of the Tāmaki Path project. As such, the project recommends the local board facilitate a separate response to the WRA and their concerns.

Recommendation/s

That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

a) approve the recommendation for a three metre wide concrete path to be implemented at the following sections, acknowledging that there will be some specific ‘pinch point’ locations where the width may be reduced based on further detailed assessment during the design phase;

i) Section A - Wai-O-Taiki Reserve Local Path

ii) Section B - Point England Reserve coastal Local Path

iii) Section C – Omaru Creek Local Path (from Kiano Place to Taniwha Street only)

iv) Section E - Riverside Reserve Local Path

v) Section F - Riverside Reserve and Dunkirk Reserve Local Path

vi) Section G – Mount Wellington War Memorial Reserve Local Path

vii) Section H - Panmure Wharf Local Path;

b) approve to place on hold Section C- Wai-O-Taiki Reserve/Omaru Creek Stream (from Taniwha Street to Point England Reserve sports fields) and Section D - Point England Reserve sports fields to the end of Point England Road until development plans for Point England have been confirmed;

c) approve the project to proceed to detailed design and consenting phase in the following two stages:

i) Tāmaki Estuary Greenway Path Stage One: Section E through to Section H

ii) Tāmaki Estuary Greenway Path Stage Two: Section A, Section B and part of Section C;

d) provide a separate response to the Wai-o-Taiki Residents Association regarding their petition and the issues they have raised.

Comments

Strategic Context

8. The Tāmaki Path works towards Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board’s Plan objective forTransport that meets their communities’ and businesses’ needs and Parks, sports and recreational facilities that promote healthy lifestyles and enhance well-being.

9. The Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board successfully advocated to the governing body for regional resources to deliver the Greenways Plan and the Tāmaki Path is the first greenway priority connection for this local board area. The Greenways Plan aims to create ecological, walking and cycling corridors across Maungakiekie-Tāmaki, with a focus on making it easy for people to walk and cycle safely and efficiently between local destinations. A formed concrete pathway will to encourage walking and cycling among groups less likely to use these options, for example older people

Background

10. The Tāmaki Estuary Walkway Plan was developed in 2012 and adopted by the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki local board in 2013 and captured as a priority project in the Local Board Plan 2014/2017.

11. At present, paths exist within Wai-o-Taiki Reserve and Point England Reserve only. These are proposed to be renewed and upgraded to the standard three meter wide shared pathway. There is no existing pathway network in any of the remaining parks and reserves.

The overall project objectives are to:

· develop a 10.1km walking and cycling pathway along the Tāmaki Estuary.

· provide a suitable pathway treatment that is in-keeping with the environment and setting and which provides for a range of walking and cycling skill and activity levels.

· provides a fit for purpose shared pathway where possible - 2m wide minimum but preferably 3m wide to meet Local Path standards.

· undertake and maintain ecological and environmental enhancement subject to funding availability.

12. The scope of works excludes:

· furniture

· planting, other than that required for resource consenting requirements

· signage (the exception being limited way finding signs).

13. In April 2016, the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board approved the Tāmaki Path project (also referred to as the Tāmaki Estuary Greenway) to proceed to the next stage of developed design and consent planning (resolution number MT/2016/54).

14. Following the meeting, a project team was established and engaged by council to plan and deliver the project. Preliminary desk and ground based research was completed and the project received local board endorsement to progress to the consultation phase in August 2016 (resolution number MT/2016/151).

15. The Tāmaki Path project is programmed to be delivered by the end of financial year 2018. The local board will be informed of any changes and/or delays to the proposed project timelines should the project completion be deferred across into the following financial year.

Consultation – recommended option and rationale

16. Consultation was undertaken to engage and consult with a broad range of people and in particular those that do not normally contact or engage with council. This was done in three stages with the fourth stage to be completed once the local board has made decisions on the way forward from here.

· Stage One - a targeted engagement with identified key stakeholders and community organisations to obtain an understanding of their potential issues and concerns.

· Stage Two - consultation with key stakeholders, community organisations and the wider community on the proposed alignment to obtain wider community views on the alignment.

· Stage Three - consultation with the key stakeholders, community organisations and the wider community on the developed design to obtain wider community views on the design.

· Stage Four - to inform the participants of the outcomes of the consultation and the final design.

17. The general feedback from the public consultation was quite supportive of a shared concrete path. However, feedback varies between the sections and details of the survey analysis is provided in Appendix. Survey also indicated that the path through the reserves will be used for a broad range of activities, including walking, walking dogs, exercise, cycling and enjoying the natural environment and socialising.

18. Path width – recommendation is that the path generally remains as three meters wide through all the sections except for Section C (two meters wide) and specific pinch points dictated by site constraints. This width also aligns with the Auckland Local Path Design Guide.

19. Path material – the proposed path material for the path is exposed aggregate concrete with 20% beach shell inclusion to represent the coastal nature of the walkway, this is similar to that used in the section along Roberta Reserve. This also allows for low maintenance and high service levels favour concrete over compacted aggregate.

20. Cycles vs pedestrian conflict – various measures, including signage such as “share with care” as well as design elements e.g. rumble strips within the path itself will be undertaken to reduce cycling speeds and improve user safety along the path.

21. Coastal erosion – the proposed path has been reviewed by the council’s Coastal and Geotechnical Services Team (CGST) who have confirmed the path itself will not exacerbate erosion issues. The width of the path may need to be reduced in localised sections due to the availability of open space to construct the full width path against the coastal edge.

22. A separate initiative is underway to identify areas of concern with respect to coastal erosion between Pointt England Road and Mount Wellington War Memorial Reserve clubrooms, with the intention of working with CGST to identify and implement possible management solutions.

Petition

23. During the consultation of the project, a petition was also received from the Wai-o-taiki Residents Association (WRA). The petition raised the residents’ concerns for Wai-o-taiki Reserve including:

· abandoning the greenway shared path proposal in Wai-o-taiki Reserve

· investing in reinstating, enhancing and extending the existing network of coastal bush walks, preserving both cultural and natural heritage.

· continue the network of erosion protection walls along the Wai-oTaiki Reserve costalwalkway

· create a unique experience extending from Tahuna Torea Wetland Reserve through Wai-o-Taiki Reserve and coastal walk up the Omaru Creek, connecting to the Point England walkway and the Glen Innes Pools. .

24. The petition data has not been included in the analysis of the consultation data as this petition raises various issues that are outside the scope of the Tāmaki Path project. As such, the project recommends the local board to facilitate a separate response to the WRA and their concerns.

Resource Management Act

25. The pathway activity of walking and cycling and associated structures including wayfinding and information signs are permitted activities within the two relevant recreation zones, the coastal transition zone and the road zone. Consent may be required for the establishment of impervious surfaces within these zones (and within proximity to the notable trees and significant ecological areas), for works within the significant ecological areas and for establishment of the bridge structure. The full suite of consent requirements and activity status will be confirmed once the width and location of the pathway and materials are finalised.

26. Consent will be required for the bridge including the landward parts of the structure.

27. Earthworks for cycle and walking tracks are permitted activities within the all zones (except where the works are undertaken within the significant ecological areas).

Future project progress and updates

28. The project will report back to the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board upon completion of the design and consenting phase and commencement of the construction phase.

Local Board views and implications

29. The Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board has supported this project by adoption of the Local Board Greenways Plan and the development of the Tāmaki Estuary Walkway Plan that was adopted by the local board in 2013 and captured as a priority project in the Local Board Plan 2014/2017. Project methodology and proposed scope of works were adopted by the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board at their April 2016 business meeting. The Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board endorsed the engagement strategy and consultation phase at their August 2016 business meeting.

Māori impact statement

30. Parks and open spaces contribute significantly to Maori well-being, values, culture and traditions.

31. Iwi engagement was undertaken with the first hui at the end of August 2016. The project also carried out a site walkover with Mana Whenua followed by several more hui sessions. The objective of this partnership engagement was to design and implement a shared pathway based on Te Aranga design principles and Mana Whenua values.

32. The project is working with Mana Whenua to finalise cultural design elements to be implemented as part of the Tāmaki Path project.

33. Discussion with Mana Whenua and their development team have confirmed that the construction of a wider shared pathway along the existing coastal track complements future development plans for the area and has little to no risk of rework or realignment at a later date.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Tāmaki Path Project progress Update Apprendix 1	21
b ⇩	Tāmaki Path Project progress Update Apprendix 2	39

Signatories

Authors

Vandna Kirmani - Project Manager

Authorisers

Rod Sheridan - General Manager Community Facilities

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

28 March 2017

Acquisition of land for open space - Glen Innes

File No.: CP2017/01533

Purpose

1. To seek the Local Board’s views on the proposed vesting, at no cost to council, of a park in the Stage 2B Fenchurch Special Housing Area in Glen Innes.

Executive summary

2. An opportunity has arisen to acquire a park, vested in council at no cost, through a resource consent submitted for the Fenchurch Special Housing Area by the Tāmaki Regeneration Company. The proposed pocket park is 1636m² in size and is located in Stage 2B of the development.

3. The proposed park is not a priority for acquisition, even at no cost, as assessed by staff against the criteria of the Parks and Open Space Acquisition Policy and the Open Space Provision Policy. Current practice is only to accept high and medium priority acquisitions at no cost to council.

4. The park would provide improved levels of amenity for residents who live in close proximity to it and it would meet a level of public expectation that has been raised. However, it does not meet wider community needs and is not located within an urban centre or a high density residential centre.

5. Staff recommend that council decline accepting the proposed park. However, the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board could choose to support the acquisition and agree to allocate ongoing funding for maintenance costs and renewals from its Local Discretionary Initiative budget.

6. The Local Board’s views on the proposed park will be reported to the Environment and Community Committee for consideration.

Recommendations

That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

Either

a) do not support the proposed vesting at no cost to council of approximately 1636m² of land for a pocket park within Stage 2B of the Fenchurch Special Housing Area, Glen Innes as shown in Attachment B of this report.

b) (i) support the proposed vesting at no cost to council of approximately 1636m² of land for a pocket park within Stage 2B of the Fenchurch Special Housing Area, Glen Innes as shown in Attachment B of this report.

and

(ii) indicate whether the Local Board would approve ongoing funding for maintenance costs and renewals of 1636m² of land for a pocket park within Stage 2B of the Fenchurch Special Housing Area, Glen Innes, from its Local Discretionary Initiative budget and that this decision is reflected in its local board agreement.

Comments

Background

7. The Tāmaki Regeneration Company is working in partnership with Auckland Council and Auckland Transport to improve the configuration of urban development and open space within the Tāmaki area.

8. The Tāmaki Regeneration Company applied for a resource consent for the redevelopment of properties in Stage 2B of the Fenchurch Special Housing Area in Glen Innes (refer to Attachment A). The resource consent has been granted.

9. The resource consent includes land for a proposed park (approximately 1636m²) that the Tāmaki Regeneration Company proposes to vest in council at no cost (refer to Attachment B). The Tāmaki Regeneration Company wish to create a playground on the pocket park.

10. The Tāmaki Regeneration Company undertook consultation on the redevelopment with the Local Board, Fenchurch community and Glenbrae Primary School between October and December 2015 and in June 2016. The children involved in the consultation outlined the features they wished to see in the playground.

11. The open space network plan that is being prepared for the Tāmaki regeneration area will strategically address playground locations. We advise that any decisions on new playground locations should be made through this process.

Decision-making allocation for open space acquisition

12. The decision-making allocations for council’s land acquisition for open space are set out in the decision-making allocations for non-regulatory activities in Volume Two of the Long-term Plan 2015-2025:

· the governing body is responsible for the acquisition and divestment of all park land, the number and general location of all new parks and prioritisation of major upgrades to parks

· local boards are responsible for the specific location of new local parks (including the prioritisation for acquisition) within budget parameters agreed with the governing body.

Acquisition assessment

13. Acquisition opportunities are assessed against the criteria of the council’s Open Space Provision Policy and the Parks and Open Space Acquisition Policy. Recommendations are based on this assessment.

14. Under the Open Space Provision Policy, pocket parks provide access to small amenity and socialising spaces in high density residential areas. They are typically between 1000m² and 1500m² in size. The provision targets for pocket parks are listed below:

· only provided by voluntary agreement, at no cost to council or retained in private ownership

· located in urban centres and high density residential areas

· not located within 100m of other open space

· be in addition to requirements for neighbourhood parks.

15. The proposed park does not meet all the Open Space Provision Policy targets because it is not within an urban or a high density residential centre. The zoning for the area under the Auckland Unitary Plan is for medium density.

16. A summary of the assessment against the policies is provided below. Proposed acquisitions are prioritised according to the highest rating achieved.

Table 1: Proposed Stage 2B Pocket Park Assessment (1636m²)
Acquisition Criteria	Comment	Rating
Meeting community needs, now and in the future	Not a priority rating as follows: · the site is suitable for a pocket park and not large enough to provide a neighbourhood park function which is typically 0.3ha in size · the proposed park is not proposed in an urban centre or high density residential area. Aveline Place is zoned mixed urban housing in the Unitary Plan and is a medium density area · the proposed site is entirely surrounded by roads and its irregular shape will place some constraints on its future layout (eg. the development of a children’s playground) · significant growth is proposed in the Tāmaki Area as part of the Tāmaki Regeneration Company redevelopment, however, there are no provision gaps for neighbourhood parks in this immediate area.	Not a priority for acquisition
Connecting parks and open spaces	Not a priority rating as follows: · the proposed park will not provide connection to any existing open spaces · Elstree North Reserve is the nearest open space approximately 200 metres walk.
Protecting and restoring Auckland’s unique features and meanings	Not a priority rating as follows: · no known heritage, cultural or natural values of significance are located within the site identified for the pocket park.
Improving the parks and open spaces we already have	Not a priority rating as follows: · the site will be a new vesting that will not improve on the open space value of existing parks and open space.

