I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board will be held on:

 

Date:                      

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

 

Wednesday, 20 September 2017

5.00pm

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Office
Shop 17B
93 Bader Drive
Māngere

 

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

 

OPEN AGENDA

 

 

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Chairperson

Lemauga Lydia Sosene

 

Deputy Chairperson

Togiatolu Walter Togiamua

 

Members

Tauanu’u Nick Bakulich

 

 

Carrol Elliott, JP

 

 

Makalita Kolo

 

 

Tafafuna’i Tasi Lauese, JP

 

 

Christine O'Brien

 

 

(Quorum 4 members)

 

 

 

Janette McKain

Local Board Democracy Advisor

 

14 September 2017

 

Contact Telephone: (09) 262 5283

Email: janette.mckain@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

 

 


 

 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 September 2017

 

 

ITEM   TABLE OF CONTENTS                                                                                        PAGE

1          Welcome                                                                                                                         5

2          Apologies                                                                                                                        5

3          Declaration of Interest                                                                                                   5

4          Confirmation of Minutes                                                                                               5

5          Leave of Absence                                                                                                          5

6          Acknowledgements                                                                                                       5

7          Petitions                                                                                                                          5

8          Deputations                                                                                                                    5

8.1     Deputation - Auckland Teaching Garden Trust                                               5

8.2     Deputation - Transpower New Zealand Ltd                                                      6

9          Public Forum                                                                                                                  6

10        Extraordinary Business                                                                                                6

11        Notices of Motion                                                                                                          7

12        Manukau Ward Councillors Update                                                                            9

13        Local Board Leads and Appointments Report                                                        11

14        Chairpersons Report and Announcements                                                             13

15        Mangere-Otahuhu Quick Response Round One 2017/2018 grant applications  15

16        Auckland Transport Update - September 2017                                                        55

17        Proposed South Harbour Business Association Inc. Business Improvement District (BID) Expansion Boundary Map.                                                                                         63

18        New Road Name Approval for the residential subdivision by Wallace Homes Limited at 155 Wallace Road, Mangere Bridge                                                                           69

19        2017/2018 Local Board Agreement fees and charges schedule for Community and Arts Facilities and Library Room hire                                                                                73

20        Adoption of Regional Membership Structure at Moana-Nui-a-Kiwa and Approval of Casual Entry Fee                                                                                                          77

21        Adoption of the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Plan 2017 – 2020                       83

22        Auckland Plan Refresh - Local Board Engagement                                              129

23        Nomination of candidate for the Kohuora Auckland South Corrections Facility (WIri Men's Prison) Social Impact Fund Allocation Committee                                    141

24        Remuneration Authority’s Consultation Document                                              151

25        Public alerting framework for Auckland                                                                 189

26        Local board resolution responses and information report                                  261

27        Governance Forward Work Calendar                                                                     321

28        Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board Workshop Notes                                                 325  

29        Consideration of Extraordinary Items 

 

 


1          Welcome

 

 

2          Apologies

 

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

 

3          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.

 

4          Confirmation of Minutes

 

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a)         confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Wednesday, 16 August 2017, as a true and correct record.

 

 

5          Leave of Absence

 

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

 

6          Acknowledgements

 

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

 

7          Petitions

 

At the close of the agenda no requests to present petitions had been received.

 

8          Deputations

 

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

 

8.1       Deputation - Auckland Teaching Garden Trust

Purpose

Graeme Hansen, Chair, Yvonne Thomas, Trustee and Toni Helleur, Secretary of the Auckland Teaching Garden Trust will update the board on their projects and future projections of new opportunities.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board thanks Graeme Hansen, Yvonne Thomas and Toni Helleur from the Auckland Teaching Garden Trust for their attendance and presentation.

 

 

 

8.2       Deputation - Transpower New Zealand Ltd

Purpose

The Strategy Manager, Rebecca Mehrtens and Selina Corboy from Transpower New Zealand Ltd would like to discuss with the local board the Auckland strategy for the national grid and also the project work that is in the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board area.   

 

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board thanks Rebecca Mehrtens and Selina Corboy for their attendance and presentation.

 

 

 

9          Public Forum

 

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

 

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

 

10        Extraordinary Business

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

11        Notices of Motion

 

There were no notices of motion.

 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 September 2017

 

 

Manukau Ward Councillors Update

 

File No.: CP2017/16978

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       A period of time (10 minutes) has been set aside for the Manukau Ward Councillors to have an opportunity to update the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board on regional matters.

 

 

Recommendation/s

a)      That the verbal reports from Cr Alf Filipaina and Cr Efeso Collins be received.

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Signatories

Authors

Janette McKain - Local Board Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

 

 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 September 2017

 

 

Local Board Leads and Appointments Report

File No.: CP2017/16979

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       This item allows the local board members an opportunity to present verbal and written updates on their leads and appointments meetings.

Resolution number MO/2016/182

MOVED by Chairperson L Sosene, seconded by Member C O'Brien:  

Organisation

 

Lead

Alternate

Community Impact Forum for Kohuora Corrections Facility

Makalita Kolo

Lemauga Lydia Sosene

Mangere Bridge BID

Tauanu’u Nick Bakulich

Lemauga Lydia Sosene

Mangere Town Centre BID

Tafafuna’i Tasi Lauese

Makalita Kolo

Mangere East Village BID

Tauanu’u Nick Bakulich

Togiatolu Walter Togiamua

Otahuhu Business Association

Christine O’Brien

Makalita Kolo

South Harbour Business Association BID

Carrol Elliott         

Makalita Kolo

Aircraft Noise Community Consultative Group

Tafafuna’i Tasi Lauese

Tauanu’u Nick Bakulich

Tamaki Estuary Environmental Forum

Carrol Elliott

Togiatolu Walter Togiamua

Youth Connections South Local Governance Group (3 members)

Christine O’Brien, Makalita Kolo,

Lemauga Lydia Sosene 

Tauanu’u Nick Bakulich (appointed 15 March 2017)

Maori input into local board decision-making political steering group (1 lead, 1 alternate)

Togiatolu Walter Togiamua

Lemauga Lydia Sosene

Te Pukaki Tapu O Poutukeka Historic Reserve & Associated Lands Co-Management Committee

Togiatolu Walter Togiamua

Lemauga Lydia Sosene

Ambury Park Centre

Christine O’Brien

Lemauga Lydia Sosene

Mangere Mountain Education Trust               

Lemauga Lydia Sosene

Togiatolu Walter Togiamua

Local Board Leads

Infrastructure and Environmental Services lead

 

Carrol Elliott

Lemauga Lydia Sosene

Arts, Community and Events lead

Tafafuna’i Tasi Lauese

Togiatolu Walter Togiamua/

Christine O’Brien

Parks, Sport and Recreation lead and Community Facilities

Tauanu’u Nick Bakulich

Togiatolu Walter Togiamua/

Tafafuna’i Tasi Lauese

Libraries and Information Services lead

Christine O’Brien

Togiatolu Walter Togiamua/

Makalita Kolo

 

Local planning and heritage lead – includes responding to resource consent applications on behalf of board

Togiatolu Walter Togiamua (Planning)

Carrol Elliott

(Heritage)

Lemauga Lydia Sosene

Transport lead

Lemauga Lydia Sosene

Carrol Elliott/

Makalita Kolo

 

Economic development lead

Christine O’Brien

Togiatolu Walter Togiamua

The Southern Initiative Joint Steering Group

Lemauga Lydia Sosene

Togiatolu Walter Togiamua (appointed 17 May 17)

Liquor Licence Hearings – Delegation to represent

Tauanu’u Nick Bakulich

(appointed 17 May 17)

 

Manukau Harbour Forum

Carrol Elliott (appointed 19 April 2017)

Togiatolu Water Togiamua (appointed 19 April 2017)

 

 

Recommendation/s

That the verbal and written updates from local board members be received.

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.    

Signatories

Authors

Janette McKain - Local Board Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

 

 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 September 2017

 

 

Chairpersons Report and Announcements

 

File No.: CP2017/16981

 

  

 

Purpose

This item gives the Chairperson an opportunity to update the local board on any announcements and for the local board to receive the Chairperson’s written report.

 

Recommendation/s

That the verbal update and written report be received.

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.    

Signatories

Authors

Janette McKain - Local Board Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

 

 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 September 2017

 

 

Mangere-Otahuhu Quick Response Round One 2017/2018 grant applications

 

File No.: CP2017/18496

 

  

 

Purpose

The purpose of this report is to present applications received for the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Quick Response Grants Round One 2017/2018. The local board is required to fund, part-fund or decline these applications.

Executive summary

1.       The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board has set a total community grants budget of $202,000 for the 2017/2018 financial year.

2.       Ten applications were received in this quick response round requesting a total of $22,708.00 including two late multi-board applications.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board considers the applications listed in Table One and agree to fund, part-fund or decline each application in this round.

 

Table One: Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Quick Round One Response Applications

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

Application number and  applicant

Project title

Focus area

Amount requested

QR1809-301
Mangere Bridge Progressive Business Association

Towards cost of free entertainment for equipment hire including bouncing castle, public address system and advertising costs to host the event at Swanson Park Mangere Bridge on 11/12/17.

Community

$2000

QR1809-302
South Auckland Seniors and Youth Association Incorporated

Towards costs of venue hire and petrol voucher for transportation  of members to the Otahuhu Town Hall

Community

$1228

QR1809-303
Mobility Assistance Dogs Trust

Towards costs of vet services for mobility dogs for the Puppies in Prison programme for Wiri Correctional Facility.

Community

$2000

QR1809-306
Lets Get Legal New Zealand

Towards costs of facilitation and booklet printouts to be used by 40 participants from the Mangere -Otahuhu area for the Lets Go Legal South Auckland programme.

Community

$6000

QR1809-307
Family First Welfare Trust

Towards costs of instructors' tuition fee, refreshments, stationary, child careand venue hire at the Otahuhu Town Hall for the “driven to be Empowered programme.

Community

$1899

QR1809-312
Totara Hospice South Auckland

Towards purchasing of four wheelchairs for loaning to patients to use when needed.

Community

$1894

QR1809-313
Samoa Atia'e I Magele Society

Towards costs of venue hire, refreshments, koha, transport and organisers cost at 272 Massey Road Mangere for Samoa Mo Taeao.

 

Community

$2000

QR1809-314
Youthline Auckland Charitable Trust

Towards purchasing tables for Youthline - Manukau Youth and Community Centre at 145 St George St, Papatoetoe, Manukau.

Community

$1996

LG1711-242
Aotearoa Urban Arts Trust (multiboard)

Towards costs of venue hire in Onehunga and administration costs to deliver the programme and artist fees for Toi Talks.

Arts and Culture

$1216

LG1711-259
Deaf Wellbeing Society Incorporated (multiboard)

Towards costs of the weekly venue hire and some operational costs for a salary for a deaf community support worker to train volunteers.

Community

$2475

Total

$22,708.00

 

Comments

3.       The implementation of the Community Grants Policy commenced on 1 July 2015. The policy supports each local board to adopt a grants programme for 2017/2018 and the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board adopted its grants programme on 19 July 2017 (see Attachment A).

4.       The local board grants programme sets out:

·        local board priorities

·        lower priorities for funding

·        exclusions

·        grant types, the number of grant rounds and when these will open and close

·        any additional accountability requirements.

 

5.       The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board will operate three quick response rounds for this financial year.

6.       The local board community grant programmes have been extensively advertised through the new council grant webpage, local board webpages, local board e-newsletters and Facebook pages, council publications, radio, local newspapers and community networks. Staff have also conducted a series of public workshops in local board areas.

7.       For the 2017/2018 financial year, the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board set a total community grants budget of $202,000.

8.       Ten quick response applications were received, including two late multi-board applications requesting a total amount of  $22,708.00

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

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

10.     The board is requested to note that section 50 of the Community Grants Policy states “We will also provide feedback to unsuccessful grant applicants about why they have been declined, so they will know what they can do to increase their chances of success next time.”

Māori impact statement

11.     The provision of community grants provides opportunities for all Aucklanders to undertake projects, programmes, activities that benefit a wider range of individuals and groups, including Maori. As a guide for decision-making, in the allocation of community grants, the new community grants policy supports the principle of delivering positive outcomes for Maori.

Implementation

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

13.     Following the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board allocating funding for round one quick response, Commercial and Finance staff will notify the applicants of the local board decision.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Mangere-Otahuhu Grant Programme 2017/2018

19

b

Mangere-Otahuhu Quick response Round One 2017/2018 grant applications

23

     

Signatories

Authors

Catherine Bolinga - Community Grants Advisor

Authorisers

Marion Davies - Community Grants Operations Manager

Jennifer Rose - Operations Support Manager

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 September 2017

 

 


 


 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 September 2017

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 September 2017

 

 

Auckland Transport Update - September 2017

 

File No.: CP2017/19131

 

  

 

Purpose

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

Executive summary

2.       This month information is also provided about the following matters:

·    Auckland Transport’s strategic alignment.

