I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Environment and Community Committee will be held on:
Date: Time: Meeting Room: Venue:
|
Tuesday, 16 May 2017 9.30am Reception Lounge |
Environment and Community Committee
OPEN AGENDA
|
MEMBERSHIP
Chairperson |
Cr Penny Hulse |
|
Deputy Chairperson |
Cr Alf Filipaina |
|
Members |
IMSB Member James Brown |
Cr Daniel Newman, JP |
|
Cr Dr Cathy Casey |
Cr Dick Quax |
|
Deputy Mayor Bill Cashmore |
Cr Greg Sayers |
|
Cr Ross Clow |
Cr Desley Simpson, JP |
|
Cr Fa’anana Efeso Collins |
Cr Sharon Stewart, QSM |
|
Cr Linda Cooper, JP |
Cr Sir John Walker, KNZM, CBE |
|
Cr Chris Darby |
Cr Wayne Walker |
|
Cr Hon Christine Fletcher, QSO |
Cr John Watson |
|
Mayor Hon Phil Goff, JP |
IMSB Member Glenn Wilcox |
|
Cr Richard Hills |
|
|
Cr Denise Lee |
|
|
Cr Mike Lee |
|
(Quorum 11 members)
|
|
Sarndra O’Toole Team Leader Governance Advisors
11 May 2017
Contact Telephone: (09) 890 8152 Email: sarndra.otoole@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
|
Environment and Community Committee 16 May 2017 |
|
ITEM TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE
1 Apologies 5
2 Declaration of Interest 5
3 Confirmation of Minutes 5
4 Petitions 5
5 Public Input 5
6 Local Board Input 5
6.1 Manurewa Local Board input - Swimming pool participation 5
7 Extraordinary Business 6
8 Notices of Motion 6
9 Options to address inequitable impacts of the region-wide swimming pool pricing policy 7
10 Auckland cultural heritage sector review: proposed terms of reference 23
11 Auckland Council's submission on the Land Transport (Vehicle User Safety) Amendment Bill 37
12 Tākaro - Investing in Play Discussion Document approval for consultation 51
13 Acquisition of land for open space - Glen Innes 75
14 161R Maraetai Drive, Maraetai - Recommendation Report on Reserve Revocation 83
15 49 Nihill Crescent, Mission Bay - Recommendation Report on Reserve Revocation 95
16 Regional Parks Management Plan 2010 Variation to incorporate land at Piha into the Waitakere Ranges Regional Park 111
17 Partnership opportunity with Western Springs College for indoor courts 123
18 Sport and Recreation Community Access Scheme 139
19 Implementation of the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2012 - Update on food waste and three bin services 153
20 Information Report - 16 May 2017 165
21 Consideration of Extraordinary Items
PUBLIC EXCLUDED
22 Procedural Motion to Exclude the Public 209
C1 Acquisition of land for open space - Takanini 209
C2 Acquisition of land for open space - Papakura 209
1 Apologies
Apologies from Deputy Mayor B Cashmore and Cr C Casey have been received.
2 Declaration of Interest
Members are reminded of the need to be vigilant to stand aside from decision making when a conflict arises between their role as a member and any private or other external interest they might have.
3 Confirmation of Minutes
That the Environment and Community Committee: a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Tuesday, 4 April 2017, including the confidential section, as a true and correct record.
|
4 Petitions
At the close of the agenda no requests to present petitions had been received.
5 Public Input
Standing Order 7.7 provides for Public Input. Applications to speak must be made to the Governance Advisor, in writing, no later than one (1) clear working day prior to the meeting and must include the subject matter. The meeting Chairperson has the discretion to decline any application that does not meet the requirements of Standing Orders. A maximum of thirty (30) minutes is allocated to the period for public input with five (5) minutes speaking time for each speaker.
At the close of the agenda no requests for public input had been received.
6 Local Board Input
Standing Order 6.2 provides for Local Board Input. The Chairperson (or nominee of that Chairperson) is entitled to speak for up to five (5) minutes during this time. The Chairperson of the Local Board (or nominee of that Chairperson) shall wherever practical, give one (1) day’s notice of their wish to speak. The meeting Chairperson has the discretion to decline any application that does not meet the requirements of Standing Orders.
This right is in addition to the right under Standing Order 6.1 to speak to matters on the agenda.
7 Extraordinary Business
Section 46A(7) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:
“An item that is not on the agenda for a meeting may be dealt with at that meeting if-
(a) The local authority by resolution so decides; and
(b) The presiding member explains at the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public,-
(i) The reason why the item is not on the agenda; and
(ii) The reason why the discussion of the item cannot be delayed until a subsequent meeting.”
Section 46A(7A) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:
“Where an item is not on the agenda for a meeting,-
(a) That item may be discussed at that meeting if-
(i) That item is a minor matter relating to the general business of the local authority; and
(ii) the presiding member explains at the beginning of the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public, that the item will be discussed at the meeting; but
(b) no resolution, decision or recommendation may be made in respect of that item except to refer that item to a subsequent meeting of the local authority for further discussion.”
8 Notices of Motion
There were no notices of motion.
Environment and Community Committee 16 May 2017 |
|
Options to address inequitable impacts of the region-wide swimming pool pricing policy
File No.: CP2017/03108
Purpose
1. To seek agreement in principle on a preferred option to increase swimming pool participation rates, particularly for Māori and Chinese children in South Auckland.
Executive summary
2. On 2 April 2013, Auckland Council implemented a region-wide swimming pool pricing policy which delivers free access for children 16 years of age and under.
3. As a result, pools in Howick and Manurewa that previously had free adult entry under the Manukau City Council, introduced adult entry charges. The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu and Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Boards met adult entry costs through a targeted rate.
4. An impact assessment, considered by the Finance and Performance Committee on 17 March 2016:
· noted the pricing policy had achieved its goal to provide equity of access for children to swimming pools across Auckland
· there was a significant decrease in adult and child visits between 2013 and 2015 in Howick and Manurewa where adult charges were introduced
· there was a further inequitable impact on Māori and Chinese people
· participation rates did not decline in pools where the local board introduced a targeted rate to cover adult entry.
5. This paper responds to the resolution of the Finance and Performance Committee (FIN/2016/23) for policy advice on options to increase participation rates.
6. Staff have identified three options to address the problem of low swimming pool participation by children 16 years and under, in Howick and Manurewa, particularly amongst Māori and Chinese populations:
· option 1: maintain the status quo based on evidence that general participation rates are increasing
· option 2: remove entry charges for adults accompanying children 16 years and under at swimming pools across all four South Auckland local board areas that were previously under the Manukau City Council.
· option 3: subsidise swimming programme(s) for children 16 years and under in Howick and Manurewa schools with high Māori and Chinese rolls.
7. Staff recommend option three. It is specifically targeted at the impact of the pricing policy. This option also helps raise the levels of children’s swimming abilities which is another objective of the policy. It also responds to the main reasons given by people in South Auckland for not visiting their local swimming pools.
8. Agreement is sought in principle for option three, subject to funding being considered, and public consultation undertaken, during the development of the Long-term Plan 2018-2028.
That the Environment and Community Committee: a) note that the status quo will remain in the short-term as there is no budgetary allocation available for addressing inequitable impact in the South of the region-wide swim pool pricing policy. b) agree in principle to adopt: EITHER i) option two: remove entry changes for adults accompanying children aged 16 years of age and under at swimming pools across Howick, Manurewa Māngere-Ōtāhuhu and Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Boards. OR ii) option three: subsidise swimming programme(s) for children 16 years of age and under in schools with high Māori and Chinese rolls located in Howick and Manurewa local board areas. c) agree that any preferred option that requires additional resources can only be considered, and implemented depending on agreed priorities identified during the development of the Long-term Plan 2018-2028. |
Comments
Background
9. In April 2013, Auckland Council implemented a region-wide pool pricing policy that provided free access to children 16 years of age and under. The goal of the policy is:
“to enable all children to access swimming pools, promote a sense of belonging, provide equity of access and help raise the level of children’s swimming abilities.”
10. The pricing policy did not harmonise other user or service charges across the council network of pools. Local boards could provide free entry for adults provided they meet all the requirements of a special consultative procedure and can fund the financial implications.
11. The introduction of the pricing policy resulted in three types of pricing changes across Auckland.
Table 1: Summary of pricing changes
Type of pricing change |
Number of facilities |
Introduced free access for children 16 years and under and adults continue to pay the same entry charge |
16 facilities across the north, central, and west local board areas |
Introduced charges for adults 17 years and over and children continue to receive free access |
3 facilities within the Manurewa and Howick local board areas |
Retained free access for all age-groups funded by a local targeted rated introduced by two local boards |
3 facilities in the Ōtara-Papatoetoe and Māngere-Ōtāhuhu local board areas |
Impact assessment of the region-wide swimming pool pricing policy
12. On 17 March 2016, the Finance and Performance Committee considered an impact assessment of the region-wide swimming pool pricing policy. It found the achievement of outcomes, including participation rates, was mixed.
· The pricing policy achieved its goal to provide equity of access for children to swimming pools across Auckland.
· The number of visits by children and adults at most council-owned pools increased for an 18-month period and then reverted to baseline trends after this period.
· Lap swimming and participation in swimming lessons increased while ‘recreational’ swimming decreased. Uptake of other services such as spa/sauna activities also increased.
· Māori users decreased from 14 per cent to 12 per cent. This was largely attributed to the introduction of adult user charges in council-owned pools that previously provided free access to both children and adults. This cluster of pools also experienced a decrease in Chinese users, from 10 per cent to five per cent.
· The introduction of user charges for adults at Manurewa and Lloyd Elsmore pools was a barrier to participation of both children and adults.
· Pools situated in local board areas that introduced a targeted rate to maintain free access for adults have maintained relatively constant participation levels.
13. Based on these results the Finance and Performance Committee [FIN/2016/23 refers] requested a report back to the Parks, Recreation and Sport Committee (or equivalent) on options for increasing participation rates.
Latest visit numbers show an upward trend for the general population
14. Staff undertook additional research to respond to the Committee’s request.
15. A review of the most recent visitor data shows overall participation rates have been steadily increasing. Significant progress has been made in improving visitor numbers and experiences across the network.
16. Most Centre Managers report the pools are at capacity during peak periods of the year (summer/holidays) and peak periods of the day.
17. Manurewa and Lloyd Elsmore pools in experienced a downward trend in visitor numbers following the introduction of adult charges. However, the participation rates at both pools have now largely reverted to baseline trends.
18. The outdoor pool at Totara Park also had reduced visits but was excluded from this analysis because it is only open for four months each year. Weather-related factors are likely to have a bigger impact than pricing at this pool.
Table 2: Numbers of visitors to Lloyd Elsmore and Manurewa pools (refer Attachment A)
Pool |
2013 |
2014 |
2015 |
2016 |
Lloyd Elsmore |
553,379 |
564,359 |
554,609 |
624,967 |
Manurewa |
282,643 |
202,169 |
230,322 |
291,298 |
19. This data indicates there has been no sustained decrease in participation rates following the pricing changes introduced in 2013. However, Auckland has experienced significant growth since that time and this may have contributed to increasing visit numbers.
20. There is no new demographic data to assess whether inequity remains an issue in pool participation rates by different ethnic groups. Recent changes to periodic council surveys mean that data is now collected from members and regular pool users only. Staff undertook targeted research to fill this gap in information.
Feedback on barriers and drivers of participation in the community
21. In December 2016, targeted community research was conducted in four local board areas. A concerted effort was made to reflect the ethnicity profiles of each local board area.
22. The research was carried out using a combination of intercept and telephone surveys. While there are some limitations to the community research, it does assist us to understand the specific barriers to participation for the communities, and what motivates communities to use their pools more often.
23. The main barriers to participation were that people did not have time to go and that the pools are overcrowded. These issues are not directly linked to the swimming pool pricing policy.
24. Price was a significant barrier in Manurewa only. Lower prices were identified as the main driver for people to increase visits to pools in almost all local board areas.
25. These findings were consistent with the ‘Manurewa and Manukau Central Community Needs Assessment.’ This research, which included Manurewa pool, looked at service needs, gaps and opportunities, The following quotes highlight similar points to the table below:
· “fighting for pool space – can’t walk and swim as easily while schools are visiting. I think it is great there are these facilities for schools and kids programmes but the pool needs to be bigger to cater for all the community needs”
· “a backward step to start charging for the pool and facilities because we are a lower socio economic area it has taken the use away from the people who may have used it and need to use it”
· “make pools free – as a family we don’t go so often now.”
Table 3: Summary of key findings from community research
Local Board |
Top three barriers |
Top detractors |
Top three options to encourage use |
Howick (adult charges) |
· Don’t have time/too busy (57%) · Too crowded (21%) · Cost of entry (20%) |
· Pool is overcrowded (44%) · Cleanliness (26%) |
· Reduced/removed charges for swimming (58%) · Improved facilities (57%) · Reduced/removed charges for activities (55%) |
Manurewa (adult charges) |
· Too busy to go (52%) · Cost of pool entry (36%) · Location not convenient (11%) |
· Pool is overcrowded (38%) · Cleanliness (24%) |
· Reduced/removed charges for swimming (75%) · Free or subsidised swimming lessons (69%) · More play equipment or activities for children 68%) |
Māngere-Ōtāhuhu (targeted rate) |
· Too busy to go (78%) · Too crowded (16%) · Lack of/cost of transport (9%) |
· Pool is overcrowded (22%) · Cleanliness (18%) |
· Cheaper/lower prices/free · Improved facilities · More events |
Ōtara-Papatoetoe (targeted rate) |
· Too busy to go (61%) · Pools too crowded (10%) · Opening hours (8%) |
· Pool is overcrowded (33%) · Cleanliness (29%) |
· More play equipment/activities (76%) · Free/subsidised swimming lessons (73%) · Improved facilities (68%) |
Research concludes that participation is complex
26. The participation picture is complex. Price was identified as a barrier to pool visits in the impact assessment. The results of recent research show that:
· pool visits are increasing and show an upward trend
· it is unclear whether Māori and Chinese participation rates have returned to the same levels as before the policy was introduced
· participation is motivated by a range of factors including time pressures and the user experience
· price remains a factor in some communities.
Options to address the problem
27. Staff have identified three options to address the problem of low swimming pool participation by children 16 years and under, in Howick and Manurewa, particularly amongst Māori and Chinese populations. The above research informs the analysis of these options.