Assessment conclusions

17. The proposed pocket park within Stage 2B of the Fenchurch Special Housing Area is not a priority for acquisition. There are no provision gaps for parks in the immediate area. Further, the site has a number of development constraints and is considered unsuitable for a children’s playground. The open space network plan, currently under development, has highlighted issues with the play network.

18. However, the proposed park would provide a level of amenity for local residents, which is currently not available in this location.

19. Operational costs for new parkland are provided for in the Long-term Plan 2015-2025 as a percentage of the acquisition costs. As the proposal is to gift the land at no cost to council, funding would need to be allocated.

20. Current practice is to accept high and medium priority acquisitions at no cost to council. Where a decision is made to accept acquisitions that are deemed not to be a priority, the governing body has previously made it conditional on the local board allocating ongoing funds from its Local Discretionary Initiative budget.

21. Any ongoing commitment of funds from the Local Discretionary Initiatives budget will mean less budget is available for other community projects.

22. Staff recommend declining the acquisition of the proposed park.

Risks

23. There is a reputational risk to council if it decides not to accept this pocket park. This is because community consultation led by Tāmaki Regeneration Company has raised expectations, especially as they have proposed a children’s playground.

24. There is a minor financial risk associated with the ongoing allocation of funds from the Local Discretionary Initiatives budget.

Costs

Acquisition costs and method

25. The land is being offered to vest in council at no cost.

26. The Tāmaki Regeneration Company and council have identified the potential for a range of land exchanges within the Tāmaki regeneration area. In order for the proposed parks to be at no cost to council, they would not form part of this land exchange.

Development costs

27. Decision-making responsibility for the development of local parks is allocated to local boards.

28. The Tāmaki Regeneration Company has confirmed that it or their development partner would fund the development of the park.

Operational costs

29. The consequential operational costs of maintaining the proposed park would be dependent on the final design and development of the park.

30. Operational costs for new parkland are provided for in the Long-term Plan 2015-2025 as a percentage of the acquisition costs. As the proposal is to gift the land at no cost to council, funding would need to be allocated, if the parks were to be acquired. Recent decisions have allocated these operational costs to Local Discretionary Initiative budgets.

31. Annual consequential operational expenditure for gardening, mowing and sweeping of the proposed open space are estimated to be up to $1,000, dependent on the amount of planting and paving proposed. Consequential operational expenditure for any playground proposal would be additional to this value and is usually calculated at 2.5 per cent of the total capex cost of the development. A $200,000 playground development would cost $5,000 per annum.

Next steps

32. The proposed vesting will be reported to the Environment and Community Committee on 16 May 2017 for its consideration.

33. The report to the committee will include the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board’s view of the proposed acquisition.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

34. Local Board views are sought through this report.

Māori impact statement

35. The proposed park does not contain any known sites and places of significance or value to mana whenua.

36. The views of iwi have not been sought by staff in relation to this acquisition.

37. The Tāmaki Regeneration Company regularly consults with the ‘Tāmaki Forum’ which comprises the 13 iwi who are part of the Tāmaki Collective. The Tāmaki Regeneration Company intend to present the proposals and seek feedback at a future hui.

38. Staff do not expect there to be any significant impacts on Māori arising from the recommendation to decline the land.

Implementation

39. There are no implementation issues arising from the recommendations in this report.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Location of proposed pocket park in stage 2B	57
b ⇩	Scheme plan of the proposed pocket park in stage 2B	59

Signatories

Authors

Carol Stewart - Principal Policy Analyst

Andrew Wood - Team Leader Parks and Recreation Policy - North/West

Authorisers

Paul Marriott-Lloyd - Team Leader

Kataraina Maki - GM - Community & Social Policy

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

28 March 2017

Public Art Gift Offer - Landowner Approval (Peter Lange artwork seat for Taumanu Reserve, Onehunga)

File No.: CP2017/02781

Purpose

1. To grant landowner consent for the Peter Lange artwork seat (gift offer) for Taumanu Reserve, Onehunga.

Executive summary

2. In February 2015, Public Trust Auckland Central informed staff of a bequest by late Auckland resident Patricia Louise Church. The bequest is for her estate to pay for the development and installation of a small public artwork by artist Peter Lange, to the value of $30,000.

3. The artwork was specified as an ‘artwork seat’ for the Taumanu Reserve, Onehunga. Artist Peter Lange has offered a concept in the form of a wave made from bricks.

4. Staff assessed the gift offer against the Public Art Policy (2013) outcomes and found it aligns with the outcome, ‘making a difference: public art that transforms Auckland’s public places’ by integrating art and design features within the design of seating. Staff presented their findings to the Advisory Panel for Art in Public Places, Auckland (the panel) on 23 February 2017. The panel supported the recommendation to accept and install the artwork.

5. Acceptance of gift offers into Auckland council’s artwork collection requires approval of the Environment and Community Committee. The committee considered the panel’s recommendation and accepted the gift on 14 March 2017. As a result, this public artwork became part of the Auckland Council Art Collection. The ongoing operational maintenance and capital renewal costs will be funded by the existing Art Collection budget.

6. This report seeks the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board’s landowner consent to install the artwork. If the local board approves the recommendation, staff will seek to install the artwork by June 2017. Staff identified three alternative locations. The best option was option one, adjacent to headland two on Taumanu Reserve. This location will encourage the public to use the artwork as a functional seat, will not inhibit the use of nearby pathways and sits comfortably in the landscape.

Recommendation/s

That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

a) provide landowner consent to allow the installation of the artwork seat by artist Peter Lange on Taumanu Reserve.

Comments

Background:

7. In February 2015, Public Trust Auckland Central informed staff of a bequest by Patricia Louise Church. Ms Church bequeathed a small public artwork to the value of $30,000, for the Taumanu Reserve, Onehunga. The specified artist is Peter Lange, and the bequest covers the artwork’s development, purchase and installation.

8. The Public Art Policy (2013) sets out the process for receiving offers of public art. In accordance with that policy, staff have:

· assessed the bequest in relation to Auckland Council’s desired outcomes for public art

· presented that assessment to the Advisory Panel for Art in Public Places, Auckland (the panel); an independent advisory panel to council

9. On 23 February 2017, the panel expressed support for the artwork to be installed on Taumanu Reserve.

10. Staff presented the recommendation to the governing body for a decision as to whether the gift offer is accepted into Auckland Council Art Collection. On 14 March 2017, the Environment and Community Committee approved the gift offer. This public artwork became part of the Auckland Council Art Collection.

11. This report seeks landowner consent to locate the artwork on Taumanu Reserve, Onehunga from the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board.

The artwork

12. Peter Lange is a well-known senior figure in the Auckland arts community and has had a lifetime association with the Māngere Harbour foreshore through his childhood in Māngere and his involvement with Auckland Studio Potters (Onehunga).

13. Peter Lange has met with Patricia Louise Church’s descendants to offer them an ‘artwork seat’ concept in the form of a wave made from bricks, which reserve visitors could sit or lean on. The wave is an existing artwork which Mr. Lange offered to alter to offer more seating. Appendix A provides photographs of the artwork.

Alignment with Public Art Policy

14. The artwork aligns with a number of outcomes in the Public Art Policy, particularly the outcome ‘making a difference: public art that transforms Auckland’s public places’ by integrating art and design features within the design of seating.

15. The artwork provides depth to the range of creative practice in the city’s public art asset collection and addresses a geographic gap in the regional provision of public art.

Artwork dimensions

16. The wave artwork is 3,800mm long, 1,160mm wide and 950mm high. It would sit on a discrete concrete foundation in a position fringing landscaped garden and a grassed area. The artwork would be able to be used as a seat in different ways, and would not inhibit the use of pathways.

Artwork positioning options

17. The artist and the public art team identified three suitable site options for the wave seat. Two of these sites are between the sea edge and the main pathway, helping to realise the concept of the ‘wave shape’ of the artwork seat ‘breaking on the shore’ from the direction of the Manukau Harbour mouth. The third site is on the inner lagoon edge. The location of these options can be found on Appendix B. These options are detailed below:

18. Location Option 1: Taumanu Reserve – (adjacent to headland 2)

Advantages

Disadvantages

· Good orientation to Manukau harbour

· Best location in the landscape conceptually relating to the artwork (wave breaking on shore)

· Best chance of being used as location would not inhibit the use of pathways

· Would meet bequest conditions in full as the location is within the Taumanu Reserve

· Unlikely to clash with existing public artworks (Ted Ngataki’s wayfinding carving, Bernard Makoare’s bridge panels)

· No disadvantages identified

19. Location Option 2: Taumanu Reserve - (adjacent to headland 4)

Advantages

Disadvantages

· Good orientation to Manukau harbour

· Good location in the landscape conceptually relating to the artwork (wave breaking on shore)

· Would meet bequest conditions in full as the location is within the Taumanu Reserve

· Unlikely to clash with existing public artworks (Ted Ngataki’s wayfinding carving, Bernard Makoare’s bridge panels)

· Somewhat limited usability as only a small area is available for installation

20. Location Option 3: Onehunga Lagoon

Advantages

Disadvantages

· Location would not inhibit the use of pathways

· Unlikely to clash with existing public artworks (Ted Ngataki’s wayfinding carving, Bernard Makoare’s bridge panels)

· Unlikely to meet bequest conditions as the location is not within the Taumanu Reserve but on the Onehunga Lagoon

· Possible reputation risk (artist, Public Trust office, media)

21. Option: Reject the installation of the artwork

Advantages

Disadvantages

· No advantages identified

· Not approving a location for the artwork carries significant reputation risk (public, artist, Public Trust Office, media) for the council as this initiative has been progressing for some time and the artwork had been accepted by the Council.

· Council will need undertake additional work to identify a suitable site for the artwork and get approvals from appropriate parties

Installation and ongoing maintenance costs

22. The $30,000 bequest fully covers the artwork and installation costs.

23. The ongoing operational maintenance costs are estimated to be under $500 per annum, and can be funded by the existing regional Art Collection operating budget (2017/2018 budget is $642,000).

24. As the artwork is constructed of bricks, future capital renewal costs are estimated to be minimal over its 30 year lifespan. These costs can also be funded by the existing regional Art Collection capital budget (2017/2018 budget is $292,000).

Staff recommendation

25. Staff recommend installing the artwork on Taumanu Reserve (adjacent to headland two).

Consideration

Local board views and implications

26. In February 2015, the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board was informed of the gift offer by Public Trust Auckland Central.

27. The proposed location of the artwork (Taumanu Reserve) is within the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board boundary and requires the local board’s landowner approval.

28. The maintenance and renewal costs of the artwork will be covered from the regional art collection budget; therefore there will be no impact to the local board budget.

29. An update regarding the gift offer was provided to the local board in February 2017.

Māori impact statement

Kaitiaki Working Group

30. Five iwi (Ngati Te Akitai, Ngati Te Ata, Ngati Tamaoho, Ngati Whatua and Te Kawerau o Maki) had a kaitiaki (guardianship) role in the Onehunga Foreshore Restoration Project. This Kaitiaki working group gifted the name, Taumanu, to the Onehunga Foreshore Restoration project.

31. Advice received from the Community Facilities (Parks) team in Council is that the consultation for this artwork location is out of scope for this Kaitiaki working group.

Iwi Consultation

32. If the local board provides the landowner consent, staff will undertake mana whenua iwi consultation regarding the recommended location. If this consultation uncovers that the site will not be appropriate, staff will work with the local board and iwi to find a resolution.

Implementation

33. Following the local board’s landowner consent and mana whenua iwi consultation, staff will aim to install the artwork in May/June 2017. The final position of the artwork will be agreed with the Parks and Places Specialist Advisor and Land Advisory team.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Gift Offer Photos	65
b ⇩	Location Options Map	67

Signatories

Authors

David Thomas - Arts Project Coordinator

Authorisers

Graham Bodman - General Manager Arts, Community and Events

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

28 March 2017

Auckland Transport monthly report - March 2017

File No.: CP2017/03998

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to; respond to resolutions and requests on transport-related matters, provide an update on the current status of Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF), request approval for new LBTCF projects, provide a summary of consultation material sent to the Board and, provide transport related information on matters of specific application and interest to the Maungakiekie Tāmaki Local Board and its community.

Executive summary

2. This report covers matters of specific relevance for the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board and its community, as well as matters of general interest relating to Auckland Transport (AT) activities of the transport sector.

3. In particular, this report covers:

· Progress on the Board’s advocacy initiatives

· Progress on the Board’s transport capital fund projects

Recommendation/s

That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

a) receive the Auckland Transport update March 2017.

Comments

Strategic alignment

4. Auckland Transport has a commitment to improve the network optimisation and resilience for predictable travel times. A key area identified by Auckland Transport and The Transport Agency is the Auckland-Manukau Eastern Transport Initiative (AMETI) project.

5. AMETI Eastern Busway – Panmure to Pakuranga

6. This update provides the Local Board with a summary of key areas of progress since the last workshop held on 21 February.

Notice of Requirement (NoR)

7. Following the fourth public information session in Panmure on 20 February 2017, Auckland Council and AT have extended the notification period to allow more time for submissions. The notification period will now close on 20 March 2017

Geotechnical, Pavement and Services Investigation

8. Pavement and services investigations on Lagoon Drive and Panmure Roundabout are now complete and the results are being processed.

9. Geotechnical investigations are on-going with night works planned (weather depending) for Sunday 12 March between 9pm and 3am in Lagoon Drive at the rear of the DG Law building, 13 Queen Street.

10. Following the completion of this site, the remaining three sites (two in the Tāmaki River and one adjacent to the marina) will be put on hold until Worksafe complete the investigation of the bridge maintenance scaffold collapse that occurred last month. It is not expected that this will have a significant effect on the time line to complete the detailed design.

Design

11. Detailed design of Lagoon Drive is 90% complete but will require review and update when the NoR is processed. Auckland Transport are continuing engagement with Mana Whenua to develop the design for Mokoia Pa and urban design/landscaping of Pakuranaga Road. This stage of the project is currently on programme.

Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF) update

12. Updates

Project Name

Problem or Opportunity Being Addressed

Current Status

Catchpit in Onehunga Mall (outside Bean There café)

Flooding outside Bean There Café in Onehunga Mall following a streetscape upgrade.