·    The Local Board Transport Capital Fund including an update on existing projects.

·    Auckland Transport projects.

 

 

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board note the Auckland Transport Update – September 2017 report.

 

 

Response to resolutions

3.       The local board’s resolution is recorded below in italics.  Auckland Transport’s response is below the resolution in normal font.

 

Resolution Number MO/2017/149

That Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board:

a)      provides the following feedback to the Airport Access report:

i.  that the board continues to hold the view that Heavy Rapid Rail is the preferred option, a point the board has consistently advocated about to council’s governing body, Auckland Transport and New Zealand Land Transport Authority (NZTA).

ii. that the heavy rail corridor to the airport is identified in the Auckland Plan and that there was no governing body resolution to strike out that infrastructure priority.

iii.     that the current selection for light rail between central Auckland and the airport fails to consider major growth implications for areas in the south, north and west. In 2015 Māngere-Ōtāhuhu area experienced Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth of 5.4 per cent, much higher than the growth rates in Auckland (3.4 per cent). In the ten years to 2015 the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu economy grew at an average annual rate of 3.3 per cent, higher than the 2.3 per cent in the Auckland region.

iv.     that a thorough comparative analysis of the benefits of a heavy rail line from Central Business District (CBD) to Onehunga and CBD to the Airport is warranted. For instance, such an analysis must take into account recent local data on commuter traffic as well as the growing business and industry in and around the airport.

v. that the Auckland International Airport and central government are key stakeholders and have a responsibility to meet the costs for this major infrastructure. The airport is a gateway for tourism and trade for the country and the cost burden of the transport and freight link is not the sole responsibility of Auckland ratepayers.

vi.     that opportunities for public private partnership must be actively pursued to realise this transport infrastructure goal of Heavy Rapid Rail link to the airport in the short to medium term.

 

4.       Auckland Transport notes the MOLB’s position expressed in para (i).

 

5.       With regards to para (ii) it is important to clarify the process by which the decision to focus on heavy rail was made.  In 2016 both the New Zealand Transport Agency and Auckland Transport boards passed resolutions stating that light rail was the preferred option over heavy rail for future airport access.  This position was reported to Auckland Council in the Auckland Transport Alignment Programme. The Governing Body ratified this plan providing a mandate from Auckland Council. Then in March 2017 both boards confirmed an outline plan by resolving to investigate a bus-based rapid transit option before progressing to light rail options.

 

6.       In para (iii) the MOLB states that by supporting light rail Auckland Council, Auckland  Transport and New Zealand Transport Agency have failed consider economic growth in Māngere-Ōtāhuhu.  This statement requires some qualification because a key reason for supporting light rail over heavy rail was the objective of supporting economic growth. Light rail provides much greater access to public transport in Māngere.  Figure 1 is a diagram demonstrating the much greater ‘catchment’ area for light rail as opposed to both of the potential heavy rail options. Light rail provides approximately 50, 000 people with access to a higher level of public transport service.  The best heavy rail option provides only about 3000. 

 

7.       Light rail will provide more people in Māngere with better connectivity both to work in the south (i.e. the airport precinct) or in the city, supporting Māngere-Ōtāhuhu’s impressive rate of economic growth.  Further light rail provides future options for connecting Māngere-Ōtāhuhu, Manukau and Botany that would not be achievable with heavy rail.

 

8.       In summary the major engine for economic growth in Māngere-Ōtāhuhu is the growth of Auckland International Airport and the strategic focus needs to be on moving people to and from that location.  In the short term, light rail opens public transport for up a large new catchment of people while in the longer term providing better options for connections to Manukau, Māngere-Ōtāhuhu and Botany.

 

Figure 1: Airport access light rail versus heavy rail catchments

 

9.       Para (iv) states the MOLB’s concern ‘‘that a thorough comparative analysis of the benefits of a heavy rail line from Central Business District (CBD) to Onehunga and CBD to the Airport” is carried out.  Taking into account commuter traffic and the increasing size of the Mangere-Otahuhu economy, Auckland Transport assures the MOLB that analysis of this nature was completed both during the original ‘SMART Study’ and then again (with updated data) as part of the ‘Mass Transit Business Case for Route Protection’. 

 

10.     On Page 1 of the 2016 ‘SMART Indicative Business Case’ the problems that SMART is seeking to address are stated as follows:

 

·  Problem 1: Constrained access to the Auckland Airport and surrounding districts will limit its economic growth and reduce the region’s productivity.

 

·  Problem 2: Limited accessibility and transport choice undermines liveability and economic prosperity for the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu area.

 

·  Problem 3: Unaffordable and inflexible planned transport investment constrains access to the Auckland Airport and surrounding business districts and Māngere-Ōtāhuhu area.

 

11.     The problems that the SMART project sought to address are exactly the issues that the MOLB appear to be concerned about in this resolution (i.e. the growth of the local economy being constrained by poor access). Auckland Transport hopes that by referencing this plan which includes comparative discussion of light rail, heavy rail and busway options, including the criteria on which the options were assessed, we will provide the MOLB with certainty that these matters have been thoroughly analysed. The document can be read using the following below link  https://at.govt.nz/media/1927342/draft-smart-indicative-business-case.pdf 

 

12.       The information used in the  SMART study will be reviewed constantly and updated during the ‘Mass Transit Business Case for Route Protection’, that starts this year and that was discussed with the MOLB in June 2017.

 

13.     Finally with regards to Paras (v) and (vi) the MOLB’s points are noted and Auckland Transport can state that it is currently negotiating the best way to share the costs of development and after the Long Term Plan process is complete, will be able to provide a better picture of how this project may be funded. 

 

14.     It is also important to remember that the project will be ‘staged’ and will be delivered in a series of steps.  First, bus services on existing routes, including dedicated bus lanes, are being increased. Next will be the ‘Mass Transit Business Case for Route Protection’ that will work through how and when the progression to light rail will happen. Once this is further understood and funding is secured, the project will progress to building the best mass transit solution for the corridor either light rail or a bus rapid transit. This allows a flexible approach that can take advantage of advances in technology.

 

Comments

 

Strategic Alignment

 

Long Term Planning

15.     Local Board Plans are due to be adopted this month. Consultation is complete and soon local boards will start discussing their requests for projects to be funded with Council’s Governing Body. The final budget will become Auckland Council’s Long Term Plan. 

 

16.     Development of the Long Term Plan is concurrent with writing the Regional Land Transport Programme (Auckland Transport’s budget). The MOLB has identified its highest priority as developing the area around Mangere East and Auckland Transport has supported this by providing information and advice to the team organising the business case for consideration by council’s Governing Body.

 

17.     Once the Regional Land Transport Programme is completed, Auckland Transport’s budget and levels of service are fixed for the next three years. We encourage all local boards to work with the Governing Body and advocate for any transport projects they wish to have funded or levels of service that they would like changed

 

City Rail Link

18.     The single largest transport project in Auckland is the Central Rail Link. The project will have a huge strategic effect on Auckland’s public transport. Central government confirmed its funding in 2016 and a joint venture company was formed that brings Auckland Council and central government together to deliver the project.

 

19.     The project will support the already huge growth of rail use in Auckland.  Figure 1 is a graph demonstrating how rail patronage has more than doubled since Auckland Council formed.  This has significant benefits for all Aucklanders.

 

20.     The rail network is the backbone of the New Network.  Buses move people locally but for longer north-south journeys, the greater capacity of rail is vital. When the City Rail Link is completed it will significantly increase the network’s capacity and ability to move people around the city.

 

Figure 1: Rail Patronage 2010-2017

21.     Development of the City Rail Link requires some upgrades of the Southern Line and the area around Otahuhu Station will be redeveloped as part of the project.  Details of the proposed work will be made public late this year but the MOLB will be briefed by the project team on 4 October 2017.

 

AT’s actions against advocacy plans

22.     This section provides a regular report about how Auckland Transport is supporting the MOLB advocacy initiatives recorded in the MOLB Local Board Plan. In this report the MOLB’s advocacy initiatives from the 2013-16 term are recorded in the table below providing a summary of their status.  When the new Local Board Plan is developed the advocacy initiatives will be replaced with new ones for the 2016-19 term.

 

Table 1: Advocacy Initiative Status

Advocacy Initiative

Key Initiative

Status

A great public transport network that is easy to get to, frequent and reliable

Ōtāhuhu bus and rail interchange project

Completed

 

 

Mangere bus interchange project

Completed

Attractive, accessible and safe cycle ways and walkways

Linking of Windrush Close and Waddon Place in Māngere Town Centre

Completed

Completion of the Peninsula Park walkway in Māngere

This project is not being delivered by Auckland Transport

Safe, attractive and well maintained roads

Delivery of the Future Streets pilot

Completed

 

 

Local board transport capital fund (LBTCF) update

Updates

23.     The LBTCF is a capital budget provided to all local boards by Auckland Council and delivered by Auckland Transport. Local Boards can use this fund to deliver transport infrastructure projects that they believe are 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 

24.     MOLB’s funding in this term is approximately $ 1.8 million.

Projects

25.     The MOLB identified a number of possible projects and the table below summarises the projects that are currently progressing.

Table 2: Local Board Transport Capital Fund Projects

Projects

Current Status

Problem or Opportunity Being Addressed

Current Status

Upgrading the footpaths in and around the Mangere East Town Centre.

 

 

Providing better pedestrian facilities in and around Mangere East.

 Rough Order of Cost approx. $700,000 - 1,000,000.

The re-development of the Mangere East Town Centre is the MOLB’s main priority during the Long Term Plan.  A business case is being developed to test Auckland Council’s support for the proposal.

Auckland Transport has been involved.

The project will stay marked ‘red’ until there is clarity about Council’s desire to fund elements of this work. 

Building a two lane roundabout at the intersection of Bader Drive and Idyllwild Road

 

Easing congestion at the intersection of Bader Drive and Idle wild Roads.

Rough Order of Cost: (21 June 2017) $700,000 - $1 million.

This project is currently undergoing detailed design to produce a ‘Firm Cost Estimate and has been assigned to design contractors.

Widening Bader Drive in front of the Cosmopolitan Club

 

Remove the road 'narrowings' near the Mangere Town Centre that create congestion on Bader Drive.

Rough Order of Cost: (21 June 2017) $200,000  

This project is currently undergoing detailed design to produce a ‘Firm Cost Estimate and has been assigned to design contractors.

Ashgrove Reserve Cycle Route

 

Build a new improved walking and styling pathway through Ashgrove Reserve.

Rough Order of Cost: (16 August 2017) $400,000  

 

Building cycling facilities such as pump tracks or cycling training tracks in Centre Park and or Boggust Park

 

Building better facilities for learning to ride.

This project has been investigated but cannot currently be delivered.

Notes:

A traffic light code is used to summarise the status of projects. The colours are used as follows:

Green – Project progressing ‘on time’ and with budget.

Orange – An issue has been identified that may need to be resolved.

Red - An major issue has been identified that needs to be resolved

Black – The project has been investigated and the HLB has decided not to pursue it at this time.

Potential Projects

26.     During August Auckland Transport’s Walking and Cycling Team suggested a number of projects that the MOLB may wish to consider building that would improve and extend the Future Streets project including:

·  Developing safer routes along Jordan Road

·  Developing safer route along Ashgrove Road and Duggan Ave

·  Improving the roundabouts on Bader Drive

27.     It is important to note that these projects are proposals made by Auckland Transport based on a request for information about projects that could be delivered to support Future Streets and have been reviewed in detail at a workshop. 

28.     If the MOLB wishes to consider any or all of these projects the next step is to request that Auckland Transport provide a Rough Order of Cost, so that these projects can be compared to other projects, with information about potential costs being available.

Upcoming projects and activities

Consultations

29.     Auckland Transport provides the MOLB with the opportunity to comment on transport projects being delivered in this Local Board Area.

30.     In this reporting period, no projects were put forward for comment by the MOLB.

31.     Traffic Control Committee (TCC) decisions are reported on a monthly basis.

Street

Area

Work

Decision

Atkinson Avenue / Mt Wellington Highway / King Street / Gordon Street / Princes Street / Luke Street / Portage Road / New Brighton Road / Albion Street

 

Otahuhu

No Stopping At All Times, Transit Lane, Ambulance Lane, Bus Stop, Bus Shelter, P10 Parking, Lane Restrictions, Stop Control, Give-Way Control, Traffic Island, Flush Median, Pedestrian Crossing, Keep Clear, No Passing, Traffic Signal Control

 

Carried

 

Regional and sub-regional projects

 

Auckland Transport and Southern Initiative work together

32.     When Auckland Transport reported that it was introducing warranted officers onto the rail network, the MOLB asked if the project could work with The Southern Initiative to encourage people from the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board and South Auckland generally to apply.

33.     The MOLB’s request was actioned and the project team met with The Southern Initiative and has developed good relationship. The aim is that by October warranted officers will start to be deployed on the Southern Line. Auckland Transport will update the MOLB further as the programme develops.