Option one: Maintain the status quo
28. Option one is to make no adjustment to the region-wide swimming pool pricing policy. It is supported by existing off-peak activation strategies at individual pools by Centre Managers and the leisure team.
29. This option assumes general participation rates that had declined at Manurewa and Lloyd Elsmore pools will revert to trends when universal free entry was provided. There is evidence that general participation rates at the two pools have steadily increased. The two pools are at capacity most days, particularly during summer months. The only capacity is in learn to swim programmes and off-peak recreational swimming.
30. There are no budget implications associated with this option. Off-peak activation costs are nominal and maintenance expenses from increased use, for example additional lifeguards, security and wear and tear are managed within existing budgets.
31. This option does not specifically address decreased visits by Māori and Chinese children 16 years and under.
Option Two: Remove entry charges for adults accompanying children at swimming pools in South Auckland
32. Option two is to provide to free pool entry for both children aged 16 years of age and under the adult(s) accompanying them in South Auckland.
33. This option includes the Howick, Manurewa, Māngere-Ōtāhuhu and Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board areas, allowing for the removal of the targeted rates. There would be no compelling rationale for limiting this only to Howick and Manurewa.
34. The costs of this option are approximately $1,200,000 per annum for free entry provided to adults accompanying children (see Attachment C for detailed costs). This applies to adults with children whether the adult is supervising or swimming.
35. It would remove price as a barrier to participation, but it does not specifically target Māori and Chinese people affected by the pricing policy. There would be a windfall gain to adults who are willing to pay at present.
36. Many of the pools are at capacity and may not be able to accommodate increased demand, which is likely to occur with the removal of entry fees.
37. Other local board areas may question the fairness of this approach.
Option three: Subsidise swimming programmes for children in Howick and Manurewa
38. Option three is to subsidise participation of children 16 years and under in Howick and Manurewa schools in existing swimming programme(s). This will facilitate their skill development. To maximise the desired outcomes the subsidy should focus on schools with the highest percentage of Māori and Chinese students.
39. This is a targeted intervention which addresses the current inequitable impact of the region-wide swimming pricing policy. It provides direct access for young people to council pools and also achieves the second objective of the pricing policy, which is to increase swimming abilities and water safety skills.
40. This option removes barriers to participation: (1) adults having insufficient time to take children; (2) overcrowding or lack of capacity at pools; and (3) price.
41. This option only applies to Howick and Manurewa. It does not apply to young people in Māngere-Ōtāhuhu and Ōtara-Papatoetoe. The local boards in these areas made specific decisions to implement a targeted rate to cover adult entry costs.
42. This could be viewed as unfair to young people in local board areas that took action to mitigate the possible negative impact of the region-wide pricing policy.
43. Two existing implementation programmes have been identified.
· Learn to swim programmes at council pools - flexible age range
· Field of Dreams provided swimming lessons to 3818 primary school children (years 2-6) from 15 schools at Lloyd Elsmore Pool in 2016. The same programme delivered lessons to 3273 children from 14 different schools at Manurewa Pool. Each child in the programme receives seven swimming lessons per year.
44. An example, for costing and viability purposes, using Field of Dreams would cost $150,780 per annum. This would allow 4308 additional students to participate in the programme by extending it to ten additional schools across the Howick and Manurewa Local Board areas (refer Attachment B).
Options analysis
45. Staff have assessed the three options against the objectives of the region-wide pricing policy and the barriers to, or drivers of, participation. A comparative analysis is presented in Table four below. A score of one indicates low levels of alignment, whereas three is highly aligned with the policy objectives and community views.
46. Option three achieves the highest score. Staff have assessed it as best meeting the policy objectives and the views of the community.
Table 4: Assessment of options against desired policy objectives
Objectives/ Barriers |
Option One |
Option Two |
Option Three |
Promotes accessibility |
1 |
2 |
3 |
Increases Māori and Chinese people’s participation |
1 |
3 |
3 |
Raises swimming abilities |
1 |
1 |
3 |
Addresses carers lack of time |
1 |
1 |
3 |
Limits overcrowding or impact on capacity |
2 |
1 |
3 |
Removes price as a barrier |
1 |
3 |
2 |
Score |
7 |
11 |
17 |
47. Option one provides the least certainty in terms of addressing poor participation rates by Māori and Chinese people. It requires no additional resource.
48. Option two is a broad approach with the highest cost. It has a high level of certainty of addressing poor participation rates by Māori and Chinese people. It provides for equal treatment of people in the four local board areas in South Auckland.
49. Option three is a highly targeted approach. It has the same level of certainty as option two in terms of improving participation rates by Māori and Chinese people. It delivers an additional benefit by improving the swimming skills of young people. It is a cost effective option, but it creates inequalities with Māngere-Ōtāhuhu and Ōtara-Papatoetoe local board areas. Staff recommend option three as it balances cost, certainty and the desired policy objectives.
Risk
50. Option one has a reputational risk because council could be seen as nonresponsive to a known problem. Option two carries financial risk. Option three may be perceived to be unfair.
51. These risks can be mitigated by clearly communicating to Aucklanders council’s response and the reasons behind the decision-making.
Financial implications
52. The costs of option two are estimated to be $1,200,000 per annum. The costs of the proposed option three are estimated to be $150,000 per annum.
53. Any funding allocation would need to be made through the Long-term Plan decision making process.
54. While there is no specific budget identified to meet these costs, it should be noted that the region-wide pricing policy and changes in operational practices delivered an initial surplus of $635,709 in 2013/2014. Staff are unable to distinguish further financial impacts of the pricing policy from the ongoing operational costs.
Next Steps
55. In the short-term there are no financial implications. The status quo will remain. Options two or three can be agreed in principle. Any implementation is subject to funding allocation decisions during the Long-term Plan 2018-2028.
Consideration
Local board views and implications
56. Workshops were held with the Howick, Manurewa, Māngere-Ōtāhuhu and Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Boards in February 2017. They were presented with recent swimming pool participation data as well as the community research findings.
57. The four local boards provided informal feedback on options to increase participation rates as outlined below.
· The Howick Local Board would consider funding a concession rate for elderly community members at off-peak times through its Local Discretionary Initiatives budget.
· The Manurewa Local Board does not support a targeted rate to cover adult entry costs because of the financial impact on its community.
· The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu and Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Boards are satisfied that the targeted rate achieved its objective of maintaining swimming pool participation rates in their communities.
Māori impact statement
58. An impact assessment in 2016 showed that Māori were disproportionately affected by the region-wide swimming pool pricing policy. Māori users decreased from 14 per cent to 12 per cent aross the council’s network of pools.
59. This impact was pronounced in the Manurewa Local Board area, which has a significantly higher percentage of Māori (25.3 per cent) than the average across Auckland (10.7 per cent).
60. Māori will continue to be affected by the pricing policy unless a targeted intervention is implemented.
Implementation
61. Additional funding required to implement a preferred option that has budget implications can be considered and public consultation undertaken, during the development of the Long-term Plan 2018-2028.
No. |
Title |
Page |
a⇩ |
Month-by-month visitation data |
15 |
b⇩ |
Identified schools for Field of Dreams |
19 |
c⇩ |
Breakdown of cost implications to cover adult entry |
21 |
Signatories
Author |
Erin Taylor - Policy Analyst |
Authorisers |
Paul Marriott-Lloyd - Team Leader Kataraina Maki - GM - Community & Social Policy Dean Kimpton - Chief Operating Officer |
Environment and Community Committee 16 May 2017 |
|
Auckland cultural heritage sector review: proposed terms of reference
File No.: CP2017/06173
Purpose
1. To approve the terms of reference for the independent review of Auckland Council’s investment in major cultural heritage institutions.
Executive summary
2. Auckland Council provides funding of over $61 million annually to a range of cultural heritage institutions, including Auckland Museum, Museum of Transport and Technology (MOTAT), New Zealand Maritime Museum, Auckland Art Gallery, and Stardome Observatory and Planetarium.
3. Auckland’s Arts and Culture Strategic Action Plan (Toi Whītiki) was adopted by council in October 2015. It sets goals and priorities for the cultural sector to: “Support a network of complementary arts and cultural institutions and facilities”, and “Ensure governance and funding arrangements of council-funded institutions enable them to operate sustainably and collaboratively”.
4. The sector currently faces a range of both short and longer-term investment challenges. Given this, on 21 March 2017 council’s Finance and Performance Committee approved establishment of an independent review of Auckland major cultural heritage institutions, and delegated responsibility for the review to the Environment and Community Committee.
5. The purpose of the review is to establish:
· whether there is a case for change
· the strategic priorities council and the sector should pursue in future
· the nature of any structural or governance changes necessary to achieve those priorities.
The review will build on the 2015 report by Tim Walker Associates (commissioned by Auckland Museum and Regional Facilities Auckland), Investing in Auckland’s cultural infrastructure, A strategic framework.
6. This report provides a draft terms of reference document for approval by the Environment and Community Committee (Attachment A). The draft document sets out the strategic context, the key purposes of the review, and specific issues to be considered by the review. The scope of the review is focussed on the institutions listed above, but recognises there is an ecosystem of smaller and related organisations for which the review may have implications.
7. The quantum of council’s investment, performing arts organisations, and built heritage are excluded from the review.
That the Environment and Community Committee: a) approve the draft terms of reference for the independent review of Auckland Council’s investment in major cultural heritage institutions b) authorise the chair of the committee to make minor amendments to the terms of reference based on feedback of the committee.
|
Comments
8. Auckland Council provides funding of over $61 million annually to cultural heritage institutions including MOTAT, Auckland War Memorial Museum, Auckland Art Gallery, New Zealand Maritime Museum, and Stardome Observatory and Planetarium. The institutions themselves manage assets worth over $1 billion (land, buildings, and collections).
9. Governance across the sector varies between institutions and does not enable Auckland Council or the institutions to develop a clear view of strategic investment priorities for the sector, nor to achieve those priorities. This restricts the ability to ensure ratepayers are maximising value for money from investment. Auckland’s cultural heritage institutions also face a range of significant specific short-medium term issues.
10. Toi Whītiki established the goal of creating a complementary regional network of cultural organisations. Supporting this, Toi Whītiki set the following key objectives set out below.
Objective 2.1 Grow and deliver strategic investment in arts and culture to enable a thriving and resilient sector.
Priority action 2.1.1: Ensure governance and funding arrangements of council-funded institutions enable them to operate sustainably and collaboratively.
Objective 3.1 Support a network of complementary arts and cultural institutions and facilities.
Priority action 3.1.1: Investigate the demand for arts and cultural facilities and infrastructure to meet gaps in future provision including:
· conservation and storage facilities and operational needs for collections and the museums sector
· coordinated repository for Auckland’s documentary heritage, and the long-term viability of digital storage
· facilities to meet demographic growth, specific sector, community or audience needs.
11. The arrangements which the sector currently operates under do not prevent collaboration from occurring, particularly at an operational level. However, there remains an opportunity for enhanced strategic and structural collaboration and coordination of priorities across institutions. A more integrated model of governance was a key focus of the 2015 Walker Report, which this review is intended to build on. Attachment B is an excerpt from the Walker Report, which gives some examples of integrated museum models.
12. On advice from council staff, the Finance and Performance Committee on 21 March 2017 approved the establishment of an independent review of Auckland Council’s investment in major cultural heritage institutions. The Environment and Community Committee was delegated the responsibility for establishing the review programme, including setting the terms of reference as a first step.
13. The draft terms of reference for the review are attached for the Committee’s consideration. Key aspects of the terms of reference are as follows:
· the scope of the review is Auckland’s major cultural heritage institutions: Auckland War Memorial Museum, Museum of Transport and Technology, New Zealand Maritime Museum, Auckland Art Gallery, and Stardome Observatory and Planetarium (Stardome is not strictly a cultural heritage institution though it does have a strong focus on education and public programmes)
· implications for related institutions and smaller cultural organisations will be considered, but are not the primary focus at this time. Performing arts and built cultural heritage institutions are excluded
· the focus of the review is maximising the cultural and community benefit from Auckland’s investment in cultural heritage institutions.
· the strategic context is set by Toi Whītiki, especially the key objectives and priorities set out above
· the review has three key purposes:
o set out whether there is a case for change to achieve greater coherence and value from council investment in cultural heritage
o make recommendations about key strategic objectives and investment priorities
o be clear about and describe the nature of any sector governance changes which should be made.
14. Other specific issues for consideration as part of the review are also set out in the terms of reference document, including:
· the current degree of sector collaboration and strengths of individual institutions
· international evidence about best practice governance models for cultural investment in cities
· MOTAT’s investment needs
· Maritime Museum and Stardome’s respective locations
· the need for conservation and storage facilities
· the role of Regional Facilities Auckland
· the legislative levy systems for Auckland Museum and MOTAT.
Consultation
15. The terms of reference were developed in conjunction with Regional Facilities Auckland and affected cultural heritage institutions. Auckland Museum, MOTAT, Auckland Art Gallery, Stardome, and New Zealand Maritime Museum have had an opportunity to have input to the terms of reference, as has the national body for museums, Museums Aotearoa.
Consideration
Local board views and implications
16. The review focusses on institutions operating at a regional level. Decision making and oversight in respect of regional activities is the responsibility of the governing body.
Māori impact statement
17. Auckland’s cultural heritage institutions have a crucial role to play in achieving outcomes for Māori as set out in the Auckland Plan. Therefore, an important element of the review will be to consider whether Auckland’s investment in cultural heritage institutions is meeting the needs and aspirations of Māori in Tāmaki Makaurau. To ensure that this happens, in the “purpose of the review” section of the terms of reference, Toi Whītiki goal 5 is specifically prioritised as a key strategic context (Auckland’s unique cultural identity, with Māori and their culture as Auckland’s point of difference).
18. In addition, the terms of reference invites the reviewer(s) to consider the role of special arrangements in legislation such as Auckland Museum’s Taumata-ā-iwi (Māori advisory group).
19. The review is also asked to consider the strengths of different institutions. As an example, the 21 March 2017 report to Finance and Performance Committee about Auckland Museum’s levy request noted that Auckland Museum continues to make significant progress towards becoming a bicultural institution. It is expected that the review will consider how the sector as a whole can build on this expertise.
Implementation
20. Once a terms of reference document is approved by this committee, staff will consider operational matters related to undertaking the review. This will include considering a panel to make appointments for the review, beginning to approach potential candidates to undertake the review, and developing a communications plan.
21. The costs of the review are not known at this stage, although initial estimates suggest that the review could cost in the order of $250,000. At this stage this is unbudgeted expenditure, and may need to be addressed through the annual plan process.