In September 2016 the previous board approved $8,000 funding from the Transport Capital Fund to install a catch pit outside Bean There Café in Onehunga Mall to prevent flooding of the cafe.

Auckland Transport identified that the majority of the water run off issues were originating in Grey Street. Watercare and Auckland Transport have worked together to install additional catch pits and soak holes in Grey Street and Onehunga Mall (opposite Grey Street) funded by Watercare. This work should prevent the need for an additional catch pit outside the café.

Due to the heavy rainfall in early March 2017, Watercare have suggested retaining the sandbags outside the café until they are 100% comfortable that the Grey Street solution is sufficient.

Auckland Transport recommends retaining the $8,000 until there is certainty that the additional catch pit is not required, if this is the case the funds will be returned back to the local board capital fund.

Financials update

Regional and sub-regional projects

13. As tabled at the February 2017 business meeting, Auckland Transport has decided to close the station at Westfield.

14. Westfield Station is one of the least used stations on the Auckland rail network and typically ranks in the bottom two stations for monthly patronage figures. The most recent figures for the station (November 2016) showed less than 330 passenger boardings and alightings per day.

15. Forecasts of future patronage at Westfield Station indicates that demand is likely to remain low, consistent with the light industrial area it services and overlap between the Westfield and Ōtāhuhu station walking catchments.

16. If it were to remain open, Westfield Station would also require significant investment to enable access for disabled passengers and upgrade general customer facilities to the same standard as other stations.

17. The closure of Westfield Station was first proposed as part of the South Auckland New Network consultation in 2013. At that time, Auckland Transport engaged in extensive consultation with local communities and key stakeholders.

18. In deciding to close the station, Auckland Transport considered the results of this consultation alongside the issues with Westfield Station outlined above and significant upgrades to the public transport infrastructure in South Auckland since 2013.

Improvements to South Auckland Public Transport Infrastructure

19. Recent improvements to the public transport network in South Auckland include:

i) the rollout of the New Network for bus services in October 2016;

ii) the construction of a high-quality, modern Ōtāhuhu Bus/Train Interchange, which opened in October 2016.

20. Other planned improvements in South Auckland include:

i) the construction of a new Māngere Town Centre bus station (formal opening in Q2 2017);

ii) the creation of a transport hub in Manukau with the construction of the new Manukau Bus Station (expected to open in Q2 2018);

iii) upgrade of Pukekohe Station to a new bus-train interchange (expected completion in late 2017); and

iv) upgrades to the Manurewa and Papakura Train Stations.

Working with existing Westfield Station passengers

21. A public information campaign providing all relevant details about the closure commenced 20 January, including a marketing campaign, an advertising campaign, and direct engagement with affected stakeholders.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

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

Māori impact statement

23. No specific issues with regard to impacts on Maori are triggered by this report and any engagement with Maori will be carried out on an individual project basis.

Implementation

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

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Melanie Dale - Elected Member Relationship Manager

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon - Manager, Elected Member Relationship Unit

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

28 March 2017

Panuku Development Local Board Six-Monthly Update 1 July to 31 December 2016

File No.: CP2016/25240

Purpose

1. To give the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki 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 July to 31 December 2016.

Background

2. Panuku Development Auckland was established in September 2015 as a result of the merger of two 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 $1.5 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 Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

a) receive the Panuku Development Auckland Local Board Update 1 July to 31 December 2016.

Local Activities

Portfolio Management

6. Panuku manages “non-service” property owned by the council and 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 1437 properties containing 1119 leases as at 31 December 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 31 December 2016 was above budget with a net surplus to the Auckland Council (AC) and Auckland Transport (AT) shareholders of $3.9m ahead of budget.

9. The average monthly tenantable occupancy rate for the 6 month period is more than 98% which is above the SOI target of 95%.

Properties Managed in the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board Area

10. Panuku Development Auckland currently manages 176 commercial and residential properties within the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board area.

Commercial Properties	74
Residential Properties	102
Total Properties Managed	176

Business Interests

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

12. There are currently no managed business interests in the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board area.

Portfolio Strategy

Optimisation

13. The 2015-2025 Long-term Plan reflects a desire of council to materially reduce or slow down expenditure and unlock value from assets no longer required or which are sub-optimal for service purposes. In response to this, prior to the establishment of Panuku, ACPL developed a new method of dealing with service property, called optimisation.

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

Portfolio Review and Rationalisation

Overview

15. Panuku is required to undertake ongoing rationalisation of the council’s non-service assets. This includes identifying properties from within council’s portfolio that may be suitable for potential sale and development if appropriate. Panuku has a particular focus on achieving housing and urban 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

16. July 2016 to June 2017 Target

UNIT	TARGET	ACHIEVED	COMMENTS
Portfolio Review	$75m disposal recommendations	$23.5 million as at 31 December 2016	These recommendations include $13.25 million of sites that are identified for development projects.

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

18. July 2017 to June 2018 Target

UNIT	TARGET	COMMENTS
Portfolio Review	To be determined as part of the statement of intent with Council.	The target will include disposal recommendations and sales for sites that are identified for housing development and urban regeneration projects

Process

19. 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 ward councillors and the Independent Māori Statutory Board and finally a governing body decision.

Under review

20. Properties currently under review in the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki 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
7 Eastview Road, Glen Innes	Approved for disposal by the governing body in September 2016.
Units 1-28, 150 Mt Wellington Highway, Mt Wellington	Approved for disposal by the governing body in December 2016.
523A and 525-529 Ellerslie-Panmure Highway, Mt Wellington	The Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board supported the disposal of the residual land at 523A and 525-529 Ellerslie-Panmure Highway, Mt Wellington in accordance with the council’s obligations to the former owners under section 40 of the Public Works Act 1981 at its December 2016 business meeting. Panuku will report to the governing body in February 2017 for a formal decision on the subject sites.
145A West Tāmaki Road, Glen Innes	Panuku attended a workshop with the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board. The Board suggested the site could be used as a community garden and provided informal feedback that it was supportive of the proposed disposal of the subject site if there was no alternate community interest in using the site as a garden. Panuku has worked with Council’s local and sports parks and community empowerment departments and have confirmed there is no community interest for the site as a community garden. Panuku will report to the Local Board’s March 2017 meeting for a formal view.
59 and 59A Mountain Road, Mt Wellington	Transferred from AT to Panuku as it is no longer required for AT infrastructure requirements. Panuku attended workshops with the Maungakiekie- Tāmaki Local Board. The Board provided informal feedback that it was supportive of retaining the property for open space purposes. Panuku will report to the Local Board’s March 2017 meeting for a formal view.
24 Waipuna Road, Mt Wellington	Transferred from AT to Panuku as it is no longer required for AT infrastructure requirements. Panuku will hold discussions with the Maungakiekie- Tāmaki Local Board in January 2017 before reporting to the local board’s March meeting for a formal view.
Units 1-4, 26 Waipuna Road, Mt Wellington	Transferred from AT to Panuku as it is no longer required for AT infrastructure requirements. Panuku will hold discussions with the Maungakiekie- Tāmaki Local Board in January 2017 before reporting to the local board’s March meeting for a formal view.
27B Waipuna Road, Mt Wellington	Transferred from AT to Panuku as it is no longer required for AT infrastructure requirements. Panuku will hold discussions with the Maungakiekie- Tāmaki Local Board in January 2017 before reporting to the local board’s March meeting for a formal view.
1/77 Waipuna Road, Mt Wellington	Transferred from AT to Panuku as it is no longer required for AT infrastructure requirements. Panuku will hold discussions with the Maungakiekie- Tāmaki Local Board in January 2017 before reporting to the local board’s March meeting for a formal view.
93 Waipuna Road, Mt Wellington	Transferred from AT to Panuku as it is no longer required for AT infrastructure requirements. Panuku will hold discussions with the Maungakiekie- Tāmaki Local Board in January 2017 before reporting to the local board’s March meeting for a formal view.
134A Mt Wellington Highway, Mt Wellington	Transferred from AT to Panuku as it is no longer required for AT infrastructure requirements. Panuku will hold discussions with the Maungakiekie- Tāmaki Local Board in January 2017 before reporting to the local board’s March meeting for a formal view.
3/136B Mt Wellington Highway, Mt Wellington	Transferred from AT to Panuku as it is no longer required for AT infrastructure requirements. Panuku will hold discussions with the Maungakiekie- Tāmaki Local Board in January 2017 before reporting to the local board’s March meeting for a formal view.

Acquisitions and Disposals

21. Panuku manages the acquisition and disposal of property on behalf of Auckland Council. We buy property for development, roads, infrastructure projects and other service needs. We manage the sale of properties that are surplus to Auckland Council requirements. These properties may be sold with or without contractual requirements for development.

Acquisitions

22. Nine properties have had purchase agreements signed this financial year for open space purposes around the region at a value of $21.3m, and three properties have been purchased for storm water purposes at a value of $2.89m.

23. No properties were purchased in the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board area during the reporting period.

Disposals

24. For the six months to December 2016 the Panuku disposals team has achieved $17.94m of unconditional net sales proceeds from the sale of 10 properties against the 2016/17 disposals target of $20.0m for the year. The disposals target is agreed with Auckland Council and is reviewed on an annual basis.

25. 5 Rayma Place, Mt Wellington and 474 Ellerslie-Panmure Highway, Mt Wellington were two of the ten properties sold. 28 freehold residential unit titles at 150 Mount Wellington Highway are currently on the market for sale as one package, and the tender closure date is 8 March 2017.

Housing for Older People

26. Council owns and operates 1412 units located in 62 villages across Auckland to provide rental housing to older people in Auckland. The Housing for Older People (HfOP) Project is a Council initiative that involves procuring a third party provider to partner with council in delivering the rental housing service.

27. Following the approval by the Panuku Board on 8 December 2015, the Auckland Development Committee noted that HfOP would be an Unlock project for Panuku and that Panuku would prepare a High Level Project Plan (HLPP) that provided the foundation for Panuku to develop and reposition the portfolio to better the needs of older people in Auckland.

28. The HLPP was approved by the Panuku Board in August 2016.

29. On 21 December 2015, Council announced that The Selwyn Foundation will be its preferred joint venture partner to manage the HfOP portfolio. Panuku has been negotiating a joint venture agreement with Selwyn. The Joint Venture Company (JVCo) will deliver the service and improve the housing portfolio.

30. Community Housing Provider (CHP) Application was submitted to MBIE by the JVCo on 20 December 2016.

31. Auckland Council has delegated Panuku to lead the development programme. A HLPP is being prepared by Panuku to cover the multi-year redevelopment of the network of village sites.

32. There are no HfOP villages located within the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board area.

Development

33. Panuku is contributing commercial input into approximately 50 region wide council-driven renewal and housing supply initiatives.

34. Panuku works with partners and stakeholders over the life of projects. It also champions best practise project delivery to achieve best value outcomes within defined cost, time and quality parameters.

35. The roles and responsibilities of Panuku are customised to each specific project initiative and location. A few are of a high custodial nature, associated with urban renewal and are known as Transform projects; both Onehunga and Tāmaki are classified as Transform projects.

36. A high level update on development activities in the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board area are below.

37. Onehunga High Level Project Plan – Significant work has been undertaken in the preparation of a High Level Project Plan (HLPP) for Onehunga. This provides a strategic plan for delivery of transformational development, including land development, public realm development and supporting Place making activities. The HLPP is due to be presented to the Planning Committee on 28 March 2017 to seek mandate to act in the Onehunga area.

38. A number of land parcels within the Onehunga Transform area were identified as potential sites for the strategic delivery of transformational development. Approval by the Governing Body for sale or development of the sites to deliver on the Transform Onehunga outcomes will be sought via the HLPP. These include:

· 45 Waller Street, Onehunga

· 3 Paynes Lane, Onehunga

· Lots 3 and 4, DP 60645 Waiapu Lane, Onehunga

· 230 Onehunga Mall, Onehunga

· 61-65 Selwyn Street, Onehunga

39. Onehunga Wharf – is included in the HLPP as a long-term development opportunity but remains highly dependent on the outcomes of the NZTA East West motorway project.

40. Tāmaki Redevelopment – major milestones in 2016 included the execution of the Shareholder’s Agreement between the Crown and Council in May and the Infrastructure Funding Framework Agreement between the Council, Auckland Transport and Tāmaki Redevelopment Company (TRC) in September. Work on the Tāmaki Open Space Network Plan is progressing, towards a report date in April 2017.

41. Requests for Proposals for Phase One of Tāmaki Large Scale Development were issued to shortlisted parties in December 2016. This will be a major Housing and Place-making initiative. Government Agencies, Council and TRC are working together on the Tāmaki Local Response and the Social Infrastructure Plan. Both are major components of the Tāmaki Social and Economic Regeneration Programme.

42. 150 Mount Wellington Highway – Approval for disposal of the site was sought in December and granted. Marketing of the property will commence at the end of January 2017.

43. Panmure Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Residential – Auckland Transport has recently signed a conditional sale agreement on a site with Housing New Zealand in late 2016. Panuku are considering the implications of this in relation to TRC. Panuku are also seeking detail on what land is surplus to transport requirements as AT have still not made this clear.

Regional Activities

44. Good progress has been made in our priority development areas, with HLPPs being worked on for Onehunga, Papatoetoe, Avondale and Henderson. In Manukau and Northcote, leading on from the Council’s approval of the HLPP, Framework Plans (which are more detailed plans on the development of the locations, including reference plans for each development site) have been developed.

45. Often it is the smaller projects that can make a huge difference in a community over a relatively short period – the placemaking activities, the development of public space, or the optimisation of Council properties. Panuku is identifying these projects, and a key focus will be on delivering more of these projects within the locations that we work.