Mangere Bridge to receive Safer Community project

34.     A key new initiative from Auckland Transport is the decision to concentrate road safety funding in certain areas. This programme is called Safer Communities. It means that road safety programmes in these areas will get more funding and deliver larger more transformational projects. The areas are selected based on need and a variety of other social factors.

35.     Although not originally on the first list of Safer Communities locations Mangere-Bridge has been lucky and has now been prioritised for this initiative.  The full details of the proposed project are not available yet, but soon we will brief the MOLB on the details.

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.    

Signatories

Authors

Ben Stallworthy, Elected Member Relationship Manager, Auckland Transport

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon, Manager Elected Member Relationship Unit, Auckland Transport

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 September 2017

 

 

Proposed South Harbour Business Association Inc. Business Improvement District (BID) Expansion Boundary Map.

 

File No.: CP2017/19053

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       This report seeks the approval of the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board of the proposed South Harbour Business Association Inc Business Improvement District (BID) expansion boundary map.

Executive summary

2.       South Harbour Business Association Inc. operates as a BID and has begun a BID expansion. This project is being done to increase their BID Programme to include the wider South Harbour commercial area. If the ballot to determine eligible voter support for the expansion is successful, the South Harbour BID programme will represent both the current and expanded areas with a combined BID target rate of $344,100 as of 1 July 2018.

3.       Under the Auckland Council BID Policy (2016), support of the proposed BID boundary map is required from the local board where the proposed map is part of a local board area. The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board support for the proposed BID boundary map is required prior to a ballot stage of the expansion project.

4.       At the end of the BID expansion project the local board will be required to approve the completed BID boundary expansion project requirements as set out in the BID Policy and provide a recommendation to the governing body regarding the striking of the BID target rate on July 1 2018.

5.       This report provides information to the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board on the progress of the South Harbour Business Association Inc BID expansion project and the proposed expansion map for their approval.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a)      approve the South Harbour Business Association Inc. proposed Business  Improvement District expansion boundary map, which includes businesses in the area defined by Walmsley Rd, Favona Rd, James Fletcher Drive, Tui St, Titi St, Kaka St, Kiwi St, Beach Rd, Norana Ave, Manu Pl and Railway Lane, as proposed in Attachment A of the agenda report.

 

 

Comments

6.       South Harbour Business Association Inc. has operated a BID programme since 2004 and is one of 48 BID programmes operating across the Auckland Region.

7.       South Harbour Business Association Inc, signalled their intention to expand their BID programme boundary at their 2017 South Harbour Business Association Inc Special General Meeting held on 4 July 2017.

8.       The Auckland Council BID Policy (2016) states there are two areas of a BID boundary expansion project that require approval by the appropriate local board as follows:

·             Auckland Council BID Policy Table 1, page 9, Partner roles: Local boards (as a whole) have allocated governance and decision-making:

o Approval of BID programme boundary maps

o Approval of BID programme boundary expansions

·         Auckland Council BID Policy Appendix 2 page 51, criteria 9: The local board pass a resolution (noted in the local board meeting minutes) approving the proposed BID programme map and support for the project.

·         Auckland Council BID Policy Appendix 2 page 63, criteria 22: A resolution noted in the local board meeting minutes approving the BID programme and boundary and recommending to the governing body to strike the BID programme targeted rate grant on 1 July.

9.       All BID programme expansion projects require local board approval of the proposed BID expansion boundary map prior to the project progresses to the ballot stage. This is to ensure the local board has the opportunity to view the map and formally approve it prior to the project progressing to the eligible voter engagement and ballot stage.

10.     The South Harbour Business Association Inc. proposed 2018 BID boundary expansion includes businesses located in the area defined by Walmsley Rd, Favona Rd, James Fletcher Drive, Tui St, Titi St, Kaka St, Kiwi St, Beach Rd, Norana Ave, Manu Pl and Railway Lane.

11.     The proposed South Harbour BID boundary expansion includes businesses and business zoned properties located within the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board. A draft map of the proposed BID boundary expansion is attached as Attachment A.

12.     Council officers are supportive of this BID expansion map. South Harbour Business Association Inc. has considered neighbouring business associations and BID programme boundaries.  There are no reasons under the BID Policy (2016) not to support the South Harbour BID expansion map.

13.     This report seeks a resolution from the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu approving the South Harbour BID boundary expansion map.

14.     If the BID expansion project is successful South Harbour Business Association Inc. will increase from 117 members to approximately 390 members. The BID target rate will increase from $81,378 to $344,100 as of 1 July 2018. This increase will be funded by the addition of new members.

15.     South Harbour Business Association Inc. have implemented a professional and detailed communication plan to all eligible voters starting in October 2017 and will continue through to the last voting date of 29 November 2017. This has ensured that all eligible voters have received a one on one visit or contact, are provided with detailed information on the proposed boundary expansion and given the opportunity to enquire more about the BID programme and ballot process.

16.     The Auckland Council BID Policy (2016) requires South Harbour Business Association Inc. to host a minimum of 3 public meetings inviting eligible voters to an information briefing and a question and answer session. This policy requirement will be completed with the last public meeting scheduled to be held before the end of October 2017.

17.     Election Services Ltd has been commissioned to provide an independent polling service for the South Harbour BID expansion ballot. South Harbour Business Association Inc. are currently preparing the ballot pack documents and finalising the business database of eligible voters to be forward to Election Services Ltd. Council officers will prepare

18.     Ballot packs will be lodged with NZ Post mid October 2017. The ballot period starts on 29 November and closes on 29 November 2017.

19.     South Harbour Business Association Inc. will begin an extensive voter campaign from early October to ensure voters vote and return their ballots by the due date.

20.     The ballot must achieve a return of voters of 25% or more and 51% of those returned need to be in support of the BID boundary expansion for the ballot to be successful.

21.     A report will be prepared by Council officers for the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board November meetings. The report will include the ballot results, an overview of the expansion project and a recommendation for the Local Board to the 2018/2019 Annual Plan.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

22.     The results of the South Harbour Business Association Inc. BID expansion ballot conducted in August/September 2017 will determine if there is a sufficient level of support for the BID expansion and associate BID target rate.

23.     The South Harbour Business Association Inc. BID programme boundary expansion project include properties located in the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board area.

24.     Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board has supported the Business Improvement District (BID) approach in the past, as it brings together local businesses collectively to invest in improvements that enhance the local business environment such as delivering better security for the business centres. A BID also has the ability to advocate and collaborate with the council on behalf of local businesses.

Māori impact statement

25.     Māori Businesses located within the South Harbour Business Association Inc BID expansion boundary map will be balloted under the same policy regulations as non-Māori businesses. A BID programme may identify opportunities for niche support or development of any Māori business sector in the area.

Implementation

26.     There are no implementation considerations needing consideration in regard to the South Harbour Business Association Inc proposed BID expansion boundary map.

27.     South Harbour Business Association Inc. will continue working on the eligible voter engagement through to the last day of voting on 27 September 2017.

28.     At the conclusion of the ballot South Harbour Business Association Inc. will pass a special resolution at a Special General Meeting (SGM) scheduled in November 2017 to present the ballot results and proposed BID expansion to members for ratification.

29.     Council officers will report to the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board demonstrating how the South Harbour Business Association Inc BID expansion project met the criteria of the Auckland Council BID Policy (2016) and provide a recommendation based on the evidence collected from the BID expansion project including the ballot result.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

South Harbour proposed BID expansion boundary map

67

Signatories

Authors

Claire Siddens - BID Partnership Advisor

Authorisers

Alastair Cameron - Manager - CCO Governance & External Partnerships

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

 



Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 September 2017

 

 



Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 September 2017

 

 

New Road Name Approval for the residential subdivision by Wallace Homes Limited at 155 Wallace Road, Mangere Bridge

 

File No.: CP2017/18469

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       The purpose of this report is to seek approval from the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board, for a new road name for a road created by way of subdivision at 155 Wallace Road, Mangere Bridge.

Executive summary

2.       Auckland Council has road naming guidelines that set out the requirements and criteria of the Council for proposed road names.  These requirements and criteria have been applied in this situation to ensure consistency of road naming for the Auckland Council.

3.       Following assessment against the road naming criteria, the road names “Tahetoka Lane” (applicant’s preferred road name), and “Amber Lane” were determined to meet the road naming policy criteria. 

4.       Local iwi groups were consulted and Ngati Whanaunga put forward three options one of which was “Tahetoka Lane” they also put forward two other names “Mutunga Kore Lane” and “Papa Totara Lane”. Ngati Whatua o Orakei and Te Runanga o Ngati Whatua both responded and were both content to defer to other iwi. No other responses were received.    

5.       The name “Tahetoka Lane”, proposed by the Applicant and the name “Amber Lane” is recommended for approval to the Local Board.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board:

a)         pursuant to section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974, considers for the approval, the road name “Tahetoka Lane”, proposed by the Applicant, for the new road created by way of subdivision at 155 Wallace Road, Mangere Bridge, while noting that Amber Lane” also meets the road naming criteria.

 

Comments

6.       The Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines allowed that where a new road needs to be named as a result of a subdivision or development, the subdivider/developer shall be given the opportunity of suggesting their preferred new road name for Council’s approval.

7.       The road to be named is a short, cul-de-sac towards the centre of the 18 lot subdivision.  Wallace Homes Limited applied and was granted this subdivision under resource consent BUN60081291 (MC_49159 SP12141).

The Applicant has proposed the following names for consideration for the road created as part of the development at the parent site address. 

 

 

 

 

Preference

Proposed New Road Name

Meaning

Preferred Name

Tahetoka Lane

Tahetoka means amber or fossilised tree resin in Maori. The name has been chosen given the word ‘amber’ has similarity in sound to ‘Ambury’.

First Alternative

Amber Lane

Given the site’s close proximity to Ambury Park Reserve and ‘Amber’ sounding similar to ‘Ambury’, the developer suggested this name.

Second Alternative

Fenzo Way

The chosen name by the developer. The name appears to be largely Italian in origin.

 

Figure One: Location and Layout of new Road

 

Decision Making

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

Assessment

9.       The Applicant’s proposed road names have been assessed against the criteria set out in the Auckland Council road naming guidelines;

10.     Mutunga Kore Lane” and “Papa Totara Lane” do not meet the road naming criteria, as to avoid cartographic issues, short roads are preferred to have short names.

11.     Ambury Park Lane” was first proposed by the applicant however NZ Post objected to this name due to being too similar to Ambury Road.

12.     The proposed suffix of “Lane” is appropriate in this circumstance, as the road is a short enclosed roadway (cul-de-sac).  Other suffixes also meet the definition, being: “Place”, “Close”, “Court” and “Way”. The applicant’s preference was “Lane”.

13.     As the Applicant’s preferred name “Tahetoka Lane” meets the criteria, it is recommended for consideration for approval while noting that the name “Amber Lane” is also appropriate as it complies with all the criteria of the road naming guidelines.

Consideration

 

Significance of Decision

 

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

Maori impact statement

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

Consultation

16.     The applicant has emailed all the 11 relevant iwi groups, and gave a two week window for iwi to respond. Ngati Whanaunga replied, and put forward three options one of which was “Tahetoka Lane” they also put forward two other names “Mutunga Kore Lane” and “Papa Totara Lane”. Ngati Whatua o Orakei and Te Runanga o Ngati Whatua both responded and were both content to defer to other iwi. No other responses were received.

17.     New Zealand Post was consulted and indicated that “Tahetoka Lane”, “Amber Lane” and “Fenzo Way”, as provided by the applicant, are all acceptable from their perspective.

Financial and Resourcing Implications

18.     The cost of processing the approval of the proposed new road name and any installation of road name signage is recoverable in accordance with Council’s Administrative Charges.

Legal and Legislative Implications

19.     The decision sought from the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board for this report is not considered to have any legal or legislative implications.

Implementation

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

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.    

Signatories

Authors

Samantha Kealey – Planner, Southern Resource Consenting

Authorisers

Ian Dobson - Manager Northern Resource Consenting

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 September 2017

 

 

2017/2018 Local Board Agreement fees and charges schedule for Community and Arts Facilities and Library Room hire

 

File No.: CP2017/18237

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       This report seeks adoption of the local fees and charges schedules for Community and Arts Facilities and Library Room hire for the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Agreement 2017/2018.

Executive summary

2.       For each financial year, Auckland Council must have a local board agreement between the governing body and the local board, for each local board area.

3.       Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board considered the local content for the Annual Budget 2017/2018 which includes a local board agreement, a message from the chair, local board advocacy, local activity budgets, local performance targets and a local fees and charges schedule on 7 June 2017. The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board adopted the local content for the Annual Budget 2017/2018 and deferred adoption of the local fees and charges schedule, pending further local board clarity and input.

4.       The board requested further clarification on library room hire and options for fees and charges at leisure centres on 21 June 2017.

5.       On 29 June 2017, the governing body adopted the Auckland Council’s Annual Budget 2017/2018 including 21 local board agreements and associated performance targets and budgets.

