Addendum Agenda of Papakura Local Board

Papakura Local Board

26 July 2017

Auckland Transport Update July 2017 to the Papakura Local Board

File No.: CP2017/14359

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to respond to resolutions and requests on transport-related matters and provide an update on the current status of Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF). The report also provides information on transport matters of specific interest to the Papakura Local Board and its community.

Executive summary

2. This report provides an update on the Board’s transport capital fund projects and their current status. It notes consultations forwarded to the Board for comment and decisions made by Auckland Transports (AT) Traffic Control Committee which affect the Board area. General information is also provided on the Roads and Streets Framework, proposed changes to the Election Signage Bylaw and public transport changes affecting south and east Auckland are being delivered in Papakura

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a) Receive the report entitled “Auckland Transport Update July 2017 to the Papakura Local Board.”

Comments

Transport capital fund update

Updates

3. The Local Board Transport Capital Fund is a capital budget provided to all local boards and delivered by Auckland Transport. The Papakura Local Board can use this fund to deliver projects that they deem important but are not part of Auckland Transport’s work programme. The limitations being that the project must:

· Be safe.

· Not impede network efficiency.

· Be in the road corridor. Although projects running through parks can be considered if there is a transport outcome.

4. The Papakura Local Board can consolidate up to three years of the funding available in an electoral term to allocate to projects. For the Papakura Local Board this means a total of approx. $1.34 million could be spent on transport projects in this electoral term.

5. Auckland Transport encourages all local boards to identify potential projects early in their electoral term to ensure that project planning, procurement and delivery can be undertaken within the current electoral term

Projects

6. In May, the Papakura Local Board identified potential projects and have requested that further investigations are taken to assess feasibility and provide a ‘rough order of costs’.

7. The current progress of all projects is summarised in the table below:

Table 1: Local Board Transport Capital Fund Projects

Projects	Current Status	Problem or Opportunity Being Addressed	Current Status
Relocation of existing cycleway on Great South Road, Takanini		Relocate the existing cycleway to the current footpath creating a shared cycling and pedestrian walkway along Great South Road, Takanini from Southgate Shopping centre to the Papakura Stream to improve safety for cyclists.	‘Rough Order of Cost’ Analysis underway to determine feasibility of project.
Relocation of pedestrian crossing on East Street, Papakura		Relocation of the pedestrian crossing on East Street, Papakura from its existing site further north, to align with the exit from the New World supermarket and the pedestrian access from the Museum and library facility.	‘Rough Order of Cost’ Pedestrian counts arranged to determine feasibility and pedestrian desire lines.
Raised pedestrian crossing for Wood Street, Papakura		A new raised crossing on Wood Street, Papakura to improve pedestrian safety for the local residents.	‘Rough Order of Cost’ Pedestrian counts arranged to determine feasibility and pedestrian desire lines.
Signage Plinth at Papakura Train Station		A directional plinth signage/information hub for the Papakura Rail Station as a way-finding tool.	‘Rough Order of Cost’ Currently underway, estimate should be available early August
Walkway/ cycleway across Pahurehure Inlet		Investigate whether the Local Board Transport Capital Fund can be utilised for the construction of a walkway/cycleway across Pahurehure Inlet between Longford Park and Pylon Point.	‘Rough Order of Cost’ Early estimates based on similar projects in the region estimates construction costs to be in excess of $3 million. This exceeds the current balance of the LBTCF for this term. Additional funding will be required if this project is to be progressed.

Papakura Park and Ride

8. This project is investigating a trial Park and Ride for Papakura facility to address the growth in patronage on the Auckland Transport Metro network, specifically the Papakura train station.

9. A briefing to the Papakura Local Board about the progress of this project is scheduled for 9 August 2017.

New Rollerson Road footpath

10. Auckland Transport has a list of approximately 500 sections of new footpath for consideration across Auckland.

11. Recently it has been raised that a section of Rollerson Road, Papakura currently only has a footpath down the western side of the street. A footpath was not installed when the area was first established.

12. A request for the opposite side of the street to have a footpath installed has been received and has been prioritised for investigation and design in 2017/18 and for construction in 2018/19.