Highlights

46. The highlights for the last six months were:

i) Sir John Wells ended his term as Chair in November. Sir John has had a long association with the Council family, including being Chair of ACPL prior to its amalgamation into Panuku. Richard Aitken was appointed Chair to replace Sir John.

ii) Roger MacDonald was appointed as the Chief Executive of Panuku, and he started in the role in November. Roger originates from the United Kingdom, and has delivered large scale urban redevelopment projects across the world, in Africa, the Middle East and in the UK.

iii) The Panuku Board agreed that Barrowcliffe Place, Manukau is a “pilot project” to form a consortium comprising a CHP, with a Mana Whenua partner(s) and other suitable development and funding partner(s), to develop the site. The aim will be to deliver a mix of market and affordable housing where sustainable and accessible design components will be tested.

iv) The first tenants have moved into the Mason Brothers building in the Wynyard Quarter. The building is part of stage one of Precinct Properties’ programme of developing the commercial sites in the Wynyard Quarter. The development of 12 Madden Street, which ATEED have taken the head lease for the establishment of Grid AKL, will be completed in July 2017.

v) Stage Two of the Hobsonville Airfields Development was tendered, and a preferred tenderer has been selected after a number of tenderers submitted strong bids. The due diligence process is underway. The 9.9ha site will see 500 homes of mixed typology constructed.

vi) Lot 1, 187 Flat Bush Road was also tendered and a development agreement has been signed. 30 homes will be constructed on the 1.9 hectare site, with construction commencing within a year of the sale.

vii) The ASB Waterfront Theatre was opened on 22 September 2016. Panuku (on behalf of Council) provided the site, contributed to the funding and provided design review and oversight for the project. The theatre is a key component of the activation of the Wynyard Quarter.

viii) The Water Edge Symposium was held in November, with invited waterfront experts attending from the USA, Asia, Europe and the Pacific. As well as discussing international case studies, the symposium workshopped ideas about how to develop the Onehunga/Manukau harbour water edge, and this thinking is feeding into the planning for the Onehunga Transform project.

ix) The Silo Park Summer Programme has seen thousands of people visit the waterfront over the summer period, to enjoy the night markets, catch movies at the Silo cinema, and enjoy the various forms of entertainment on offer, cementing the waterfront as the place to be in Auckland over summer.

x) After an audit of Panuku against ACC’s Workplace Safety Management Practices external accreditation, Panuku attained Tertiary standard, reflecting its commitment to continual improvement in health and safety.

Future outlook

47. Over the next few months, Panuku will:

a) Formalise the joint venture between the Council and The Selwyn Foundation (JVCo) to manage the Housing for Older People portfolio and tenants with legal agreements being negotiated and Community Housing Provider registration being prepared. JVCo will take over the management of the Housing for Older People portfolio in July 2017.

b) The lease of the Panuku office accommodations expires in mid-2017. Options are being considered, and it is likely that it will be more cost effective for Panuku to move to a modest-quality building in the CBD rather than remaining in its current building.

c) Tawera Group is marketing residential apartments to gather pre-sales for the redevelopment of the Civic Administration Building, which is part of the Civic Quarter development. This follows on from the signing of the Development Agreement between Panuku and the Tawera Group.

d) Panuku is working on a refresh of the Waterfront Strategy, which will frame future development within the CBD waterfront area. This work will be reported to the Council in March 2017, with draft Framework Plans reported in May 2017.

e) Panuku has been reviewing how to improve the transparency of its Board meetings and interactions with the media. Panuku will hold as many of its monthly board meetings in the open as possible. A public-excluded session will be held at each meeting to discuss confidential matters. Agendas for each meeting will continue to be posted on the Panuku website (panuku.co.nz) prior to the meeting. Board papers (with confidential information redacted) will also be posted online. Members of the public will be invited (via the Panuku website) to present to the Board on issues relevant to Panuku.

f) All media enquiries will be responded to in a timely fashion and all information is shared with the media unless it is of a confidential nature. Major projects are outlined on our website and all key documents (such as our Annual Report and the project plans for our development locations) are available online.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

48. This report is for the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board’s information.

49. 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

50. Tāmaki Makaurau has the highest Māori population in the world with one in four Māori in Aotearoa living here.

51. Māori make up 12% of the region’s total population who mainly live in Manurewa, Henderson-Massey, Papakura, Ōtara-Papatoetoe, Māngere-Ōtahuhu and Franklin. Māori have a youthful demographic with 50% of Māori in Tāmaki Makaurau under the age of 25 years. 5% of the Māori population in the region are currently 65 years and over.

52. There are 19 Mana Whenua in the region, with 14 having indicated an interest in Panuku lead activities within the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board area.

53. Māori make up 13 percent of the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board population, and there are three marae located within the local board area.

54. Panuku works collaboratively with Mana Whenua on a range projects including potential property disposals, development sites in the area and commercial opportunities. Engagement can be on specific individual properties and projects at an operational level with kaitiaki representatives, or with the Panuku Mana Whenua Governance Forum who have a broader mandate.

55. Transform Onehunga and Tāmaki are key Panuku projects within the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board area and have attracted interest from a number of mana whenua and Māori developers.

56. Panuku will continue to partner with Māori on opportunities which enhance Māori social and economic wellbeing.

Implementation

57. 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

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

28 March 2017

Disposals recommendation report

File No.: CP2016/24825

Purpose

1. This report seeks the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board’s endorsement for Panuku Development Auckland (Panuku) to recommend to the Finance and Performance Committee the divestment of Council owned properties in the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board area.

Executive summary

2. The council-owned properties presented in this report have been identified as potentially surplus to council requirements through a review process. Panuku is required to identify properties from within council’s portfolio that may be suitable for potential sale to a combined value of $75 million by 30 June 2017. Capital receipts from the sale of surplus properties contributes to both the Auckland Plan outcomes and the Long Term Plan 2015-2025 by providing the council with an efficient use of capital and prioritisation of funds to achieve its activities and projects.

3. The first property presented in this report, 145A West Tāmaki Road, Glen Innes is a vacant site that was vested as plantation reserve upon subdivision and is subject to the Reserves Act 1977. The rationalisation process commenced in June 2016. Consultation with council and its CCOs, iwi authorities and the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board has now taken place. No alternative service uses have been identified and the feedback received has been supportive of the proposed divestment of this site. As no alternative service uses have been identified, Panuku recommends the revocation of the reserve status and divestment of 145A West Tāmaki Road, Glen Innes. A resolution approving the divestment of this site is required from the Finance and Performance Committee before the proposed reserve revocation and disposal can be progressed. If approval is obtained to dispose of the subject site, the reserve status of the land would need to be revoked. Final revocation of the reserve status will be subject to completing the statutory requirements of the Reserves Act 1977 and Local Government Act 2002, including public advertising.

4. The council owned properties 59 and 59A Mountain Road, Mt Wellington are vacant sites that were acquired for transport purposes. The properties are no longer required for this purpose. The rationalisation process for the properties commenced in May 2015. Consultation with council and its CCOs, Iwi authorities and the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board has now taken place. As no alternative service uses have been identified and the feedback received has been supportive of the proposed divestment of the sites, Panuku recommend the divestment of 59 and 59A Mountain Road, Mt Wellington.

5. The council owned properties at 24, 26, 27B, 1/77, 93 Waipuna Road and 3/136B Mt Wellington Highway, Mt Wellington are residential properties that were acquired for transport purposes. The properties are no longer required for this purpose. The rationalisation process for the subject sites commenced in 2016. Consultation with council and its CCOs, iwi authorities and the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board has now taken place. As no alternative service uses have been identified, and the feedback received has been supportive of the proposed divestment of these sites, Panuku recommend the divestment of 24, 26, 27B, 1/77, 93 Waipuna Road and 3/136B Mt Wellington Highway, Mt Wellington.

6. The council owned property 134A Mt Wellington Highway, Mt Wellington is a vacant site that was acquired for transport purposes. The property is no longer required for this purpose. The rationalisation process for 134A Mt Wellington Highway, Mt Wellington commenced in June 2016. Consultation with council and its CCOs, iwi authorities and the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board has now taken place. The Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board provided informal feedback that this site should be further assessed to ascertain if it should be retained as an ecological buffer/open space due to its proximity to Van Damme's Lagoon. Advice from Council’s park and biodiversity teams is that this site is not a priority for open space and does not contain ecological values. The full ecological assessment was forwarded to the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board in February 2017 and is included in the property summary. As no alternative service uses have been identified for this site, Panuku recommend the divestment of this site. .

Recommendation/s

That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

a) endorse Panuku Development Auckland’s recommendation to the Finance and Performance Committee to revoke the reserve status and dispose of 145A West Tāmaki Road, Glen Innes;

b) endorse Panuku Development Auckland’s recommendation to the Finance and Performance Committee to dispose of 59 Mountain Road, Mt Wellington;

c) endorse Panuku Development Auckland’s recommendation to the Finance and Performance Committee to dispose of 59A Mountain Road, Mt Wellington;

d) endorse Panuku Development Auckland’s recommendation to the Finance and Performance Committee to dispose of 24 Waipuna Road, Mt Wellington;

e) endorse Panuku Development Auckland’s recommendation to the Finance and Performance Committee to dispose of Units 1-4, 26 Waipuna Road, Mt Wellington;

f) endorse Panuku Development Auckland’s recommendation to the Finance and Performance Committee to dispose of 27B Waipuna Road, Mt Wellington;

g) endorse Panuku Development Auckland’s recommendation to the Finance and Performance Committee to dispose of 1/77 Waipuna Road, Mt Wellington;

h) endorse Panuku Development Auckland’s recommendation to the Finance and Performance Committee to dispose of 93 Waipuna Road, Mt Wellington;

i) endorse Panuku Development Auckland’s recommendation to the Finance and Performance Committee to dispose of 134A Mt Wellington Highway, Mt Wellington;

j) endorse Panuku Development Auckland’s recommendation to the Finance and Performance Committee to dispose of 3/136B Mt Wellington Highway, Mt Wellington.

Comments

7. Panuku and Auckland Council’s Stakeholder and Land Advisory team in Community Facilities work jointly on a comprehensive review of council’s property portfolio. One of the outcomes of the review process is to identify properties in the council portfolio that are potentially surplus to requirements and may be suitable to sell. The subject sites are identified as potentially saleable through the review process.

8. Once a property has been identified as potentially surplus, Panuku engages with council and its CCO’s through an expression of interest process, to establish whether the property must be retained for a strategic purpose or is required for a future funded project. Once a property has been internally cleared of any service requirements, Panuku then consults with local boards, mana whenua and ward councillors. All sale recommendations must be approved by Panuku’s Board before it makes a final recommendation to the Auckland Council governing body.

9. Site specific property information is contained in the property attachments to this report.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

10. Local Boards are informed of the commencement of the rationalisation process for specific properties. Following the close of the expression of interest period, relevant Local Boards are engaged with.

11. Panuku have attended workshops with the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board about the subject properties. The Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board provided informal feedback that it was supportive of the proposed disposal of the majority of the subject sites. Site specific feedback is contained in the property attachments to this report.

12. This report provides the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board with an opportunity to formalise its views regarding these properties.

Māori impact statement

13. The importance of effective communication and engagement with Māori on the subject of land is understood. Panuku has a robust form of engagement with mana whenua groups across the region. Each relevant mana whenua group is contacted independently by email based on a contact list which is regularly updated. Each group is provided general property details, including a property map, and requested to give feedback within 15 working days. Confirmation of any interest expressed is sent in writing and recorded for inclusion in the disposal recommendation report.

14. Panuku’s engagement directs mana whenua to respond with any issues of particular cultural significance the group would like to formally express in relation to the subject properties. We also request express notes regarding any preferred outcomes that the group would like us to consider as part of any disposal process.

15. Mana whenua groups are also invited to express potential commercial interest in any sites and are put in contact with Panuku’s Development team for preliminary discussions if appropriate to the property. This facilitates the groups’ early assessment of the merits of a development opportunity to their Iwi. In the event a property is approved for sale all groups are alerted of the decision, and all groups are alerted once a property comes on the market.

16. Consultation with mana whenua groups has now been completed. Property specific feedback received is included in the Mana Whenua Engagement section of the property attachments to this report.

Implementation

17. Following receipt of the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board’s resolutions, these sites will be presented to the Finance and Performance Committee with a recommendation to divest of them. If the Finance and Performance Committee approves the proposed disposal of these sites, Panuku will seek to divest of these sites in a manner which provides an optimal outcome and return to council.

18. The terms and conditions of any disposal would be approved under appropriate financial delegation.

19. For the sites which currently have a residential dwelling located upon them, Panuku will seek to dispose of the sites in a manner which ensures the properties remain as housing stock.

20. If approval is obtained to dispose of 145A West Tāmaki Road, Glen Innes, the reserve status of this parcel of land would need to be revoked. Final revocation of the reserve status will be subject to completing the statutory requirements of the Reserves Act 1977 and Local Government Act 2002, including public advertising.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	145A West Tāmaki Road, Glen Innes property information	103
b ⇩	59 Mountain Road, Mt Wellington property information	107
c ⇩	59A Mountain Road, Mt Wellington property information	111
d ⇩	24 Waipuna Road, Mt Wellington property information	115
e ⇩	26 Waipuna Road, Mt Wellington property information	119
f ⇩	27B Waipuna Road, Mt Wellington property information	123
g ⇩	1/77 Waipuna Road, Mt Wellington property information	127
h ⇩	93 Waipuna Road, Mt Wellington property information	131
i ⇩	134A Mt Wellington Highway, Mt Wellington property summary	135
j ⇩	3/136B Mt Wellington Highway, Mt Wellington property information	141

Signatories

Authors

Anthony Lewis - Senior Advisor Portfolio Review, Panuku Development Auckland

Authorisers

Letitia McColl - Team Leader Portfolio Review, Panuku Development Auckland

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

28 March 2017

2016 Elections - Highlights and Issues

File No.: CP2017/03969

Purpose

1. To provide local board input into submissions to the Justice and Electoral Select Committee’s “Inquiry into the 2016 local authority elections”.