This report provides information on library room hire in Attachment A.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a)      adopt the local fees and charges schedule: Community and Arts Facilities and Library Room hire (Attachment A) for the local board agreement 2017/2018.

b)      note that a separate report from Parks, Sports and Recreation will provide options to the local board for fees and charges at leisure centres.

 

 

Comments

6.       For each financial year, Auckland Council must have a local board agreement between the governing body and the local board, for each local board area.

7.       Every three years a local board plan is developed to inform the long-term plan (and associated local board agreements) which outlines priorities, budgets and intended levels of service over a 10 year period.

8.       In February and March this year, the council consulted on proposed content for the Annual Plan 2017/2018. Local boards then held discussions with the Finance and Performance Committee on regional policy issues, community feedback and key initiatives that local boards are advocating for.

 

Consideration

Local board views and implications

9.       Engagement with the community, including consultation, and a number of workshops and meetings have been held by the local board and with the governing body to finalise their local board agreement.

10.     This report seeks adoption of the local fees and charges schedules for Community and Arts Facilities and Library Room hire for the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Agreement 2017/2018.

11.     The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board adopted the local content for the Annual Budget 2017/2018, except the local fees and charges schedule for 2017/2018. The board requested further clarifications on library room hire and options for fees and charges at leisure centres.

Māori impact statement

12.     Many local board decisions are of importance to and impact on Māori. Local board agreements and the annual budget are important tools that enable and can demonstrate council’s responsiveness to Māori.  The local board agreement is based on the local board plan and the Annual Budget 2017/2018 which have both been developed through engagement with the community, including Māori.

13.     There is a need to continue to build relationships between local boards and iwi, and where relevant, the wider Māori community.

Implementation

14.     Decisions on the local board agreement including local fees and charges are required in order for staff to finalise local content for the Annual Budget 2017/2018 and for operational delivery.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

2017/2017 Fees and charges schedules for Community and Arts Facilities and Library Room Hire

75

     

Signatories

Authors

Audrey Gan - Lead Financial Advisor Local Boards

Authorisers

David Gurney - Manager Corporate Performance & Reporting

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 September 2017

 

 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 September 2017

 

 

Adoption of Regional Membership Structure at Moana-Nui-a-Kiwa and Approval of Casual Entry Fee

 

File No.: CP2017/19640

 

  

 

Purpose

1.         To endorse the introduction of a regional membership structure across Auckland Council operated pools and leisure centres and approve new membership options for Moana-Nui-a-Kiwa Pool and Leisure Centre.

2.         To approve revised aquatic and leisure fees and charges for 2017/2018.

Executive summary

3.         A new Auckland Council Pools and Leisure membership structure was piloted in three leisure centres during the month of June, including at Moana-Nui-a-Kiwa. The membership strategy and pilot outcomes were presented to the board for discussion at the 9 August workshop.

4.         The customer and staff response to the pilot was overwhelmingly positive, with meaningful increases in membership, member satisfaction and staff engagement. As workshopped with the board, we intend to apply the new membership model across all Auckland Council operated pools and leisure centres, beginning in late October 2017. This will give more choice and benefits to members, allow full members access to more activities in more centres throughout the region and provide lower cost options for people that predominantly enjoy one leisure activity at their home centre.

5.         The impact in the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board area:

·    Moana-Nui-a-Kiwa Pool and Leisure Centre will become a bronze centre. New members will pay $16.00 per week for full membership and access to all functions (including the fitness centre, group fitness and swimming) at Moana-Nui-a-Kiwa and at nine other bronze leisure centres across Auckland. Concessions apply to this standard cost and additional benefits will be introduced over time.

6.         We have also approached CLM and agreed in principle that full membership at MNAK (and our other bronze tier sites) will also include membership of Toia. Staff are currently working through the details of the arrangement with CLM.

7.         Alternatively, new members can choose a local, single function Gym It (gym access) membership at Moana-Nui-a-Kiwa, for $14.00 per week.

8.         Existing members are welcome to retain their current memberships until:

·    Their current fixed term membership period ends at which time they will be offered a new, equivalent, fixed or open-term membership, or

·    They choose to upgrade or cancel their open-term direct debit membership.

9.         These changes only apply to our membership-based products and services. There will be no impact on the cost, features or availability of other activities, including: pool entry, Learn-To-Swim, spa/sauna/steam access, casual fitness, OSCAR, ECE, recreation or holiday programmes.

10.       The local board considered the 2017/2018 Leisure fees and charges at their meeting on 7 June 2017 and deferred them to the meeting on 21 June 2017.

11.       The board passed the following resolution: MO/2017/122, Adoption of the local fees and charges schedules for the Local Board Agreement 2017/2018

 

 

 

12.       That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

·      Refuse to accept the local fees and charges schedules for the Annual Budget and local board agreement 2017/2018.

·      Request officers to come back to the board with further options for the fees and charges at the leisure centres.

13.       The board requested further information on the proposed increases and the financial implications of not adopting the 1.5% CPI increase recommended by the council revenue and financing policy, or agreeing to other proposed price changes. This was workshopped with officers in August, when the board indicated its preference for maintaining current Learn-To-Swim prices and offsetting revenue through increased gym and sauna/spa fees.

14.       After further review of pricing options and financial implications, officers are proposing no change to Learn-To-Swim prices.

 

 

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a)         approves the following new membership prices for Moana-Nui-a-Kiwa pool and leisure centre for the 2017/18 financial year:

·      Get Into It (full) bronze membership, valued at $16.00 per week. This provides members with full access to Moana-Nui-a-Kiwa, Toia (TBC) and eight other council operated pools and leisure centres

·      Gym It membership, at $14.00 per week. This gives members access to fitness activities in the gym at Moana-Nui-a-Kiwa only.

b)         approves the following changes to the casual entry fees and charges schedule for the 2017/18 financial year (attached to report CP2017/11597, dated 21 June 2017) at Moana-Nui-a-Kiwa:

Function

Current Price

Change

Proposed Price

 

 

Learn-To-Swim - baby

$10.00

none

$10.00

 

Learn-To-Swim - pre-school

$11.00

none

$11.00

 

Learn-To-Swim - school age

$11.00

none

$11.00

 

Learn-To-Swim - teen & adult

$11.00

none

$11.00

 

Learn-To-Swim - squad

$11.00

none

$11.00

 

 

Comments

15.       The Active Recreation Game Plan is a three year transformation programme designed to achieve the outcomes in the Auckland Sport and Recreation Strategic Action Plan (ASARSAP) of:

·           Inspiring more Aucklanders to be more active, more often

·           Enabling our children, young people and whanau to reach their potential

·           Delivering quality experiences through an operationally cost neutral leisure network.

16.       Based on extensive sector insights, market research and customer feedback, Active Recreation has developed a range of new initiatives to improve engagement with “insufficiently active” Aucklanders. These are based on:

 

 

 

·      Offering more flexibility and variety in our membership offering, including regional access to Auckland Council operated pools and leisure centres (a new membership structure)

·      Providing consistently high quality and engaging member services that encourage and support regular activity for a wide variety of Aucklanders (a new customer promise)

17.       This requires us to be more responsive to customer needs, to continually improve our services and to use our size, scale and resources (including paths, parks and open spaces) to deliver better value and provide unique recreational and leisure opportunities for all Aucklanders.

18.       Our new leisure consolidated operating system (LCOS) will be deployed across all council operated leisure facilities by March 2018. The new system will support improvements in operational processes and business practices (including: point of sale, processing entries and payments, managing memberships, running programmes and courses, allocating staff).

19.       One significant advantage of the consolidated operation system – for both customers and council – is the ability to simplify and standardise products (memberships), services (courses and programmes) and prices across the leisure network. It will enable us to offer a new range of affordable and accessible “Get Active Your Way” memberships that include access to many more of our council operated leisure centres and activities. Care has been taken to ensure that within each membership tier there is a mix of services including pool, gym and group fitness programmes for customers with “Get into it” membership and that our prices reflect the needs of the local community.

20.       We have also introduced new single function (swimming, fitness, group fitness) memberships at each centre – to offer cheaper, but flexible, alternatives to our full memberships.

Membership%20Tiers%20Pic

Membership Pilot

21.       The membership framework was developed, tested and then piloted in three sites, including Moana-Nui-a-Kiwa, in June 2017. Feedback from new members who signed up during the pilot period was overwhelmingly positive, with over 90% at Moana-Nui-a-Kiwa opting for the “Get Into It” full access bronze membership.

22.       All three centres saw such benefit in the new membership structure (note that we have not changed the prices – only the membership service) that they have opted to carry on with the new membership types past the end of the pilot. This has allowed us to continue to evaluate the membership model against our current offer in other centres. Results remain positive: sales are increasing in all centres and the staff experience has improved measurably.

23.       The table below shows the new membership growth at Moana-Nui-a-Kiwa

 

30 June 2016

30 May 2017

30 June 2017

30 July 2017

27 Aug 2017

Total Membership

956

985

988

1039

1062

Get Into It

0

0

+53

+135

+201

Gym It

0

0

+6

+8

+9

Customer Experience at Moana-Nui-a-Kiwa

24.       We perform regular customer research, using a Net Promoter Score (NPS) survey – which provides a quantitative measurement of customer satisfaction. It benchmarks the quality of our customer engagement and service standards.

25.       Our NPS results suggest that, along with other improvements to our service and support offering, the new membership framework has been received really positively by customers.

Moana-Nui-a-Kiwa

6 months to June 2017

average NPS score = 53.5

Moana-Nui-a-Kiwa

60 days to 31 August 2017

NPS score = 63

Auckland Council Pools & Leisure

60 days to 31 August 2017

average NPS score = 34.3

 

26.       The survey also enquires about the key attributes that customers valued. The top MNAK attributes are currently:

 

1.         Programme suitability

2.         Good instructors/teachers

3.         Friendliness

4.         Value for money

27.       These are all attributes associated with the new membership services, which reinforces the positive feedback we have received from staff and through customer interactions.

Toia

28.       These new membership options apply only to council operated facilities with one exception: officers have approached CLM and have an agreement in principle that full membership at MNAK (and our other bronze tier sites) will also include membership of Toia, and vice versa. We are currently working through the details of the arrangement with CLM and expect that we will implement that around the same time we roll out our new membership framework.  Fitness membership (for 2017/18) at Toia costs $16 per week.

Existing Members

29.       One of the key principles of the new access model is that existing members are not disadvantaged by the changes. This means that current membership types will either be continued for active members and access will not change, or the current membership will be matched to an equivalent new membership (and any cost difference discounted). If the new cost is lower in price, existing members will pay the lesser amount. New members will sign up to one of the new membership types at the new prices.

 

30.       We are confident that the new Get Active Your Way membership model, coupled with improvements to our service offer and a more integrated network of pools and leisure centres (including Toia) will give Māngere and Ōtāhuhu residents better access to quality facilities, expert staff and meaningful advice.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

 

31.       Cost comparison, Moana-Nui-a-Kiwa to other leisure centres:

Proposed standard cost*

Moana-Nui-a-Kiwa

Toia

Otara

Lloyd Elsmore

Tepid Baths

Get Into It membership/week

Bronze

$16.00

Bronze

$16.00

Bronze

$16.00

Silver

$19.50

Gold

$23.00

Gym It or fitness

membership/week

$14.00

$16.00

$14.00

$16.00

$19.50

Swim visit

Free

Free

Free

$5.00

$7.80

Spa/Sauna visit

$5.80

$5.40

$5.80

$7.00

NA

LTS – baby

$10.00

$12.00

$11.00

$13.50

$13.00

LTS – pre-school

$11.00

$12.00

$13.00

$14.50

$14.00

LTS – school, teen

$11.00

$12.00

$13.00

$15.00

$14.00

LTS – squad

$11.00

$12.00

$13.00

$14.50-19.00

$14.00

Holiday programs

$25.00

$25.00-$50.00

$27.00

$32.00

NA

*Standard cost; before concessions, discounts and/or promotional offers applied

 

32.       The table above demonstrates that the proposed prices and value benefits at Moana-Nui-a-Kiwa compare favourably with other pools and leisure centres in the local community and across the Auckland network.

Māori impact statement

 

33.       Recreation, leisure and aquatics programmes, provided for the Māngere and Ōtāhuhu communities through Moana-Nui-a-Kiwa and Toia, contribute to improving wellbeing among Maori communities. Some programmes, such as free swimming, are intended to benefit local Maori as a targeted population, but this report does not focus on Maori communities or local Iwi specifically.

 

 

 

 

Implementation

 

34.       The membership model and changes to access are being socialised with Local Boards for approval during September, with the wider Pools and Leisure team currently developing and delivering staff training to support the new membership structure and customer activation process. Communications for existing members and marketing materials for the new memberships are being created. We are aiming, with local board approval, to roll out the new memberships in two phases from the third week in October.

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.    

Signatories

Authors

Garth Dawson, Leisure Business Manager

Authorisers

Rob McGee - Manager Leisure – Parks, Sports and Recreation

Mace Ward - General Manager Parks, Sports and Recreation

Neil Taylor - Senior Local Board Advisor  

 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 September 2017

 

 

Adoption of the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Plan 2017 – 2020

 

File No.: CP2017/19215

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       To adopt the final version of the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Plan 2017.