No. |
Title |
Page |
a⇩
|
Draft Terms of Reference, Independent review of Auckland cultural heritage institutions |
27 |
b⇩
|
Models of integrated museum governance, excerpt from Walker Report 2015 |
33 |
Signatories
Author |
Edward Siddle - Principal Advisor |
Authorisers |
Alastair Cameron - Manager - CCO Governance & External Partnerships Phil Wilson - Governance Director Dean Kimpton - Chief Operating Officer |
Environment and Community Committee 16 May 2017 |
|
Auckland Council's submission on the Land Transport (Vehicle User Safety) Amendment Bill
File No.: CP2017/07369
Purpose
1. To approve Auckland Council’s submission to the Transport and Industrial Relations Select Committee on the Land Transport (Vehicle User Safety) Amendment Bill.
Executive summary
2. Staff recommend that the committee approve the submission (refer Attachment A) on the Land Transport (Vehicle User Safety) Amendment Bill (the bill) (refer Attachment B).
3. The bill proposes to stop people washing car windows on roads in a way that is unsafe, intimidates, causes nuisance or obstructs vehicles. An enforcement regime including infringement fines is also proposed.
4. Car window washing on roads is an ongoing issue in Auckland. The issue is currently controlled through the Auckland Transport and Auckland Council Public Safety and Nuisance Bylaws. The bylaw controls are difficult and expensive to enforce. They are not a sufficient deterrent to window washing activity and sustaining compliance.
5. The submission supports the bill for the following reasons:
· the safety and protection of Auckland road users is at the forefront of the bill
· Auckland Council received 314 complaints about window washing in 2016
· prosecution is expensive for council and is not always the most appropriate solution
· the bill aligns with council bylaw controls, focusing on the prohibition of nuisance and safety behavior linked to window washing.
6. The submission also recommends increased non-regulatory measures, including support for social initiatives to reduce youth participation in car window washing.
7. The Transport and Industrial Relations Select Committee has invited submissions on the bill by 1 June 2017.
8. Opportunity to provide feedback on the submission was provided to all committee members on 4 May and all local board chairs on 8 May. Feedback received has been used to inform the contents of the submission.
That the Environment and Community Committee: a) approve Auckland Council’s submission to the Transport and Industrial Relations Select Committee on the Land Transport (Vehicle User Safety) Amendment Bill as contained in Attachment A of the report. b) appoint a councillor representative to appear before the Transport and Industrial Relations Select Committee on behalf of Auckland Council. |
Attachments
No. |
Title |
Page |
a⇩
|
Auckland Council's submission on the Land Transport (Vechicle User Safety) Amendment Bill |
39 |
b⇩
|
Land Transport (Vehicle User Safety) Amendment Bill |
47 |
Signatories
Author |
Katherine Wilson - Policy Analyst - Social Policy & Bylaws |
Authorisers |
Kataraina Maki - GM - Community & Social Policy Dean Kimpton - Chief Operating Officer |
Environment and Community Committee 16 May 2017 |
|
Tākaro - Investing in Play Discussion Document approval for consultation
File No.: CP2017/02410
Purpose
1. To seek approval to the public release of ‘Tākaro – Investing in Play’ discussion document.
Executive summary
2. The total value of council’s playground equipment is $66 million. The Long-term Plan 2015-2025 allocates $33 million for renewing these assets and a further $25 million to provide new play opportunities in areas of growth.
3. Council invests in play because it provides a range of health, social, community and economic benefits to Aucklanders.
4. The development of a play investment plan will help the council to invest in a way which delivers the most benefit to Auckland’s communities.
5. The key challenge is to respond to a growing population, financial constraints and increasing and diverse demand for play over the next 20 years.
6. Staff have prepared a discussion document as the first phase in the development of the play investment plan. The purpose of the discussion document is to gauge opinion on a range of investment possibilities and issues.
7. Local boards, children and a range of play experts will be engaged through a series of workshops during June and July 2017. Other stakeholders include:
· Auckland Council advisory panels
· play space designers and academics
· non-governmental organisations including the International Play Association
· Sport New Zealand.
8. The public will have the opportunity to provide comments through the Shape Auckland website.
That the Environment and Community Committee: a) approve the public release of the ‘Tākaro – Investing in Play’ discussion document (Attachment A of the report) for formal engagement with local boards, key stakeholders, and the general public from 29 May to 10 July 2017. |
Comments
Background
9. Play improves physical and mental health, creates a sense of community and is critical to child development.
10. Play takes place everywhere and everybody benefits from playing.
11. Auckland Council currently invests predominantly in playgrounds. The total value of council’s playground equipment is $66 million.
12. The Long-term Plan 2015-2025 allocates $33 million for renewing these assets and a further $25 million to provide new play opportunities in areas of growth.
13. Research indicates the kinds of play spaces provided by Auckland Council meets the needs of able bodied children two to seven years of age. This is a narrow age group which represents a small percentage of the total population.
14. The development of an investment plan will facilitate decision-making with a view to providing a play network that meets the needs of Auckland’s communities both now and in the future.
15. The plan will contribute to the delivery of the Auckland Plan by putting children and young people first. It will also provide opportunities for Aucklanders to participate in recreation and sport.
16. The development of Tākaro – Investing in Play is a programmed piece of work. The development of guidelines for the design of play spaces and the provision of play opportunities is an action identified in the Parks and Open Spaces Strategic Action Plan 2013.
Discussion document
17. Staff have prepared a discussion document (Attachment A) to engage with local boards and stakeholders. The purpose of the discussion document is to test ideas and to gauge opinions on a range of investment possibilities and issues. For example:
· opportunities and trade-offs for the provision of play opportunities in Auckland, including nature play, temporary play, and play activation
· provision of shade and fencing at playgrounds and the removal of swings from street trees are media issues.
18. The discussion document seeks feedback on possibilities and issues using the following key questions:
· Should council investment continue to target a particular demographic group, such as young children, or should it seek to cater to users of all ages and abilities and backgrounds equally?
· What principles should underpin Auckland’s investment in play?
· Should council prioritise investment in areas of high socio-economic deprivation over other areas?
· What priority should be given to investment provision of temporary play experiences over permanent play assets?
· What is an acceptable level of risk in play? What happens if something goes wrong? How should Auckland Council respond?
· How accepting do you think the wider community would be to lowering maintenance standards to provide for nature play in some parks?
· What opportunities are there for partnerships between council and private providers?
19. Engagement on the discussion document will take place from 29 May to 10 July 2017. It will target the 21 local boards, as well as children and their parents or caregivers. Other key stakeholders include:
· Auckland Council advisory panels; disability, ethnic peoples, seniors, Pacific peoples and youth
· play experts and play space designers
· academics
· non-governmental organisations including the International Play Association
· Sport New Zealand.
20. The public will be invited to provide feedback through the Shape Auckland website.
21. Mana whenua will be actively involved in the development of Tākaro – Investing in Play. A plan for engaging with mana whenua and maatawaka will be developed following a hui in June 2017.
22. The objective is to incorporate a Māori world view. For example, engagement with Māori will test if Te Kapehu Taka Ora (a guide to continuous well-being, which identifies five outcomes for sport and recreation) is an appropriate framework to guide the development of Tākaro – Investing in Play.
Risk and mitigation
23. There are limited risks with engaging the public on play and circulating a discussion document. The proposed approach allows council to test ideas and gather feedback. It does, however, lengthen the timeframe for the development of the investment plan.
Next steps
24. Feedback on the discussion document will be compiled and a summary will be presented to the Environment and Community Committee in November 2017. An analysis of feedback will be circulated to local boards and to the public so they can see how their ideas have influenced a draft investment plan.
Consideration
Local board views and implications
25. A series of cluster workshops are scheduled in June 2017. Local boards are likely to be interested in the provision and distribution of play spaces and investment in activating open spaces for play.
26. Local boards hold the capital budgets for investing in play spaces and the operational budgets for activating spaces for play.
Māori impact statement
27. In 2013, Māori comprised 15.7 per cent of all young people aged 0 to 24 years old living in Auckland. Half of all Auckland Māori (52.4%) are under 25 years of age.
28. Statistics New Zealand’s projections (medium series) suggest that the number of children and young people in Auckland will continue to increase over the next twenty years by another 26.5 per cent. This combined with high Māori birth rates suggest issues affecting Māori children and young people will continue to be important into the future.
29. In comparison to other groups, Auckland’s Māori children and young people face marked disparities in health, education and labour market outcomes. There are many drivers behind these outcomes, including social and economic vulnerability.
30. The situation of Māori young people is of particular importance because the Auckland Plan seeks to enable and support mana whenua and mataawaka aspirations in recognising Te Tiriti o Waitangi/The Treaty of Waitangi and to ensure Māori have opportunities to contribute to the city.
31. Māori are identified as a key target group for the investment plan. The first five years of a child’s life are the stepping-stones to future socio-economic success and wellbeing. Children who are nurtured, safe and well housed are more likely to become resilient and healthy adults. The highest social return on investment is achieved through early intervention, supporting parents through pre-natal programmes and supporting children under three years of age.
32. The plan will incorporate a mana whenua perspective and identify opportunities to express kaitiakitanga in local play spaces.
Implementation
33. Formal feedback on the final Tākaro – Investing in Play will be sought from local boards prior to the adoption of the investment plan by the Environment and Community Committee in late 2017.
No. |
Title |
Page |
a⇩
|
Takaro - Investing in Play Discussion Document |
55 |
Signatories
Author |
William Brydon - Principal Policy Analyst |
Authorisers |
Paul Marriott-Lloyd - Team Leader Kataraina Maki - GM - Community & Social Policy Dean Kimpton - Chief Operating Officer |
Environment and Community Committee 16 May 2017 |
|
Acquisition of land for open space - Glen Innes
File No.: CP2017/05260
Purpose
1. To seek decision on the acquisition of approximately 1795m2 of land for public open space 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 1795m2 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. Acquisition 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 recommended that the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board decline to support the proposed park. However, it could choose to support the acquisition and agree to allocate ongoing funding for maintenance costs and renewals from its Local Discretionary Initiative budget. This advice was based on the position of the governing body which previously made acquisitions that are deemed not to be a priority conditional on the local board allocating ongoing funds from its Local Discretionary Initiative budget. The Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board agreed to meet this requirement.
6. Staff recommend the acquisition of this pocket park, based on the Local Board’s decision to allocate Local Discretionary Initiative funds, and to ensure consistency with previous governing body decision-making. The Committee has an alternate option to decline the acquisition.
That the Environment and Community Committee: EITHER a) approve the acquisition at no cost to council, of approximately 1795m2 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 on the condition that the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board funds maintenance costs and renewals from its LDI budget and that this be included in the local board agreement. OR b) decline the acquisition at no cost to council, of approximately 1795m2 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.
|
Comments
7. The Tāmaki Regeneration Company has a resource consent to redevelop the properties in Stage 2B of the Fenchurch Special Housing Area in Glen Innes (refer to Attachment A).
8. The resource consent includes land for a proposed park that the Tāmaki Regeneration Company would like to vest in council at no cost (refer to Attachment B). The Tāmaki Regeneration Company proposes to create a playground on the pocket park.
9. 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.
Decision-making allocation for open space acquisition
10. The decision-making allocations for the acquisition of land by the council for parks are set out in Volume Two of the Long-term Plan 2015-2025. In summary:
· 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
11. Acquisition opportunities are assessed against the criteria in the council’s Open Space Provision Policy and the Parks and Open Space Acquisition Policy. Recommendations are based on this assessment.
12. Under the Open Space Provision Policy, pocket parks provide access to small amenity and socialising spaces in high density residential areas.
13. The proposed park does not meet all the Open Space Provision Policy targets for pocket parks 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.
14. A summary of the assessment against the policies is provided in Table 1. Proposed acquisitions are prioritised according to the highest rating achieved.
Table 1: Assessment of proposed open space acquisition – Stage 2B Pocket Park |
|
||||||||||
Park type: Pocket Park |
Number of new dwellings: 29 |
|
|||||||||
Density: Medium |
Number of new residents[1]: 87 |
|
|||||||||
Unitary plan zone: Residential - Mixed Housing Urban Zone |
Proposed size of acquisition: 1795m2 |
|
|||||||||
Independent Valuation: N/A – offered at no cost |
Settlement: 2017/18. |
|
|||||||||
Pocket parks are typically between 1000m2 and 1500m2 in size. The provision targets for pocket parks are that they are: · 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 · in addition to requirements for neighbourhood parks. |
|
||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
Potential future features: |
|
Informal recreation facilities |
|
Playground
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||||||
Acquisition Criteria |
Comment |
Overall Rating |
|
||||||||
Meeting community needs, now and in the future |
Not a priority as: · the site is suitable for a pocket park, but not large enough to provide a neighbourhood park function (typically at least 0.3ha in size) · the proposed park is not in an urban centre or high density residential area · the proposed site is entirely surrounded by roads and its irregular shape will place some constraints on its future layout (e.g. the development of a children’s playground) · there are no provision gaps for neighbourhood parks in this immediate area, despite significant growth proposed as part of the Tāmaki Regeneration Company redevelopment. |
û Not a priority for acquisition |
|
||||||||
Connecting parks and open spaces |
Not a priority as: · the proposed park will not provide connections 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 as: · 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 as: · the site will be a new vesting that will not improve on the open space value of existing parks and open space. |
|
|||||||||
|
1. |
|
|||||||||
Development Costs: |
Operational Costs: |
|
|||||||||
Local boards decide how local open space is developed. The Tāmaki Regeneration Company has confirmed that it or their development partner would fund the development of the park. |
Estimated cost for the park (mowing and sweeping): $1,000 per annum. Estimated cost for the proposed playground: $5,000 per annum Local Board willing to fund maintenance and renewal costs from its Local Discretionary Initiative budget. |
|
|||||||||
Assessment conclusions
15. 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.
16. 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.
17. 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. The Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board has agreed to meet this requirement.
18. Staff recommend the acquisition of this pocket park, based on the Local Board’s decision to allocate Local Discretionary Initiative funds, and to ensure consistency of decision-making. The proposed park would also provide a level of amenity for local residents, which currently is not available in this location.
Risks
19. 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.
Next steps
20. The Tāmaki Regeneration Company will be informed of the decision.
Consideration
Local board views and implications
21. Staff provided two options to the local board. One option was to support the proposed acquisition on the condition that it would approve funding for the ongoing maintenance costs and renewals from its Local Discretionary Initiative budget. The other option was to decline to support the acquisition.