Executive summary

2. This report has been presented to the Governing Body which has agreed that the report will be presented to all local boards for their feedback on submissions to the Justice and Electoral Select Committee’s “Inquiry into the 2016 local authority elections”. The issues on which submissions might be based are outlined under the heading later in the report “Submission to Justice and Electoral Select Committee on legislative change”. Local board comments will be reported back to the Governing Body, to decide the final form of the submission.

3. Planning for the 2016 elections commenced at the end of 2014. Staff presented a report to the Governing Body in March 2015, which set out the areas of focus for achieving outcomes in terms of voter and candidate experiences and turnout.

4. This report:

(i) describes initiatives taken in the areas of focus

(ii) evaluates the achievement of the outcomes

(iii) notes other activities associated with the election, such as inaugural meetings

(iv) summarises the budget and forecast expenditure

(v) identifies issues for the council to follow up

(vi) proposes submissions to make to Parliament’s Justice and Electoral Select Committee’s “Inquiry into the 2016 local authority elections”

(vii) outlines the timetable for the review of representation arrangements leading up to the 2019 elections.

5. The 2016 elections were successful. Particular highlights were:

(i) a successful marketing campaign based on the ‘showyourlove’ brand

(ii) innovative approaches to engaging with the community, including through social media, websites and the Love Bus

(iii) increased participation in Kids Voting

(iv) personal assistance provided to the visually impaired

(v) increased turnout over 2013

(vi) the elections came within budget.

6. This report is presented to local boards to provide input to a submission to the Select Committee, with the final submission presented back to the Governing Body in May 2017. The submission needs to be lodged by December 2017.

Recommendation/s

That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

a) agree its comments to be reported back to the Governing Body for inclusion in the Auckland Council’s submission to the Justice and Electoral Select Committee’s “Inquiry into the 2016 local authority elections”.

Comments

Strategic approach

7. A report to the Governing Body in March 2015 set out the strategic approach to the 2016 elections. It identified the following areas of focus:

· communications and community engagement

· candidate awareness

· on-line voting

· optimum use of council resources.

Those areas of focus were to deliver the following outcomes:

· an excellent experience for candidates and voters

· a voter turnout of at least 40 per cent

· a candidate-to-member ratio of three

· user-centric, innovative and transparent local body elections.

8. The following sections describe initiatives taken in these areas of focus and the achievement of the outcomes.

Actions taken in areas of focus

Communications and community engagement

9. Voter participation statistics showed that previous participation rates were low among 18 - 39 year olds and this age group was a key focus for the Election Planning Team.

10. Initiatives included:

· a comprehensive marketing campaign based on the “showyourlove” brand

· advertising – billboards, adshells, bus backs, press, magazine, radio, digital, ethnic radio and newspapers

· heart ballot boxes

· digital bus shelter voting tallies

· targeted social media: videos and articles via VoteAkl social media sites, Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, YouTube

· “Our Auckland” council’s news channel

· Auckland Council channels for posters, such as libraries and service centres

· the Love Bus and community presentations

· showyourlove.co.nz web pages for information about candidates

· Kids Voting programme in schools.

11. The Election Team tested the “showyourlove” brand with audiences. Feedback, particularly from young people, has been very positive. Wellington City Council also developed its own brand, using our ‘love’ concept. Auckland Council and Wellington City Council experienced greater increases over 2013 turnouts than other metropolitan councils.

12. The Love Bus provided a visual reminder of the elections. It stopped at various locations where people gathered, such as at malls, and staff engaged with passers-by.

13. An engagement programme included making presentations to community groups:

· 80 events including: 22 Love Bus events, 11 English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) events, 22 community presentations (total attendance at these presentations was approximately 800), three meetings or informal chats, five5 information stalls

· 10 of these events were run in conjunction with the Electoral Commission

· sessions were facilitated by the deaf community, Disability Network NZ, Tongan and Samoan churches and Korean Youth Leadership Institute independent of council support

· 24 engagement sessions included an interpreter for at least one language; interpreters for eight different languages, including New Zealand sign language, were used

· groups reached included faith communities (Jewish, Muslim), Rainbow communities, Youth, Korean, Chinese, African, Indian, Tongan, Samoan, Sri Lankan, Somalian, Ethiopian, Rwandan, Filipino, West Indian, Burmese, Cambodian and Japanese

· all advisory panels contributed to the elections programme

· engagement activities and events were run in 15 of the 21 local board areas

· approximately 24,000 Aucklanders were reached by engagement activities.

14. The showyourlove.co.nz website provided information about candidates for voters. People often state, when asked in surveys, the reason they do not vote is they lack information about candidates. This website was planned very carefully to ensure that council did not provide any candidate with an electoral advantage. All candidates were given the same opportunity to provide information in addition to the information in their candidate profile statements.

15. A survey conducted after the 2016 elections gauged the effectiveness of these initiatives. The sample size was 1,259 people.

16. Awareness and likelihood of voting:

· awareness of the elections rose from 83 per cent before the campaign to 93 per cent following the campaign

· before the election, 75 per cent intended to vote but after the election only 63 per cent (of the survey sample) actually voted

· of the 35 per cent who did not vote, 56 per cent intended to vote but did not

· reasons given for not voting by the 35 per cent who did not vote include:

o don’t know anything about the candidates (25 per cent)

o don't know enough about the policies (22 per cent)

o did not know when voting finished, missed deadline (18 per cent)

o forgot to vote (18 per cent)

o can't work out who to vote for (16 per cent)

o not interested in politics or politicians (14 per cent)

o didn’t think vote would make a difference (11 per cent)

o couldn’t be bothered voting (11 per cent)

o too much effort to select the candidate (10 per cent)

o had other commitments during that time (10 per cent).

17. Effectiveness of messaging:

· 53 per cent said the ads made them think of their community

· 44 per cent said the ads reminded them of what they love about their city

· 46 per cent said the ads made them more likely to vote.

18. 21 per cent used the web and social media for information about the elections – mostly the Auckland Council website.

19. Of those who intended to vote but did not vote, 25 per cent said on-line or app based voting would encourage them to vote.

20. 74 per cent said they would prefer on-line voting over postal voting with 18 per cent preferring postal voting; those who preferred on-line voting were spread amongst all age groups but were mainly in the younger age groups.

21. The Kids Voting programme was an on-line voting experience for students. Students cannot legally take part in the actual election, but Kids Voting creates awareness of the elections which often flows from the participating students to their families. The Election Team prepared teaching kits class teachers could use to explain how council works. There was a hypothetical referendum question that students voted on using the STV voting system. 11,730 students and 56 schools registered to take part, compared with 8,319 students and 44 schools in 2013. 4,748 students from 41 schools actually voted. The lessons provided to the schools by the Election Team were:

· an introduction to Auckland Council

· an introduction to elections and voting

· a real world on-line referendum case study

· Local boards, wards and local issues

· researching candidates.

Candidate awareness of election information

22. The council’s website provided information for candidates. This included:

· candidate information handbook

· candidate audio booklet

· FAQs

· research material

· how to be nominated

· election timetable

· video explaining Auckland Council

· posters on all Auckland Council channels

· ads in newspapers

· radio

· digital ads.

23. The Election Team focused on on-line content over hard copy booklets. It did not hold candidate information evenings following the experience in 2013 of twenty-eight information evenings gathering only small attendance.

24. Wellington City Council publicised community-based candidate meetings on its website which people apparently found useful. The council could consider this for 2019.

On-line voting

25. Prior to the elections, the Associate Minister of Local Government announced that trials for on-line voting would not take place for the 2016 elections.

26. The community expects to have an on-line option, provided concerns about the security of on-line voting are addressed. In the post-election awareness survey, 74 per cent said they would prefer on-line voting over postal voting.

27. The Finance and Performance Committee resolved in December 2016 to request the Minister of Local Government to explore a pilot trial of an electronic voting system including for by-elections.

Optimum use of council resources

28. Key areas of the council involved in the elections were:

· Democracy Services and Communications and Engagement

· libraries and service centres held election information, received nominations and issued special votes

· communications staff undertook advertising, branding, web content, social media with assistance from the design studio

· bylaws compliance staff enforced the Auckland Transport Elections Signs Bylaw

· Legal Services provided legal advice when required

· Research and Evaluation (RIMU) staff provided advice on demographic data and undertook research for the report on the order of names.

29. Elections planning staff worked closely with the Electoral Commission, Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) and the Society of Local Government Managers (SOLGM).

30. Council’s election services provider (Independent Election Services Ltd) was based in the central business area, in Anzac Avenue, and was the main central city office. Staff later provided limited services at the Bledisloe service centre in response to demand.

Achievement of outcomes

31. The desired outcomes were:

· an excellent experience for candidates and voters

· a voter turnout of at least 40 per cent

· a candidate-to-member ratio of three

· user-centric, innovative and transparent local body elections.

Candidate experience

32. For the first time, the council conducted an on-line survey of candidates. 150 candidates took part. This feedback shows a positive candidate experience.

33. Key findings were:

· 76 per cent said it was easy, or very easy, to find information

· 88 per cent said that overall they could access the information they needed

· 87 per cent said they used resources on the Auckland Council website

· 83 per cent were aware of the “Love your Auckland – stand for council” campaign

· 80 per cent contributed to their information on the showyourlove.co.nz website

· 50 per cent said this was their first time standing for elected office with Auckland Council and 50 per cent said it was not their first time.

34. The Election Team has noted some candidate issues for following up or improvement:

i) a couple of candidates were nominated for positions for which they did not intend to stand. In one case a number of candidates on the one ticket arrived at a service centre together, creating increased demand on staff at the last minute. In the future, the Election Team will co-ordinate with ticket campaign managers to help manage the processing of nominations and will provide additional briefings to staff helping at service centres. Legislative change to allow electronic submission of nominations to improve these processes will be sought.

ii) there was a question whether a Samoan matai title could be used on the nomination form. The legislation prohibits “titles” but does not define “title”. The Electoral Officer, after receiving legal and cultural advice, allowed matai “titles” on the basis they were used more like names than titles. It would be helpful to have legislative guidance on this.

iii) some candidates expressed concern about the requirement to state in the profile statement whether they lived in the area for which they were standing. The council previously submitted in opposition to this requirement.

Voter experience

35. The awareness survey showed that voters used on-line tools to find out about voting and about candidates.

36. Issues which negatively affected the experience of voters (some outside the control of council):

i) a small number of voters in one area did not receive voting documents. The Electoral Officer received about 90 applications for special votes from voters in that area.

ii) voters outside the area during the voting period either could not vote or had to apply for a special vote. An example was a voter who was overseas and who had arranged for a special vote to be posted to them but who could not meet the deadline for posting it back from overseas. An ability to supply the voting documents electronically would assist

iii) an issue which continues to affect the voter experience is the mixture of different voting systems on the one voting document and different orders of candidate names.

37. Ten staff volunteered to assist blind people with their voting. This was arranged in partnership with the Blind Foundation and the volunteers were trained and made declarations as electoral officials. The volunteers visited voters at their residences and help them mark their voting documents. The Auckland Branch of Blind Citizens NZ wrote an appreciative letter to the mayor and chief executive.

Voter turnout

38. The council aimed for a 40 per cent turnout. The turnout was 38.5 per cent, an increase of 3.7 per cent over the 2013 turnout.

39. Across all of New Zealand, there was a slight increase over 2013:

2010

2013

2016

Change

National voter turnout %

49.0

41.3

42.0

+0.7

40. Across metropolitan councils, Auckland and Wellington achieved the two highest increases:

Voter turnout % - Metro	2010	2013	2016	Change %
Auckland	51.0	34.9	38.5	+3.7
Christchurch City	52.2	42.9	38.3	-4.6
Dunedin City	53.0	43.1	45.2	+2.1
Hamilton City	37.8	38.3	33.6	-4.7
Hutt City Council	40.4	36.6	37.8	+1.2
Nelson City	52.2	52.2	52.1	-0.1
Palmerston North City	43.2	38.7	39.1	0.4
Porirua City	39.1	36.6	38.0	+1.5
Tauranga City	43.8	37.8	38.0	+0.2
Upper Hutt City	44.3	40.8	41.0	+0.2
Wellington City	40.0	41.5	45.6	+4.1
Total	45.0	38.0	39.3	+1.3

Candidate to member ratio

41. The target was three candidates per position.

42. There were 19 candidates for mayor. In 10 out of 13 electoral ward issues for councillors, the ratio of candidates to positions was 3 to 1, or greater.

43. There were 32 local board electoral issues (there are 21 local boards but elections in some local board areas are on a subdivision basis). In 9, the ratio of candidates to positions was 3 to 1 or greater. For a local board that is not divided into subdivisions, it is harder to achieve the ratio because the number of positions is greater.

44. Overall, there were 468 candidates for 170 positions, which is a ratio of 2.8 to 1.

User-centric, innovative and transparent local body elections

45. The key ‘users’ in an election are the candidates and the voters. Feedback shows:

· candidates got the information they needed

· compared to previous elections voters could find out more about candidates, through the “showyourlove” website

46. Assistance was provided to voters who were blind. Blind Citizens NZ communicated its appreciation back to the council.

47. The report details above a number of innovative activities such as the Love Bus and Heart Ballot Boxes.

48. Aspirations to have on-line voting were not met. There is a need to provide a user-friendly option for voters who do not use postal services. Voters who are not in the area during the voting period also have issues. If a voter is overseas, by the time voting documents have been posted to them (if they have a reliable postal address) there is not sufficient time to post them back. The ability to download blank forms, and to scan and email completed forms, should be investigated.

49. For candidates, there is only the one option of paper-based nomination forms. Submitting nominations electronically needs to be investigated.

50. The communications and community awareness programmes were innovative and received positive feedback, as noted above under “Communications and Community Engagement”.

51. Ensuring candidates and voters had sufficient information assisted the transparency of the elections.

Other activities relating to the elections

52. The Executive Leadership Team adopted a staff policy around political neutrality and involvement in the election process outside of work hours. The Governing Body adopted an elected members’ policy dealing with issues such as the use of council resources by incumbent members. The policy required close management of council communications during the sensitive period and a panel met weekly to monitor this.