Executive summary

2.       Under the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 each local board is required to adopt a local board plan by 31 October 2017.

3.       The Act also requires local board plans to be developed using the special consultative procedure. The consultation period for the 2017 local board plans ran from 22 May to 30 June.

The local board have considered submissions received and feedback gathered from the consultation period. As a result of this consideration, the following changes are proposed:

-     Reference to additional opportunities for partnership  with Auckland Airport for skills and jobs for young people and tourism

-     Including reference to Tamaki Estuary

-     Emphasis on maintaining clean environment through partnerships with businesses and community organisations and emphasis on enhancing capacities in communities

-     Advocating to Auckland Transport on major transport initiatives

-     Adding reference to implementation of the recently adopted local accessibility plan.

4.       The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Plan 2017, which includes proposed changes, is attached to this report.

5.       Pending adoption of the plan, photos and other design features will be added to prepare it for publication.

 

 

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a)      approves the following changes being made from the draft Local Board Plan 2017

-        include reference to Ara, Airport’s jobs and skills hub; and Airport tourism group

-        additional detail and emphasis to partner with community organisations and businesses to encourage development of social enterprise

-        add reference to Tamaki Estuary

-        additional text noting opportunities to ‘protecting natural environment and heritage’: Work in partnership and advocate to businesses to encourage waste reduction and for maintaining clean environment around local town centres; Good communication to better engage, inform and educate communities and to equip them to respond to changes in waste management

 

 

 

-        additional text related to connected area:
…to advocate for the completion of changes to road corridor infrastructure to support a fast and reliable bus service on Route 32 to connect Māngere to Ōtāhuhu
…advocate to AT to improve the public transport connection from Māngere to Middlemore hospital

… strong advocacy to Auckland Transport, governing body and New Zealand Transport Authority on major projects that delivers a comprehensive transport network for young people and a working population

-        removing specific reference to ‘MO Arts Jam’

-        including reference to implementation of  the local accessibility plan.

b)      subject to recommendation a), adopts Attachment A as the final Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Plan 2017.

c)      delegates authority to the Chair to approve any minor edits that may be necessary.

 

 

Comments

6.       The Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 requires local boards to produce and adopt a local board plan every three years. This means that the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Plan 2017 must be adopted by 31 October 2017.

7.       Local board plans are strategic plans for the following three years and beyond. The plans reflect the priorities and preferences of the community. They guide how the local board:

·       makes decisions on local activities and projects

·       provides input into regional strategies and policies.

8.       The plans form the basis for development of the annual local board agreement for the following three financial years and subsequent work programmes. They also inform the development of council’s 10-year budget.

9.       Under Section 83 of the Local Government Act 2002 local boards are required to use the special consultative procedure in adopting their local board plan. The consultation period ran from 22 May to 30 June 2017.

10.    Submissions were made through the following channels and coded together:

·       online form available on the Shape Auckland website

·       hard copy form included in the household summary document

·       via email or post.

11.    In total 214 submissions were received on the draft Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Plan 2017. In addition, 24 people attended the ‘Have your say’ event hosted in May 2017 and there were 49 pieces of feedback gathered through Facebook.

Consideration of submissions and feedback

12.     The board has considered the submissions and feedback gathered. They received data analysis reports and all submissions and feedback to read on their Business meeting on 16 August 2017 and prior to that held a workshop to discuss this on 9 August 2017. Advice has been sought from staff on matters raised in the consultation period, where needed to finalise the plan. 

 

 

13.     Public feedback on the draft plan was generally positive although some feedback was given concerning things people didn’t like about the draft or thought were missing. Key feedback points are outlined in the table below. Analysis of these points, and any resulting proposed changes to the outcome chapters, are outlined in the corresponding columns.

Key public feedback points

Analysis

Proposed changes

Strong support for the outcome area of ‘A strong local economy’.

Feedback reiterated the emphasis in the draft plan on

-     skills and jobs for local young people

-     tourism opportunities in local area

-     stimulate local businesses and enterprise

-     improvements around town centres to make good quality, attractive urban environments

 

The Auckland Airport is a key player situated in the local area. Its long term vision, development plans and initiatives can support achieving local outcomes.

Include opportunities of collaboration with the recently launched Ara, Airport’s jobs and skills hub; and Airport tourism group.

 

Additional detail and emphasis to partner with community organisations and businesses to encourage development of social enterprise.

 

 

Overall responses showed strong support for the outcome area ‘Protecting our natural environment and heritage’

 

Feedback drew attention on the need to include reference to Tamaki Estuary, with reference to improvements to the Manukau Harbour coastline.

 

Several pieces of feedback raised concerns on the changes to council’s waste management policy and ways and means to improve practices in the local area.

 

The Tamaki Estuary has an overlap with the local board’s boundaries. The board has shared interests with the adjacent local board to achieve the outcomes for improving the harbour. Board acknowledged that this is ongoing work, not new.

 

 

 

Noted that reduction in waste requires changes at many levels – household practices, neighbourhoods, businesses and maintenance of streets, public places and town centres. Different people, groups, agencies, organisations, businesses and council have responsibilities in achieving in reducing waste and keeping local surroundings clean and tidy. Local board can support actions to enable the changes in partnership with stakeholders.

 

Reference to Tamaki Estuary is included.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Additional opportunities:

·    Work in partnership and advocate to businesses to encourage waste reduction and for maintaining clean environment around local town centres.

·    Good communication to better engage, inform and educate communities and to equip them to respond to changes in waste management

There was a very strong support for the outcome area, ‘A well-connected area.

 

Feedback points are very supportive of the outcome and initiatives. They emphasised transport and connectivity concerns - for range and frequencies - and the need for continued improvements.

 

 

Noting that Route 32 is in operation, however more works for improvements to the road corridor infrastructure are expected to take place.

Additional point with more clarity and emphasis:

 

We will continue to advocate for the completion of changes to road corridor infrastructure to support a fast and reliable bus service on Route 32 to connect Māngere to Ōtāhuhu.

The board will also advocate to AT to improve the public transport connection from Māngere to Middlemore hospital.

Additional point as an  opportunity:

·    Continuing strong advocacy to Auckland Transport, governing body and New Zealand Transport Authority on major projects that delivers a comprehensive transport network for young people and a working population.

There is support for the outcome area, ‘We are the heart of Māori and Pasifika culture’

Many comments conveying support for the emphasis in the plan on cultural identity of the local area.

 

Some points of feedback also noted that the plan should include and not ignore other cultures, and the wider diversity of peoples. 

The plan recognises that the local community is made up of significant proportion of people holding Pacific and Māori cultural identity.  This uniqueness is valued as a local point of difference in Auckland. The plans focus is to make best use of the local cultural assets for the area and also for the wider region.

 

The first of the three objectives states an emphasis on ‘diverse communities’ – which emphasises inclusion and importance of many identities that make up the local communities.

Opening emphasis in text is modified to place priority in stating, “We celebrate, showcase and share our many cultures, which attract visitors to our area.”

 

 

 

 

Specific reference to ‘MO Arts Jam’ is removed.

There was strong support for the outcome area ‘Facilities to meet diverse needs’ and ‘A place where everyone thrives and belongs’

Feedback noted accessible pathways and walkways, value for green open areas and making these safe and attractive for all age groups and diverse groups.

 

 

Noted that the board recently adopted a local accessibility plan.

 

Noted that LBP has, in the overall, placed significant focus on rangatahi and tamariki throughout the six outcome areas.

Additional text noting greater emphasis - opportunity to implement the accessibility plan;  that providing play equipment in parks, programmed activities, valuing and supporting active and passive recreation to make the area accessible and attractive for all users.

 

Included ‘youth’ for additional emphasis in the initiative ‘ Work with the Southern Initiative to deliver family-whanau programmes…’

Changes to the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Plan 2017

14.     The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Plan 2017, with proposed changes to the outcome chapters as described in the above table, is attached to this report (Attachment A).

15.     Other minor changes, made for the purposes of clarification, are also included.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

16.     The local board’s views have driven the development of the plan attached to this report.

17.     In developing the plan, the board considered:

·         what we already know about our communities and what is important to them

·         submissions received via online forms, hardcopy forms, emails and post as well as feedback provided by people at engagement events and gathered through Facebook

·         regional strategies, policies and references, including e.g. Auckland Plan, I Am Auckland status report 2017, Local Economic Overview- Māngere-Ōtāhuhu 2017, Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Open Space Network Plan, Local Pathways plan, State of Auckland, Marine Report Card, 2016, Te Toa Takitini - Council led initiative designed to effect better outcomes for and with Māori, Toi Whitiki – Auckland’s Arts and Culture Strategic Action Plan.

·         staff advice

·         stakeholders (29) from a range of community and sports groups and the private sector provided their input on the local board plan. See names of groups in table below:

MP Manukau East

 

The Tree Council Inc

 

Auckland Niue Ruby League Inc. 

St Andrew Commercial Building

Church in Progress MCC

Te Whakakitenga O Waikato-Tainui

Cooks Island Development Agency

Otahuhu Steering Group

Pacific Smokefree Network (PSN)

Auckland Cricket Association

Kiwi Coaches

Auckland Rugby Union

Save Our Unique Landscape

 

The Arts Council of New Zealand Toi Aotearoa Creative NZ

Otahuhu Youth Panel

Love Our Libraries

South Harbour Association Inc.

 

Respect Our Community Campaign- ROCC

Otahuhu-Mangere Youth Group (OMYG)

Mangere East ACCESS Trust

EcoMatters Environmental Trust

Auckland Teaching Gardens Trust

Heathy Auckland Together

Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga

Big Man Clothing

Manukau Rovers Rugby Football Club

Cancer Society Auckland Northland

Homes. Land, Community - HLC

Auckland Curling Club

 

 

Māori impact statement

18.     As part of developing the plan, the board have:

·         considered views expressed by mana whenua authorities at a sub-regional governance level hui and local level one-on-one hui

·         considered pre-existing feedback from Māori within the local board area

·         engaged with mataawaka by 29 June 2017.

19.     The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board 2017 promotes outcomes or issues of importance to Māori by:

·          Māori input into local board decision making project

·          Mana whenua relationship agreements

·          Supporting rangatahi leadership and co-development of actions

·          Supporting the Ōtāhuhu Portage route project

·          Kaitiaki role for projects, e.g.

-     Kiingi Tāwhiao Cottage restoration

-     Pukāki Crater future development

Implementation

20.     Pending adoption of the plan, minor edits may be necessary. This report recommends that responsibility for approving these are delegated to the Chair.

21.     Photos and other design features will then be added to the plan to prepare it for publication.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board Plan 2017

91

     

Signatories

Authors

Rina Tagore - Senior Local Board Advisor

Daniel Poe - Local Board Advisor

Authorisers

Neil Taylor - Senior Local Board Advisor  

 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 September 2017

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 September 2017

 

 

Auckland Plan Refresh - Local Board Engagement

 

File No.: CP2017/18787

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       To seek local board feedback on draft Auckland Plan content to inform the final draft of the refreshed Auckland Plan.

Executive summary

2.       In June and July 2017 the Auckland Plan refresh team provided all local boards with summaries of the strategic themes and focus areas for the refreshed Auckland Plan for their consideration.

3.       Resolutions and feedback from local boards over June and July, and feedback from stakeholders informed the further development of the content and development of the strategic framework. The framework was approved in principle by the Planning Committee on 1 August 2017.   A summary of the feedback from local boards accompanied the report to the Planning Committee.

4.       A further update on the Auckland Plan refresh was sent by memo to local boards on 16 August. This memo highlighted next steps, in particular that there would be further engagement with local boards in September 2017. 

5.       Local boards are scheduled to hold workshops during September 2017 to review the Auckland Plan package of materials, including content across the six outcome areas and the Development Strategy. This report seeks formal feedback on this content which will be considered as part of the proposed Auckland Plan.  

6.       Further Planning Committee meetings will be held in October and November to finalise draft content for the proposed Auckland Plan prior to public consultation in early 2018. 

 

 

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a)      provides feedback, including any specific feedback on the package of materials across the six outcome areas and the Development Strategy (attachment A).

b)      notes that the resolutions of this meeting will be reported back to the Planning Committee for consideration in the drafting of the refreshed Auckland Plan.

 

 

Comments

Background

7.       Auckland Council is required under the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 to develop and review a spatial plan for Auckland. The Auckland Plan refresh provides an opportunity to revisit Auckland’s most challenging issues, to ensure the plan continues to be a useful guiding document for Auckland.

8.       On 28 March 2017, the Planning Committee endorsed a streamlined spatial approach for the refresh of the Auckland Plan. The refreshed plan is intended to be more focused and structured around a small number of inter-linked strategic themes that address Auckland’s biggest challenges. The plan is also intended to have a greater focus on the development strategy.