22. Staff recommended that council do not accept the proposed park. However, the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board could choose to support the acquisition and agreed to allocate ongoing funding for maintenance costs and renewals from its Local Discretionary Initiative budget.
23. At its 28 March 2017 meeting the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board resolved to (Resolution CP2017/01533):
a) support the proposed vesting at no cost to council of approximately 1795m2 of land for a pocket park within Stage 2B of the Fenchurch Special Housing Area, Glen Innes as shown in the tabled document LSK-0001 Revision B as explained in the officers report it provides a level of amenity for local residents which is currently not available in this location;
b) would approve ongoing funding for maintenance costs and renewals of 1795m2 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;
c) note that the board were not consulted in the early development of this park and request going forward that if Tāmaki Regeneration Company develops more parks that it consults earlier with the local board.
Māori impact statement
24. The proposed park does not contain any known sites and places of significance or value to mana whenua.
25. 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 intends to present its proposal and to seek feedback at a future hui.
Implementation
26. Operation maintenance costs of approximately $6000 will need to be allocated from the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board’s Local Discretionary Initiative budget reflected in its local board agreement.
No. |
Title |
Page |
a⇩
|
Location of proposed pocket park in stage 2B |
81 |
b⇩
|
Draft layout of the proposed pocket park in the Fenchurch 2B development |
83 |
Signatories
Author |
Carol Stewart - Principal Policy Analyst |
Authorisers |
Paul Marriott-Lloyd - Team Leader Kataraina Maki - GM - Community & Social Policy Dean Kimpton - Chief Operating Officer |
Environment and Community Committee 16 May 2017 |
|
161R Maraetai Drive, Maraetai - Recommendation Report on Reserve Revocation
File No.: CP2017/06780
Purpose
1. To approve the revocation of the reserve status of land at 161R Maraetai Drive, Maraetai (Lot 12 DP 34466), as recommended by the Independent Commissioner.
Executive summary
2. The land is a recreation reserve under the Reserves Act 1977.
3. The Regional Strategy and Policy Committee approved the land for disposal subject to the reserve status being uplifted (resolution REG/2016/73).
4. The public and iwi notification of the intention to revoke the reserve status resulted in two objections, one of which was subsequently withdrawn.
5. The Regulatory Committee appointed an independent commissioner to consider the objections and make a recommendation to council (REG/2017/5).
6. The commissioner recommends that the reserve status can be uplifted.
7. The recommendation report is attached.
That the Environment and Community Committee: a) accept the recommendation of the independent commissioner that Auckland Council proceed with its application to the Department of Conservation to uplift the reserve status of Lot 12 DP 34466 (161R Maraetai Drive, Maraetai). |
Comments
8. 161R Maraetai Drive, Maraetai is a vacant section with an area of 1,057 square metres. Details of the site include:
· it was vested as a recreation reserve upon subdivision in 1947
· it is sloping and narrowing away from the road frontage, grassed with a few bushes along the boundaries
9. Auckland Council’s Regional Strategy and Policy Committee passed a resolution to dispose of the property on 4 August 2016, subject to the satisfactory conclusion of any required statutory processes (REG/2016/73).
10. Council received two submissions following iwi and public notification of the proposal to revoke the reserve status of the land.
11. On 9 February 2017 Auckland Council’s Regulatory Committee passed a resolution to appoint an independent commissioner to consider the submissions received (REG/2017/5).
12. Subsequent to the appointment of the commissioner, one submitter (an iwi authority) withdrew their objection.
13. The salient point in the remaining submission was contamination of the land by water runoff from the road. The submitter expressed a preference for the land to be retained and planted with native trees to absorb the contamination and improve air quality.
14. The Independent Commissioner has considered all the issues and met with the submitter, who wished to be heard.
15. The commissioner has issued the report, which concludes that:
· the concerns over contamination of the land have not been justified
· council’s policy on the provision of open space provides a sound basis for proceeding with the divestment of this reserve
16. The report recommends that the council proceed with its application to the Department of Conservation to revoke the reservation of recreation reserve at 161R Maraetai Drive.
Consideration
Local board views and implications
17. The Franklin Local Board endorsed the reserve revocation and disposal of 161R Maraetai Drive at its business meeting on 28 June 2016 (FR/2016/119).
Māori impact statement
18. Eleven iwi authorities were contacted during the rationalisation process, and the same eleven authorities were again invited to comment on the proposal to revoke the reserve status.
19. Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua objected to the proposal. They did not give a reason for their opposition to the reserve revocation, but stated that it was an interim position, until the position of Ngai Tai Ki Tamaki was known.
20. When Ngai Tai Ki Tamaki advised that they had no issue with the proposed revocation, Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua withdrew their objection.
Implementation
21. If the Committee accepts the Independent Commissioner’s recommendation to proceed with the application to revoke the reserve status, council officers will forward the resolution to the Department of Conservation with a request to uplift the reservation of recreation reserve.
22. The request will include the submissions and the Commissioner’s consideration report and recommendation.
No. |
Title |
Page |
a⇩
|
Report of the Independent Commissioner dated 12 April 2017 |
87 |
Signatories
Author |
Carl May - Property Acquisitions&Disposals Advisor |
Authorisers |
Nigel Hewitson - Team Leader Property Disposals Ian Wheeler - Director Portfolio Management Dean Kimpton - Chief Operating Officer |
Environment and Community Committee 16 May 2017 |
|
49 Nihill Crescent, Mission Bay - Recommendation Report on Reserve Revocation
File No.: CP2017/06789
Purpose
1. To approve the revocation of the Reserves Act 1977 to revoke the reserve status of land at Lot 2, 49 Nihill Crescent Mission Bay (Lot 2 DP 21200), as recommended by the Independent Commissioner.
Executive summary
2. The land is a local purpose (plantation) reserve under the Reserves Act 1977.
3. The Regional Strategy and Policy Committee approved the land for disposal subject to the reserve status being uplifted (resolution REG/2016/19).
4. The public and iwi notification of the intention to revoke the reserve status resulted in seven objections.
5. The Regulatory Committee appointed an independent commissioner to consider the objections and make a recommendation to council (REG/2017/5).
6. The commissioner recommends that the reserve status can be uplifted.
7. The recommendation report is attached.
That the Environment and Community Committee: a) accept the recommendation of the independent commissioner that Auckland Council proceed with its application to the Department of Conservation to uplift the reserve status of Lot 2 DP 21200 (49 Nihill Crescent, Mission Bay). |
Comments
8. 49 Nihill Crescent, Mission Bay is a narrow strip of land with an area of 875 square metres. Details of the site include:
· it was vested as a local purpose (plantation) reserve upon subdivision in the 1920s
· it is steeply sloping, unmaintained and overgrown, with a number of mature bushes and trees
· it includes a lower lying area that is an overland flow path and is subject to flooding
· it is land locked
9. Auckland Council’s Regional Strategy and Policy Committee passed a resolution to dispose of the property on 7 April 2016, subject to the satisfactory conclusion of any required statutory processes (REG/2016/19).
10. Council received seven submissions following iwi and public notification of the proposal to revoke the reserve status of the land.
11. On 9 February 2017 Auckland Council’s Regulatory Committee passed a resolution to appoint an independent commissioner to consider the submissions received (REG/2017/5).
12. The concerns expressed in the submissions covered lack of effective public consultation on the proposal, statutory and process issues, the imperative to keep reserves to attenuate the effects of intensified urban development, lack of consultation with iwi, the aesthetic value and spiritual contribution of reserves, and the loss of trees & birds.
13. The Independent Commissioner has considered all the issues and met with a submitter who wished to be heard. He also met with two local board members, seeking clarification on consultation issues.
14. The commissioner has submitted the report, which concludes that:
· the concerns over lack of public consultation have not been justified
· the concerns over process are not well-founded
· council’s policy on the provision of open space does in fact place high value on the need to meet the needs of a rapidly growing population
· the requirements for iwi consultation have been met
· council has adequately assessed the proposal to revoke the plantation reserve status and that it is in the interests of the wider community.
15. The report recommends that the council proceed with its application to the Department of Conservation to revoke the reservation of plantation reserve at 49 Nihill Crescent, lot 2.
Consideration
Local board views and implications
16. The Orakei Local Board endorsed the reserve revocation and disposal of 49 Nihill Crescent at its November 2015 business meeting.
Māori impact statement
17. Twelve iwi authorities were contacted during the rationalisation process, and the same twelve authorities were again invited to comment on the proposal to revoke the reserve status.
18. One iwi authority (Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua) opposed the reserve revocation on the grounds that there are healthy trees on the site.
19. Another authority (Ngāti Tamaoho) requested that council place a covenant on all native trees.
20. The commissioner considered these submissions and an arborist’s report, and has made no recommendation for the protection of any of the trees on the site.
Implementation
21. If the committee accepts the Independent Commissioner’s recommendation to proceed with the application to revoke the reserve status, council officers will forward the resolution to the Department of Conservation with a request to uplift the reservation of plantation reserve.
22. The request will include the submissions and the Commissioner’s consideration report and recommendation.
No. |
Title |
Page |
a⇩
|
Report of the Independent Commissioner dated 6 April 2017 |
101 |
Signatories
Author |
Carl May - Property Acquisitions&Disposals Advisor, Panuku Auckland Development Ltd. |
Authorisers |
Nigel Hewitson - Team Leader Property Disposals, Panuku Auckland Development Ltd Ian Wheeler - Director Portfolio Management, Panuku Auckland Development Ltd. Dean Kimpton - Chief Operating Officer |
Environment and Community Committee 16 May 2017 |
|
Regional Parks Management Plan 2010 Variation to incorporate land at Piha into the Waitakere Ranges Regional Park
File No.: CP2017/05717
Purpose
1. To seek approval to notify a draft variation to the Regional Parks Management Plan 2010 to incorporate land at Piha into the Waitakere Ranges Regional Park.
2. To seek approval to protect the land in perpetuity by an Order in Council under section 139 of the Local Government Act 2002.
3. To seek approval to designate the land for regional parks purposes within the Auckland Unitary Plan.
Executive summary
4. Council acquired 78 hectares of land (known as the Byers Block) in June 2014 at Piha for addition to the Waitakere Ranges Regional Park.
5. Public consultation was initiated in December 2016 in the form of a draft concept plan. Many of the submissions sought a fuller policy framework for the management of the land because of the unique nature of the land and its known fire risks. It is therefore recommended that a formal variation to the Regional Parks Management Plan be undertaken to include such policies. Feedback from this first phase of consultation has been used to develop a draft variation which is proposed to be notified in May 2017.
6. It is recommended that independent hearings commissioners be appointed to hear submissions on the draft variation and recommend back to the committee. The committee has the delegated authority to adopt variations to the Regional Parks Management Plan 2010.
7. The land is not currently zoned for open space purposes and it is recommended that it be designated as regional parkland within the Auckland Unitary Plan. The land is also not currently protected as regional parkland and it is recommended that the council seek an Order in Council under section 139 of the Local Government Act 2002 to protect it in perpetuity as regional parkland.
That the Environment and Community Committee: a) approve the land being protected in perpetuity by Order in Council in terms of section 139 Local Government Act 2002. b) approve the land being designated as regional parkland within the Auckland Unitary Plan. c) approve the public notification of the draft variation of the Regional Parks Management Plan 2010 to incorporate land at Piha into the Waitakere Ranges Regional Park. |
Comments
The land
8. The land at Piha comprising 78 ha was purchased by council in 2014 as an addition to the Waitakere Ranges Regional Park (Refer Attachment A). The land adjoins the southern end of Piha beach and contains a number of unique visitor attractions, such as ‘The Gap’ beach, a dramatic coastal blow hole and a herbfield of selliera repens, known as the ‘tennis court’. The area has high cultural significance to Te Kawerau a Maki who own the adjoining Taitomo Island, being the only remaining land in their ownership on the west coast. The land offers the opportunity to provide an off-road route for the Hillary Trail between Karekare and Piha.
Consultation to date
9. A draft concept plan prepared in mid-2016 was discussed at a workshop with the Waitakere Ranges Local Board in November 2016. An open day was held in December 2016 and the public were invited to comment on the draft concept plan. The local board subsequently made formal submissions on the first round of public consultation together with 8 community groups and 75 individuals. A summary of the issues raised in the submissions is attached as Attachment B.
10. The draft concept plan focused on the development of tracks, visitor safety and public information features. A number of the submissions on the draft concept plan raised concerns relating to the fact the land consists of low scrubland infested with gorse and other weed species that are vulnerable to fire and called for stronger policy direction on the management priorities, especially around vegetation management and enhancement and visitor management. For these reasons it is recommended that the Regional Parks Management Plan 2010 (the Management Plan) be formally amended to include policies to deal with these issues.
Nature of the variation
11. The Management Plan sets out the general policies for managing the regional parks network. It also contains specific policies for each park and in some cases, special management zones where it is necessary to apply specific management approaches to protect sensitive environments or retain special visitor experiences, such as the feeling on remoteness and wilderness. It is recommended that the land at Piha be managed as a special management zone as set out in the draft variation (Attachment C) consistent with other locations within the Waitakere Regional Park.
Further consultation
12. The table below sets out the key stages and proposed timeframes for further consultation:
Stage |
Timeframe |
Analysis of comments received on the draft concept plan |
March 2017 |
Public notification of the draft variation |
May 2017 |
Submission period (2 months) |
May - June 2017 |
Analysis of submissions |
July 2017 |
Hearings (if required) |
August 2017 |
Finalise the variation |
September 2017 |
Report to the Environment and Community Committee with recommendations on adoption of the variation |
October 2017 |
Independent Hearing Commissioners
13. The submissions on the draft concept plan have raised some issues and differences of opinion that would benefit from independent scrutiny. It is recommended that independent commissioners be appointed to hear submissions on the draft variation and to make recommendations back to the Environment and Community Committee for consideration and adoption.
14. The Regulatory Committee will appoint independent hearings commissioners to hear submissions on the draft variation and to recommend to the Environment and Community Committee a variation to the Regional Parks Management Plan 2010 to incorporate land at Piha into the Waitakere Ranges Regional Park.
Protection-in-perpetuity and designation
15. A number of submitters have raised the need to protect the land as regional parkland. It has been normal practice for council to protect regional parkland in perpetuity by an Order in Council under section 139 of the Local Government Act 2002. The land is currently zoned as ‘Rural Coastal Zone’ and ‘Coastal Transition Zone’ under the Auckland Unitary Plan. These zones are not designed to facilitate management of the land as public open space. It is recommended that the land be ‘designated’ for regional park purposes within the Auckland Unitary Plan, with an underlying zoning of Open Space Conservation to facilitate the efficient development and management of the land as part of the regional parks network.
Consideration
Local board views and implications
16. A draft concept plan was discussed at a workshop with the Waitakere Ranges Local Board in November 2016 and the board made formal submissions on the draft concept plan which raised, amongst other concerns, the need for more formal management policies. This sentiment was echoed by many of the other submitters.
Māori impact statement
17. All iwi with mana whenua interests in the Waitakere Ranges were notified of the intention to prepare the concept plan. Te Kawerau a Maki indicated their special interest in the land and has been engaged from the outset in the development of the draft concept plan, including site visits to discuss issues of interest and concern. Te Kawerau a Maki has requested that the area be known as Taitomo. This will included in the draft policies for public comment and if endorsed will be referred to the committee for formal approval.
Implementation
18. The costs of the variation will be met from the existing Regional Parks operational budgets. There is no specific budget tagged to the development of land in the Long-term Plan 2015-2025, however some residual funding is available for the development of new regional parkland which can help support the implementation of the variation once adopted.
No. |
Title |
Page |
a⇩
|
Location Map |
119 |
b⇩
|
Summary of submissions |
121 |
c⇩
|
Draft Special Management Zone Policies |
123 |
Signatories
Author |
Neil Olsen - Parks and Recreation Advisor |
Authorisers |
Mace Ward - General Manager Parks, Sports and Recreation Dean Kimpton - Chief Operating Officer |
Environment and Community Committee 16 May 2017 |
|
Partnership opportunity with Western Springs College for indoor courts
File No.: CP2017/08208
Purpose
1. To outline the partnership opportunity with Western Springs College to develop indoor courts as part of a major rebuild of the school and seek the committee’s approval to allocate $2 million to secure this opportunity.
Executive summary
2. The Ministry of Education (the Ministry) is undertaking an extensive $79 million rebuild of Western Springs College, on Motions Road in Westmere. The rebuild includes the development of one Ministry-funded indoor court to serve school sport needs.
3. A feasibility study completed as part of the Community and School Partnership project shows there is potential to add four additional courts on the school site in two stages. Overall, there could be five indoor courts for school use during the day and community use outside of school periods. An indicative plan for the courts is attached in Attachment A.
4. The feasibility study was completed as there is a critical shortage of indoor courts across Auckland with demand in the central area under the greatest pressure. The National Facilities Strategy for Indoor Courts states Auckland has a current under-supply of 13 courts which is projected to increase to 42 over the next 20 years. Sports like basketball and volleyball have noted participation growth is significantly curtailed by supply.
5. The four additional courts can be developed in two stages. The estimated cost of stage one, which adds two courts to the Ministry funded court is $12.3 million. The estimated cost of stage two, adding a further two courts is $11.7 million. The total estimated cost of $24 million is comparable to other recent indoor court developments.
Ministry funded |
Stage 1 - $12.3 million |
Stage 2 - $11.7 million |
||
Court 1 |
Court 2 |
Court 3 |
Court 4 |
Court 5 |
6. The benefits of a potential partnership with Western Springs College include:
· The value of the school land to build the indoor courts particularly as the availability is low and the cost of land in the central city is very high to purchase.
· Community access to the Ministry funded indoor court outside of school periods. If stage one is completed, this would provide a total of 175 court hours per week for dedicated community use, which is 35 more hours per week compared to a non-partnership approach.
· Efficiencies in operation through maximising court utilisation during and after school.
· Partnership between school and sport codes is beneficial for both students and community users for sport development, coaching opportunities and player pathways.
7. There are no practical alternative site options in the central area to build an indoor court facility.
8. The window of opportunity to form a partnership with Western Springs College is linked to the current school development. The Ministry will shortly appoint a contractor to design and build the new college facilities. To secure the option to develop indoor courts on the school site for community use, then a collaborative project approach is required to the investment to ensure the design accommodates this potential.
9. The options council can consider are:
i. Do nothing – the opportunity to build indoor courts on the site in the future will be foregone or potentially compromised due to design decisions.
ii. Enter a partnership with the Ministry and Western Springs College Board of Trustees (the Board) to contribute to the design process and preserve the opportunity to build the indoor courts in the future. It is anticipated a contribution of around 10% (or $2 million) of the additional four courts would be required. This option requires final agreement with the Ministry and the Board to determine if they are open to this approach.
iii. Enter a partnership and allocate $12.3 million for the development of stage one to add two additional courts as part of the Ministry-led construction.
10. There is no funding currently earmarked for this particular opportunity. However within the Auckland Council Long-term Plan 2015-2025 there is the capital development budget within the Parks, Community and Lifestyle theme of $104 million from 2018 to 2025. The priorities for development and allocation of this budget are still to be determined. There is also funding of $2 million per annum in Parks, Sport and Recreation budget for significant partnerships.
11. Option two is the preferred option as it secures the partnership opportunity with Western Springs College and recognises the limited opportunities to meet critical shortage of indoor courts in the central area. A business case can be prepared for consideration in the council’s Long-term Plan 2018-2028 for the construction of the indoor courts in 2018-2019.
12. The recommended option is consistent with the Auckland Sport and Recreation Strategic Action Plan (Priority Area 7).
That the Environment and Community Committee: a) approve entering into a partnership agreement with Western Springs College and the Ministry of Education to secure the option to provide four additional indoor courts for school and community use within the Western Springs College rebuild. b) approve the allocation of $2 million from the Parks, Sport and Recreation Partnership budget as council’s contribution to the design process for the indoor courts as part of the Ministry of Education’s appointed design and build process of Western Springs College. c) delegate the approval of the terms and conditions within the Partnership Agreement to the Chief Operating Officer. d) request a full business case is developed for construction of the indoor courts at Western Springs College for consideration as part of the Long-term Plan for 2019 project commencement, including but not limited to community access, operational funding and governance. |
Comments
Community and School Partnership Project
13. The Ministry of Education (the Ministry), Sport New Zealand, Aktive and council are working collaboratively to “improve access for Aucklanders to sport and recreation facilities by fostering opportunities for investment and greater sharing of school and community assets”. Further information on the project is attached in Attachment B.
14. Part of the Community and School Partnership project is to explore a number of pilots with schools to test the framework. Pilot projects have been selected using three criteria:
· Alignment – common agreement on the desired outcomes and need for facility.
· Willingness – a willing partner who is keen to discuss the opportunity.
· Achievability – timely results can be achieved to inform learnings for the project.
Western Springs College
15. Western Springs College is located on Motions Road in Westmere. It is located within a precinct which includes Pasadena Intermediate School, Auckland Zoo, Motat, Seddon Fields, Western Springs Football Club and Western Springs Park.
16. The school is a co-educational secondary school which has a current roll of 1,400 students from year 9 to year 13. The student demographics include 55% European, 27% Maori and 18% other ethnicities. The Ministry forecast roll growth to 1,900 initially and over time it is expected to grow to a maximum capacity of 2,500.
17. The college has a long history of partnerships with council and the local community. The Auckland Performing Arts Centre (TAPAC) was developed as a facility partnership between Auckland City Council and Western Springs College in 2003 to provide performing arts rehearsal and performance space for community and school use. The school also provides a marae which is used by the community, an adult education programme and community use of its sport fields and outdoor courts.
18. Western Springs College is undergoing an extensive $79 million rebuild which includes replacement of school buildings and development of one new indoor court to serve school sport needs, all funded by the Ministry.
Indoor court feasibility study
19. An independent feasibility study has been completed which shows there is potential to add an additional four courts on the school site in two stages. An indicative plan showing where the indoor courts would be located on the school site is attached in Attachment A.
20. Ultimately a partnership with the school could provide a total of five indoor courts which could be used by the school during the day and directly after school and by the community during evenings and weekends. It is proposed the facility would be used for structured indoor sport use such as basketball, volleyball, badminton, table tennis, netball, futsal where the leagues are organised by clubs or groups who take responsibility for the activity. It is not envisioned to be a facility for casual community use as this would involve additional staffing costs.
21. If stage one is implemented, which provides three courts, the indicative school / community use across a week would involve:
· School physical education – 90 court hours
· School sport – 50 court hours
· Community sport – 175 court hours
22. The four additional courts can be developed in two stages. The estimated cost of stage one which adds courts two and three to the Ministry funded court one is $12.3 million. The estimated cost of stage two, adding courts four and five is $11.7 million. These costs are based on current market prices and do not account for possible escalation.
23. The indicative cost of building indoor courts at Western Springs College is slightly higher than originally anticipated due to underlying ground conditions from the old landfill. However, the estimated cost is comparable to other recent estimates for five and six indoor court facilities in Auckland costed at $5 million per court.
24. A high level operating budget has been developed for a three court facility which is based on estimated revenue and expenditure including depreciation to fund long-term asset renewal. The budget indicates an annual contribution from council between $75,000 to $90,000 per annum to meet the shortfall between likely revenue and expenditure. This could be reduced to zero if the partners agree not to fully fund long-term depreciation on the basis future grants would be forthcoming for asset renewal.
25. One issue is the provision of car parking. Due to the popularity of Auckland Zoo, Motat and Seddon Fields, the area is already under pressure at peak times (weekends) to provide adequate car parking to serve all the sites. An indoor court facility is likely to increase car parking pressure at certain times during the weekend. There are options to address car parking at a precinct level which needs exploration with the other stakeholders in the area. There are plans to undertake this investigation in the near future, including travel demand management options.
26. Two governance models were considered for the potential facility:
· Ownership of the facility by a charitable trust – the entity would receive grant funding to build and operate the facility. The trust would hold a licence to occupy from the Ministry. The advantage of this model is the transparency of charitable ownership to source funding from other funders. The disadvantage is the creation of another entity which needs to be resourced and potential confusion where asset responsibilities lie if one court is Ministry owned and four courts trust owned. This model is similar to Waiheke Recreation Centre.
· Ownership of the facility by the school – the school would receive funding to build and operate the facility. The council would have an agreement regarding community access and other conditions. The advantage is clarity of ownership and asset responsibility but the disadvantage is other funders are less likely to contribute funding under this model. This model is similar to Avondale College Stadium.
Benefits of a council partnership with Western Springs College
27. The value of the school land to build the indoor courts particularly as the cost of land in the central city is very high to purchase. There is no suitable unused council land in the central city, so if council wanted to develop its own indoor facility in the central city, it would either need to purchase new land at considerable cost or displace uses on existing land.
28. Community access to the Ministry funded court outside of school hours. If stage one was completed to provide three indoor courts, this would provide a total of 175 court hours per week for community use. If council was to build its own two court facility, this would provide a total of 210 court hours per week between 7am and 10pm. However up to 35 hours during the working day (70 court hours) will have low use meaning the realistic community use is 140 court hours per week. The partnership approach yields 35 (20%) more accessible court hours for community use, through this optimised approach.
29. Maximising the utilisation of the courts between the school day and after school. Under the partnership approach there is potential to almost fully utilise the facility which provides significant return on investment for both the Ministry and the council.
30. Efficiencies in operation by maximising revenues and minimising expenditure. The estimated operational cost for council is between $75,000 to $95,000 per annum. If council was to build its own two court facility, based on comparison with existing facilities, the estimated cost of operation is likely to be higher at over $120,000 per annum. This is due to limited revenue during the working day.
31. Efficiencies and cost-savings in procurement, design and construction costs by working directly with the Ministry appointed design and build contractor.
32. Partnership between the college and sport codes is beneficial through mutual coaching opportunities, high performance pathways for students and reinforces the school’s position as a focal point in the community.
Need for indoor courts in the central area
33. The National Facilities Strategy for Indoor Courts 2014 states the Auckland Region has a current under-supply of 13 courts which is projected to grow to 42 courts over the next 20 years. This is based on the benchmark estimate of 1 court per 9,000 population but this does not recognise demographic variations in the demand for indoor courts. There is evidence to show diverse communities are more inclined towards many of the indoor sports like badminton, table tennis, futsal and volleyball.
34. Through engagement on the Sports Facilities Investment Plan, sports like basketball, volleyball, badminton and futsal noted the ability to deliver their sports is constrained by the number of indoor courts available in Auckland. There is significant latent demand and consequently participation growth is curtailed by supply.
35. The Sport Facilities Priorities Plan (in development) also identifies there is a significant undersupply of indoor courts across the Auckland Region with the central area identified as critical. Of particular concern is the lack of 3-6 multi-court venues which enable more intensified and efficient leagues and tournaments.
36. A cross section of sport organisations were consulted as part of the feasibility study to understand their level of interest in a potential facility at Western Springs College. All indoor sport codes expressed strong support for the proposal. A summary of their views is attached in Attachment C.
Alternative sites
37. There are no practical alternative site options in the central area to build a large indoor court facility. All possible sites from the central city to Point Chevalier are summarised in table one below with the associated analysis.
Alternative option |
Analysis |
Seddon Fields, Westmere |
Would result in loss of sports fields |
Cox’s Bay Park, Westmere |
Would result in loss of sports fields. Close to residential areas. |
Western Springs Stadium outer fields, Western Springs |
Would result in loss of sports fields. Likely required for future development of stadium. |
Chamberlain Park, Mt Albert |
Other developments planned. Underlying ground conditions (volcanic rock) will be a major issue. |
Walker Park, Pt Chevalier |
Would result in loss of sports fields. Close to residential area. |
Victoria Park, CBD |
Would result in loss of sports fields. |
St Paul’s College, Ponsonby |
Has possible space, but very close to residential area may be a challenge for consent purposes |
YMCA Pitt Street Stadium, CBD |
There is potential to build more indoor courts by going up but this is not in current plans for the YMCA |
Unitec, Mt Albert |
Uncertain opportunity for partnership |
38. While there are some school sites which might have sufficient land, the close proximity to residential areas undermines achievability due to consent requirements. The only other suitable land in the area is existing sport parks which are not feasible due to the current under-supply of sport fields across the central area.
39. Indoor courts at Western Springs College presents a number of advantages due to its central location, proximity to the motorway, distance from any residential areas and potential synergies with other regional amenities. A 15 minute drive time catchment shows the facility can serve populations reaching into the west, central and east.
Options
40. The window of opportunity to form a partnership with Western Springs College is now. The Ministry will shortly appoint a contractor to design and build the new college facilities. If there is a desire to develop additional indoor courts on the school site for community use, then decisions are required now to ensure the design accommodates this potential.