53. Council staff enforce the Auckland Transport Election Sign Bylaw and dealt with 162 complaints. Earlier in the year there was media coverage about the use of commercial billboards. This will be addressed in a review of the Auckland Transport bylaw.

54. Following each election there are a number of activities arranged for elected members:

i) induction sessions for members

ii) refreshing the technology provided to members

iii) powhiri for all members

iv) inaugural meetings of the governing body and the local boards at which members make their statutory declarations.

Cost of the election

55. Summary of budget and expenditure:

Budget	Planned	Actual (at 31/01/17)	Forecast	Comments
Election Services - IES	$4,893,000	$4,515,500	$4,653,490	Amount payable to IES as per contract plus a 10 per cent buffer for variable costs to be determined at wash-up in Feb ’17, Whilst costs are currently forecast to arrive over contract amount, these are expected to be within budget (including buffer).
Communications & Engagement (internal charge)	$1,221,000	$1,160,960	$1,221,498	Expected to meet budget once final costs are confirmed.
Staff	$620,000	$659,637	$669,637	Slight over-spend in staff due to increased programme scope and staff turnover.
Kids Voting	$50,000	$49,424	$49,424	Steering Group approved exceeding budget for increased number of participating schools and students. This includes $30,000 for IES for on-line voting capability.
Community Engagement	$40,000	$27,441	$27,441	Initial Elections budget had no allocation for Community Engagement hence in 2016 $40k was reallocated from other items. Under-spend here due to final budget being confirmed after a lower cost engagement schedule was already planned. $10k for translations and accessibility was covered by C&E budget.
Governing Body Inaugural Meeting	$57,000	$49,661	$52,697	Initial budget had allocated $81,000 for post-election costs of which specifics were not known to Elections team. This was reduced to cover Inaugural Meeting only and then further to fund Community Engagement. In 2013, Inaugural Meeting cost was $57,000.
Local board inaugural meetings	$129,300	$97,921	$129,300	The budgets for travel and equipment hireage were not fully utilised.
Research	$20,000	$6,404	$8,700	This amount was reduced from $30,000 to fund Community Engagement.
Pre-election IES, DDB & Buzz	$0	$48,980	$48,980	Unplanned costs for development of elections strategy were funded by Democracy Services in 2015.
Miscellaneous	$0	$9,244	$9,244	Includes judicial recount, costs associated with services at libraries and service centres, other programme-wide costs and office expenses.
Recoveries - DHBs & LTs	-$1,500,000	-$622,500	-$1,517,964	Full recoverable amount will be determined at wash-up in February 2017. Current estimates expect to meet planned amount.
Total	$5,530,300	$6,002,672	$5,352,447	Overall budget under-spend expected once wash-up is confirmed in February 2017.

56. The costs of the Howick by-election ($104,000) will be absorbed in the budget if possible.

Issues to progress further

Howick by-election

57. A member of the Howick Local Board resigned at the inaugural meeting of the board. The council held a by-election at a cost of $104,000, which the Finance and Performance Committee has approved as unbudgeted expenditure. The committee considered the council should have the option of appointing to a vacancy that occurs within six months of an election and that the council should have the option of conducting a by-election on-line. The committee resolved:

“That the Finance and Performance Committee:

…

c) agree that the Mayor will write to the Minister of Local Government requesting, among other amendments to the Local Electoral Act 2001 necessary to improve the conduct of local elections, an amendment to section 117 to allow a local authority using the first past the post electoral system to determine by resolution whether to fill an extraordinary vacancy which occurs up to six months after the previous triennial local government election either by appointing the highest polling unsuccessful candidate from the previous triennial local government election, or by holding a by-election.

d) request the Minister of Local Government to explore a pilot-trial of an electronic voting system including by-elections.”

(Resolution number FIN/2016/1)

58. Both of these issues are discussed further in this report.

On-line voting

59. Survey results show the community prefers on-line voting. The government previously established a working party which made recommendations for a staged approach with trials in 2016. The government supported this and set out the requirements to be met for a council to establish a trial. Auckland Council was considered to be too large for a trial and was not eligible. In April 2016 the Associate Minister of Local Government announced the trial would not proceed as requirements had not been met.

60. The government wants local government to lead on-line voting, subject to its requirements being met. LGNZ should co-ordinate the local government sector’s development of on-line voting and Mayor Goff and Councillor Hulse will be pursuing this with the Local Government New Zealand National Council.

Voter participation

61. In order to prepare for the 2019 elections a voter participation project has been established. The main aims of the project are to reduce barriers to participation, encourage diversity and increase awareness and understanding of council and local elections.

62. The planning team for the 2016 elections has now completed its task and has been disbanded, however a position of Senior Advisor, Voter Participation, has been established within Democracy Services to provide continuity between the work that was carried out for the 2016 elections and the engagement that needs to occur for the 2019 elections.

Research on order of names

63. An analysis of the 2010 and 2013 election results was undertaken so that the council could decide whether the order of names on voting documents should be alphabetical or random. Further research will be undertaken and provided to the council when it next makes a decision on the order of names.

Review of Auckland Transport Election Signs Bylaw

64. Auckland Transport has undertaken to review the bylaw. The review will take place in time for implementation for the 2017 parliamentary election.

Submission to Justice and Electoral Select Committee on legislative change

65. The Justice and Electoral Select Committee conduct an enquiry following each election. Submissions on the inquiry into the 2016 elections will close in December 2017.

66. This report seeks input from local boards for the submission, particularly on the following issues. A proposed submission will be reported to the governing body later in 2017.

i) Matai names

The Local Electoral Act 2001 prohibits the use of official titles when listing candidate names on the voting document. Names that can be used include a registered name or a name by which the candidate has been commonly known for the six months prior to an election. Although sometimes referred to as ‘matai titles’, legal advice provided to staff is that these are more in the nature of names than of a title denoting the holding of some sort of office. To avoid doubt, the legislation should give guidance.

ii) Vacancies occurring within six months of an election

Since the 2016 elections were held, three vacancies have occurred – Auckland (resignation of local board member), Bay of Plenty Regional Council (death) and Waikato Regional Council (death). When considering the budget for the Howick by-election, the governing body resolved to seek a law change allowing a local authority using the first past the post electoral system to appoint the highest polling unsuccessful candidate to a vacancy occurring within six months of an election.

iii) Legal requirement for candidate to state whether residing in area

Some candidates complained about this requirement. The council has previously submitted in opposition to it and may consider doing so again. Following the 2013 elections, the select committee recommended that the requirement be removed and noted that candidates for parliamentary elections did not have to make a similar statement. However, it has not yet been removed.

iv) Timing of school holidays

The school holidays overlap with the postal voting period. Many people go out of the area during school holidays and do not vote. Currently local government elections are on the second Saturday in October. Moving election day to the first Saturday in October would provide one week before election day that would not overlap with school holidays. This still gives time to adopt the annual report and it provides an additional week between the elections and the end of the year for the new council to attend to business, such as a draft annual plan.

v) Electronic transmission of voting documents to and from voters overseas

Voters who are overseas during the postal voting period often do not have enough time to post back voting documents prior to election day, after receiving their voting documents in the post. The select committee has previously recommended electronic transmission. The government has supported sending blank voting documents electronically but has opposed the return of completed votes electronically. On-line voting would also solve this issue.

vi) Electoral Officer to have access to the supplementary roll

The processing of special votes relies on the Electoral Commission checking that voters are on the electoral roll. If the EO had access to the supplementary roll, the EO could do this, with the potential to speed up the counting of special votes. This has previously been supported by the select committee and the government.

vii) Access to data associated with electoral roll

It is a concern that local government election turnouts are low. Having access to statistical data associated with the electoral roll, such as age groups of electors, would be helpful when planning election awareness campaigns. Currently the Electoral Act only allows this information to be supplied for research into scientific or health matters.

viii) Electronic nominations and candidate profile statements.

The option to submit nominations electronically would benefit the candidate experience and it would lead to more accurate representation of candidate profile statements. Currently there are over 600 profile statements to be typed, from copy supplied by candidates, and then proof-read. Occasionally this leads to mistakes.

(ix) Legislative confirmation that local authorities may promote elections

Legislation should give a clear mandate to local authorities to promote elections. This is to avoid any uncertainty about public funds being used for election promotion purposes.

x) Time period for printing electoral rolls

Electoral rolls were not printed in time for the start of candidate nominations because the legislated time period is too short. Extend time period for printing. This corrects a previous change to timeframes which shortened the time for printing the rolls.

xi) Electronic access to electoral rolls for election staff

When processing candidate nominations, staff at service centres need to check whether nominators are on the electoral roll for the specified area. They may only have one hard-copy version to share between staff processing nominations for different candidates. It would be more efficient to access the current roll electronically.

xii) Close of voting time

Extend voting later into the last day and create one full 'voting day'. The Electoral Officer received 18,000 votes on the Saturday morning via our ballot boxes. Extra time on the final Saturday would give voters more time to vote and could help turn the final Saturday into a voting day celebration.

xiii) Discourage inappropriate use of elections

There were 19 candidates for mayor. Clearly some of these had no chance of being elected but presumably used the opportunity to promote their cause. Consideration could be given as whether this is an issue that needs to be addressed.

xiv) Separation of DHB elections.

A variety of election issues on the one voting document together with different voting systems and ordering of names confuses voters. It would be better to hold DHB elections on a separate time, for example a separate year, or with the parliamentary elections. However, this would increase the cost of an election to Auckland Council, which currently receives $1.5 million in recoveries from DHBs and Licensing Trusts.

xv) Candidate information in different languages

Candidate profile statements are limited to 150 words. If a candidate profile statement is provided in English and Māori, then each version may have 150 words as Māori is an official language. If a candidate profile statement includes English and a language other than Māori it is limited to 150 words in total. Consideration could be given to other options for candidates to provide information in languages relevant to their constituents.

xvi) Consistency between Electoral Regulations and Local Electoral Regulations

The Electoral Regulations include provisions that would be helpful to local elections such as:

· Telephone dictation for voters with disabilities

· Receipt of special votes electronically.

xvii) Relationship with Electoral Commission

Some voters, confused about who was responsible for running the council elections, contacted the Electoral Commission. The Electoral Commission typically referred callers to the council and enquirers ended up calling the council call centre only to be referred on to Independent Election Services. There should be consideration to jointly promoting awareness about who enquirers should contact with queries about local elections. This does not require a legislative change but could be implemented through Local Government New Zealand.

Timetable for 2019 elections

Electoral system

67. If the council wishes to change the electoral system from First Past the Post to Single Transferable Vote, a resolution is required by 12 September 2017. Such a resolution might then be subject to a petition for a poll. Alternatively the council could conduct a poll.

Māori wards

68. If the council wishes to establish Māori wards, a resolution is required by 23 November 2017. Such a resolution might then be subject to a petition for a poll. Alternatively the council could conduct a poll.

Review of representation arrangements

69. The council is required to review:

· whether the election of councillors is on a ward basis or at large and, for each local board, whether election of board members is on a subdivision basis or at large

· the number of members in each local board within a minimum of five and a maximum of twelve

· if there are wards or subdivisions, what the boundaries are and how many members there are in each

· the names of wards, subdivisions and local boards.

70. Unlike other councils, the council cannot review the number of members of the Governing Body because the legislation sets this at 20 members.

71. The statutory timetable for the review is:

Due dates	Requirement
No earlier than 1 March 2018	A council resolution setting out the council’s initial proposal
Within 14 days of resolution but no later than 8 September 2018	Public notice of the resolution, providing at least one month for submissions
Within 6 weeks of close of submissions	The initial proposal may be amended after considering submissions. Public notice of the final proposal
20 December 2018	Appeals from those who submitted on the initial proposal and fresh objections to any amendments are received
15 January 2019	Appeals and objections are forwarded to the Local Government Commission
11 April 2019	Appeals and objections are determined by the Local Government Commission, which may conduct hearings in order to do this

72. The review will be conducted as one component of the wider governance framework review reported to the Governing Body last December. The Governing Body established a political working party comprising 7 governing body members and 7 local board members.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

73. The report is being presented to all local boards for their views, before being presented back to the Governing Body to finalise a submission to the select committee.

Māori impact statement

74. Initiatives that encourage the community to engage with elections will have a positive impact on Māori. There are activities associated with elections that are particularly significant to mana whenua, such as the pōwhiri to welcome all elected members following the elections.

75. The survey of candidates asked candidates to identify their ethnicities. Ten per cent of candidates were Māori, compared to 9 per cent of the total Auckland population. As a result of the election, 7 per cent of elected members are Māori (115 of 170 elected members replied to the survey).

76. There will be an opportunity to consider the establishment of Māori wards for the 2019 elections.

Implementation

77. This report will be presented to local boards for their comments, to be included in a report back to the Governing Body so that the Governing Body can finalise its submission to the select committee.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Warwick McNaughton - Principal Advisor - Democracy Services

Authorisers

Marguerite Delbet - General Manager Democracy Services

Karen Lyons – General Manager Local Board Services

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

28 March 2017

Reinstatement of the Manukau Harbour Forum

File No.: CP2017/04037

Purpose

1. To approve the reconstitution of the Manukau Harbour Forum (the forum), including the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board, for the 2016 to 2019 local government term.

2. To nominate a board member, and an alternate, to represent the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board on the forum.

Executive summary

3. The Manukau Harbour Forum was established in 2012 as a joint committee of nine local boards bordering the Manukau Harbour Member boards recognised the need for joint decision making and advocacy to achieve water quality improvements for the Manukau Harbour.

4. The committee ceases to exist at the end of every electoral term and can be reconstituted following agreement of the entities involved. This report invites boards to consider reconstitution of the forum, and to nominate a board member (and alternate) to represent this board on the Forum.

5. The Forum’s Terms of Reference outlines the purpose. The report also notes that a review of the forum will be undertaken in the next twelve months to develop a future state direction and new three year work programme.