Local Board involvement in the refresh

9.       Local board chairs have been invited to all Planning Committee workshops on the Auckland Plan during 2017.  Throughout these workshops, chairs (or their representatives) have provided early input into opportunities and challenges for Auckland over the next 30 years and feedback on the proposed strategic framework for the refreshed Auckland Plan. This input was the views of chairs only and does not represent formal local board feedback.

10.     At local board cluster briefings in February and April 2017, local board members gave feedback and information which was used to refine the scope of strategic themes and focus areas. 

11.     A report on the Auckland Plan Refresh was considered at local board business meetings in June and July.  Local boards were invited to consider their formal position on the themes and focus areas and provide further feedback. 

12.     Local board cluster briefings were also held in April and July on the Development Strategy which is a core component of Auckland Plan.

13.     Resolutions and feedback from local boards over June and July informed the further development of a draft strategic framework. This was approved in principle by the Planning Committee on 1 August.   A summary of the feedback from local boards accompanied this report to the Planning Committee.

14.     A further update on the Auckland Plan refresh was sent by memo to local boards on 16 August 2017. This memo highlighted next steps, in particular that there would be further engagement with local boards in September 2017.

15.     Local boards are scheduled to hold workshops during September 2017 to review the Auckland Plan package of materials, including content across the six outcome areas and the Development Strategy. This report seeks formal feedback on this content which will be considered as part of the proposed Auckland Plan. 

16.     Further Planning Committee meetings will be held in October and November to finalise draft content for the proposed Auckland Plan prior to full public consultation in early 2018. 

 

Consideration

Local board views and implications

17.     Local board feedback on the package of engagement material is being sought in this report.

18.     Local boards play an important role in relation to the content of the Auckland Plan through communicating local views to the governing body and providing input to regional strategies, policies, and plans  

Māori impact statement

19.     The council is required to provide opportunities for Māori engagement and to support Māori capacity to participate in decision-making. When making significant decisions in relation to land or a body of water, the council must take into account the relationship of Māori and their culture and traditions with their ancestral land, water, sites, waahi tapu, valued flora and fauna and other taonga.

20.     Staff from the Independent Māori Statutory Board (IMSB) provided guidance on the strategic themes of the plan. The IMSB’s Māori Plan for Tāmaki Makaurau was a guiding document underpinning the development of the strategic themes and focus areas.

21.     The strategic themes acknowledge and celebrate Māori culture as Auckland’s point of difference, and Māori as Treaty partners in Auckland.

22.     Māori Identity and Wellbeing is one of the six outcomes of the plan. The outcome describes the application of Te ao Māori values to the region, acknowledges the unique role of mana whenua as kaitiaki of Tāmaki Makaurau and acknowledges the foundational role of Te Tiriti o Waitangi.  

23.     Engagement with mana whenua, mataawaka, and relevant Māori community groups has been undertaken to develop the draft plan.

Implementation

24.     Feedback from the local boards will be summarised and provided to the Planning Committee for consideration in the drafting of the refreshed Auckland Plan.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Auckland Plan draft content package

133

     

Signatories

Authors

Christina Kaiser - Principal Strategic Advisor

Authorisers

Jacques Victor – GM Auckland Plan Strategy and Research

Karen Lyons - General Manager Local Board Services

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 September 2017

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 September 2017

 

 

Nomination of candidate for the Kohuora Auckland South Corrections Facility (WIri Men's Prison) Social Impact Fund Allocation Committee

 

File No.: CP2017/17404

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       Requesting the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board to nominate their candidate for consideration by the Environment and Community Committee’s Sub-committee to Make Appointments to the Wiri Prison Social Impact Fund Allocation Committee.

Executive summary

2.       The Social Impact Fund Allocation Committee (SIFAC) was established as a result of the Board of Inquiry (BOI) hearing relating to the planning designation for the new men’s prison located at Wiri, Manukau.

3.       The Social Impact Fund Allocation Committee is administered by the Department of Corrections. Its purpose is to allocate, review and oversee the social impact fund which may accumulate to a maximum of $500,000.

4.       Each triennium Auckland Council must appoint two representatives to the Kohuora Auckland South Corrections Facility Social Impact Fund Allocation Committee.

5.       The Environment and Community Committee has delegated making the appointment of the two Auckland Council representatives to the Environment and Community Committee’s Sub-committee to Make Appointments to the Wiri Prison Social Impact Fund Allocation Committee.

6.       The Manurewa, Papakura, Māngere-Ōtāhuhu and Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Boards are being asked to put forward their preferred candidate for consideration by the subcommittee.

7.       The candidate is required to provide a one page brief outline of what they bring to the role and why they should be considered.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a)      nominate its preferred candidate for consideration by the Environment and Community Committee’s Sub-committee to Make Appointments to the Wiri Prison Social Impact Fund Allocation Committee

b)      note that a one page brief outline of what the nominated candidate can bring to the role, and why they should be considered, is required.

 

 

Comments

8.       The Social Impact Fund Allocation Committee (SIFAC) was established as a result of the Board of Inquiry (BOI) hearing relating to the planning designation for the new men’s prison located at Wiri, Manukau.  The BOI’s decision included the following conditions:

·    Condition 55 - “The Minister shall establish a Social Impact Fund Allocation Committee whose purpose is to allocate, review and oversee the funds made available by the Minister under condition 52(d) for the purposes recommended to it from the Community Impact Forum (CIF) and/or the Tangata Whenua Committee.”

·    Condition 55(a) - “The SIFAC shall be chaired by the chairperson appointed to the CIF.”

·    Condition 55(b) - “There shall be no more than 7 members of the SIFAC of whom at least 2 shall be appointed by the Minister (one of whom shall be appointed in consultation with the Minister of Maori Affairs), at least 2 shall be appointed by the Council, and up to 2 may be co-opted by the SIFAC following its establishment.”

 

9.       The Social Impact Fund Allocation Committee is administered by the Department of Corrections. Its purpose is to allocate, review and oversee the social impact fund.

10.     The Minister of Corrections makes $250,000 available annually to avoid, remedy or mitigate identified social and cultural effects directly attributable to the Kohuora Auckland South Corrections Facility (ASCF) and Auckland Region Women’s Corrections Facility (ARWCF). Any unused allocation accumulates to a maximum of $500,000.

11.     Refer to attachments A and B for more information about the Social Impact Fund Allocation Committee’s membership and purpose.

12.     Each triennium Auckland Council must appoint two representatives to the Kohuora Auckland South Corrections Facility Social Impact Fund Allocation Committee.

13.     The Environment and Community Committee at its meeting held on 8 July 2017 resolved as follows:

Resolution number ENV/2017/1

MOVED by Cr E Collins, seconded by Cr J Walker:  

That the Environment and Community Committee:

a)      delegate making the appointment of two members to the Social Impact Fund Allocations Committee to an ad-hoc sub-committee comprising the chair, or deputy chair, of each of the Manurewa, Papakura, Māngere-Ōtāhuhu and Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Boards and up to two councillors from the southern wards.

b)      refer to the sub-committee as the “Environment and Community Committee’s Sub-committee to Make Appointments to the Wiri Prison Social Impact Fund Allocation Committee”.

c)      appoint Cr A Filipaina and Cr D Newman from the southern wards to the Environment and Community Committee’s Sub-committee to Make Appointments to the Wiri Prison Social Impact Fund Allocation Committee.

d)      note that the Independent Māori Statutory Board will have the right to make two appointments to the Environment and Community Committee’s Sub-committee to Make Appointments to the Wiri Prison Social Impact Fund Allocation Committee.

CARRIED

14.     The Manurewa, Papakura, Māngere-Ōtāhuhu and Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Boards are being asked to put forward their preferred candidate for consideration by the subcommittee. 

15.     The candidate is required to provide a one page brief outline of what they bring to the role and why they should be considered.

16.     The board is being asked to nominate its preferred candidate for consideration for the two Auckland Council representative roles on the Social Impact Fund Allocation Committee.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

17.     This report is requesting the board to nominate its candidate for consideration along with the Manurewa, Papakura, and Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Boards’ candidates.  

18.     The appointment process for the two Auckland Council representatives will be undertaken by the Environment and Community Committee’s Sub-committee to Make Appointments to the Wiri Prison Social Impact Fund Allocation Committee.

Māori impact statement

19.     This report has no specific impact on Māori. It covers the nomination of a local board candidate for consideration. 

20.     The Independent Māori Statutory Board has the option to put forward two representatives on the Environment and Community Committee’s Sub-committee to Make Appointments to the Wiri Prison Social Impact Fund Allocation Committee.

Implementation

21.     There are no implementation issues as a result of the recommendations in this report.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Kohuora Auckland South Corrections Facility Social Impact Fund Allocation Committee membership and purpose

145

b

Kohuora Auckland South Corrections Facility Community Impact Forum and Social Impact Fund Allocation Committee role and position descriptions

147

     

Signatories

Authors

Lee Manaia - Local Board Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Rex Hewitt - Relationship Manager

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 September 2017

 

 

Social Impact Fund Allocation Committee (“SIFAC”)

 

 

55.     The Minister shall establish a Social Impact Fund Allocation Committee whose purpose is to allocate, review and oversee the funds made available by the Minister under condition 52(d) for the purposes recommended to it from the CIF and/or the Tangata Whenua Committee.

 

a.         The SIFAC shall be chaired by the chairperson appointed to the CIF.

 

b.         There shall be no more than 7 members of the SIFAC of whom at least 2 shall be appointed by the Minister (one of whom shall be appointed in consultation with the Minister of Maori Affairs), at least 2 shall be appointed by the Council, and up to 2 may be co-opted by the SIFAC following its establishment.

 

c.         Other than the Chair, no member may also be a member of the CIF             unless that is the unanimous resolution of the SIFAC.

 

d.         The SIFAC shall determine its own proceedings but must report on its activities annually to the Minister and the Manager – Resource Consents.  The SIFAC must determine a quorum for the purpose of any significant decision or recommendation.

 

e.         The Minister shall provide a secretariat to the SIFAC – who may be the Community Liaison Officer.

 

f.          A member shall be appointed for a term of 3 years and may be reappointed at the end of any such term.  A vacancy created by a member retiring or resigning for any reason may be filled in such manner as the SIFAC determines.

 

g.         The Minister will offer an honorarium to SIFAC members for participants not members of Government agencies to cover the reasonable expenses in attending meetings.  The amount of this honorarium will be at the sole discretion of the Minister.

 

h.         The SIFAC shall cease to exist when the fund created under condition 52(d) ceases and all allocations and reviews have been finalised.

 

 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 September 2017

 

 

 


 

Role Description: Member of  Social Impact Fund Allocation Committee

 

 

Background

The Social Impact Fund Allocation Committee (SIFAC) is a newly established body resulting from the Board of Inquiry (BOI) hearing relating to the planning designation for the new men’s prison to be located at Wiri, Manukau.  The BOI’s decision included the following conditions:

Condition 55 “The Minister shall establish a Social Impact Fund Allocation Committee whose purpose is to allocate, review and oversee the funds made available by the Minister under condition 52(d) for the purposes recommended to it from the Community Impact Forum (CIF) and/or the Tangata Whenua Committee.”

Condition 55(a) “The SIFAC shall be chaired by the chairperson appointed to the CIF.”

Condition 55(b) “There shall be no more than 7 members of the SIFAC of whom at least 2 shall be appointed by the Minister (one of whom shall be appointed in consultation with the Minister of Maori Affairs), at least 2 shall be appointed by the Council, and up to 2 may be co-opted by the SIFAC following its establishment.”

In establishing the SIFAC, CIF and Tangata Whenua Committee (TWC) the Board was endeavouring to establish a structure that would ensure suitable consideration and mitigation of any effects of the Prison.  The Board advised in its decision:

“We have considered the various proposals put forward and decided that a tripartite structure is most likely to be effective, being the CIF, TWC, and a committee responsible for final allocation decisions about the use of the social impact fund.  That committee, to be known as the Social Impact Fund Allocation Committee (SIFAC) will be chaired by the chairperson of the CIF ….. will receive recommendations for funding from the CIF, and determine the project priorities and scheduling for allocations from the fund…”

For more information on the new men’s prison please refer to the Department’s website:

http://www.corrections.govt.nz/news-and-publications/wiri_project.html

 

Purpose of Role

The purpose of the SIFAC is to allocate, review and oversee funds made available to address social and/or cultural effects.


The establishment of this annual fund of “at least $250,000” is for the purposes of appropriately avoiding, remedying or mitigating identified social and/or cultural effects directly attributable to the Auckland Region Women’s Corrections Facility (ARWCF) and the Men’s Corrections Facility (MCF).

Secretariat services for the SIFAC will be provided by the Community Liaison Manager (CLM), a Department employee.

 

Term of Office

The SIFAC members shall be appointed for a term of three years.

 

Remuneration

 

Under the Cabinet Office Fees Framework the SIFAC has been assessed as a Group 4, level 1 body. This equates to a daily fee for non-government SIFAC members of $375-$640.  The Minister of Corrections has approved a daily rate of $450.