41. The options council can consider are:
i. Do nothing – the opportunity to build indoor courts on the site in the future will be foregone or potentially compromised due to design decisions.
ii. Enter a partnership with the Ministry / Western Springs College Board of Trustees to contribute to the design process and preserve the opportunity to build indoor courts in the future. Funding for the construction can be considered as part of the Auckland Council Long-term Plan 2018-2028. It is anticipated a design contribution of around 10% (or $2 million) of the additional four courts would be required. This option requires testing with the Ministry and school to determine whether they are open to this approach. One of the concerns the school is likely to raise is future disruption from another construction period. This option loses the inherent construction efficiencies by not utilising the Ministry appointed contractor.
iii. Enter a partnership and allocate $12.3 million for the development of stage one to provide two additional indoor courts as part of the Ministry led construction. The commitment could be in principle at this stage until further planning and a full business case is completed and approved by Ministry, Western Springs College and Council. Funding would be required in 2017/2018 and 2018/2019.
Funding and preferred option
42. There is currently no funding earmarked for this particular opportunity. Within the Long-term Plan 2015-2025 there is a capital development budget within the Parks, Community and Lifestyle theme of $104 million from 2018 to 2025. The priorities for development and allocation of this budget are still to be determined. It is likely provision for indoor courts will be of high priority. There is also $2 million per annum in Parks, Sport and Recreation budget for significant partnerships.
43. Normally projects of this magnitude are considered as part of long-term planning process as this provides the ability for council to consider its overall priorities.
44. Option two is the preferred option as it recognises the financial constraints but also secures one of the limited options to meet the critical shortage of indoor courts in the central area. If the Ministry and school support this approach, a funding agreement would be prepared with council committing $2 million to the design process. This could be funded from Parks, Sport and Recreation partnership budget. A business case can be prepared for consideration in the council’s Long-term Plan 2018-2028 for the construction of stage one of the indoor courts in 2018-2019.
Consideration
Local board views and implications
45. The views of the Waitematā Local Board are being sought on the potential partnership with Western Springs College and their feedback will be provided verbally to the committee.
Māori impact statement
46. The provision of accessible facilities is a known factor to increase participation in sport. Western Springs College has student population of which 27% identify as Māori. By working in partnership with Western Springs College, there is an opportunity to provide accessible indoor courts and a range of sporting opportunities which can lead to increased participation by Māori students but also from the surrounding community.
Implementation
47. If the recommendation to seek a partnership with Western Springs College is supported the next step will be to negotiate the terms and conditions of the Partnership Agreement. It is recommended the approval of the agreement could be delegated to the Chief Operating Officer.
48. Staff resources will be allocated to work with the Ministry appointed design team to prepare the design for the indoor courts. Further work would also be required on associated requirements such as car parking.
49. A business case will also be prepared to outline the opportunity to fully invest in the indoor court development, which the council can consider as part of the Long-term Plan 2018-2028.
No. |
Title |
Page |
a⇩
|
Western Springs College Indicative Master Plan showing indoor court |
135 |
b⇩
|
Update on Community and School Partnership project |
137 |
c⇩
|
Summary of Sporting Organisation Feedback |
141 |
Signatories
Author |
Anita Coy-Macken - Team Leader Provision |
Authorisers |
Sharon Rimmer - Manager Sport and Recreation Mace Ward - General Manager Parks, Sports and Recreation Dean Kimpton - Chief Operating Officer |
Environment and Community Committee 16 May 2017 |
|
Sport and Recreation Community Access Scheme
File No.: CP2017/06954
Purpose
1. To approve the Sport and Recreation Community Access Scheme funding agreements.
Executive summary
2. In July 2016, the Parks, Recreation and Sport Committee approved the Sport and Recreation Community Access Scheme Guidelines (the guidelines).
3. The purpose of the Community Access Scheme (the scheme) is to leverage access to non-council facilities to support an increase in sport and recreation participation and reduce inequities of access for certain communities. The scheme supports implementation of the Auckland Sport and Recreation Strategic Action Plan (the strategic action plan).
4. The guidelines were developed to provide guidance for funding the 11 existing relationships and also provide a framework to address identified sport and recreation provision gaps via partnerships. The current funding for the Community Access Scheme is $1,023,000.
5. As part of the implementation of the scheme, a review of the legacy arrangements has been undertaken. Eight of the existing arrangements were invited to submit a proposal with strategies to support the implementation of the community access scheme. Staff assessed proposals against the prioritisation criteria within the guidelines and an assessment matrix to inform recommendations for future funding allocations.
6. There is currently no additional budget available to support community access and therefore limited ability to address equity issues and regional provision gaps.
7. The eight Community Access arrangements recommended for funding continue to fill a gap in the regional network of sport and recreation facility provision and strategically align to the Auckland Plan, the strategic action plan, and the scheme prioritisation criteria.
That the Environment and Community Committee: a) approve the allocation of funding from the existing Sport and Recreation Community Access Scheme budget as follows: i) $60,000 to AUT Millennium Ownership Trust to provide community access to Sovereign Stadium from 1 July 2017 to 30 June 2018 ii) $40,000 per annum to Avondale College to provide community access to the stadium, hockey turf and six netball courts from 1 July 2017 to 30 June 2020 iii) $100,000 per annum to Tamaki College Community Recreation Centre Trust to provide community access to Tamaki Recreation Centre from 1 July 2017 to 30 June 2020 iv) $90,000 per annum to East City Community Trust to provide community access to ASB Stadium from 1 July 2017 to 30 June 2020 v) $80,000 per annum to Waiheke Recreation Centre Trust to provide community access to Waiheke Recreation Centre from 1 July 2017 to 30 June 2020 vi) $325,000 per annum to Te Puru Community Charitable Trust to provide community access to Te Puru Community Centre from 1 July 2017 to 30 June 2020
vii) $150,000 per annum to Papatoetoe Sports & Community Centre Trust to provide community access to Kolmar (Papatoetoe Sports Centre) from 1 July 2017 to 30 June 2020 viii) $150,000 to Auckland Netball to provide community access to the Auckland Netball Centre from 1 July 2017 to 30 June 2018 |
Comments
Background
8. At amalgamation Auckland Council inherited 14 sport and recreation operational funding agreements. Eleven of the funding agreements were deemed out-of-scope of the Community Grants Policy due to the primary nature being community access grants to third-parties to deliver asset-based services.
9. In July 2016, the Parks, Recreation and Sport Committee approved the Sport and Recreation Community Access Scheme guidelines. Resolution number PAR/2016/49. A copy of the approved guidelines is attached as Attachment A.
10. The purpose of the scheme is to leverage access to non-council facilities to support an increase in sport and recreation participation and reduce inequities of access for certain communities. The scheme supports implementation of the Auckland Sport and Recreation Strategic Action Plan (the strategic action plan).
11. The guidelines were developed to provide guidance for funding the 11 existing relationships and also provide a framework to address identified sport and recreation provision gaps via partnerships.
12. The aim of the scheme is to facilitate access to sport and recreation facilities where there are identified gaps in the regional network, encourage greater use of existing assets and support multi-sport and multi-use facilities.
13. Application of the scheme will enable council to move investment across Auckland in response to highest need/demand and invest strategically on a three yearly cycle. The scheme provides the opportunity for multi-year agreements.
Implementation of the scheme
14. To be eligible for the scheme, facilities must meet the criteria in the guidelines.
15. As part of the implementation of the scheme, a review of the legacy arrangements has been undertaken. Eight of the legacy arrangements were invited to submit a proposal with strategies to support the implementation of the community access scheme and develop innovative ways to increase sport and recreation participation at the facility.
16. The other three legacy funding arrangements are no longer eligible for community access funding under the scheme (Hato Petera College $28,000, Dacre Park $17,000, Manukau Tennis Centre $41,000. Reallocation of this funding is recommended in this report. A table is provided as Attachment B and illustrates the approved investment for the 2016/2017 financial year and the recommended Community Access Scheme allocations from 1 July 2017.
Assessment
17. The available funding for the scheme is $1,023,000.
18. There is currently no additional budget available to support community access and therefore limited ability to address equity issues and regional provision gaps.
19. Six out of eight organisations requested additional funding. The total requested amount is $1.404 million therefore oversubscribed by $381,000.
20. Staff assessed proposals against the prioritisation criteria within the guidelines and an assessment matrix to inform recommendations for future funding allocations.
21. Workshops have been held with six of the seven directly affected local boards to seek feedback on the proposals as part of the assessment for each facility.
22. A workshop with the Environment and Community Committee was held on 13 April to share the applications and assessment approach.
23. The overall assessment identified the eight existing arrangements fill a gap in the regional network of sport and recreation facility provision and are eligible under the guidelines criteria. Detailed assessment and Local Board views for each organisation are available in a summary report.
Assessment summary for existing arrangements
Sovereign Stadium – AUT Millennium Ownership Trust
24. Sovereign Stadium is located on Rangitoto College land that is leased to AUT Millennium Ownership Trust. The stadium fulfils both a local and sub-regional role in the provision of athletics facilities. Council has had a community access arrangement with the Stadium since 1990. Since 1997, Council’s operational funding has been approximately $58,000. AUT Millennium Ownership Trust provides community access to the athletics track and sports field. On average the stadium has 30,000 community visits per annum.
25. The AUT Millennium Ownership Trust owns and manages the Owen G Glenn National Aquatic Centre. In 2012 Auckland Council contributed $13 million towards the construction of the facility and through the funding agreement the Trust must provide an acceptable level of casual public access to the new pool during normal hours of operation.
AUT Millennium Ownership Trust proposal
26. Through the proposal, AUT Millennium Ownership Trust requested an increase in funding to continue provision of community access to Sovereign Stadium and additional operational funding support for National Aquatic Centre. Staff have advised the Trust that the current assessment relates to existing community access arrangements and therefore funding support for the pool would be considered as a separate process and report.
27. The community access grant for Sovereign Stadium has remained at the same level since 2002 and the increased financial demands created by the National Aquatic Centre have prompted the Trust to request an increase in council funding.
28. The proposal outlines the increase in funding would assist with:
- Operational and maintenance support
- Management of the facilities and promotion of its use
- Ensuring a quality service to our community
- Event support to assist in the hosting of international, national and regional events and cover the cost of pool closures to host events.
29. The Trust is requesting a total of $100,000 per annum over three years with $60,000 going towards Sovereign Stadium and $40,000 towards the National Aquatic Centre.
30. Assessment summary - Sovereign Stadium fulfils a gap in the provision of athletic facilities and provides for significant community access. A Sports Facility Investment Plan is currently being developed by Council that will guide decisions on sport facility provision and investment in the future.
31. Recommendation - It is recommended that the current level of funding to AUT Millennium Ownership Trust of $60k is provided for 2017/2018, and following the development of the Sports Facility Investment Plan consideration of a longer term agreement is given.
Avondale College
32. Avondale College Stadium is located on Avondale College campus and is managed by the Avondale College Stadium Management Committee. In 1992 Auckland City Council contributed $360,000 towards its construction. The stadium fills both a local and sub-regional role in the provision of sport and recreation facilities, with two full-sized indoor courts (one with spectator seating for 1000), two squash courts, an aerobics studio and a weights room. Council has had a community access arrangement with Avondale College for the stadium since 1992 and over the last two years provided a grant of $17,060. The stadium is available to the community outside of school hours and is a well-used community facility. On average the stadium has 24,500 community visits per annum.
33. Also on Avondale College Campus and available for community use are a water-based hockey turf and pavilion, and 6 netball courts both of which council has invested in by way of grants for their capital development. The school theatre didn’t receive capital contribution from council but is also used by the community.
Avondale College proposal
34. Through the proposal, Avondale College is requesting an increase in funding to continue provision of community access to the stadium. Additionally Avondale College is seeking support for the operational costs of the hockey turf, school theatre and netball courts which are available for community use. The increase in funding would support a shortfall in operational costs, specifically repairs and maintenance costs. The proposal indicates there would be no change to the current level of community access.
35. The Trust is requesting a total of (or up to) $75,000 per annum over three years which is an increase of $57,940 per annum.
36. Assessment summary - Avondale College fills a gap in the provision of council recreation facilities in the Avondale and central west area. The assessment and options analysis has identified a significant opportunity to increase sport and recreation participation and community access at Avondale College. The facilities include stadium, hockey turf and the 6 netball courts.
37. Recommendation - The recommended option is to increase funding to Avondale College to $40,000 per annum to increase community access to include the stadium, hockey turf and 6 netball courts.
Tamaki Recreation Centre - Tamaki College Community Recreation Centre Trust
38. The Tamaki Recreation Centre is located on Tamaki College, Glen Innes and is managed by the Tamaki College Community Recreation Centre Trust. The recreation centre is used by both the school and the community and fills a local role in the provision of indoor recreation facilities. In 2001, Auckland City Council committed $1,150,000 to the construction of the facility; a facility partnership agreement documents the parties’ obligations, including the provision for council to consider an annual operating grant to the Trust to support low-cost community access until 2021.
39. Since 2002, Council has provided operational funding of $100,000 per annum. The Trust provides community access to the sports hall, fitness suite and community meeting room at rates accessible to the local community.
40. Access is available to part of the centre during the school day and to the full centre outside school hours. There are increasing pressures on the facility as the school roll grows and the school is requiring more space within the facility. The Tamaki Recreation Centre has on average 65,000 community visits per annum.
Tamaki College Community Recreation Centre Trust proposal
41. Through the proposal, Tamaki College Community Recreation Centre Trust is seeking a continuation of the current level of funding to provide low cost or no cost recreational activities to the community. The Trust is requesting $100,000 per annum over three years.
42. Assessment summary - Tamaki Recreation Centre fills a gap in the provision of council recreation facilities in the Glen Innes area, in particular the provision of indoor court space. The recommended option will ensure the existing level of community access is provided and where possible provide increased opportunities for the community to participate in sport and recreation activities at the centre.
43. Recommendation – The recommended option is to maintain the current level of funding of $100,000 per annum to Tamaki College Community Recreation Trust to provide community access to the Tamaki Recreation Centre.
ASB Stadium – East City Community Trust
44. Council has supported a community access arrangement with East City Community Trust since 2002, with council providing operational funding from $70,000 to $80,000 per annum. The Trust provides community access to the three court sports hall. The school has exclusive access to the stadium during school hours. The community access hours are 4.30pm to 10pm weekdays and all weekends and school holidays. The current Community Access grant for East City Community Trust is $80,000 per annum. The stadium has between 160,000 and 175,000 community visits per annum.
East City Community Trust proposal
45. Through the proposal, East City Community Trust is seeking an increase in funding to support a shortfall of operational costs. This is largely due to the increased need to address essential maintenance of the facility.
46. The proposal indicates no change to the current level of community access. The Trust is requesting $200,000 per annum over three years which is an increase of $120,000 per annum.
47. Assessment summary - ASB Stadium fills a geographic gap in the network of sports facilities and there is an identified shortage of accessible indoor court space available in the central and Orakei Local Board area. The proposal indicates no change to the current level of community access however focusses on catching up on deferred maintenance, improving data collection and identifying new customer groups. The recommended option would ensure the existing level of community access is provided and an increase in operational funding may assist with deferred maintenance costs.
48. Recommendation – The recommended option is to increase funding to East City Community Trust to $90,000 per annum to provide community access to ASB Stadium.
Waiheke Recreation Centre – Waiheke Recreation Centre Trust
49. The centre is currently available to the community from 4pm on weekdays and all day during weekends and school holidays. During these times, the community has access to the indoor court and three meeting / activity rooms.
50. Auckland City Council contributed $750,000 to the construction of the Waiheke Recreation Centre between 2000 and 2002. The Waiheke Recreation Centre Trust is required, through a facility partnership agreement, to ensure the centre is accessible to the local community outside of school hours.
51. Since 2002, Council has contributed annual operational funding to the Waiheke Recreation Centre Trust to support community access and programmes. The current Community Access grant for Waiheke Recreation Centre is $75,000.00 per annum. On average the centre has 11,000 community visits per annum.
Waiheke Recreation Centre Trust proposal
52. Through the proposal, the Trust is seeking an increase in funding to support a new business model which includes the current level of community access with the addition of afterschool care and school holiday programmes and potentially older adult programmes.
53. The Trust is requesting $165,000 for 2017/2018 with a reducing amount over the next two years at $118,000 for 2018/2019 and $96,000 for 2019/2020.
54. Assessment summary - The Waiheke Recreation Centre is the only facility of its type on Waiheke Island therefore fills a gap in the network of recreation facilities. The centre supports new groups by giving reduced rates to encourage utilisation of the facility. The recommended option will ensure the community can continue to access the facility at the same level and potentially increase opportunities for sport and recreation participation.
55. Recommendation – The recommended option is to increase funding to Waiheke Recreation Centre Trust to $80,000 per annum to provide community access to Waiheke Recreation Centre.
Te Puru Community Centre - Te Puru Community Charitable Trust
56. The Te Puru Community Centre is located at Te Puru Park between Maraetai and Beachlands. Council has provided an operational grant to the Te Puru Community Charitable Trust since 2005 enabling community access to its facilities which includes an indoor sports hall, clubrooms and studio while also delivering local sport and recreation opportunities and programmes. Community visits to the centre are in the region of 20,000 per annum.
Te Puru Community Charitable Trust proposal
57. Through the proposal, Te Puru Community Charitable Trust is seeking a continuation of the current level of funding to support the implementation of identified actions within the newly developed strategic plan aimed to increase community access and participation. This includes a new school holiday programme, “Have a Go” days and initiatives aimed at girls aged 10 -18 years. The Trust is requesting $327,000 per annum over three years.
58. Assessment summary - The Te Puru Community Centre fills a gap in the provision of indoor court space and multi-sport space in the Maraetai Beachlands area. The recommended option would ensure the community can continue to access the facility to the existing level and the Trust can implement new programmes to increase sport and recreation participation.
59. Recommendation – The recommended option is to provide funding to Te Puru Community Centre Trust of $325,000 per annum to provide community access to Te Puru Community Centre.
Kolmar (Papatoetoe Sports Centre) – Papatoetoe Sports & Community Charitable Trust
60. Council contributed $8.5 million to the construction of the Papatoetoe Sports Centre and has supported the Trust with ongoing operational funding over the last eight years in excess of $1.3 million. Since 2014 this has included an annual community access grant of $100,000.
61. Kolmar is home to 13 member clubs and the facility averages 3,600 participation visits per week and approximately 180,000 visits per annum. The facility provides indoor and outdoor facilities including indoor cricket nets, a club weightlifting gymnasium, hockey turf, artificial hard courts, bowling greens and access to sports fields for rugby, football, cricket and kabaddi. Across the various areas the facility provides 949 available community hours per week.
Papatoetoe Sports & Community Charitable Trust proposal
62. Through the proposal, the Trust is seeking an increase in funding to address the shortfall in operating costs. The Trust submitted a business plan for 2017 to 2022 which outlines two strategic objectives.
63. The overarching objectives are:
- Increased participation in sport, recreation and leisure
- New Zealand’s leading sport club partnership
64. The Trust is requesting $200,000 per annum over three years which is an increase of $100,000 per annum on the current community access grant. They are proposing an increase in participation visits from 180,000 to 200,000 visits per annum.
65. Assessment summary - Kolmar provides a multi-sport facility that meets a range of local and sub regional sport facility provision needs. Kolmar prioritises accessible and affordable community access, partners with 13 clubs and local schools to ensure quality participation opportunities through providing 949 community hours per week. The recommended option would ensure the community can continue to access the facility to the existing level and the increase in funding will assist with the shortfall in operating funding.
66. Recommendation - The recommended option is to increase funding to Papatoetoe Sports & Community Charitable Trust to $150,000 per annum to provide community access to Kolmar.
Auckland Netball Centre – Auckland Netball
67. Auckland City Council granted $10 million to the construction of the facility. The facility partnership funding agreement outlines the community access requirements. The centre comprises of three indoor and 30 outdoor courts. Since 2010 council has provided operational funding to Auckland Netball of $150,000 per annum to support community access to the outdoor courts when not booked.
Auckland Netball proposal
68. Through the proposal, Auckland Netball is seeking an increase in funding to support repairs and maintenance of the facility. The facility is over 10 years old and costs of replacing assets and undertaking repairs and maintenance has increased significantly. This is offset against the provision of programmes and community access opportunities of which the facility has over 473,000 visits per annum.
69. The proposal indicates no change to the current level of community access. Auckland Netball Centre is requesting $200,000 per annum which is an increase of $50,000 per annum.
70. The proposed increase in funding will contribute towards the court resurfacing renewal and other repairs and maintenance deemed a high priority. The asset maintenance plan identifies the higher priority areas.
71. Assessment summary - The Auckland Netball Centre is a multi-purpose facility providing local and regional netball opportunities. The Centre has 473,219 visits per annum showing considerable community use from local and regional users. This high community use indicates this facility is accessible to the wider Auckland population. The recommended option would ensure the existing level of community access is provided.
72. Recommendation - It is recommended that the current level of funding of $150k to Auckland Netball is provided for 2017/2018, and following the development of the Sports Facility Investment Plan consideration of a longer term agreement is given.
Consideration
Local board views and implications
73. Local Boards were consulted during the development of the Auckland Sport and Recreation Strategic Action Plan (the strategic action plan) which sets out how the priorities and strategic directions of the Auckland Plan will be put into action. This community access scheme implements these plans.
74. Local boards with facilities that have existing community access agreements have been engaged in on-going dialogue with staff about potential future change in agreements since amalgamation. Workshops were held with the directly affected local boards on the draft guidelines and their impact on the existing funding agreements.
75. Workshops have been held with six of the seven directly affected local boards to seek feedback on the proposals as part of the assessment for each facility. Local Board views for each organisation are outlined in the assessment summary report.
76. Workshops will be scheduled with the directly affected Local Boards to define the outcomes and key performance indicators for the community access scheme funded facilities once funding decisions have been made by the Environment and Community Committee.
Māori impact statement
77. The scheme will support Auckland Council’s commitment to Māori and support positive outcomes for Māori participation in sport and recreation through investing in eligible organisations that help achieve this objective. Matauranga Māori / Māori knowledge and world views will be respected. We will ensure that we:
i. Engage effectively with Māori to identify investment opportunities to increase access
ii. Provide appropriate capacity building support to those invested in to support increased Māori participation in sport and recreation.
78. The community access proposals were assessed for Māori outcomes such as increased access to facilities and sport and recreation participation for Māori. Examples are:
i. The Auckland Netball Centre supports initiatives that increase Māori participation in sport and recreation such as, providing coaching support for Aotearoa Māori netball teams, scholarships for Māori players and engaging with Te Wananga O Aotearoa to increase participation in social leagues. Ngati Whatua is also involved in centre competitions at the Centre.
ii. The Tamaki College Community Recreation Trust is working with local Marae (Ruapotaka) and the school marae to develop and deliver authentic sport and recreation opportunities for Māori.
Implementation
79. Following the funding decisions by this Committee, all existing community access funded relationships will be notified of the outcome.
80. Funding agreements and key performance indicators (KPI’s) will be prepared for the community access scheme funded facilities in consultation with the relevant local boards.
81. Funding will be subject to the Long-term Plan (LTP) approval for years two and three (2018/2019 and 2019/2020) for multi-year agreements.
82. Local Board workshops will be scheduled to define the outcomes and key performance indicators for the community access scheme funded facilities within their respective areas.
83. As part of the accountability, community access arrangements are obligated to provide council with user numbers on a monthly basis and regular reports which include financials, KPI progress updates and participation data.
84. All arrangements will be monitored, evaluated and reported to the relevant Local Boards and Committee on an annual basis.
No. |
Title |
Page |
a⇩
|
Sport and Recreation Community Access Scheme Guidelines |
151 |
b⇩
|
Community Access Scheme Funding Allocations |
155 |
Signatories
Author |
Kerri Moran - Sport & Recreation Investment Advisor |
Authorisers |
Sharon Rimmer - Manager Sport and Recreation Mace Ward - General Manager Parks, Sports and Recreation Dean Kimpton - Chief Operating Officer |
Environment and Community Committee 16 May 2017 |
|
Implementation of the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2012 - Update on food waste and three bin services
File No.: CP2017/07048
Purpose
1. To note the approach to food waste collection services as per the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2012, and Auckland Council’s progress on the implementation of these services.
2. To endorse the Waste Political Advisory Group’s direction to progress the implementation of a food waste collection service in urban areas of Auckland, commencing in the legacy Papakura District Council area, with the implementation of a three bin waste collection service for households in that area.
Executive summary
3. Auckland Council’s Waste Management and Minimisation Plan was approved in 2012, to give effect to council’s aspirational goal of zero waste to landfill by 2040. The main focus of the current Waste Management and Minimisation Plan is to reduce the amount of household waste going to landfill, and to enable Aucklanders to minimise their waste disposal costs.
4. On 6 December 2016, the Environment and Community Committee established the Waste Political Advisory Group to provide oversight of the implementation of the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan for the 2016-2019 electoral term.
5. In alignment with the current Waste Management and Minimisation Plan, staff requested guidance from the Waste Political Advisory Group on the implementation of the following initiatives at its 28 February 2017 meeting:
· a kerbside food waste collection service in urban areas of Auckland (following a governing body decision in June 2012), starting in the legacy Papakura District Council area
· a three bin system for food waste, disposer pays refuse, and recycling in the legacy Papakura District Council area within the next 12 months.
6. The food waste collection service will impact approximately 20,000 households in the Papakura and Franklin Local Board areas, formerly included in the Papakura District Council area. These services will not impact households in the rural parts of the former district which are located in the Franklin Local Board area (see Attachment A).
7. As a food waste collection service requires a significant investment from council, the endorsement of council’s proposed approach to managing food waste was requested from the Waste Political Advisory Group. The cost to provide a food waste collection service in urban Auckland is approximately $16-17 million per annum. The budget for this service has been approved through the Long-term Plan 2015-2025.
8. The Waste Political Advisory Group supported the recommendation to continue delivering on the current Waste Management and Minimisation Plan through the progression of a food waste collection service, and the introduction of the three bin system for the legacy Papakura District Council area. The food waste service will be rolled out to all urban areas of Auckland from the 2019/2020 financial year.
9. Although the food waste collection service was endorsed by the governing body in the previous electoral term, the Waste Political Advisory Group requested that this be reported to the Environment and Community Committee for further endorsement. Endorsement of the introduction of the three bin service in Papakura is also requested, as this service is considered to be a precursor to a future regional service.
That the Environment and Community Committee: a) note that Auckland Council’s Waste Management and Minimisation Plan, adopted in 2012, committed to a food waste collection service in the urban areas of Auckland, the funding for which was approved through the Long-term Plan 2015-2025. b) note that in alignment with the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2012, a three bin system for food waste, disposer pays refuse, and recycling will be implemented in the urban parts of the legacy Papakura District Council area within the next 12 months. c) endorse the political steer of the Waste Political Advisory Group to progress the implementation of a food waste collection service in urban areas of Auckland, commencing in the legacy Papakura District Council area, and the implementation of a three bin waste collection service for households in the legacy Papakura District Council area. |
Comments
Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2012 – Progress to date
10. Auckland Council has an aspirational goal of achieving zero waste to landfill by 2040. Council has committed to providing consistent waste services across all legacy council areas, with the goal of zero waste to landfill through turning waste into resources.
11. The targets set in the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan include:
· 30% less domestic refuse by 2018
· 30% less total waste by 2027
· 30% less in-house waste per capita by 2018.
12. The strategic objectives for achieving these targets are:
· Reducing reliance on landfills
· Achieving operational efficiencies
· Restricting organic waste to landfill
· Developing infrastructure to maximise resource recovery
· Advocating to reduce council’s responsibility for dealing with end-of-life products and packaging
· Maximising local economic development
· Reducing litter and illegal dumping costs.
13. Council’s current waste assessment analysis has shown that approximately 1.6 million tonnes of waste from Auckland was disposed into landfill in 2016, compared to 1.2 million tonnes in 2012 (an increase of 25 per cent). Approximately 14 per cent of waste to landfill comes from kerbside refuse collections, and the remaining waste is commercial. The expected levels of waste to landfill until 2040 have been included in Figure 1.
Figure 1. Expected waste to landfill for Auckland by source
14. The current Waste Management and Minimisation Plan focused on household waste, as this is the waste that council has direct control over. Analysis of the average household refuse bin or bag shows that 45 per cent of waste is food waste, 10 per cent is green waste, and 10 per cent recyclables. Only 35 per cent of waste in the refuse bins or bags is currently considered refuse. Pending public consultation on the review of the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan, the plan may choose to focus on the three largest sources of commercial waste to landfill: construction and demolition waste, organics, and timber. This could be in addition and complementary to the actions currently delivered through the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan.