Papaka Road construction

13. Auckland Transport has begun construction of the new Papaka Road in Hingaia. The works represent the start of the next phase of creating the essential roading infrastructure for the new housing development on the Hingaia Peninsula. The road will run north for 250 metres off Hingaia Road, directly opposite Kuhanui Drive.

14. The work includes laying additional footpaths and installing new traffic signals at the Hingaia and Papaka road intersection.

15. One of the key benefits of the new road will be improved safety for cyclists and pedestrians, especially the teachers, parents and pupils of Hingaia Peninsula School who currently have to navigate an uncontrolled, highly congested road where speed is an issue at peak times.

16. The recent weather may impact on the timing for the completion of the works later this year.

Upcoming projects and activities

Consultations

17. Auckland Transport provides the Papakura Local Board with the opportunity to comment on transport projects being delivered in the local board area.

18. In the reporting period for June 2017, three projects were put forward to the Papakura Local Board for comment. The proposals were for:

· A Give Way at Wellington Street onto Ray Small Drive;

· Roundabout improvements to Porchester Road and Walters Road, Takanini

· Speed limit reductions on Porchester Roads, Popes Road, Spartan Road, Takanini School Road and Great South Road

19. No objections were received and a summary of the proposals can be found in Attachment A of this report.

20. The Traffic Control Committee (TCC) decisions are reported on a monthly basis. In the June period there were two TCC decisions in the local board area. These are listed in the table below.

Table 1: Transport Control Committee Decisions

Street	Type of Report	Nature of Restriction	Committee Decision
Old Wairoa Road / Unnamed Roads	Permanent Traffic and Parking changes Combined	No Stopping At All Times, Angle Parking, SVL-Cycle Lane, Give-Way Control	Approved in Principle
Great South Road / Rosehill Drive	Permanent Traffic and Parking changes Combined	Lane Restrictions, no Stopping At All Times, Bus Stop, Bus Shelter, Traffic Island, Pedestrian Crossing, Stop Control, Flush Median, Edge Line, No Passing Restriction	Carried

Regional and sub-regional projects

Roads and Streets Framework (RASF)

21. The Papakura Local Board has reviewed the Roads and Streets Framework, a new policy structure that seeks to put people first in transport planning. Historically, Auckland Transports mandate for network efficiency has led to criticism due to its limited flexibility in responding to community’s desire for more a ‘place shaping’ approach to planning.

22. Auckland Transports response has been to draft a new policy which commits to a new approach that seeks to balance ‘place’ (i.e. where and how people live) with ‘movement’ (i.e. network efficiency).

23. The overall aim is to create better transport infrastructure that better serves local communities needs and provides more balanced outcomes for Auckland. The RASF also includes a detailed structure for better community input into transport planning. The RASF will have considerable strategic effects by improving the quality of local town centres, roads and streets in the Papakura area.

24. Through discussions, the Papakura Local Board has shown support for the RASF in principle and has developed a submission that is included as Attachment B to this report.

Election Signage Bylaw

25. Since the 2016 local body elections, Auckland Transport has reviewed its election signage bylaw.

26. Auckland Transport proposes amending the bylaw to clarify controls relating to the display of election signs. It will also remove the present restriction limiting the display of election signs to the nine weeks’ period preceding a general election, local election or election for the Auckland Energy Consumer Trust.

27. The proposed amendments have been circulated to local board members and is appended to this report as Attachment C.

28. The Papakura Local Boards formal feedback is contained within this months agenda as a separate report. The local boards feedback was submitted prior to the closing date for feedback which was the 26 June 2017.

Public Transport

29. The Southern New Network is operational. The next public transport project with strategic implications for the Papakura Local Board Area is the Eastern New Network. This is planned to start operation late in 2017 to early 2018. It will increase options for travelling east-west across the southern areas of Auckland.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

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

Māori impact statement

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

Implementation

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

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Summary of consultation information sent to the Papakura Local Board June 2017	11
b ⇩	The Papakura Local Board feedback for the Roads and Streets Framework	15
c ⇩	Proposed Amendments to Auckland Transport Election Signs Bylaw 2013	17

Signatories

Authors	Trish Wayper - Local Board Democracy Advisor
Authorisers	Rex Hewitt - Relationship Manager

Papakura Local Board

26 July 2017

Airport Access

File No.: CP2017/14363

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to respond to a number of enquiries received by Auckland Transport regarding the decision to discount a heavy rail option as a mass transit solution between the airport and the city centre. This report will illustrate additional reasons, other than the value for money rationale that has been provided to date.

2. In addition, the report will clarify the process, the steps taken and the studies and factors that contributed to the decision made by Auckland Transport (AT) and the NZ Transport Agency.

Executive summary

3. Auckland Transport is progressing a business case for route protection for mass transit for the airport to city centre corridor. The two modes being investigated for this route are bus and Light Rail Transit (LRT). Studies to date have concluded the benefits of an LRT system outweigh the benefits of heavy rail.

4. The context for this discussion are the numerous studies that have contributed to the decision-making process regarding mass transit to the airport; the key study regarding heavy rail being the South-Western Multi-modal Airport Rapid Transit study (SMART), after which the heavy rail option was discounted.

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a) receives this report.

b) acknowledges the rationale for heavy rail being discounted as the optimum mass transit solution for the Airport to City Centre corridor.

Comments

5. Attachment A illustrates the walk-up catchment unlocked by each option. The location of new stations along the route would provide 51,700 residents with access to the strategic public transport network on LRT and 3,100 on heavy rail.

6. Attachment B is the resolution passed at the AT board meeting in June 2016 where the board resolved “That Management discount heavy rail to the airport from any further option development due to its poor value for money proposition”.

7. Attachment C illustrates the progression path from current bus services to LRT agreed to by the Auckland Transport and NZ Transport Agency boards in March 2017 and the next steps for the project.

8. A key factor in the decision to discount heavy rail was value for money. The cost estimate and Benefit Cost Ratio (BCR) of each option at the time of the SMART study analysis are as follows:

· Heavy rail BCR = 0.37-0.64

· Heavy rail cost estimate = $2.6-$3 billion

· Light rail BCR = >1

· Light rail cost estimate = $2.5-$3 billion

9. The cost was similar between a heavy rail option for the section from Onehunga to the airport and an LRT line for the route from the city centre to the airport. It was concluded that an LRT option would be accessible to more people than heavy rail and the benefits would be more widespread (including relieving the bus congestion in the city centre).

10. Generally, the high cost of the heavy rail option was due to the number of structures that it would require in areas such as along SH20. The impact of this mode on property and business would require it to be elevated, which signifies high capital cost. At the airport, a heavy rail option would require tunneling to the planned terminal that is part of the Auckland Airport Masterplan.

11. Investing in a heavy rail line from Onehunga to the Airport would offer a number of benefits, but would not solve the bus congestion problems in the city centre or on Dominion Road – one of the busiest public transport corridors in the country.

12. Investment in a LRT line from the airport to Wynyard Quarter, would address the bus congestion issue, bring connectivity through the city and south west, address the public transport issues in Wynyard Quarter, and enable housing development and town centre improvements along the route at a similar cost.

13. The LRT route through Dominion Road and into the city achieves more benefits than a heavy rail option, adding additional capacity to the current network. This means that into the future, the resilience of the network can grow and services can be further improved and optimized to service the southern growth areas and east to Botany in the longer term. LRT provides a supportive service to the existing network, which means that the pressure and strain is spread across services, and the network resilience is retained.

14. The LRT option would support the Auckland Transport Alignment Project (ATAP) Strategic Public Transport Network and provides a one seat journey from the airport to the city.

15. It has been acknowledged by Auckland Council and Auckland Transport through ATAP, and in addition by Kiwirail, that the Southern line through Wiri and into Manukau is under pressure with all of the services coming through, which include freight.

16. Adding extra services in order to service the airport limits the future possibility to increase passenger train services to Papakura, Pukekohe or south in the future to Hamilton due to overloading the network.

17. If the southern heavy rail line was to be used to service the airport, the resilience of the network as a whole would be compromised. The reliance on one service line to the airport would mean that in the case of an incident on that line, the effect would be more widespread than if there was a supplementary network that could take some of the passenger load. For example, in the case of an accident on the line, the operators have a statutory obligation to halt all services until resolution is reached. If the rail line was the only option for frequent and reliable access to the airport, the effect of any such incident would cause major disruption across the network.

18. There is high cost involved in making the Onehunga line a feasible option for heavy rail. It would require double tracking, removal of a number of level crossings, relocation of the Onehunga station and a larger number of structures.

19. There is a limit to the service levels of heavy rail because of the number of services already running on the rail network. Heavy rail and LRT provide similar levels of capacity into the future, but LRT has the added advantage of doing that by running more frequently than the heavy rail option.

20. Additional information regarding rail to the airport can be found in the minutes from the 4 July 2017 Planning Committee meeting at

http://infocouncil.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/Open/2017/07/PLA_20170704_ATT_6723_PLANS.PDF

21. A summary is:

· Bus congestion and terminal space in the city centre are major constraints and not addressed by heavy rail

· Heavy rail provides less network resilience and operational constraints limit its capacity

· Mass transit on the airport to city corridor via Dominion Road is a supplementary service to the rail network and therefore increases the resilience of the network

· Both options can provide a one-seat ride to the city centre

· Dominion Road corridor offers service benefits for the whole isthmus and addresses access issues at each end of the corridor

· Heavy rail access to Manukau from the airport via Puhinui has a number of operational constraints that reduce its benefits – overloading, sharing with freight – for one extra station – no further catchment opened up

· City centre bus congestion remains a problem under heavy rail

· Both options cost the same but LRT has higher benefits – accessibility, connectivity, catchment, housing and development potential

· LRT serves the isthmus

· LRT provides resilience to the strategic network – more corridors / more modes.

Next steps

22. The progress of the Airport to City Centre project is illustrated in Attachment C. The NZTA and AT boards have agreed to progress to LRT, with the next steps being three business cases for route protection.

23. Airport to city centre business case for route protection – will include analysis of how and when to transition between modes, with a possible transition to bus rapid transit before introducing an LRT system, and a full understanding of implementation staging and the operational impacts of the options.

24. Southern and eastern access business case for route protection – will include mass transit from Auckland Airport to Botany via Manukau with bus to LRT transition and implementation staging, including staged additional capacity on SH20B and SH20 and a new southbound link from SH20A to SH20.

25. Improving short and medium term airport access – investigation to further refine the public transport and road infrastructure requirements to support the already identified short and medium term public transport improvements.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Benefits of LRT and heavy rail to Aucklanders	23
b ⇩	Auckland Transport Board resolution	25
c ⇩	Progression pathway	27

Signatories

Authors	Trish Wayper - Local Board Democracy Advisor
Authorisers	Rex Hewitt - Relationship Manager

Papakura Local Board

26 July 2017

Input to the Review of Citizens Advice Bureaux Services

File No.: CP2017/14554

Purpose

1. To seek approval of local board input to the Review of Citizens Advice Bureaux services.

Executive Summary

2. Council is reviewing Citizens Advice Bureaux services in Auckland following a resolution by the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee in April 2016.

3. The review will determine ongoing level of support for Auckland Citizens Advice Bureaux Incorporated and Citizens Advice Bureaux services from 2018/2019 onwards.

4. Thirty-one Citizens Advice Bureaux operate in the Auckland region.

5. Auckland Council fund Auckland Citizens Advice Bureaux Incorporated approximately $1.8 million a year which then distributes the funds to bureaux.

1. Local boards hold relationships with their local bureaux. Local bureaux report to local boards on service usage and other matters of interest to the community.

2. A briefing of the review was provided at regional local board cluster workshops on 19 and 26 June 2017.

3. Local boards informally discussed input to the review in workshops in June and July 2017 and are requested to formalise their input through resolution.

4. Analysis of the input will inform the development of options on future funding of Citizens Advice Bureaux and service provision. This will be reported to the Environment and Community Committee in September 2017.

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a) approve the Papakura Local Board input to the Review of Citizens Advice Bureaux services by 18 August 2017.

Comments

Background

5. On 7 April 2016 the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee resolved to:

“seek information from staff regarding a review of the service after consultation with the 21 local boards on the issues raised by the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board regarding Auckland Citizens Advice Bureaux Incorporated (ACABx) funding, to achieve greater equity and fairness, taking into consideration social issues in local communities across Auckland.” (REG/2016/22)

6. Since 2013 Auckland Citizens Advice Bureau Incorporated (ACABx), a board made up of nine representatives from across Auckland Bureaux, has been distributing the council funding to bureaux using a population based funding model which replaced previous funding arrangements by legacy councils.

7. ACABx receives $1.796 million on an annual basis for FY2017 and 2018, plus an annual inflation provision. Provision for this expenditure is included in the Long-term Plan 2015-2025.

8. ACABx distribute funds to local Citizens Advice Bureaux (CAB) services so that communities are provided with access to information, advice, referral and client advocacy services.

9. Support for CAB services aligns with the following:

· local board plans

· the Auckland Plan (chapter one, strategic direction one): to create a strong, inclusive and equitable society that ensures opportunity for all Aucklanders

· the Empowered Communities Approach, where individuals, whanau and communities have the power and ability to influence decisions.

10. Currently there are 31 Auckland CAB sites in 19 local board areas, with over 900 trained volunteers fielding approximately 300,000 enquiries per annum; 75% of the service is delivered face-to-face.

The review

11. The review seeks input from the 21 local boards on their relationship with ACABx, local bureaux and service provision. In September 2017 staff will report the findings of the review to the Environment and Community Committee.

12. The review will inform council’s future approach to its funding relationship with ACABx and CAB, including how responsive they are to the changing demographics and growth in local communities. It will also consider other funding models.

Role of local boards

13. Local boards have detailed knowledge of both their individual bureau delivery and of their local communities’ needs.

14. Some local boards provide funding to their local bureau in addition to the core funding allocated through ACABx. Such funding is at the board’s discretion.

15. Local bureaux are expected to:

· report to local boards on service usage and other matters of interest

· provide informal updates

· provide opportunities to input into future local bureaux service development

· consider opportunities for co-location or location in Auckland Council-owned facilities.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

16. Local boards have discussed their input to the review informally at workshops during June and July 2017. A comprehensive information pack was provided to resource and support the discussions.

17. On the basis that CAB services are not currently provided in Franklin and Great Barrier, these local boards have not participated in a workshop discussion.

18. The following questions guided the workshop discussions and where applicable the board’s input from the workshop is attached.

· What is your relationship with your local CAB?

· What is the value of your local bureau service to your community?

· Is your local bureau delivering outcomes that support the local area and local board objectives?

· Is the current funding model effective in terms of delivering what is required for Auckland and locally?

· What kind of factors should be considered in the funding of local bureaux to ensure fair and equitable service distribution across the region?

· What type of information does the board wish to receive when local bureau are reporting?

· Would you prefer that the local bureau report quarterly or six monthly to the local board?

· Do you understand the role of ACABx in relation to your local bureaux?

· Regarding CAB services, what is working well in your local board area?

· What would you change if you could?

19. Once approved, future options for funding of CAB’s and service provision will be presented to the Environment and Community Committee in September 2017.

Māori impact statement

20. From the information available for 2015/2016, Māori users of CAB services comprised between 2.5% of users in the central Auckland/Waiheke cluster to 13.2% in south/east Auckland cluster.

21. Through the review there may be opportunities to improve Māori engagement with CAB services which can be explored in the development of options for the future.

Implementation

22. The timeline for the review is provided below:

Date	Phase	Action
June 2017	Phase one - discovery and definition on the current state	Local board chairs forum; local board cluster briefings
June – August 2017	Phase one - discovery and definition on the current state	Local board workshops; local board business meetings
September 2017	Phase two - development of options for the future state	Report to the Environment and Community Committee

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Carole Blacklock - Specialist Advisor - Partnering and Social Investment, Community Empowerment Unit, Arts, Community a

Authorisers

Graham Bodman - General Manager Arts, Community and Events

Rex Hewitt - Relationship Manager

Chairperson	Brent Catchpole
Deputy Chairperson	Felicity Auva'a
Members	Hon George Hawkins, QSO
	Bill McEntee
	Michael Turner
	Katrina Winn