 

Key Responsibilities

 

·      Evaluate and prioritise the recommendations of the CIF and TWC regarding the use of the Social Impact Fund.

·      Interpret the SIMP to ensure that the decisions made will best address the social and cultural effects of the two correctional facilities. 

·      Communicate clearly to the CIF and TWC the reasoning for decisions made. 

·      Support the SIFAC Chairperson as required in preparing the annual report on the SIFAC’s activities for the Minister and the Department.

·      Support the SIFAC Chairperson as required in meeting any other reporting obligations as agreed.

 


Criteria for appointment

 

Knowledge and experience

·      Understanding of the Conditions relevant to their duties.

·      Proven ability to make balanced and reasonable decisions.

·      Proven ability to write in a concise and accurate manner.

·      Experience in a decision-making role.

·      Ability to cope with stressful situations and balance competing needs and views.

·      Demonstrate interest and experience working with community based committees.

 

Decision-making and analytical skills

·      Demonstrate financial acumen.

·      Contribute and lead to sound, balanced and defensible decision making.

·      Remain open minded and be willing to put aside their own opinions.

·      Assimilate and assess competing information.

·      Thoroughly analyse the information and quickly identify facts, opinions and key issues.

·      Recognise when further critical information is required.

 

 

Environmental awareness

·      An awareness, sensitivity and commitment to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi and the role of both mana whenua and tangata whenua.

·      Sensitivity and awareness of diversity within communities.

·      Sensitivity and awareness of community and social issues.

·      Ability to manage competing interests and work with a wide range of stakeholders with diverse and sometimes conflicting views.

·      Ability to listen, articulate and understand others.

 

 

 

 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 September 2017

 

 

Remuneration Authority’s Consultation Document

 

File No.: CP2017/19216

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       To provide comments on the Remuneration Authority’s Consultation Document “Local Government Review” by 15 December 2017.

Executive summary

2.       The Remuneration Authority is consulting local authorities on proposals in its consultation document “Local Government Review”. Feedback is due by Friday 15 December 2017. The Remuneration Authority wants to discuss the proposals with Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) zone meetings.

3.       The Authority has noted that they are seeking the views of councils, not individual elected members or staff.  All local boards are being provided the opportunity to respond as is the governing body.

4.       The Authority proposes the following long-term changes to the way in which remuneration is decided:

(i)         each council is sized according to proposed factors such as population

(ii)        a remuneration pool for the council is determined based on the size

(iii)       the mayor’s salary is determined by the Authority

(iv)       the council then proposes how to allocate the total pool (after the mayor’s salary is deducted) among elected members to recognise positions of responsibility

(v)        there is relativity between mayors and MPs, with the Auckland mayor being paid no more than a cabinet minister.

5.       The consultation document sets out the proposals and asks for feedback in regard to specific questions. 

6.       The proposals do not impact on expenses policies or meeting fees for resource management hearings. 

7.       The body of this report summarises the content of each section of the document and quotes the questions. Comments from staff highlight issues the local board might wish to consider. The document is in Attachment A and provides the full details of the proposals.

8.       The proposal to provide each council with a remuneration pool gives councils more flexibility to recognise varying responsibilities among members, but it puts elected members in the position of making decisions about their own salaries.

9.       The consultation document does not discuss local boards.  In other councils, community board salaries would be funded from the council pool, unless they were funded by a targeted rate.  Local boards are very different from community boards and local boards should make their comments in the context of their role and responsibilities within Auckland Council. Local boards may wish to comment on how, if the remuneration pool concept proceeds, the remuneration of local boards should be decided.

 

 

 

 

 

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a)      provide its comments on the Remuneration Authority’s Consultation Document Local Government Review.

 

 

Comments

Introduction

10.     The Remuneration Authority has circulated a discussion document with a request for comments by 15 December 2017. This is appended in Attachment A. The Authority states that a separate consultation document will be circulated for Auckland Council but that the principles in the current document will apply to Auckland Council.

11.     The Authority has noted that they are seeking the views of councils, not individual elected members or staff.  All local boards are being provided the opportunity to respond as is the governing body.

12.     Currently, the key aspects for setting remuneration for councils other than Auckland are:

(i)      a size index for each council based on population and expenditure

(ii)      job-sizing council positions in sample councils

(iii)     assessing the portion of full-time work

(iv)    the Authority’s pay scale

(v)     a pool equivalent to one member’s salary for recognising additional positions of responsibility

(vi)    a loading of 12.5% for unitary councils

(vii)    hourly rates for resource consent hearings.

13.     The report summarises the content of each section of the discussion document and quotes the questions. Comments from staff highlight issues the local board might wish to consider. The document is in Attachment A and provides the full details of the proposals.

Council size

14.     The discussion document defines council size as “the accumulated demands on any council resulting from its accountability for its unique mix of functions, obligations, assets and citizenry”.  It proposes a number of measures on which to base council size such as:

(i)      population

(ii)      operational expenditure

(iii)     asset size

(iv)    social deprivation

(v)     guest nights.

15.     For regional councils, social deprivation would not be used to assess size, but land area would be.

16.     For unitary councils, land area would be added to all other factors in order to recognise regional responsibilities.  The previous 12.5% loading would not apply.

17.     Detailed explanations about why these factors were chosen are in the discussion document.

 

 

18.     Remuneration Authority questions on sizing factors:

With regard to the proposed factors to be used for sizing councils

·      Are there significant influences on council size that are not recognised by the factors identified?

·      Are there any factors that we have identified that you believe should not be used and why?

·      When measuring council assets, do you support the inclusion of all council assets, including those commercial companies that are operated by boards?

·      If not, how should the Authority distinguish between different classes of assets? 

19.     Comments:

(i)     It is noted that prior to 2013, the Authority took population growth into account.  The councils experiencing higher growth might be expected to be faced with more complex issues to resolve than councils with stagnant growth.

(ii)     In a review conducted in 2012, the Authority stated:

The adjustment for ‘abnormal population growth’ has been discontinued, because it is felt that such growth will be reflected in a council’s expenses

Weighting

20.     The discussion document proposes weighting the factors slightly differently for different types of council.

Territorial authorities:

Population, operational expenditure

Assets

Deprivation index, visitor nights

 

Regional councils:

Operational expenditure, geographic size

Assets, population

Visitor nights

 

Unitary authorities:

Population, operational expenditure, geographic size

Assets

Deprivation index; visitor nights

 

21.     Remuneration Authority questions on weighting:

·      Are you aware of evidence that would support or challenge the relativity of the factors for each type of council?

·      If you believe other factors should be taken into account, where would they sit relative to others?

22.     Comments:

(i)     Staff do not see any issues with this proposal.

Mayoral remuneration

23.     Mayors are considered to be full-time positions.  The discussion document states that a base rate would be determined and additional amounts would be based on the size of the council as assessed above.  The Remuneration Authority would set the mayor’s salary.

24.     Remuneration Authority questions on Mayoral remuneration:

·      Should mayor/chair roles should be treated as full time?

·      If not, how should they be treated?

·      Should there be a “base” remuneration level for all mayors/chairs, with additional remuneration added according to the size of the council?

·      If so, what should determine this “base remuneration”?

25.     Comments:

(i)     For Auckland Council, the roles of the mayor, councillors and local board chairs have all been treated as full-time. There has been no diminution in role responsibilities since that was determined.  There is no rationale for change.

Councillor remuneration

26.     A total remuneration pool would be set for each council and each council would decide how to distribute the pool among elected members (after the mayoral salary has been deducted).  A 75% majority vote would be required.  The Remuneration Authority would receive each council’s decisions and would then make formal determinations.

27.     The pool could be used to recognise additional workload arising from appointments to external bodies.

28.     Remuneration Authority questions on councillor remuneration:

·      Should councillor remuneration be decided by each council within the parameters of a governance/representation pool allocated to each council by the Remuneration Authority?

·      If so, should each additional position of responsibility, above a base councillor role, require a formal role description?

·      Should each council be required to gain a 75% majority vote to determine the allocation of remuneration across all its positions?

29.     Comments:

(i)     Setting a remuneration pool for an entity with the entity then responsible for deciding how it is allocated among members, is a valid remuneration practice. 

(ii)     One issue to consider relating to the pool proposal is that the size of the pool, once determined, is fixed.  If a pool is determined for each local board, then if the number of members on a board is increased or decreased, say by a review of representation arrangements, the amount that each member is paid will decrease or increase accordingly.  This issue is acknowledged in paragraphs 102 and 103 of the discussion document.

(iii)    In view of this, the local board might wish to consider its view on the assumption that the governance responsibility can be represented by a fixed pool.

(iv)   A further issue to consider is that elected members would need to debate how to allocate the pool. The Remuneration Authority currently fully sets Auckland Council’s elected member remuneration.  Council has not had to debate how remuneration might be apportioned among governing body and local board members.  This would be a major change.

(v)    Staff do not see any issues with the proposals for role descriptions and a 75% majority vote.

External representation roles

30.     The Authority notes that elected members are increasingly being appointed to represent councils on various outside committees and bodies.

31.     Remuneration Authority questions on external representation roles:

·      Should external representation roles be able to be remunerated in a similar way to council positions of responsibility?

32.     Comments:

(i)       There are many bodies such as trusts and co-governance entities to which Auckland Council elected members are appointed.   These appointments are currently treated as part of the role of being an elected member.

(ii)      If the pool proposal allows councils to recognise additional responsibilities (or workload) attached to representation on external organisations, an issue to consider is whether such recognition of additional workload might then extend to internal committee membership, including the number of committees a member is part of. The issue is how granular the recognition of responsibilities should be.

Appointments to CCOs

33.     The Authority notes that some councils make appointments of elected members to CCOs.

34.     Remuneration Authority questions on appointments to CCOs:

·      Do the additional demands placed on CCO board members make it fair for elected members appointed to such boards to receive the same director fees as are paid to other CCO board members?

35.     Comments:

(i)     Auckland Council cannot legally appoint elected members to substantive CCOs, other than Auckland Transport. 

(ii)     In the current term, Auckland Council has not appointed elected members to Auckland Transport, but in previous terms the two appointees received directors’ fees.

Community boards

36.     The discussion document includes proposals and questions regarding community boards. Auckland Council does not have community boards and we recommend this is clearly stated in any local board response.

37.     Community board salaries would either come from the council pool or be separately funded by way of a targeted rate.

38.     Remuneration Authority questions on community boards:

·    Should community board remuneration always come out of the council governance/representation pool?

·    If not, should it be funded by way of targeted rate on the community concerned?

·    If not, what other transparent and fair mechanisms are there for funding the remuneration of community board members?

Local Boards

39.     The discussion document does not mention local boards.

40.     Most local boards are larger or similar in size to other councils in New Zealand.

41.     Local boards have decision-making and governance responsibilities over $500million per annum

Comments:

Local boards should comment

(i)    On the merits or otherwise of a bulk funding approach

(ii)   If the Remuneration Authority does decide on a bulk funding approach

a.      Should the governing body determine remuneration for each local board or

b.      Should the Remuneration Authority determine separate bulk funding for the governing body and each local board.

 Local government pay scale

42.     The discussion document discusses how the role of elected members might compare to other roles and other entities for the purposes of setting a pay scale.  It considers local government managers, central government managers and boards of directors.   These are not elected member roles.

43.     The document then considers parliamentary elected member salaries for comparison.

44.     Remuneration Authority questions on local government pay scale:

·      Is it appropriate for local government remuneration to be related to parliamentary remuneration, but taking account of differences in job sizes?

·      If so, should that the relativity be capped so the incumbent in the biggest role in local government cannot receive more than a cabinet minister?

·      If not, how should a local government pay scale be determined?

45.     Comments:

(i)    The Authority suggests in the document that mayor/chair salaries are related to MPs. The question refers to the “biggest role in local government” which would be the Auckland mayor.  By setting the salary of the Auckland mayor to that of a cabinet minister, other mayors would be scaled accordingly.

Timetable

46.     A determination setting councils’ remuneration pools will be made around 1 July in each election year.  Following the elections, each council is to resolve its remuneration policy on the allocation of the pool for the triennium.  In the years between elections, adjustments will be made based on published “Labour Market Statistics”.

Conclusion

47.     These proposals constitute a major change for Auckland Council.  From its inception, the salaries of Auckland Council elected members have been fully determined by the Remuneration Authority. 

48.     The remuneration pool proposal provides councils with more flexibility to recognise varying responsibilities among members, but this puts elected members in the position of making decisions about their own salaries.   

Consideration

Local board views and implications

49.     This report seeks the local boards’ views on the proposals contained in the Remuneration Authority’s discussion document. Local board views will be reported individually to the Remuneration Authority.

Māori impact statement

50.     The level at which elected members are remunerated does not impact differently on Māori as compared with the wider community. 

 

 

 

 

Implementation

51.     Feedback from the local board will be communicated to the Remuneration Authority. 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Local Government Review

159

     

Signatories

Authors

Warwick McNaughton - Principal Advisor - Democracy Services

Authorisers

Phil Wilson - Governance Director

Karen Lyons - General Manager Local Board Services

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 September 2017

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 September 2017

 

 

Public alerting framework for Auckland

 

File No.: CP2017/19569

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       To provide information on the Public Alerting Framework for Auckland.  The report also provides the results of an analysis carried out by GNS Science, identifying communities at risk from tsunami across Auckland.

2.       In addition, the report also seeks in-principle support for the proposed enhancement of Auckland’s tsunami siren network.

Executive summary

3.       In February 2017, the Auckland Civil Defence and Emergency Management (CDEM) Group Committee endorsed the draft Public Alerting Framework for Auckland.

4.       Following on from this, crown research agency, GNS Science was commissioned to provide an analysis of those communities most at risk from tsunami within the orange and red tsunami evacuation zones.

5.       The GNS report and the Public Alerting Framework was presented to local boards in workshop sessions. Auckland Emergency Management is asking local boards for in principle support for the Public Alerting Framework and for an enhanced tsunami siren network.

6.       Next steps involve procurement and design of tsunami siren and signage. Further information will be presented to local boards in due course.

 

 

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a)      notes the approach to public alerting as outlined in the Public Alerting Framework for Auckland. (Attachment A).

b)      provides in-principle support for the development of an enhanced and expanded regional tsunami siren network, noting that further information on design, placement and other considerations for the network will be reported in due course.

 

 

Comments

Tsunami risk for Auckland

7.       A tsunami is a natural phenomenon consisting of a series of waves generated when a large volume of water in the sea, or in a lake, is rapidly displaced[1]. Tsunami threats pose a risk to New Zealand and to Auckland. Occurrence rates of tsunami are higher in the Pacific than for other oceans because of the "Ring of Fire".[2] Tsunami waves are most commonly caused by underwater earthquakes.  In addition, these events have the potential to cause multiple other hazards including but not limited to; fire, fault line ruptures, coastal inundation, landslides, lifeline utility failures and serious health issues.[3] The Tonga-Kermadec trench is one of the Earth’s deepest trenches, and is Auckland’s highest risk for tsunami. Auckland is susceptible to regional and distant source tsunami, that is, tsunami generated from earthquakes in and around the Pacific Rim with travel time more than 1 hour as well as locally generated tsunami. Tsunami can be categorised as local, regional or distant based on their travel time or distance to the Auckland coastline.

·    Local source – less than 1 hour travel time. These tsunamis can be generated by offshore faults, underwater landslide or volcanic activity.

·    Regional source – Earthquakes in and around the Pacific Islands and the Tonga-Kermadec Trench 1 to 3 hours travel time to Auckland

·    Distant source – Commonly generated by a large earthquake from any location around the Pacific Rim including but not limited to South America, Japan, the Aleutian Islands and Alaska. The travel time to Auckland will be 3 hours or greater. [4]

Figure 1. This map shows the position of New Zealand in the Pacific Ocean within an area of intense seismic activity called the ‘Ring of Fire’. Source: GNS Science

 

Tsunami sirens

8.       Currently, Auckland has 44 fixed tsunami warning sirens across nine sites in legacy Rodney and Waitakere. These sirens were installed in 2008 and 2010 and do not meet current government technical standards[5] for tsunami warning sirens. All new and existing siren installations will need to meet these standards by June 2020.

9.       Auckland Emergency Management is currently investigating the upgrading of its existing siren network from ‘tone-only’ sirens to those with PA/voiceover loudspeaker capability. The sirens have a strong immediate effect and can prompt immediate action to seek further information. There are valuable benefits in using tsunami sirens, in particular, sirens can be used when other communications (e.g. cell phones and radio broadcasting) may not have the maximum reach or be as effective. It is commonly accepted across the emergency management sector that effective public alerting systems are those that take a holistic view. This being said, public alerting needs to be well planned, understood, and in conjunction with effective public education information and campaigns. This is imperative for a regionally consistent approach to public alerting that communities can use and understand.

10.     The limited locations of the present tsunami siren systems have been identified as a gap in the public alerting capabilities of Auckland region. Presently, Auckland is not well represented by tsunami sirens with the estimated reach of Auckland’s current sirens being only eight per cent of the ‘at-risk’ population. Auckland’s tsunami siren network is currently being considered for enhancement and expansion through the delivery of the Public Alerting Framework

Public Alerting Framework

11.     Auckland Council has recognised the need for a regionally consistent approach to public alerting through the adoption of the Public Alerting Framework. The Framework, which was approved for consultation with local boards in February 2017, has been designed to:

·    explain what public alerting in a CDEM sense is, what it can and cannot do;

·    give detail on the range of channels for public alerting currently available in Auckland;

·    highlight the advances being taken with regards to public alerting at a national level;

·    provide some commentary on tsunami sirens, their uses and limitations; and

·    assist with decisions taken by the Auckland CDEM Group Committee, local boards and partners and stakeholders with regards to the prioritisation of budgets and options for enhancing public alerting across the Auckland region.

 

12.     Auckland Council recognises the need to enhance the public alerting network, and as such, has allocated funds from the Long-Term Plan for this venture. This funding provides a starting point for consultation on the future of Auckland’s tsunami siren network and the enhancement of public alerting.

13.     It is important to understand that no one public alerting system is without fault. The Public Alerting Framework focusses on the use of multi-platforms, understanding that a holistic approach is one that maximises the reach of public alerting in an emergency or hazard event. Through this project, prioritised public education is critical. Without effective public education and engagement activities, sirens alone are not considered a standalone approach to public alerting.

 

GNS Science report

Introduction and methodology

14.     Following the endorsement of the Public Alerting Framework, crown research agency GNS Science was contracted to complete an independent analysis (see Appendix B) of those communities most at-risk of tsunami.

15.     A GIS based analysis was used to calculate the number of exposed residents in communities.  The analysis used 2013 census population data to identify the number of residents located in the red and orange tsunami evacuation zones. (see Figure 2.) For further detail on the evacuation zones and the methodology please see Appendix B.

 

Figure 2. Auckland red and orange tsunami evacuation zones as used in the GNS Science analysis

 

Results

16.     The results of the analysis carried out by GNS Science identified 217 communities at-risk from tsunami. For all 217 communities modelled, there are a total of 49,853 people at-risk from tsunami in the orange and red evacuation zones. For detailed information on the results of this analysis including detail on those communities at risk of tsunami please refer to the report from GNS Science at Appendix B.

 

Next steps

17.     Workshops have been held with local boards across the region in order to share the results of the GNS Science report and the intention to implement an enhanced and expanded regional tsunami siren network. This report seeks in-principle support for this enhanced and expanded network. More information on design, placement and other considerations for the network will be reported in due course.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

18.     Workshops on tsunami risk were held with local boards in 2016.  Following the development of the Public Alerting Framework further information on tsunami risk, including the results of the GNS Science report, were shared with local boards between July and October 2017.  Local boards were told that in-principle support for the enhanced and expanded tsunami siren network would be sought at formal business meetings of local boards.

19.     As key decision makers representing local communities, local board input into this important project will continue.

Maori impact statement

20.     There are no particular impacts on Maori communities which are different from the general population arising from this report.  The Public Alerting Framework for Auckland notes the importance of community resilience, of reaching all members of the community and of having systems in place to ensure that public alert messages are understood and ubiquitous. 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Public Alerting Framework

195

b

GNS Science Report

205

     

Signatories

Authors

Celia Wilson, Project Manager

Authorisers

Craig Glover, Head of Strategy and Planning                                  

John Dragicevich, Civil Defence Emergency Management Director

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 September 2017

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 September 2017

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 September 2017

 

 

Local board resolution responses and information report

 

File No.: CP2017/16982

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       This report provides a summary of resolution responses and information reports for circulation to the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board.

 

Update on Auckland Council’s Safeswim programme

2.       The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board received the update on Auckland Council’s Safeswim programme memo on 11 August 2017 (Attachment A).

3.       Key public messages on the Safeswim programme will be circulated to local board communications teams and local board members closer to the campaign launch in November 2017.

 

 

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board notes the memo on the update on Auckland Council’s Safeswim programme.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Memo - Update on Auckland Council's Safeswim programme

263

    

Signatories

Authors

Janette McKain - Local Board Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 September 2017

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 



Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 September 2017

 

 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 September 2017

 

 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 September 2017

 

 


 


 


 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 September 2017

 

 

Governance Forward Work Calendar

 

File No.: CP2017/16984

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       To present the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board with its updated governance forward work calendar.

Executive Summary

2.       The governance forward work calendar for the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board is in Attachment A. The calendar is updated monthly, reported to business meetings and distributed to council staff.

 

3.       The governance forward work calendars were introduced in 2016 as part of Auckland Council’s quality advice programme and aim to support local boards’ governance role by:

·    ensuring advice on meeting agendas is driven by local board priorities

·    clarifying what advice is expected and when

·    clarifying the rationale for reports.

 

4.       The calendar also aims to provide guidance for staff supporting local boards and greater transparency for the public.

 

 

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board notes the Governance Forward Work Calendar.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Governance Calendar

323

     

Signatories

Authors

Janette McKain - Local Board Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 September 2017

 

 

 

Date

Topic

Governance Role

Purpose

Meeting

20/09/2017

Adoption of the local fees and charges schedules for the Local Board Agreement 2017/2018

Setting direction / priorities / budget

Formal adoption

Business Meeting

18/10/2017

Mangere Citizens Advice Bureau agency services in Toia

Keeping informed

Receive update on progress

Report requested/pending

18/10/2017

Auckland Transport/Future Streets

Oversight and Monitoring

Check in on performance/ inform future direction

Report requested/pending

18/10/2017

Public Forum - Mangere Domain Change Room Facilities

Oversight and Monitoring

Receive update on progress

Report requested/pending

18/10/2017

Accessibility Report Options

Oversight and Monitoring

Provide direction on preferred approach

Business Meeting

18/10/2017

Mangere Mountain Education Trust Statement of Intent

Setting direction / priorities / budget

Formal approval

Business Meeting

18/10/2017

Mangere Mountain Education Trust Funding Agreement

Setting direction / priorities / budget

Formal approval

Business Meeting

18/10/2017

Auckland Transport - update on public transport on Westney Rd, Timberley Rd, and Verisimmo Drive south

Oversight and Monitoring

Information dissemination

Business Meeting

18/10/2017

Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board Area Plan Monitoring report - Place-based spatial planning programme

Input to regional decision making

Receive update on progress

Business Meeting

13/12/2017

Area Plan Progress Report

Oversight and Monitoring

Receive update on progress

Report requested/pending

13/12/2017

Boarding Houses - Report on options to manage proliferation and density issues

Oversight and Monitoring

Define board position and feedback

Report requested/pending

13/12/2017

Mangere Town Centre Canopy Project

Local initiatives / Specific decisions

Check in on performance/ inform future direction

Report requested/pending

13/12/2017

Financial Planning for Extreme Weather Events

Oversight and Monitoring

Information dissemination

Report requested/pending

13/12/2017

Ōtāhuhu arts and culture report - community needs assessment and options analysis

Local initiatives / Specific decisions

Receive update on progress

Report requested/pending

13/12/2017

Application from D65Fitness - FITLIFE Dome Project

Keeping informed

Receive update on progress

Report requested/pending

13/12/2017

Shopping Trolleys in Mangere

Oversight and Monitoring

Receive update on progress

Report requested/pending

13/12/2017

Deputation - Mangere East HUB Development Project

Local initiatives / Specific decisions

Define opportunities/potential approach

Report requested/pending

13/12/2017

Food Truck Application

Local initiatives / Specific decisions

Formal approval

Business Meeting

 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 September 2017

 

 

Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board Workshop Notes

 

File No.: CP2017/16983

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       Attached are the notes for the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board workshops held on 2, 9, 23 and 30 August 2017.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board workshop notes from the workshops held 2, 9, 23 and 30 August 2017.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Workshop Notes 2 August

327

b

Workshop Notes 9 August

329

c

Workshop Notes 23 August

331

d

Workshop Notes 30 August

333

    

Signatories

Authors

Janette McKain - Local Board Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 September 2017

 

 


 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 September 2017

 

 


 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 September 2017

 

 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 September 2017

 

 


 

    

    



[1] Berryman, K. et al. (2005) Review of Tsunami Hazard and Risk in New Zealand. Dunedin, Institute of Geological and Nuclear Sciences Limited.

[2] GNS Science, Tsunami in New Zealand data accessed on 26th June 2017 from https://www.gns.cri.nz/Home/Our-Science/Natural-Hazards/Tsunami/Tsunami-in-New-Zealand

[3] ACDEM (2016), Auckland Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group Plan 2016-2021

[4] Auckland Council, Natural hazards and emergencies- Tsunami data accessed on 26th June 2017 from http://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/en/environmentwaste/naturalhazardsemergencies/hazards/pages/tsunamihazardsinauckland.aspx

 

 

[5] [5] MCDEM (2014), Tsunami Warning Sirens Technical Standard [TS 03/14]