Recommendation/s

That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

a) agree to re-constitute the Manukau Harbour Forum joint committee with the Franklin, Mangere-Otahuhu, Manurewa, Otara-Papatoetoe, Papakura, Puketapapa, Whau, and Waitakere Ranges Local Boards for the 2016/19 electoral term;

b) appoint one named member and one named alternate member to the Manukau Harbour Forum;

c) confirm that the chairperson and deputy chairperson of the Manukau Harbour Forum will be elected by a majority of members at the first meeting of each electoral term;

d) confirm the Terms of Reference for the Manukau Harbour Forum as outlined in Attachment A;

e) delegate authority to the Manukau Harbour Forum to make decisions within its terms of reference, noting that any significant or controversial decisions will only be made by the forum with the confirmation by resolution of all the member boards that would be affected by the decision and that the local board will reserve the right to hold and promote a different view to that of the forum on any issue that may impact the local board area;

f) confirm that any changes to the forum’s terms of reference will be agreed first by the forum then recommended to the nine member boards for their approval, noting that resolutions must be identical;

g) note that in order for the requirements of this agreement for the Manukau Harbour Forum to be reached, the resolutions of each of the nine member boards made in respect of recommendations a) (b)-(f) above (with the exception of (b) where appointees are to be named) must be identical and that in the absence of identical resolutions by all member boards the Forum will not meet the requirements under clause 30a of Schedule 7 to the Local Government Act 2002.

Comments

6. Nine local boards (Franklin, Mangere-Otahuhu, Manurewa, Maungakiekie-Tāmaki , Otara-Papatoetoe, Papakura, Puketapapa, Whau, and Waitakere Ranges Local Boards) together formed the Manukau Harbour Forum with the view to form a means of collective local board advocacy on common issues affecting the Manukau Harbour.

7. The Manukau Harbour Forum was constituted formally as a joint committee of nine local boards (Franklin, Mangere-Otahuhu, Manurewa, Maungakiekie-Tāmaki , Otara-Papatoetoe, Papakura, Puketapapa, Whau, and Waitakere Ranges Local Boards) under standing orders 2.8.1 and 2.8.2.

8. Standing orders 2.8.1 and 2.8.2 enable a local board to appoint a joint committee with another local board or boards. Being a joint committee enables the Forum to conduct business more efficiently, as a local board joint committee can make decisions and provide direction to officers without seeking confirmation and/or ratification from the individual member boards. In accordance with Clause 30(7) of the Local Government Act 2002, the Forum automatically dissolved following the 2016 Local Government elections.

9. The Terms of Reference for the Manukau Harbour Forum setting out the purpose and principles of the forum setting out the purpose and principles of the forum are presented in Attachment A. The purpose of the Forum is to champion a sustainable management approach for the Manukau Harbour. Since its formation the Forum has:

· identified issues, such as mangroves, pacific oysters, coastal erosion, stormwater, recreational access/wharves and Maui Dolphin Sanctuary as high priority;

· funded a work programme consisting of annual seminar, communications programme, and a business to business education programme;

· developed a ‘Manukau Harbour Forum Vision and Strategy’, undertaken a comprehensive stocktake of all research pertaining to the Manukau Harbour and catchment, produced a set of maps and a list of stakeholders;

· received regular updates on marine monitoring within the Manukau Harbour;

· advocated to central government and Auckland Council (e.g. feedback on the Unitary Plan) on issues affecting the Harbour, including hydrodynamic modelling of sediment runoff;

· identified areas of interest and potential projects that the local boards surrounding the Manukau Harbour could progress jointly and through funding from the member local boards’ budget, adopted a work programme to deliver the forum’s objectives.

10. It is recommended that each constituting local board agrees to re-instate the Manukau Harbour Forum for another term and appoints one member plus an alternate to represent the board on the Forum.

11. During the 2016/19 term of the Forum, it is recommended to undertake a review of the role of the Forum in order to recommend a decision-making structure that will enable the objectives relating to the Manukau Harbour to be addressed effectively.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

12. Local boards have previously agreed, through adoption of the forum’s terms of reference, that the Manukau Harbour is a regional asset and it was appropriate that local boards collectively contribute to strategies and outcomes that enhance the social, economic, environmental and cultural well-being of the harbour. The forum has been seen as an effective mechanism to achieve this.

13. The role of the forum is to champion the sustainable management of the Manukau Harbour and adjacent communities. It developed a vision and strategy in line with this which was adopted in September 2014.

14. In the last term, the forum agreed a three year work programme. Following the ratification of this work programme by member boards, each board committed between $8,000 and $15,000 from its budget to implement that work programme.

Māori impact statement

15. The Manukau Harbour Forum recognised mana whenua interest in Manukau Harbour. During the last term, the forum agreed to hold up to three hui per financial year with mana whenua.

16. While the forum did discuss a joint committee with mana whenua, or mana whenua representatives being appointed to the forum, it was agreed that this was inappropriate while treaty negotiations are pending. The forum anticipates receiving further advice and options as to how it interfaces with mana whenua as treaty settlement progresses.

17. Workshops of the Manukau Harbour Forum were held on 13 April and 8 June 2015 to discuss the ongoing role of mana whenua in relation to the forum. Some minor changes were made to the forum’s terms of reference as a result of this to reflect the forum’s obligations under Te Tiriti o Waitangi/The Treaty of Waitangi, and its desire to work with mana whenua on an ongoing basis.

Implementation

18. Local Board Services provide governance advisory and support services to the Forum. Co-ordination and delivery of the work programmes adopted to date are led by Infrastructure and Environmental Services. It is recommended that the role of Infrastructure and Environmental Services (I&ES) to administer the entire work programme be considered during the proposed review.

19. I&ES has provided full technical support to the forum since its inception It is recommended that as part of the forum’s review, consideration be given to how other council teams can offer support to the forum. I&ES will continue to engage with the forum as an important stakeholder group in the development of an integrated watershed management plan for the Manukau catchment.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Manukau Harbour Forum Terms of Reference	279

Signatories

Authors	Philippa Hillman - Democracy Advisor, Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board
Authorisers	Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

28 March 2017

Project 17: Auckland Council Maintenance Contracts

File No.: CP2017/03519

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to seek feedback from local boards on maintenance contracts for parks, buildings and open space, prior to Finance & Performance Committee approval on 28 March 2017.

Executive summary

2. Auckland Council manages over 5,000 sites across the region including parks, buildings and open space. Existing Auckland Council maintenance contracts for these sites expire on 30 June 2017.

3. Project 17 was setup to procure and implement new maintenance contracts due to take effect 1 July 2017. This includes Full Facilities, Arboriculture and Ecological services across the Auckland Council region.

4. Over the last twelve months, Community Facilities has engaged with elected members through both formal and informal processes, to shape up the direction of this project and seek feedback on maintenance requirements and service levels. Refer to Attachment A for the Political Engagement Timeline.

5. Elected member feedback, including local priorities, informed the Request for Proposal document which was the basis of negotiation with suppliers. Refer to Attachment B for this local board’s resolutions dated September 2016.

6. This report outlines the following documents which will form part of final maintenance contracts and standard service levels:

· Attachment C Standard and Enhanced Assets;

· Attachment D Full Facilities Contract Service Specifications;

· Attachment E Supplier Specific Information (CONFIDENTIAL);

· Attachment F Contractor Performance Balanced Scorecard;

· Attachment G Tupuna Maunga Values Specifications; and

· Attachment H Contract Information (CONFIDENTIAL).

7. Community Facilities seek feedback from local boards on Attachments C, D and E, prior to Finance and Performance Committee approval on 28 March 2017.

Recommendation/s

That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

a) provide feedback on:

i. Standard and Enhanced Assets (Attachment C);

ii. Full Facilities Contract Service Specifications (Attachment D); and

iii. Supplier Specific Information (Attachment E).

b) note that the local board will have the opportunity to meet successful suppliers in April and May to discuss and refine local service level variations.

Comments

Process

8. Over the last twelve months, Community Facilities has engaged with elected members through both formal and informal processes, to shape up the direction of this project and seek feedback on maintenance requirements and service levels. Refer to Attachment A for the Political Engagement Timeline.

9. An open, competitive tender process seeking proposals for the supply of full facilities, arboriculture and ecological maintenance services of council assets was conducted as follows:

· On 10 August 2016, an Expression of Interest was published to identify market interest in providing maintenance services for buildings, parks and open spaces to Auckland Council. 36 Expressions of Interest were received.

· Formal feedback from local boards on the project approach and proposed service specifications was received in September 2016.

· Feedback was also sought from local boards on the list of assets in their area, used as the basis of asset data in the Request for Proposal.

· Refer to Attachment B for this local board’s resolutions.

· Feedback was used to inform the Request for Proposal document which was released on 28 October 2016 and submissions closed 9 January 2017.

· Submissions were assessed and scored by an evaluation team against weighted criteria including methodology, resources and capability, innovation and SMART procurement, and price.

· Negotiations are now underway with shortlisted suppliers, due for completion 10 March.

· Recommended contracts for five areas across the region, including pricing and baseline service levels, will be presented to the Finance & Performance Committee on 28 March 2017 for final approval.

10. Community Facilities seek feedback from local boards on Attachments C, D and E, prior to Finance and Performance Committee approval on 28 March 2017.

Approach

11. Following a review last year of management and maintenance processes of council’s assets, this project has adopted an improved approach to maintenance services, to:

· focus on the whole-of-life cycle of assets;

· deliver more services without compromising quality;

· encourage and incentivise contractors to be accountable for the assets and develop ownership at all levels of their service delivery;

· provide a contractual framework that enables contractors to employ innovate ideas and methods without compromising on quality delivery; and

· implement five new contract areas (called Tahi, Rua, Toru, Whā, Rima) to allow for better economies of scale. The local boards represented within each area are:

Contract Area

Tahi

Rua

Toru

Whā

Rima

Devonport-Takapuna

Hibiscus & Bays

Kaipātiki

Upper Harbour

Albert-Eden

Great Barrier

Puketāpapa

Waiheke

Whau

Henderson-Massey

Rodney

Waitākere Ranges

Howick

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki

Orākei

Waitematā

Franklin

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu

Manurewa

Ōtara-Papatoetoe

Papakura

12. A key change is that contracts will have a more outcome-based focus on service levels, as opposed to predictive or frequency based maintenance schedules (unless where necessary). This ensures service standards are consistently maintained and managed by suppliers.

13. A standard maintenance service level is applied to every asset to ensure it is fit for purpose, in good condition and achieves community outcomes.

14. Where an asset may have specific known demands such as high frequency use, high reputational risk, requires attendance due to its nature (e.g. old, troublesome asset) or is a heritage site, an enhanced level of service may be applied to the asset.

15. An enhanced service level should not be confused with poor performance from a supplier to provide the agreed standard service level.

16. Refer to Attachment C outlining the updated asset list (including those requiring an enhanced service level) for this local board area as at March 2017. Please note that this asset list is continually reviewed to ensure up to date data in alignment to council decisions and asset assessments.

17. Maintenance contracts have been negotiated to cover three core functions across the five areas:

· Full Facilities;

· Specialist Arboriculture; and

· Specialist Ecological.

18. Council may immediately terminate (or suspend the supplier’s performance of) the contract in whole or in part, by written notice to the supplier, if a persistent performance breach occurs. Please refer to the Contractor Management section in this report for further details.

19. Refer to Attachment H (confidential) for further information about contract terms and Attachment E (confidential) for supplier specific information.

Standard Service Levels

Full Facilities Contract (FFC)

20. Service specifications determine the criteria and outcomes associated with maintaining an asset or facility, which then sets the foundation of a contract agreement.

21. Refer to Attachment D for the Service Specifications expected across the Auckland region for Full Facilities maintenance work. In summary, these are service level output statements by category:

Full Facilities Category	Output Statement
Open Space	Parks, reserves and roadsides within Auckland are maintained and developed to provide a sustainable, safe, clean and healthy environment while assets are maintained and enhanced to meet the amenity and use needs of council, Auckland residents and visitors.
Arboriculture	Trees (under three metres in height) are maintained to an aesthetically pleasing state which promotes healthy growth with the tree adding to the resident or visitors experience with targeted maintenance activities to achieve healthy and safe trees.
Locking and Unlocking	Assets are actively managed to minimise vandalism and anti-social behavior
Buildings - Maintenance	All Auckland Council owned and/or operated facilities require on-going Planned and Response Maintenance (compliance and non-compliance) to ensure that all facilities provided for public and Auckland Council staff use are functional, fit-for-purpose, safe and where possible ensure that the building services are optimised to reduce disruption to the facilities operation.
Buildings – Cleaning	All Auckland Council owned and/or operated buildings that require planned and response cleaning shall be cleaned to a standard that allows all buildings users to utilise a sanitary, hygienic, safe, functional and fit for purpose space for their operation. All litter and debris shall be removed from site and done so in a sustainable manner.

22. Standard Operating Procedures have been developed to agree minimal functional requirements such as height of grass mowing, mulching thickness, goal post painting etc. These procedures have been developed through expertise knowledge and are operational in nature.

23. Minor Capital Works (low value, low risk) is included in these contracts to ensure appropriate mitigation measures are incorporated when maintaining assets.

24. The baseline service level for specialist sportsfield maintenance ensures sports playing surfaces are managed to provide surfaces and assets that are ‘fit for use’ for the type and level of sport being played and which maximise usage and support organised sporting activities.

25. Specialist sportsfield renovation work includes:

· Fertilisation, application, fertilisers;

· Winter treatment - cambridge rolling, slicing and spiking, solid tine vertidraining, ground breaking, vibramoling;

· Summer - vertimowing, dethatching, organic matter removal, leaf collection, scarifying/ dethatching, coring/hollow tine, core harvesting, undersowing/oversowing, sand topdressing, soil topdressing, vibramoling, mole plough, verti-draining, ground probe aeration, weed control, weed control (couch), agrichemical controls on sportsfields, top planning;

· Turfing – turf replacement (minor);

· Artificial - cleaning, rubber top-ups, grooming, repair, hygiene;

· Supply bulk supply materials - eg sand, soil, seed, agrichemicals, turf (winter and summer species), fertilizer;

· Renovation works programme development; and

· Not that the Full Facilities contract incorporates sports mowing, line marking, goal posts/furniture, soil and/or tissue sample analysis, grass selection, pest and disease detection, minor turf repairs, renovation works programme report, cricket.