15. A suite of actions were identified in the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan in order to reduce household waste from 160 kg per person in 2012 to 110 kg per person by 2018[2]. The key actions are:
· Introducing a disposer pays system across the region through pay per lift refuse bins
· Introducing a rates-funded comingled recycling service
· Implementing a rates-funded kerbside food waste collection service in urban areas
· Undertaking extensive community engagement and waste minimisation behaviour change programmes
· Implementing an on-property rates-funded booked inorganics service
· Developing a resource recovery network of community recycling centres, local drop-offs, and resource recovery parks.
16. Reducing waste to landfill and converting waste to resources underpins the current Waste Management and Minimisation Plan. These approaches support environmental stewardship, as well as delivering social and economic outcomes. The proposed services will enable households to divert waste from landfill, as well as minimising the costs associated with waste disposal.
17. Due to efficiencies in procuring a large scale residential waste and recycling collection service, council’s services are expected to be at a lower cost to Aucklanders than if the services were delivered by multiple entities in the private sector. These efficiencies enable staff to procure services for rural areas of Auckland and the Hauraki Gulf Islands at similar costs to mainland Auckland.
Progress towards reducing household waste
18. One of the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan targets is to reduce kerbside refuse from 160 kg in 2012 to 110 kg per person by 2018. In 2016, this was tracking at 146 kg per person, which is a reduction of approximately 10 per cent per household from the baseline measure.
19. A summary of the initiatives that have been delivered to date as part of the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan has been included as Attachment B. The following initiatives are still to be delivered to ensure council meets its target of reducing kerbside refuse to landfill by 30 per cent by 2018:
· A kerbside food waste collection service for urban Auckland
· Consistent refuse bin collection service
· Consistent charging for rubbish on a pay per lift basis.
20. Given the importance of the implementation of the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan, a Waste Political Advisory Group was established to guide the implementation. The members of the Waste Political Advisory Group are Councillor Penny Hulse (chair), Deputy Mayor Bill Cashmore (deputy chair), Councillors Alf Filipaina, Richard Hills, Daniel Newman, Wayne Walker, and Independent Māori Statutory Board Member Glenn Wilcox.
21. The Waste Political Advisory Group has supported the continuation of the delivery of the current Waste Management and Minimisation Plan. The Waste Political Advisory Group a desire that the next Waste Management and Minimisation Plan, which will be refreshed in 2018, will build on the existing plan, and will not re-litigate the initiatives adopted in the current plan.
Food waste collection service
22. One of the main topics that the Waste Political Advisory Group has considered is a food waste collection service. This was identified under the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan as an action to help urban Auckland households reduce food waste, and to reduce the impact of a disposer pays service.
23. A disposer pays service for refuse was endorsed by council as part of the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan. This service is to be introduced to the legacy Manukau and Auckland City Council areas on the proviso that council will assist residents to minimise their waste to landfill through awareness campaigns and the introduction of the food waste service.
24. A food waste collection service across urban Auckland is expected to initially divert 50 per cent of kitchen organic waste and will equate to approximately 50,000 tonnes per annum from landfill, which equates to approximately 21 per cent of kerbside waste (three per cent of overall waste to landfill). This is expected to rise to 75,000 tonnes per annum by 2040, due to a better capture rate and higher household numbers. Processing of food waste creates high quality compost, which can be used to revitalise and fertilise agricultural soils. Reduction of food waste from landfill also contributes to the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions.
25. Since 2014, food waste collection trials have been undertaken with 2,000 North Shore households on a no-charge basis. Independent survey results have indicated that the majority of North Shore residents who are participating in the trial are in the support of the service continuing. The amount of household food waste for collection has remained constant since the trial started. Based on staff audits, residents participating in the trial have seen on average a 54 per cent reduction in the amount of refuse in their user pays bags (from 7 kg to 3.2 kg per bag), resulting in less bags going to landfill, which has had associated cost savings.
26. More in-depth methodological trials have been undertaken in south Auckland. This involved trials on a couple of streets including Solveig Place in Manurewa, and Smiths Avenue and Bates Street in Papakura, as well as the Edmond Hillary Primary School in Papakura.
27. The south Auckland trials were implemented to test the effectiveness of a community partnership approach for rolling out a food waste service in marginalised communities. This approach resulted in a higher level of participation when compared to areas of similar size in the North Shore trial. However, participation has since dropped, which had been attributed to a lack of communication with new tenants in the area about the scheme. This has highlighted a need for continuous communication with residents. It is expected that once a regional service is operating, there will be an enhanced level of awareness.
28. Before implementing a food waste service, staff sought independent advice to ensure that the proposed methodology to divert food waste was aligned with other international cities that are effectively minimising their waste. SLR Consulting Limited were engaged by council to advise on waste strategies and service delivery options for the next Waste Management and Minimisation Plan. The SLR consultants review confirmed that council’s business case was aligned with international best practice.
29. The cost to provide the food waste service across urban Auckland is approximately $16-18 million per annum, compared to $20 million and $32 million per annum for recycling and refuse collection services respectively.
30. The cost of the three bin service was approved through the Long-term Plan 2015-2025, including the urban kerbside food waste collection. The average household cost for residential waste services are estimated in the Long Term Plan 2015-2025 to be approximately $260 per year (an increase of $25 per year per household from current costs).
31. It is planned that the disposer pays refuse service will be delivered alongside an urban food waste collection service. To deliver this at a regional level requires the full processing capacity for food waste to be operational by 2019.
Option to scale the current food waste service, starting in the legacy Papakura District Council area
32. The current food waste trial on the North Shore of 2,000 households has shown a reduction in food waste to landfill and a high rate of customer satisfaction with the service. Residents in other areas of Auckland have requested a similar food waste collection service.
33. Staff looked at all urban legacy council areas in Auckland to identify where the food waste collection service could be first introduced. The legacy Papakura district council area, being a contained area of approximately 20,000 households, was considered as an ideal area for the introduction of this service.
34. The introduction of the food waste service will be rolled out across the region in a staged manner, as currently the capacity to process food waste in Auckland is limited to waste produced from a small urban area. Once the infrastructure is in place to increase the processing capacity of food waste in Auckland, the service will be extended to the remaining urban areas of Auckland. It is expected that the food waste service will then be rolled out to the remaining urban areas of Auckland from the 2019/2020 financial year.
35. The endorsement of this approach is being sought from the Environment and Community Committee, as the introduction of this service in legacy Papakura District Council area is considered to be the precursor to a regional service as approved in the current Waste Management and Minimisation Plan.
Disposer pays refuse bins
36. Planning is underway to transition current disposer pays areas (the legacy Waitākere and North Shore City Council areas, as well as the legacy Papakura, and Franklin District Council areas) to disposer pays wheelie bins. Options are currently being finalised for the roll-out of the disposer pays service in north-west Auckland, and an option to commence in Papakura within the next 12 months is being considered, before implementing in Franklin.
37. By September 2017, both the legacy Auckland City Council and Manukau City Council areas will have wheelie bins, and there are plans for these areas to shift to disposer pays in 2019.
Consideration
Local board views and implications
38. Local board views were considered during the development of the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan. Eleven local boards specifically commented on the organic collections during the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan consultation in 2012, with ten local boards agreeing to the introduction of a kerbside service.
39. The three bin service will only be implemented in the urban legacy Papakura District Council areas at this stage. The Franklin and Papakura Local Boards have been advised of the introduction of the food waste and three bin services in their local board areas. Staff will keep the boards fully informed throughout the implementation process.
40. The Papakura Local Board provided positive feedback on the food waste trial undertaken in Smiths Avenue and Bates Street, and Edmund Hillary Primary School in 2015. Papakura Local Board members have recently noted a need to reinvigorate this trial, as well as expressing support for waste minimisation projects more generally. A memo advising the board of this report and associated recommendations will be provided in anticipation of a full local board workshop once implementation commences.
41. The Franklin Local Board has also provided positive feedback on the proposed food waste service, and has indicated an interest in piloting the service, as the processing facility is located in the neighbouring town of Tuakau.
Māori impact statement
42. Two hui were held during the consultation period for the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan in 2012, as well as individual visits to marae. Written and oral submissions by mana whenua indicated general support for the direction of the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan. Opportunities for economic development to recover more resources and minimise waste were welcomed, while noting the need to ensure that communities were supported through any transition to a disposer pays service. This would include a provision of a rates funded food waste services
43. At the 6 April 2017 Infrastructure and Environmental Services mana whenua hui, mana whenua representatives supported the provision of the food waste collection service across urban Auckland. A representative from Ngāti Manuhiri indicated an interest in being involved in the development of the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan review.
44. Since the adoption of the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan, mana whenua have also been involved in waste minimisation initiatives such as the Para Kore ki Tāmaki project, as well as the planning of a community recycling centre in central Auckland. The project team for community recycling centre includes a mana whenua working group, on which there is representation from Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei, Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki, Te Ākitai Waiohua and Te Ahiwaru Waiohua.
Implementation
45. Funding for the introduction of the food waste service across urban Auckland has been included in the Long-term Plan 2015-2025. The introduction of the food waste and bins for refuse services in the legacy Papakura District Council area can be undertaken within these existing budgets.
46. Staff will continue the procurement process for the food waste service, including the processing infrastructure. The procurement service for the three bin service for Papakura will also commence, with the intent to start the service within the next 12 months.
47. Based on guidance from the Waste Political Advisory Group, staff will continue with the delivery of the current Waste Management and Minimisation Plan. The next Waste Management and Minimisation Plan, which will be adopted in 2018, will build on the existing plan, with an increased focus on commercial waste, which is projected to grow at a much faster rate than domestic waste (see Figure 1). The plan will not re-litigate the initiatives adopted in the current plan.
No. |
Title |
Page |
a⇩
|
Legacy Papakura District Council area map |
165 |
b⇩
|
Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2012 - Achievements to date |
167 |
Signatories
Authors |
Parul Sood – Acting General Manager, Waste Solutions Mara Bebich - Relationship Manager, Infrastructure & Environmental Services |
Authorisers |
Barry Potter - Director Infrastructure and Environmental Services Dean Kimpton - Chief Operating Officer |
Environment and Community Committee 16 May 2017 |
|
Information Report - 16 May 2017
File No.: CP2017/07083
Purpose
1. To note progress on the forward work programme. (Attachment A).
2. To inform the committee of the final submission from Auckland Council submitted to the Ministry for the Environment – Clean Water Consultation 2017. (Attachment B).
3. To provide a public record of memos, workshop or briefing papers that have been distributed for the Committee’s information since 4 April 2017.
Executive summary
4. This is regular information-only report which aims to provide public visibility of information circulated to committee members via memo or other means, where no decisions are required.
5. The following papers/memo were circulated to members:
· 21 March 2017 – Memo re Recently Released OECD and Vivid Economics Reports
· 24 March 2017 – Memo re Notification of a pending announcement on the establishment of a China Cultural Centre in Auckland
· 4 April 2017 – Workshop One re: Regional Pest Management Plan Review presentation
· 1 May 2017 – Memo re: Monthly Global Engagement Activity update
· 3 May 2017 – Workshop two re: Regional Pest Management Plan Review notes. The power-point presentation was confidential
· 8 May 2017 – Memo re: Proposed Thriving Tamariki Maori Service Trials
· 9 May 2017 – Memo re: Community and School project update
· 9 May 2017 – Bio News May update.
6. The workshop papers and any previous documents can be found on the Auckland Council website at the following link: http://infocouncil.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/
· at the top of the page, select meeting “Environment and Community Committee” from the drop-down tab and click ‘View’;
· under ‘Attachments’, select either HTML or PDF version of the document entitled ‘Extra Attachments’.
7. Note that, unlike an agenda decision report, staff will not be present to answer questions about these items referred to in this summary. Committee members should direct any questions to the authors.
That the Environment and Community Committee: a) receive the information report. |
No. |
Title |
Page |
a⇩
|
Environment and Community Committee Forward Work Programme |
171 |
b⇩
|
Final Submission from Auckland Council submitted to the Ministry for the Environment - Clean Water Consultation 2017 |
179 |
21 March 2017 - Memo re recently released OECD and Vivid Economics Reports (Under Separate Cover) |
|
|
24 March 2017 - Memo re Notification of a pending announcement on the establishment of a China Cultural Centre in Auckland (Under Separate Cover) |
|
|
4 April 2017 – Workshop one re Regional Pest Management Plan Review presentation (Under Separate Cover) |
|
|
1 May 2017 - Memo re: Monthly Global Engagement Activity update (Under Separate Cover) |
|
|
g⇩
|
3 May 2017 – Workshop 3 May 2017 Workshop teo re: Regional Pest Management Plan Review notes (Under Separate Cover) |
|
8 May 2017 Memo re: Proposed Thriving Tamariki Maori Service Trials (Under Separate Cover) |
|
|
9 May 2017 - Memo re: Community and School project update (Under Separate Cover) |
|
|
9 May 2017 - Bio News May update (Under Separate Cover) |
|
Signatories
Author |
Tam White - Senior Governance Advisor |
Authoriser |
Dean Kimpton - Chief Operating Officer |
Environment and Community Committee 16 May 2017 |
|
Exclusion of the Public: Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987
That the Environment and Community Committee:
a) exclude the public from the following part(s) of the proceedings of this meeting.
The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter, and the specific grounds under section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution follows.
This resolution is made in reliance on section 48(1)(a) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 and the particular interest or interests protected by section 6 or section 7 of that Act which would be prejudiced by the holding of the whole or relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting in public, as follows:
C1 Acquisition of land for open space - Takanini
Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter |
Particular interest(s) protected (where applicable) |
Ground(s) under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution |
The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7. |
s7(2)(h) - The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities. s7(2)(i) - The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations). In particular, the report identifies land the council seeks to acquire for open space purposes. |
s48(1)(a) The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7. |
C2 Acquisition of land for open space - Papakura
Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter |
Particular interest(s) protected (where applicable) |
Ground(s) under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution |
The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7. |
s7(2)(h) - The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities. s7(2)(i) - The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations). In particular, the report identifies land the council seeks to acquire for open space purposes. |
s48(1)(a) The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7. |
C3 Acquisition of land for open space - Orewa
Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter |
Particular interest(s) protected (where applicable) |
Ground(s) under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution |
The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7. |
s7(2)(h) - The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities. s7(2)(i) - The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations). In particular, the report identifies land the council seeks to acquire for open space purposes. |
s48(1)(a) The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7. |