26. Sportsfield renovations seasonally renovate surfaces back into condition for subsequent sporting code use, including renewal of surfaces that have reached their life span, or reinstating an asset that has been damaged through excessive overuse.

27. Sportsfield renovations are collaboratively implemented to complement maintenance activities in the contract.

28. When asset components are replaced (e.g. turf type), the same style and material type is supplied, unless otherwise directed by Auckland Council.

Arboriculture Specialist Contract

29. The scope of the arboriculture contract covers the management of council owned trees i.e. it’s ‘urban forest and rural surrounds’

30. The arboriculture contract includes, but is not limited to, the following services:

· general administration and communication;

· inspections and programmes;

· pruning;

· reactive works;

· clean-up;

· tree removal;

· planting;

· aftercare maintenance; and

· tree asset inventory.

31. The arboriculture contract will be managed as a prescriptive measure and value contract, but may shift to output basis through the term of the contract. Work will be managed on both a scheduled and reactive basis.

32. Auckland Council will retain ownership of all chipped bio-mass (foliage, brushwood and wood) resulting from Arboriculture Specialist contracts.

33. It will be expected that the supplier takes a proactive approach in relation to Council’s assets, including those not directly related to the contract’s scope. This will involve reporting any faults or issues, regardless of asset ownership in a timely manner e.g. reporting a vandalised bus shelter (Auckland Transport) next to a street garden.

34. The management of Kauri Dieback and weeds are incorporated into Standard Operating Procedures included in the Arboriculture Specialist contract.

Ecological Specialist Contract

35. The ecological contract provides for the maintenance of Auckland Council’s high value ecology sites, and significant bush and natural areas. The prioritised targeted removal of animal and plant pests from council’s open spaces is a core service within this contract. The overarching objective is to restore and rehabilitate native biodiversity in a sustainable and long term approach.

36. The scope of the ecological contract includes:

· preparing ecological restoration plans that take a long term perspective and provide the optimum cost effective management to reinstate the ecological processes, so the site environmental values are conserved and enhanced;

· assessing, monitoring and controlling pests impacting the ecological processes and or values at each site. This includes but is not limited to plant, animal and invertebrate pests; and

· restorative planting of sites.

37. The supplier is required to have all vehicles to carry a web based GPS tracking system. This enables reports to be produced on journey length and stay.

38. The ecological contract is supplemented by an Ecological and Environmental Pest Control Standard Operating Procedure which provides guidance to methodologies and site-specific requirements.

39. The supplier is required to report any hazardous dumping to Auckland Council’s Pollution Hot Line immediately

Other Maintenance Priorities

SMART Procurement

40. The following SMART procurement outcomes are requirements outlined in maintenance contracts:

· Increase capability and capacity – suppliers are required to create sustainable businesses that provide training and development to ensure continued quality delivery of services over the term of the contract;

· Youth employment - contracts should facilitate connecting work-ready youth to local employment by creating local jobs with training and development opportunities;

· Diversity and inclusion - contracts should promote inclusion, reduce discrimination and remove barriers to opportunity and participation, particularly for disadvantaged groups who face barriers to employment e.g. long term unemployed, and people with disabilities;

· Valuing Māori - suppliers are required to work collaboratively with council to achieve better outcomes with Māori, by supporting skill development and labour market participation, and engagement with Māori owned businesses;

· Pacific Auckland - contracts should support further training, development and labour market participation for Pacific youth and communities; and

· Local community and economy - contracts should support local business where reasonable/practical, and should meet the social needs of the delivery area.

41. Contracts have retained flexibility to remove assets (by contract variation) to facilitate active participation by the third sector/volunteers to deliver maintenance outcomes.

42. Suppliers (and subcontractors) are required to establish, document, implement, maintain and continually improve an environmental management system. This will capture practices such as an environmental policy, environmental impacts of significance, legal requirements, environmental objectives and targets. At a mimimum the management system will monitor and measure energy conservation, water conservation, waste management and recycling, chemical use, Scope 1 and Scope 2 Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

43. Suppliers are proposed to annually reduce the carbon footprint from year two onwards.

44. The environmental management system must be certified by an accredited third party to the standard of ISO14001, EcoWarranty, Enviro-Mark or an agreed-upon alternative programme. Where the supplier has certified to the Enviro-Mark programme they will commit to attaining the highest level of certification, Enviro-Mark Diamond.

45. Please refer to Attachment E for further supplier specific information.

Weed Management

46. A memorandum from Barry Potter, Director Infrastructure and Environmental Services, was circulated to local board members on 15 November 2016 regarding weed management. A second memorandum was circulated to all elected members on 16 December 2016 providing an update on the implementation of Auckland Council’s Weed Management Policy, particularly with regards to this project.

47. New maintenance contracts have been designed to reflect the objectives of Auckland Council’s Weed Management Policy which includes implementing the following changes:

48. What will change?

· Minimise agrichemical use

§ the new contracts require a reduction in agrichemical usage and this will be closely monitored - a 10% penalty of the monthly invoice to the supplier will be applied if the ‘annual reduction in use of agrichemicals’ KPI is not met;

§ chemical usage will be reported monthly by suppliers and tracked on a local park by local park basis. Please refer to the Contract Management section in this report for further information on reporting, auditing and KPI’s;

§ contracts will standardise which type of glysophate will be used across the region by all suppliers;

§ manual and mechanical weed control methods are currently used in and around children’s playgrounds across the region. Agrichemicals are not used within these spaces. This will continue under new contracts; and

§ mechanical edging will be applied along paving and other hard edges.

· Integrated weed management, ensure best practice and value for money

§ the volume of mulch in gardens and garden beds will be increased to reduce other methods of weed control;

§ change from frequency based maintenance contracts to a focus on environmental outcomes, to encourage suppliers to be more innovative in their approach to weed management and edge control;

§ learnings from innovations will be socialized across all suppliers to promote continuous improvement and best practice methodology;

§ suppliers will be encouraged and rewarded for innovation in weed management at quarterly supplier forums;

§ development of a weed management manual which is currently being reviewed by the Best Practice Reference Group;

§ establishment of the Best Practice Reference Group made up of external technical experts and community representatives as per the policy action plan; and

§ a No-Spray register will be used by suppliers to ensure consistency in practice and process.

· Empower the community to manage weeds in accordance with the policy

§ weed control programmes in ecological restoration contracts will be planned and agreed in advance of the works;

§ targeted weed control, including the use of volunteers, will be enabled to ensure that agrichemical usage is minimized and integrated with other sustainable practices such as replanting with eco-sourced species to prevent weed re-infestation;

§ contracts include supplier inductions and training on public awareness of vegetation controls, including herbicides and the importance of public education, including signage when spraying; and

§ improved information on council’s website outlining how and why council controls weeds.

49. At the 13 December 2016 Finance and Performance Committee meeting, the following resolutions relating to weed management were approved:

· an addition to recommend to the Environment and Community Committee as follows:

a) Note that significant funding reallocations are not within the scope of the Annual Plan process

b) Endorse glysophate reduction targets within the current budget

c) Express support for the continued implementation of the Weed Management Policy

d) Agree that a political group be appointed by the Mayor, monitors and reviews the implementation of Auckland Council’s Weed Management Policy and practice

e) Recommend that a review and consultation of allocated funding take place through the upcoming Long-term Plan process

· resolution d) reshapes the weed management political advisory group

Co-Governance

50. As pre-agreed with co-governance partners, suppliers submitted a detailed report and costings on how they would manage and provide specific services to the Tūpuna Maunga Authority and / or Parakai Recreation Reserve in their preferred areas.

51. This report is being socialised with leaders and representatives from co-governance entities with the outcome being determined at the end of March 2017 with either of the following options being the preferred solution:

· maintain the status quo;

· offer maintenance services to the supplier in the specific area; or

· offer maintenance services to only one supplier who would be accountable for all outcomes.

52. Whenua Rangatira (Bastion Point) – no change proposed to current maintenance agreements where iwi are responsible for managing this site.

Community Empowerment

53. Local boards expressed strong support to enable community empowerment including volunteers, through these contracts.

54. Contracts have the flexibility to accommodate contract variations such as community empowerment initiatives, however compliance with Health and Safety, legislative obligations, agreed service levels and operating procedures are critical in these cases.

55. Local boards should work with their strategic brokers (within the Arts, Community and Events team) to identify requirements and opportunities, who will then liaise with Community Facilities to agree and implement suitable solutions.

Contract Management

Contractor performance

56. Key Performance Indicators (KPI’s) measure how well the Supplier is doing to meet specifications and outcomes. KPI’s cover five categories:

· quality;

· innovation;

· management;

· smart procurement and environmental management; and

· stakeholder, customer and community impact.

57. Health and Safety (H&S) is a contractual obligation.

58. KPI’s are measured monthly, bi-monthly, quarterly or annually.

59. Suppliers are required to meet Full Facilities Key Performance Indicators (KPI’s) and Minor Capital Work KPI’s to have their level of direct award for Minor Capital Works increased, as an incentive for good performance.

60. For each category component failed, suppliers must provide an improvement plan to resolve the performance issue.

61. If a supplier continues to fail on a category component beyond the performance resolution improvement plan deadline, council will be entitled to withhold payment of 10% of each month's invoices (excluding minor capex) until the supplier starts meeting the category component target.

62. Suppliers have the right to earn back withheld payments relating to category components if they start meeting required target levels by a timeframe set by council.

63. Attachment F outlines the Contractor Performance Balanced Scorecard that will be monitored and applied across the region.

Auditing

64. Auditing of contractor performance was previously conducted by external parties. However, this function is now being conducted internally by Community Facilities. A team of auditors conduct spot checks onsite targeting 10% of all maintenance work conducted by each supplier.

Response maintenance

65. Response maintenance work will be categorised by urgency and a maximum response time determined. Criteria is still under negotiation and agreement for some suppliers.

66. The supplier will undertake programmed maintenance, responsive maintenance and all other minor contract works (including emergency works on an as needs basis only) on Monday to Sunday, restricting noisy and any activities that may cause a nuisance to between the hours of:

· 7:00am and 6:00pm (52 weeks of the year); and

· 10:00am and 6:00pm (Saturdays and Sundays and statutory holidays).

67. The supplier will provide a call out service 24 hours, 7 days a week, carried out as part of normal duties.

68. Following completion of response maintenance work, the supplier will call the customer (between 8:00am and 6:00pm unless otherwise stated), to inform them that works have been undertaken and check that the customer is satisfied.

69. It is expected that suppliers assist with ‘whole of life’ asset management which requires the supplier to assess and make recommendations on the optimal most cost effective balance of programmed maintenance, responsive maintenance, and renewal of assets across their whole life.

70. Suppliers are required to update a condition assessment grading once a maintenance service has been undertaken, to be included in council’s asset management system, and to notify council of any significant degradation.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

71. Project 17 has engaged with local boards through various channels including:

· Local Board Chairs Procurement Working Group;

· Local Board Chairs Forum presentations;

· memorandums;

· cluster workshops;

· individual local board workshops; and

· business meeting reports.

72. Refer to Attachment A outlining the political engagement timeline.

73. Community Facilities is now seeking feedback from local boards during the final stage of this procurement process, prior to Finance and Performance Committee approval of contracts.

Māori impact statement

74. Auckland Council is committed to meeting its responsibilities under Te Tiriti o Waitangi/the Treaty of Waitangi and its broader statutory obligations to Māori.

75. Māori responsiveness requires the collective effort of everyone. Under the new contracts, suppliers will work collaboratively with council to achieve better outcomes with Māori and for Auckland. This will include:

· building positive relationships with Māori – effective communication and engagement with Māori, developing resilient relationships with mana whenua;

· significantly lift Māori social and economic well-being; and

· building Māori capability and capacity.

76. Through these contracts, opportunities to support local community outcomes and economic development include (but are not limited to):

· providing employment opportunities, in particular for local people and for youth;

· increasing capability and capacity (apprenticeships, cadetships or equivalent) in particular for youth;

· building on community and volunteer networks.

77. The Request for Proposal outlined Tūpuna Maunga Value Specifications as outlined in Attachment G, which suppliers are required to support as part of new maintenance contracts.

Implementation

78. The transition into new contracts will commence once formal approval is agreed by the Finance & Performance Committee.

79. Local boards will have the opportunity to meet new suppliers in April and May 2017 to discuss specific local priorities. Any local service level variations may need to be reflected in contract variations and implementation timelines agreed with the supplier.

80. New maintenance contracts take effect on 1July 2017. Note that there will be approximately six to twelve months to bed in changes, in particularly systems and reporting.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Political Engagement Timeline	295
b ⇩	Local Board Resolutions (September 2016)	297
c ⇩	Standard and Enhanced Assets	301
d ⇩	FFC Service Specifications	307
e ⇩	Supplier Specific Information (Under Separate Cover) - Confidential
f ⇩	Contractor Performance Balanced Scorecard	359
g ⇩	Tupuna Maunga Values Specifications	363
h ⇩	Contract Information (Under Separate Cover) - Confidential

Signatories

Authors

Kate Marsh – Principal Business Analyst

Authorisers

Rod Sheridan - General Manager Community Facilities

Karen Lyons – General Manager Local Board Services

[1] Member boards listed in geographical order from north to south

Chairperson	Josephine Bartley
Deputy Chairperson	Don Allan
Members	Debbie Burrows
	Bernie Diver
	Nerissa Henry
	Chris Makoare
	Alan Verrall

MT/2016/179	Community Facilities Maintenance Contracts 2017
FILE REF	CP2016/18218
AGENDA ITEM NO.	18

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

Authors	Shirley Coutts - Senior Local Board Advisor
Authorisers	Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager