Ōrākei Local Board

19 October 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 - Ngati Whatua Ōrākei, Sports and Wellbeing Facility 5

8.2 Deputation - Heather Harris, Auckland War Memorial Museum 6

9 Public Forum 6

9.1 Public Forum - Floyd Ormsby, Liston Park 6

10 Extraordinary Business 6

11 Notices of Motion 7

12 Ōrākei Local Board grant applications for local grants round one 2017/2018 9

13 Auckland Transport Update – October 2017 to the Ōrākei Local Board 99

14 Adoption of the Ōrākei Local Board Plan 2017 105

15 Road Name Approval for a New Private Road at 36 Mainston Road, Remuera 113

16 Feedback on the proposed direction of the draft Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 119

17 Review of representation arrangements - process 125

18 Remuneration Authority consultation document 137

19 Regional Facilities Auckland Fourth Quarter Performance Report for the quarter ending 30 June 2017 173

20 Chairman’s Report – Colin Davis 201

21 Board Member Report - Kit Parkinson 217

22 Board Member Report - Troy Churton 275

23 Board Member Report - Carmel Claridge 289

24 Board Member Report - Ros Rundle 305

25 Board Member Report - David Wong 311

26 Governance Forward Work Calendar 315

27 Ōrākei Local Board Workshop Notes 321

28 Resolutions Pending Action 331

29 Consideration of Extraordinary Items

PUBLIC EXCLUDED

30 Procedural Motion to Exclude the Public 339

C1 Liston Park Development Options 339

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 minutes of Ōrākei Local Board meeting, held on Thursday, 21 September 2017 be confirmed 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 Ōrākei 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 - Ngati Whatua Ōrākei, Sports and Wellbeing Facility

Purpose

1. To deliver a presentation to the Board during the Deputation segment of the business meeting.

Executive summary

2. Renata Blair and Marama Royal, Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei Trust, Clay Hawke and Andrew Brown, Whai Maia Ltd (Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei Trust subsidiary), Mary Gilman, Okahu Bay Bowling Club, Matt Rua and Tama Morehu, Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei Volcanoes Sports Club and Ngahuia Hawke, Ōrākei Marae will be in attendance to discuss its plan to develop a multi-sports and community activities centre in the local area.

Recommendation

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a) thank Renata Blair and Marama Royal, Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei Trust, Clay Hawke and Andrew Brown, Whai Maia Ltd (Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei Trust subsidiary), Mary Gilman, Okahu Bay Bowling Club, Matt Rua and Tama Morehu, Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei Volcanoes Sports Club and Ngahuia Hawke, Ōrākei Marae for their attendance and presentation.

8.2 Deputation - Heather Harris, Auckland War Memorial Museum

Purpose

1. To deliver a presentation to the Board during the Deputation segment of the business meeting.

Executive summary

2. Heather Harris, Chief Operating Officer, Auckland War Memorial Museum will be in attendance to discuss some of the upcoming changes at the museum as part of its Future Museum strategy.

Recommendation

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a) thanks Heather Harris, Chief Operating Officer, Auckland War Memorial Museum for her 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.

9.1 Public Forum - Floyd Ormsby, Liston Park

Purpose

1. To deliver a presentation to the Board during the Public Forum segment of the business meeting.

Executive summary

2. Floyd Ormsby will be in attendance to present a presentation to the Board outlining his concerns regarding the poor condition of the Liston Park clubroom facility and grounds.

Recommendation

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a) thank Floyd Ormsby for his attendance and presentation.

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.

Ōrākei Local Board

19 October 2017

Ōrākei Local Board grant applications for local grants round one 2017/2018

File No.: CP2017/20588

Purpose

1. The purpose of the report is to present applications received for Ōrākei Local Grants Round One 2017/2018.

Executive summary

2. The Ōrākei Local Board has set a total community grants budget of $220,000 for the 2017/2018 financial year. A total of $7,030 was allocated for quick response round one leaving a total of $212,970.

3. Twenty-four applications were received for Ōrākei Local Grants Round One, with a total requested of $221,150.

Recommendations That the Ōrākei Local Board: a) fund or part fund, or decline each application listed in Table One:
	Application ID	Organisation	Main focus	Requesting funding for	Amount requested	Eligibility
	LG1812-111	Ellerslie Theatrical Society Incorporated	Arts and culture	Towards venue hire for Ellersllie Memorial Hall.	$10,000.00	Eligible
	LG1812-108	Aphasia New Zealand (AphasiaNZ) Charitable Trust	Community	Towards costs of service delivery and enabling people with and affected by aphasia to access services and travel to and from the support service.	$5,000.00	Eligible
	LG1812-109	Saint Chads Church	Community	Funding for expenses in Nairobi including the hire of two vans with drivers, donations to the Nairobi families and, new tshirts for the Spur Afrika children.	$5,000.00	Eligible
	LG1812-120	St Heliers and Community Support trust	Community	Towards the wages for the manager of the Saint Heliers Community Centre.	$9,400.00	Eligible
	LG1812-121	Stonefields Community Network Incorporated	Community	Towards the cost of newsletter production and website development for the Stonefields Community Network.	$2,000.00	Eligible
	LG1812-124	The Selwyn College Family Centre trading as Carol White Family Centre Incorporated	Community	Towards travel vouchers for participants, basic supplies for infants and support for volunteers for the refugee family programme.	$10,000.00	Eligible
	LG1812-125	Auckland Sexual Abuse Help Foundation Charitable Trust	Community	A contribution towards wages for the cost to run the crisis counselling service.	$10,000.00	Eligible
	LG1812-106	The Lonely Miaow Association Incorporated	Environment	As a contribution towards vet fees for the “Lonely Miaow” programme.	$750.00	Eligible
	LG1812-116	Eastern Songbird Project Incorporated	Environment	Towards communications and provision of traps for the Eastern Songbird programme.	$15,000.00	Eligible
	LG1812-101	The Remuera Business Association Incorporated	Events	Towards costs for Chinese New Year 2018, including event management and entertainment; ‍and Bastille Day 2018, including promotion and entertainment.	$20,000.00	Eligible
	LG1812-105	Ellerslie Business Association Incorporated	Events	Towards costs for the Ellerslie Fairy and Pirate Festival, Ellerslie Santa Parade and “ARTerslie” events.	$20,000.00	Eligible
	LG1812-128	Christian City Church Auckland trading as C3	Events	Towards costs for the stage, sound, lighting, generators and toilets for Christmas in the Park on 3 December 2017.	$30,000.00	Eligible
	LG1812-127	The Condor Rugby Football Club Incorporated	Events, Sport and recreation	Towards the infrastructure costs of running the world school rugby sevens held at Sacred Heart College, Glendowie held on 30 November to 3 December 2017.	$10,000.00	Eligible
	LG1812-103	Alby Enterprises Ltd	Historic Heritage	Towards the design and installation of a Bruce McLaren commemorative display.	$3,000.00	Eligible
	LG1812-113	Parish of Ellerslie	Historic Heritage	Towards a quantity survey and feasibility report into heritage window and church preservation.	$12,500.00	Eligible
	LG1812-102	FutureDreams Limited	Sport and recreation	Towards two inflatable paddle boards, a propeller guard for the safety boat and free “oceanclinics” at all the nine high tide events for the “Kohi Summer Swim Series” from 2 November 2017 to 8 March 2018.	$3,500.00	Eligible
	LG1812-104	New Zealand Wheelchair Rugby	Sport and recreation	Towards costs for hosting the International Wheelchair Rugby Federation Asia Oceania Zone Championship event from August to September 2017.	$10,000.00	Eligible – application was received by the local board as an urgent request in August.
	LG1812-107	Crow Marketing Communications Limited	Sport and recreation	Rental costs for rent at the Ōrākei Community Centre.	$1,000.00	Eligible
	LG1812-110	Auckland Basketball Services Limited	Sport and recreation	Hall hire for the ASB Stadium for the school development programme from 7 February 2018 to 6 July 2018	$10,000.00	Eligible
	LG1807-105 Multiboard	LifeKidz Trust	Community	Towards the after school and school holiday programme including wages of youth workers, and activity resources, from October 2017 to January 2018.	$2,500.00	Eligible
	LG1807-111 Multiboard	Royal New Zealand Foundation of the Blind	Community	Towards the purchase of multi-license digital talking books.	$4,000.00	Eligible
	LG1811-111 Multiboard	OneTree House Limited	Community	Towards costs of development of translations and the design requirements for print ready artwork.	$10,000.00	Eligible
	LG1803-124 Multiboard	New Zealand Women Limited	Events	Towards costs of performers fees, advertising, equipment and operational costs for Elvis in the Gardens 2018.	$10,000.00	Eligible
	LG1806-138 Multiboard	NZ Dance Advancement	Arts and culture	Towards the costs to create, rehearse and deliver the Youth Engagement performances and workshops	$7,500.00	Eligible
				Total	$221,150.00

Comments

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

5. The local board grants programme sets out:

· local board priorities

· lower priorities for funding

· exclusions

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

· any additional accountability requirements.

6. The Ōrākei Local Board will operate two tree protection, two quick response and two local grant rounds for this financial year. The first quick response round closed on 1 September 2017.

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

8. For the 2017/2018 financial year, the Ōrākei Local Board set a total community grants budget of $220,000. A total of $7,030 was allocated for quick response round one leaving a total of $212,970.

9. The local grants round one closed on 1 September 2017 and 24 applications were received with a total requested of $221,150.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

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

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

12. A summary of each application is attached (see Attachment B).

Māori impact statement

13. The provision of community grants provides opportunities for all Aucklanders to undertake projects, programmes, activities that benefit a wider range of individuals and groups, including Māori. 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 Māori.

Implementation

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

15. Following the Ōrākei Local Board allocating funding for this grant round, Commercial and Finance staff will notify the applicants of the local board’s decision.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Ōrākei Local Board Grant Programme 2017/2018	15
b ⇩	Ōrākei Local Grants 2017/2018 grant applications	19

Signatories

Author

Marion Davies - Community Grants Operations Manager

Authorisers

Jennifer Rose - Operations Support Manager

Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Ōrākei Local Boards

Ōrākei Local Board

19 October 2017

Ōrākei Local Board

19 October 2017

Auckland Transport Update – October 2017 to the Ōrākei Local Board

File No.: CP2017/21823

Purpose

1. This report:

a) provides an update on the current status of the Local Board Transport Capital Fund

b) responds to requests on transport-related matters

c) provides a summary of consultation material sent to the Ōrākei Local Board, and

d) provides information on transport related matters of specific application and interest to the Ōrākei Local Board and its community.

Executive summary

2. This report:

a) provides an update on the current status of Local Board Transport Capital Fund

b) seeks approval to utilise the Local Board Transport Capital Fund to install cycle racks in Selwyn Reserve, Mission Bay

c) responds to resolutions on request that the Board’s written feedback be sought on all matters; redundant markings at Allum Street, Kohimarama; Saint Vincent Avenue, Remuera angle parking; 400 St Johns Road and extending bus services to Meadowbank Station

d) provides a summary of consultation material sent to the Board on the Glen Innes to Tāmaki Drive Shared Path, Ngapipi Bridge widening and Link to Glen Innes Cycle way and,

e) provides transport related information on matters of specific application and interest to the Ōrākei Local Board and its community.

Recommendation

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a) approve $5,000 from the Local Board Transport Capital Fund for the installation of two cycle racks in Selwyn Reserve, Mission Bay.

Comments

Local board transport capital fund (LBTCF) update

3. 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 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.

4. The Ōrākei Local Board has approximately $600,000 per annum of discretionary funding for transport related capital projects.

5. Auckland Transport encourages all Local Board’s to identify potential projects as early as possible to ensure delivery within the current electoral term.

6. The Local Board’s current Local Board Transport Capital Fund projects are summarised in the table below:

Project Name	Opportunity	Current Status	Funds Allocated
Shared path - Gowing Drive and Ōrākei Spine	Connect the community to the Glen Innes to Tāmaki Shared Path. Currently no direct north and south link across the Shared Path to local schools, shopping and community facilities.	Ōrākei Local Board approved up to $2,000,000 of Capital Funding to the project. The Feasibility Study commissioned found the link to be technically feasible with a total project cost estimated of $9,770,000. The Ōrākei Local Board is taking this to the Governing Body for inclusion in the Long Term Plan (LTP) early November, 2017.	$2,000,000
Walkway Connection –Wilson’s Beach to Shore Road Reserve	Walkway connection between Wilson’s Beach and Shore Road Reserve.	The Local Board allocated $30,000 to enable the development of the concept plans. This project has been handed over to Auckland Council Community Facilities to commence when resources are available.	$30,000
Elwood Place Footpath Extension	Connect the existing footpaths at Elwood Place and the park.	A resolution was approved in August 2017 requesting Auckland Transport to proceed to detailed design. This allows for a 2 metre wide path, removal of trees, installation of a fence and replanting. It does not allow for relocation of underground services as none are known at this stage.	$63,000
537 Selwyn Reserve Walkway	Close the gap in the current walking network in Selwyn Reserve	A resolution was approved in August 2017 requesting Auckland Transport to proceed to detailed design. It should be noted that all the remaining path along the Mission Bay frontage is concrete with a small area of basalt stone paving just to the west of this site. It may be preferable to look for a concrete solution to match the surrounding area. Neither option allows for relocation of underground services as none are known at this stage. There are possible consent issues with these works due to the proximity to the adjacent historic pohutakawa trees.	$148,000
Selwyn Reserve Cycle Racks	Improve amenities for cyclists in the park	The Firm Estimate of Cost (FEC) for two bike racks in Selwyn Reserve is $5,000. Approval to proceed to instillation of two cycle racks in Selwyn Reserve is found under resolution above.	Approval to expend found in resolution above
Landing Entrance Upgrade	Improved entrance way to “The Landing” on Tāmaki Drive	The design for the Landing has been completed and has a Firm Estimate of Cost (FEC) of $140,000. Construction work for a new marine sports center at the marina has started with completion due in the first quarter of 2018. The landing entrance construction will need to be delayed until completion of the current works.	On-hold

Financials update

Ōrākei Local Board Transport Capital Fund Financial Summary
Total Funds Available in current political term	$2,385,895
Amount committed to date on projects approved for design and/or construction	$600,792
Remaining Budget left	$1,785,103

Progress on the Board’s Advocacy Issues

7. The number one advocacy initiative of the Ōrākei Local Board is to develop a cycling and pedestrian feeder link from the Gowing Drive area to the Glen Innes to Tāmaki Drive Shared Path (the Shared Path). The main purpose of the connection is to provide a safe and direct transport connection between the Gowing Drive area and the Kohimarama area by crossing the Shared Path.

8. The Ōrākei Local Board committed up to $2 million of discretionary local board funding for the feeder link and has requested Auckland Transport to utilise the Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF) to investigate the feasibility of an underpass at 92 Gowing Drive.

9. Auckland Transport undertook a feasibility study and found a link connecting the Shared Path and facilities and amenities north of the railway line was crucial to the full realisation of the benefits to the Glen Innes to Tāmaki Drive Shared Path. While an underpass is technically feasible at the identified location, there is still considerable funding shortfall.

10. The feasibility study provides the necessary information for the Local Board to seek funding from the Governing Body.

Responses to resolutions

11. The Resolution is recorded below in bold. Auckland Transport’s response is below the Resolution in normal font.

12. requests Auckland Transport to report on using the Local Board Transport Capital Fund as detailed on the ‘Local Board Transport Capital Fund Proposal Form’ (Attachment A) for the re-design of street parking on the top half of the western side of Saint Vincent Avenue, Remuera.

13. Following Auckland Transports Code of Practice, Saint Vincent Avenue, Remuera is not wide enough to accommodate angle parking. Therefore, this project is unable to progress for funding using the Local Board Transport Capital Fund.

14. requests that the road markings relating to the previous Kea Crossing at Allum Street, Kohimarama be fully erased for safety reasons.

15. The redundant markings at Allum Street, Kohimarama have now been removed. There is some light “ghosting”, this is expected and will decrease with time.

16. requests officers to immediately progress the option of granting a community lease over the Council owned property at 400 St Johns Road (previous Scarborough Yard site) to Meadowbank Pony Club and Riding for the Disabled and request officers to examine the possibility of the Meadowbank Pony Club using the adjacent Scarbo’s site buildings at 400 St Johns Road during the construction phase of the Glen Innes to Tāmaki Drive Shared Path.

17. Auckland Council owns the land at 400 St Johns Road. The site (and its buildings) are currently fully utilised by Auckland Transport (AT), Auckland Tourism, Events and Economic Development (ATEED) and Central Rail Link (CRL). However, Auckland Transport does not have a long term requirement for this site, so any decision regarding its use sit with Auckland Council.

18. Auckland Transport Major Projects team will examine the project impacts of the Meadowbank Pony Club using the adjacent Scarbo’s site buildings at 400 St Johns Road during the construction phase of the Glen Innes to Tāmaki Drive Shared Path.

19. request Auckland Transport to examine the feasibility of extending current bus services to connect with train services at Meadowbank Station, including the installation of a new bus stop to connect with train services. That Auckland Transport report on the impact on current parking facilities at Meadowbank Train Station and adjacent residential streets from the addition of a bus stop, and bus turning capability at the Meadowbank Train Station.

20. Auckland Transport is in the process of commissioning additional work, to fully explore this matter and come up with a formal design for consideration. The timelines for this are uncertain due to many other work elements that are being progressed at the present time. AT will keep the LB updated as appropriate.

21. seek assurance that the Ōrākei Local Board’s position as governors in local matters will, in future, be fully recognised by Auckland Transport and that the Ōrākei Local Board’s written feedback be sought on all matters with a stated deadline in accordance with the Auckland Council’s Governing Body’s Statement of Intent for Auckland Transport which requires Auckland Transport to provide local boards with timely and relevant reporting and information.

22. Section 17(1)(a) of the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 (LGACA) gives local boards decision making responsibility only in regards to the non-regulatory activities of Auckland Council that they are allocated by the governing body of Auckland Council. Furthermore as per section 15(1)(ca) of LGACA decision making in regards to the governance of CCO’s is reserved to the governing body and cannot be allocated to local boards.

23. However, on the basis of the above legislation Auckland Council have resolved to direct Auckland Transport, in working with local boards, to: ensure that local boards have a strong governance role in determining the ‘look and feel’ of town centres and streetscapes, in line with their allocation of non-regulatory decision-making.

24. This would only extend to what Auckland Council’s decision making powers are in regards to town centres and streetscapes. It cannot cross over into any decision making powers of Auckland Transport nor does it give the powers to “govern” but rather a role as far as their “allocation of non-regulatory decision-making” intends them to.

25. Auckland Transport, as the Road Controlling Authority, gives an assurance that it will work with the Ōrākei Local Board to deliver mutually satisfactory outcomes around the placemaking aspects of projects within the road corridor in the Ōrākei Local Board’s area.

Consultation

26. The local board’s views will be taken into account during consultation on any proposed schemes. The following were consulted in August and September 2017:

· Glen Innes to Tāmaki Drive Shared Path and Ngapipi Bridge widening consultation- Specifically, the alignment of the route for section 4 along the coastline and the connection to Ngapipi Road to determine the best possible positioning, and design elements and features.

· Link to Glen Innes Cycleway - includes dedicated cycle routes along Morrin Road, Merton Road, Apirana Avenue, Point England Road, Taniwha Street, Line Road, and Stonefields Avenue.

· No Stopping at All Times restrictions (Broken Yellow Lines) on the traffic islands at the intersection of Crossfield Road and Washington Avenue in Glendowie.

Traffic Control Committee (TCC) decisions

Street Name	Suburb	Type of Report	Nature Of Restriction
Tāmaki Drive, Sunset Road	Ōrākei	Permanent Traffic and Parking changes Combined	No Stopping At All Times, Bus Stop, Edge Line, Flush Median
Tāmaki Drive, Selwyn Avenue	Mission Bay	Permanent Traffic and Parking changes Combined	No Stopping At All Times, Bus Stop, Cycle Lane, Stop Control, Flush Median, Edge Line
Rakau Street	Remuera	Temporary Traffic and Parking changes (Works)	Residential Construction - Loading Zone

Consideration

Local board views and implications

27. The local board’s views will be taken into account during consultation on any proposed schemes.

Māori impact statement

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

Health and safety implications

29. Health and Safety is an inherent part of all Auckland Transport projects. Any specific concerns will be covered as part of individual project reporting.

Implementation

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

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Author	Felicity Merrington, Elected Member Relationship Manager
Authoriser	Jonathan Anyon, Manager Elected Member Relationship Unit

Ōrākei Local Board

19 October 2017

Adoption of the Ōrākei Local Board Plan 2017

File No.: CP2017/16977

Purpose

1. To adopt the final version of the Ōrākei 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.

4. The local board has considered submissions received and feedback gathered from the consultation period. As a result of this consideration, the following substantive changes are proposed to be included in the Plan:

· Revising the message from the Chairman, taking into account the feedback received

· Strengthening the wording to reflect strong submitter support for improving water quality, including the need for improved infrastructure to assist with this

· Amending the transport outcome to emphasise safety, especially for pedestrians and cyclists as the area intensifies

· Addressing feedback about flooding on roads such as Tāmaki Drive and Portland Road

· Adding more emphasis on working with mana whenua and the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board on shared initiatives

· Acknowledging the community’s desire to makes public places and events chemical-free and smoke-free

· Adding quotes throughout the Plan from the feedback received.

5. A number of minor changes were made throughout the document following consultation for the purpose of clarification

6. The Ōrākei Local Board Plan 2017, which includes the proposed changes, is attached to this report.

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

Recommendations

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

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

i) Revising the message from the Chairman, taking into account the feedback received

ii) Strengthening the wording to reflect strong submitter support for improving water quality, including the need for improved infrastructure to assist with this

iii) Amending the transport outcome to emphasise safety, especially for pedestrians and cyclists as the area intensifies

iv) Addressing feedback about flooding on roads such as Tāmaki Drive and Portland Road

v) Adding more emphasis on working with mana whenua and the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board on shared initiatives

vi) Acknowledging the community’s desire to makes public places and events chemical-free and smoke-free

vii) Adding quotes throughout from the feedback received.

b) subject to recommendation a), adopt Attachment A as the final Ōrākei Local Board Plan 2017.

c) delegate authority to the Chair to approve any minor edits that may be necessary to the final Ōrākei Local Board Plan 2017.

Comments

8. 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 Ōrākei Local Board Plan 2017 must be adopted by 31 October 2017.

9. 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.

10. 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.

11. 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.

12. 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.

13. In total 274 submissions were received on the draft Ōrākei Local Board Plan 2017. In addition, 44 people provided feedback at engagement events and there were 50 pieces of feedback gathered through Facebook.

Consideration of submissions and feedback

14. The Board has considered the submissions and feedback gathered. Board members received data analysis reports and all submissions and feedback to read on 26 July 2017 and held two workshop to discuss this on 17 and 24 August 2017. Advice has been sought from staff on matters raised in the consultation period and this is reflected in the table included later in this report.

15. Public feedback on the draft plan was generally positive, although some iterated concerns about 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 substantive proposed changes to the outcome chapters, are outlined in the corresponding columns.

Key public feedback points	Analysis	Proposed changes to Local Board Plan
The largest number of submissions was received on the need to improve the health of water in streams and receiving environments, with concern that more intensification would lead to further decline in water quality. Some submitters raised concerns about outdated infrastructure contributing to this.	There is likely to be continued intensification and redevelopment in the Local Board area. This can lead to declining water quality. While the development of a healthy waters actions plan and other initiatives had been noted in the draft plan, the need to upgrade old infrastructure should be added as a contributor to a healthier natural environment	Add a new bullet point under Challenges in Outcome 4 “Upgrading underground stormwater and wastewater infrastructure is necessary to ensure marine and freshwater receiving environments are not polluted”.
Traffic safety on roads and shared paths was raised as a concern for a number of people (submitters and Have Your Say event attendees), especially as the area grows and intensifies. Container trucks from the Port and on-going intensification along arterial routes are mentioned as being in conflict with encouraging walking and cycling to school, especially from Meadowbank/St Johns to Selwyn College and St Thomas’s School.	The Local Board can only advocate to Auckland Transport (AT) and cycling groups for improvements to shared path and road user behaviour. However, the location and design of some shared paths is within the council’s influence, and if necessary local bylaws can be investigated to address some of the safety concerns. As AT implements more cycleways and lanes, congestion on roads needs to be managed.	Add the words “and safely” to Outcome 3: “People can move around our area easily”. Add a new bullet point under Challenges: “Growth and intensification also have implications for road safety. With more people living near and alongside arterial roads and the increased traffic associated with this, the continued movement of heavy truck and trailer units through our area incurs greater negative impacts on our communities”. Add a new paragraph to the Outcome description which expands on the issues raised. Add a new objective: “Safe roads, free of flooding and congestion”. Add a new initiative: “Advocate to AT and the Governing Body for a bylaw eliminating heavy truck and trailer units from using Ngapipi, Kepa, Kohimarama and St Johns roads as a through-route to and from the Port”.
Flooding in some areas, such as Tāmaki Drive and Portland Road/Shore Road has also been raised as an issue that needs to be addressed	The Board has been trying to resolve these flooding issues for some time. Work is underway now to raise Tāmaki Drive, as part of other cycleway and Ngapipi intersection works. Council staff AT need to find a solution together for Portland Road.	Add wording to address flooding on roads to the end of the last paragraph of Outcome 3 as follows: “Flooding on some streets, such as Portland Road, is also an issue for some residents and we will aim to address this within the next three years”. Add a new objective: “Safe roads, free of flooding and congestion”, and a new initiative: “Work with the council’s stormwater staff and AT to address flooding and its associated negative effects in the Portland Road/Shore Road area”.
A submission from Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei Ltd recognises the shared aspirations of the Board and Ngāti Whātua and highlights a number of projects where they can work more closely together	The Board is already working with iwi and adjoining local boards on some initiatives, such as the Tāmaki Open Space Network Plan, Stonefields Heritage Trail, Purchas Hill, Ōkahu Bay, but more collaboration is to be encouraged.	Opportunities to work more closely with mana whenua are acknowledged and it is recommended that wording to Outcome 4 is added as follows: “Working with Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei, we will improve the water quality and ecology in Ōkahu Bay.” Under Opportunities, add new bullet point: “There are environmental project on which the Board and iwi can work collaboratively and innovatively, such as the re-establishment of mussels in Ōkahu Bay”. And a new initiative is proposed: “Work with Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei on restorative projects to improve water quality, including Ōkahu Bay and its inland catchment.” Include wording under Working with Māori acknowledging that “other initiatives and site-specific projects will be identified where the Board and iwi can work together, and with other groups, to deliver and optimise benefits for all the communities in the Ōrākei Local Board area”.
A number of submitters encouraged the Board to work more closely with adjoining local boards where there are shared projects and issues.	The Board is already working with adjoining local boards on initiatives, such as the new maintenance contract covering four local board areas. It is also working with the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board on the Tāmaki Open Space Network Plan and the Stonefields Heritage Trail, but more collaboration is to be encouraged.	Outcome 5 in the draft plan included an initiative to “work with the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board to facilitate the formation of a business association in the Lunn Avenue business precinct” and this should be retained. Add a further initiative about working together on the Tāmaki Open Space Network Plan and further development of the Stonefields Heritage to Outcome 1 initiatives: “Work with the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board on : · Having a co-ordinated Tāmaki Open Space Network Plan, · Progressively enhancing the Stonefields Heritage Trail with appropriate planting and park furniture.”
Submissions from Auckland-wide advocacy group such as the Cancer Society, Spray-Free Streets and the Toxins Awareness Group have been considered and wording added to reflect the community health aspirations	For the health of the community, the Board has already advocated for non-toxic methods of weed control and considers that smoke-free events should also be encouraged. Community health can be supported by ensuring places and events are free from smoke, chemicals and rubbish	Add wording to the end of the second paragraph of Outcome 2 “Community health is also important and we should strive to keep our public places clean, chemical free and smoke free”. Add a new clause to the end of last initiative: “Encourage and support a range of community-run events across the local board area, which are smoke free and zero waste”.

16. While there was general support expressed through feedback for the implementation of agreed masterplans for the area’s sports parks, specific park projects have been added as new initiatives to enable progress on them over the next three years. The projects are:

Project

Proposed changes to Local Board Plan

New or upgraded club and/or changing rooms at Madills farm and Michaels Avenue Reserve

Add a new initiative under Outcome 1: Progress the upgrade or development of new clubrooms and changing facilities on Madills Farm Reserve and Michaels Avenue Reserve

Develop a north-south link through Colin Maiden Park

Add a new initiative under Outcome 3: Advocate to AT for a north-south link through Colin Maiden Park, connecting Stonefields and St Johns/Glen Innes

Changes to the Ōrākei Local Board Plan 2017

17. The Ōrākei Local Board Plan 2017, with proposed substantive changes to the outcome chapters as described in the above table, is attached to this report.

18. Following consultation with the community, the Chairman of the Ōrākei Local Board has amended his message in the draft plan, taking into account the feedback received.

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

Consideration

Local board views and implications

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

21. In developing the plan, the board considered:

· what it already knew about its 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 and policies, including the Auckland Plan, the Unitary Plan, the Quality of Life Survey 2016 and the Community Facilities Network Plan 2015, the Ōrākei Local Board Economic Overview 2016

· subject matter expert advice from Infrastructure and Environmental Services, Arts, Community and Events, Parks Sport and Recreation, Plans and Places Auckland Tourism, Events and Economic, and Auckland Transport

· submissions from the following Auckland-wide groups:

The Arts Council of NZ Toi Aotearoa	Cancer Society	Love our Libraries
Te Whakakitanga o Waikato Tainui	Kaipatiki Project	The Tree Council Inc
Auckland Central Volleyball	Auckland Cricket Association	Auckland Curling Club
Auckland Rugby Union	Auckland School Cycling	Sport Auckland
Squash Auckland	Tennis in Auckland	Toxins Awareness Group

· submissions from the following local groups:

Auckland Netball	Auckland University Rugby Football Club	Auckland School Cycling
Ellerslie Football Club	Grammar TEC Rugby Club Inc	Ōrākei Bowling Club
Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei	Remuera Heritage Inc	Tāmaki Drive Protection Society
Remuera Residents Assn	Mission Bay-Kohimarama Residents Assn	Ellerslie Business Assn
Guerilla Garden	Meadowbank-St Johns Residents Assn	Mission Bay Business Assn
St Heliers Centre	People’s Warden – Christ Church Ellerslie	St Heliers Bay Pony Club

Māori impact statement

22. As part of developing the plan, the Board has considered views expressed by mana whenua authorities at a sub-regional governance level hui and local level one-on-one hui and considered pre-existing feedback from Māori within the local board area.

23. The Ōrākei Local Board Plan 2017 promotes outcomes or issues of importance to Māori by:

· noting that there are opportunities for the Board and Mana Whenua “to work collaboratively and innovatively” on environmental projects in Ōkahu Bay and Pourewa Valley

· including a new initiative under the Environment outcome to “work with Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei on restorative projects to improve water quality, including in Ōkahu Bay and its inland catchment”, and

· Under “Working with Māori”, reiterating the Board’s intent to work with iwi on environmental enhancement initiatives to enhance water quality, natural bush and waterways, to protect native flora and fauna and to improve habitat for birds and wildlife. It also acknowledges that there will also be “other initiatives and site-specific projects will be identified where the Board and iwi can work together, and with other groups, to deliver and optimise benefits for all the communities in the Ōrākei Local Board area.”

Implementation

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

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

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Ōrākei Local Board Plan 2017 (Under Separate Cover)

Signatories

Author	Suzanne Weld - Senior Local Board Advisor Ōrākei
Authoriser	Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Ōrākei Local Boards

Ōrākei Local Board

19 October 2017

Road Name Approval for a New Private Road at 36 Mainston Road, Remuera

File No.: CP2017/21618

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to seek approval from the Ōrākei Local Board to name a new private road, being a jointly owned access lot, providing access to a residential subdivision off Mainston Road, Remuera.

Executive summary

2. The Ōrākei Local Board Road Naming Policy and Guidelines require that new roads serving more than five sites must have a road name. This also applies to private roads, jointly owned access lots (common access ways) and rights of way.

3. The applicant and developer of the site at 36 Mainston Road, Remuera, wishes to name the new private road (a jointly owned access lot) within this 10-lot residential subdivision development as ‘Nick Garden Place’ and has also provided the two alternative road names; ‘Nina Garden Place’ and ‘Anna Garden Place’, after his daughters.

4. As a result of iwi consultation, Ngaati Tamaoho also suggested 2 road name options appropriate for use in this location; ‘Tohikuri Place’ and ‘Te Whare Aitu Place’.

5. All of the proposed names are technically suitable for use, having been checked for duplication by LINZ and NZ Post and authorised for use in this location. However, the applicant’s three proposed names refer to living people, which is not encouraged by the road naming guidelines.

Recommendation

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a) approves the new road name ‘Tohikuri Place’ suggested by Ngaati Tamaoho, under section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974, for the jointly owned access lot created by way of subdivision at 36 Mainston Road, Remuera. Council consent reference: R/JSL/2016/910.

Comments

6. Resource consent details: The applicant and developer is Nick Ni of Unite Investment and Management Limited, the site address is 36 Mainston Road, Remuera, and the associated approved resource consent references are R/LUC/2014/3891, R/JSL/2016/910, and R/VCC/2016/910/1 for 9 new residential dwellings and an associated 10-lot subdivision around the dwellings, with Lot 10 being a jointly owned access lot containing the subject private road to be named.

7. Site details: A location map and site plan are attached showing the new private road to be named and the development it serves, which is a rear site set back from the cul-de-sac of Mainston Road, adjacent to College Rifles Park. The new private road will be accessed from the cul-de-sac end of Mainston Road, with no thoroughfare beyond this point.

8. Name Options: The applicant has suggested three potential road names and Ngaati Tamaoho also suggested two names. The applicant would be happy with any of these road names. The proposed suffix ‘place’ is appropriate for this road type.

9. Assessment of names: All of the proposed names are technically suitable for use, having been checked for duplication by LINZ and NZ Post and authorised for use in this location. However, the applicant’s three proposed names refer to living people, which is not encouraged by the road naming guidelines.

10. The proposed road names are outlined in the table below:

Proposed Name

(Proposed by)

Meaning

Tohikuri Place (Iwi)

Hereditary Tamaoho Rangatira who was an advisor to the 3^rd maaori king Mahuta, Taawhiao, Pootatau Te Wherowhero

Acceptable – suggested by Ngaati Tamaoho, checked by LINZ and NZ Post

Te Whare Aitu Place (Iwi)

Tamaoho Rangatira who lead Ngaati Tamaoho in the inter hapuu & tribal battles of ancient times

Acceptable – suggested by Ngaati Tamaoho, checked by LINZ and NZ Post, although 3 word names less desirable

Nick Garden Place

(Applicant)

The applicant’s name is Nick and his ambition is to develop this site into a garden-like area with no intention to sell the site and maintain the area for this family to enjoy. This will allow for the site to have meaning for both the applicant and his family for future generations. The alternative names Nina and Anna are the names of Nick’s daughters.

Technically acceptable - checked by LINZ and NZ Post, but refer to living people, which is not encouraged by the road naming guidelines

Nina Garden Place

(Applicant)

Anna Garden Place

(Applicant)

11. Community consultation: The applicant’s agent approached Remuera Business Association, Remuera Residents Association and the Remuera Heritage Society for consultation purposes within an acceptable timeframe, but received no comments or feedback on the proposed names.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

12. 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 the Local Boards.

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

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

Māori impact statement

15. The applicant contacted all relevant local iwi regarding the proposed names. Ngaati Tamaoho provided the names listed above. No other iwi provided additional comments.

16. ‘Epiha Putini Place’ was a third name option suggested by Ngaati Tamaoho, however, this name was not acceptable as there is a ‘Putini Road’ in Mangere Bridge 8 kms away. (Background to ‘Epiha Putini Place’: Tamaoho Rangatira who became a minister of the Wesleyan Church in the early 1800s).

Implementation

17. The cost of processing the approval of the proposed new road name is recoverable in accordance with Council’s Administrative Charges.

18. The applicant has responsibility for ensuring that appropriate signage will be installed accordingly once an approval is obtained for the new road name.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Location Map - 36 Mainston Road	117

Signatories

Author

Emerald James - Subdivision Advisor

Authorisers

Ian Smallburn - General Manager Resource Consents

Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Ōrākei Local Boards

Ōrākei Local Board

19 October 2017

Feedback on the proposed direction of the draft Waste Management and Minimisation Plan

File No.: CP2017/22103

Purpose

1. To seek feedback from the Ōrākei Local Board on the proposed direction of the draft Waste Management and Minimisation Plan review.

Executive summary

2. Auckland Council is currently undertaking a review of its Waste Management and Minimisation Plan. This plan is prepared under the Waste Minimisation Act 2008, and is part of council’s responsibility to promote effective and efficient waste management and minimisation in Auckland.

3. This report seeks feedback from the Ōrākei Local Board on the revised proposed approach to waste management and minimisation. In particular:

· advocating to central government for a higher waste levy and for product stewardship

· addressing three priority commercial waste streams:

o construction and demolition waste

o organic waste, and

o plastic waste

· addressing waste generated from council and council-controlled organisation’s operational activities, particularly construction and demolition waste.

4. These points were initially discussed with local boards during September and October workshops on the draft Waste Management and Minimisation Plan.

5. The proposed draft Waste Management and Minimisation Plan will be presented to the Environment and Community Committee in December 2017, seeking approval to publicly notify the draft plan. Formal feedback from all local boards will be included as a part of this report.

Recommendation

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a) provide feedback on the proposed direction of the draft Waste Management and Minimisation Plan.

Comments

Legislative context

6. Under the Waste Minimisation Act 2008, Auckland Council is required to adopt a Waste Management and Minimisation Plan, as part of its responsibility to promote effective and efficient waste management.

7. The first Auckland Waste Management and Minimisation Plan was adopted by council in 2012. It set an aspirational vision of achieving zero waste to landfill by 2040. It placed initial priority on waste reduction within the waste services that are more directly managed by council, which account for approximately 20 per cent of all waste to landfill in the region.

8. Council is required to review the Auckland Waste Management and Minimisation Plan every six years. This includes conducting a Waste Assessment to review progress, to forecast future demand for waste services, and to identify options to meet future demand. This assessment was completed in mid-2017, and the findings have been outlined below.

Findings of the Waste Assessment: progress and challenges

9. Under the first Waste Management and Minimisation Plan, seven separate council-managed waste services to households are being merged into one standardised region-wide service. This has included:

· introducing a new inorganic collection service

· introducing large bins for recycling across the region

· introducing bins for refuse in areas that had bag collections

· establishing five community recycling centres in Waiuku, Helensville, Devonport, Henderson and Whangaparaoa, with another seven to be established by 2024.

10. Some service changes agreed under the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2012 are still to be introduced to standardise the approach across the whole Auckland region, most notably, a food waste collection in urban areas and pay-as-you-throw charge for kerbside refuse collections.

11. Whilst the council-managed services have achieved waste minimisation, the total amount of waste to landfill has increased by 40 per cent between 2010 and 2016. This is due to the increased amounts of commercial waste being generated, particularly construction and demolition waste. The amount of waste sent to landfill is projected to continue to grow unless a concerted effort is made to intervene to address this trend.

12. Barriers to waste minimisation in Auckland include the low cost of sending waste to landfill compared to diverting waste to other productive uses, the lack of financial incentives to divert waste from landfill, the lack of council influence over the 80 per cent of waste that is commercially managed, and rapid population growth.

Options analysis

13. The Waste Assessment identified and evaluated three options to guide the direction of the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2018, as follows below.

14. Option one: status quo involving full implementation of the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2012. Undertaking the actions agreed in 2012 will focus interventions on 20 per cent of waste within council’s direct control. Although this option could be implemented within council’s waste budget envelope it would not meet council’s responsibilities under the Waste Minimisation Act 2008 to minimise waste in Auckland.

15. Option two: expanded focus. Full implementation of the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2012 and a focus on three priority commercial waste streams identified in the Waste Assessment - construction and demolition waste, organic waste and plastic waste. This option addresses the 80 per cent of waste outside of council’s direct control and could be implemented within the current waste budget, with some reprioritisation.

16. Option three: significant investment in residual waste treatment technologies. This option requires development of residual waste treatment facilities, with energy from waste (mass-burn incineration facilities) likely to achieve the best diversion. Significant investment is needed from both the private and public sector to develop these technologies, and there would be reputational risks associated with disposal of waste by incineration.

17. It is proposed the council adopts option two, which has the potential to significantly reduce total waste to landfill, and can be undertaken within the current funding envelope.

Proposed updates to the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2012

18. It is proposed that the new Waste Management and Minimisation Plan will continue the direction of the 2012 Plan, and extend the focus of council activity from the 20 per cent of waste that is directly managed by council and its contractors, to the other 80 per cent that is commercially managed.

19. The proposed vision of the draft Waste Management and Minimisation Plan is ‘Auckland aspires to be zero waste by 2040, taking care of people and the environment, and turning waste into resources’.

20. It is proposed that zero waste is maintained as an aspirational target. Achieving high diversion rates in Auckland (in the order of 80 per cent as achieved by an exemplar city, San Francisco) is considered to be a successful response to such an aspirational target.

21. To achieve the zero waste vision, three goals are proposed: minimise waste generation, maximise opportunities for resource recovery, and reduce harm from residual waste.

22. Three updated targets are proposed:

· total waste; reduce by 30 per cent by 2027 (no change from the current waste plan)

· domestic waste: reduce by 30 per cent by 2020/2021 (extension of date from 2018 to align with the roll-out of the food waste kerbside collection service; a new target will be set once this is achieved)

· council’s own waste;

o reduce office waste by 60 per cent by 2040 (target doubled from current waste plan)

o work across council to set a baseline for operational waste (generated as a result of council activities such as property maintenance, construction and demolition, and events, and implement these baseline targets by 2019.

23. The proposed draft Waste Management and Minimisation Plan identifies the actions that will be undertaken over the next six years. The priority actions that will have the biggest impact on waste reduction include:

· continued delivery of the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2012, including the transition to consistent kerbside services (including introduction of a kerbside organic collection in urban areas and the standardisation of pay-as-you throw kerbside refuse collection across the region), and establishment of the resource recovery network

· a focus on addressing the 80 per cent of waste that council does not directly influence, by;

o advocating to central government for a higher waste levy and for product stewardship

o addressing three priority commercial waste streams;

- construction and demolition waste,

- organic waste, and

- plastic waste

o addressing waste generated from council and council-controlled organisation’s operational activities, particularly construction and demolition waste.

24. The draft Waste Management and Minimisation Plan will put emphasis on partnership and engagement with other sectors that are relevant to the priority action areas. Council recognises that it cannot achieve its waste minimisation responsibilities by acting alone.

25. It is important to note that council has limited tools to address commercially managed waste. Achieving policy changes at central government level will be essential to achieving waste to landfill reductions in Auckland. If council is unsuccessful in its advocacy, targets will not be met.

Request for local board feedback

26. Local boards are being asked whether they support the proposed approach taken in the draft Waste Management and Minimisation Plan, and in particular the focus on:

· advocating to central government for a higher waste levy and for product stewardship

· addressing three priority commercial waste streams;

o construction and demolition waste

o organic waste, and

o plastic waste

· addressing waste generated from council and council-controlled organisation’s operational activities, particularly construction and demolition waste.

Financial implications

27. The actions proposed in the draft Waste Management and Minimisation Plan can be achieved within existing waste funding. Funding will be obtained through a combination of:

· pay-as-you-throw domestic refuse collections, which will be progressively introduced across the region

· rates funding, and

· revenue from the waste levy (from the $10 per tonne waste levy that is administered by the Ministry for the Environment, 50 per cent of which is distributed to councils, amounting to $6.1 million for Auckland Council in 2016).

28. Infrastructure to enable commercial resource recovery will require investment from external sources such as government and the private sector.

29. The budget for implementing the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan will be considered through the Long-term Plan 2018-2028 process.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

30. Workshops were held with all local boards in September and October 2017 to discuss the proposals set out in this report. This report seeks formal feedback from local boards.

Māori impact statement

31. Mana whenua and mātāwaka have been actively engaged in implementing the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2012. A number of initiatives have enabled waste minimisation from a te ao Māori context. Through Para Kore ki Tāmaki, marae in the Auckland region are able to foster kaitiakitanga practices and affirm their connections with the natural world. More than 2,000 whānau participate in the programme annually, and over 50 Para Kore zero waste events have been held since the programme rolled out in 2014. The programme provides a catalyst for taking the kaitiakitanga message from the marae into homes and the community. Protecting Papatūānuku, connecting with traditions and showing respect for customs has become a priority for whānau through this programme.

32. The proposed draft Waste Management and Minimisation Plan seeks to present a stronger mana whenua and mātāwaka perspective, recognising the close alignment between te ao Māori and zero waste. Two mana whenua hui and one mātāwaka hui held in June 2017 have identified mana whenua and matāwaka principles and priorities, for direct inclusion into the draft Waste Management and Minimisation Plan.

Implementation

33. The draft Waste Management and Minimisation Plan will have financial implications, as the targeted rate for food waste must be costed and included in consultation on the draft Waste Management and Minimisation Plan. It is proposed that this be aligned with consultation on the Long-term Plan 2018-2028. This will ensure that any budget implications are considered through the Long-term Plan process.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Parul Sood, General Manager Waste Solutions (Acting)

Julie Dickinson, Waste Planning Manager (Acting)

Authorisers

Barry Potter, Director Infrastructure and Environmental Services

Carol McKenzie-Rex Acting General Manager Local Board Services

Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Ōrākei Local Boards

Ōrākei Local Board

19 October 2017

Review of representation arrangements - process

File No.: CP2017/21786

Purpose

1. To provide comments to the Governing Body on the proposed process (in Attachment B to the agenda report) for the review of representation arrangements.

Executive summary

2. All local authorities are required by the Local Electoral Act 2001 to undertake a review of representation arrangements at least once every six years in order to determine them arrangements for the following elections.

3. Auckland Council was established in 2010 and was not required to undertake a review of representation arrangements for the 2016 elections, but is required to undertake a review for the 2019 elections. The review will take place during 2018.

4. It is possible to review the following for the Governing Body:

i. whether members are elected at-large or by ward or a combination

ii. if elected by ward, the number of members in each ward, the ward boundaries and ward names.

5. It is possible to review the following for each local board:

i. the number of members

ii. whether local board members are to be elected by subdivision or at large

iii. if by subdivision, the number of members in each subdivision and the subdivision boundaries and names

iv. the local board name.

6. It is not possible to review the number of governing body members. This is set in the Auckland Council legislation. Other councils are able to review the number of members.

7. It is also not possible to review the boundaries, or number, of local boards. A reorganisation process is required to do this. This is a separate process under the legislation.

8. With a governing body and 21 local boards, Auckland Council has more complex arrangements than other councils and an efficient and effective process for undertaking the review needs to be determined.

9. The report attached as Attachment A was considered by the Governing Body on 28 September 2017. The report sets out the background and context to the review and a proposed process for conducting the review.

10. The Governing Body resolved a proposed process on 28 September 2017, as set out in Attachment B, and is now seeking the views of local boards on this process.

11. In December the Governing Body will resolve the final process for conducting the review, following feedback from local boards on the proposed process.

12. This report seeks the local boards’ views on the proposed process as set out in Attachment B, for conducting the review of representation arrangements.

13. Representation by way of establishing one or more Māori wards is being considered separately by the Governing Body. There is not a similar provision for Māori seats on local boards.

14. Feedback from the local board will be communicated to the Governing Body 14 December 2017 meeting.

Recommendation

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a) provide its comments on the proposed process for conducting the review of representation arrangements.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Process to conduct a review of representation arrangements – report to Governing Body meeting on 28 September 2017	127
b ⇩	Process to conduct a review of representation arrangements – resolution of Governing Body	135

Signatories

Author

Warwick McNaughton - Principal Advisor - Democracy Services

Authorisers

Phil Wilson - Governance Director

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Ōrākei Local Boards

Ōrākei Local Board

19 October 2017

Remuneration Authority consultation document

File No.: CP2017/22102

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

That the Ōrākei 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 per cent 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 per cent 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	143

Signatories

Authors

Warwick McNaughton - Principal Advisor - Democracy Services

Authorisers

Marguerite Delbet - General Manager Democracy Services

Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Ōrākei Local Boards

Ōrākei Local Board

19 October 2017

Chairman’s Report – Colin Davis

File No.: CP2017/21803

Purpose

1. To update the Ōrākei Local Board Members on projects, activities and issues since last reported.

Recommendation

a) That the report be received.

b) That the Board’s submissions on:

1) Draft Auckland Plan Refresh Strategic Directions and Focus Areas

2) Low Emissions Economy; Productivity Commission’s Issues Paper

be formally endorsed.

Portfolio Lead: Arts, Events and Libraries; Heritage

Other (alternate portfolio holder): Resource Consenting and Regulatory; Civil Defence and Emergency Management

Heritage

(1) Tāmaki Drive Searchlights

I have now been informed that a resource consent was granted in August for the restoration and maintenance of the three emplacements. A senior project manager from Project Delivery, Community Facilities has now been assigned to progress this project. I have met with her and the contract architect to discuss aspects of the project with the objective of reducing the substantial cost of an extensive restoration, after 60 years or so of neglect, while still achieving as soon as possible satisfactory and long term conservation of the three scheduled heritage buildings. I have drafted the text for the information sign and am working with the Project Manager to obtain complementary illustrations.

(2) Heritage Projects

The draft inventory of sites of heritage significance in the Board’s area is progressing. Most of the text has been drafted and photographs have been taken or sourced to illustrate and document the publication.

(3) Stonefields Heritage Trail

The tentative date for the official opening of the Trail is now 18 November. Initial planning for the event is under way.

(4) World War One Roll of Honour

I have arranged with the Auckland Museum for a URL link to the PDF of the Board’s World War One Digital Roll of Honour containing 112 records which the Board prepared for our area to commemorate the War’s centenary. This will help the Board to share this important research and it may attract additional information from the public for inclusion in the Board’s Roll of Honour.

Events

As resolved by the Board on 3 August I am working with members of the events team to edit and update the draft Tāmaki Drive Precinct Events Guidelines. When this is done the draft Guidelines will be presented to the Board for approval.

Governance Framework Review

The Governing Body has recently approved further delegations to local boards as part of the governance review by Governing Body members and local board members. A copy of the Governing Body resolutions from its meeting held on 28 September 2017 is attached to this report as attachment A. It is noted that the Governing Body has decided to reserve the courtesy title of “councillor” to Governing Body members alone, despite Auckland’s unique legislated model of shared governance.

A review of delegations by local boards to the Chief Executive should now follow, as the present delegations were last approved by this Board in December 2012.

Communications

The Board’s third e-newsletter was published. The fourth e-news is being prepared but may be delayed until the Board’s new local communications advisor is appointed in the Public Affairs, Communications and Engagement team.

Board Feedback

(1) Draft Auckland Plan Refresh Strategic Directions and Focus Areas (Attachment B to this report).

(2) Low Emissions Economy; Productivity Commission’s Issues Paper (Attachment C to this report).

Activities (since 8 September 2017)

As well as assisting with a range of citizens’ enquiries, attending meetings, and involvement with other community activities, including Board business through emails and phone calls, I have also attended the following to date:

11 September the local boards chairs’ forum.

11 September Council farewell to Karen Lyons.

14 September the Chair and Deputy Chair catch-up with staff.

14 September the Ōrākei Local Board workshop various topics.

15 September the public meeting for candidates for the Tāmaki electorate co-hosted by 5 local residents’ associations, with support by the Ōrākei Local Board.

19 September the community services monthly portfolio briefing.

19 September the community facilities monthly portfolio briefing.

19 September the monthly leases portfolio briefing.

21 September the Ōrākei Local Board business meeting.

23 September Mens Shed AGM.

25 September Auckland Transport’s quarterly briefing for local board members.

26 September a meeting with the Board’s new strategic broker.

26 September a further meeting with events staff regarding the draft Tāmaki Drive Precinct Events Guidelines.

27 September, as Chairman of the Auckland Library Heritage Trust, an exhibition opening about “Dance”, and the book launch on the history of the Limbs Dance Company, at the central library.

28 September the Chair and Deputy Chair catch-up with staff.

28 September the Ōrākei Local Board workshop various topics.

29 September a meeting with the St Heliers library manager regarding the photographic montage prepared by the late Robert Johnson, for permanent display at the library. In the meantime and during the Heritage Festival an enlarged copy with canvas backing, made available by the Auckland Library Heritage Trust funding, is on display at the library.

29 September on-site meeting and inspection with parks staff regarding remedial and safety work required on the pedestrian/boat access from Glendowie Road to Andersons Beach.

30 September hosted the St Heliers heritage trail walk, as part of Heritage Week.

3 October “Conflict of Interest” workshop for Ōrākei Local Board members.

3 October “Health and Safety” workshop for Ōrākei Local Board members.

3 October AGM of the St Heliers Village Association.

5 October a meeting with the heritage architect and staff regarding restoration of the searchlight emplacements.

5 October the Ōrākei Local Board workshop various topics.

8 October the “People of the West” heritage conference organised by 3 West Auckland local boards, at which I was a guest presenter.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Resolutions from Governing Body meeting dated 28 September 2017	205
b ⇩	Ōrākei Local Board Submission: Draft Auckland Plan Refresh Strategic Directions and Focus Areas	211
c ⇩	Ōrākei Local Board Submission: Low Emissions Economy; Productivity Commission's Issues Paper	215

Signatory

Author

Colin Davis – Chairman, Ōrākei Local Board of the Auckland Council

Date: 8 October 2017

Ōrākei Local Board

19 October 2017

Board Member Report - Kit Parkinson

File No.: CP2017/21805

Purpose

1. To update the Ōrākei Local Board Members on projects, activities and issues.

Recommendation

a) That the report be received.

Portfolio Lead: Parks and Reserves and Community Leases

Other (alternate portfolio holder): Environment

Other Appointments (Lead): Friends of Madills Farm Incorporated, Friends of Tahuna Torea

Michaels Avenue Reserve Community Liaison Committee, Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei Reserves Board, Ōrākei Basin Advisory Group (Chair Oct 2017 to Oct 2018), Tāmaki Drive Protection Society, Tūpuna Maunga Authority

Other Appointments (Alternate): Mission Bay Business Association, Mission Bay-Kohimarama Residents Association Incorporated, East City Community Trust

Parks and Reserves

2. Attended to constituents enquiries.

3. Followed up and met on site with Ventia representatives and Sam Murrell on the issue of Reserves not being mowed regularly (including Mary Atkin Reserve which has only been mowed once since 1st July 2017, over three months) the wetness of Reserves has meant they cannot be mowed without causing damage to the underlying soil, this will be addressed at the quarterly KPI report from Ventia also.

4. The Ōrākei Basin Walkway Draft Concept Plan is attached to this report (attachment A). This plan is currently being consulted on. The Tonkin and Taylor review on the entrance way project has been completed. The report and recommendations are attached (attachment B).

5. A member of the public cleared five 10kg bags of broken bottles from Ladies Bay in early October. Questions have been asked about the quality of service from our cleaning contractor in this area.

6. Remuera Rotary paid for and planted over 100 trees in Waiatarua Reserve. Great community action.

7. Our first Big Belly Bin went in at Kohimarama Beach, these have a solar powered compactor that enables more rubbish to be stored and collected, very efficient.

Big Belly Bin, Kohimarama Beach Rangitoto Reserve land slip

8. Work was carried out by the adjoining property owner at Rangitoto Reserve to stabilise the bank after a recent slip.

9. Men’s Shed Lease Progressing: followed up and had meetings on Lease to Auckland Hockey in CMP, Gymnastics in CMP and Tāmaki Yacht Club Lease of carpark and building on Atkin Ave reserve.

Public notice for proposed lease

Michaels Avenue Reserve Community Liaison Committee

10. Attended meetings scheduled for this period.

Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei Reserves Board

11. Attended meetings scheduled for this period.

Tūpuna Maunga Authority

12. Attended meetings scheduled for this period.

Activities: 12 September to 6 October 2017

Date

Activities

12 September	Ōrākei Local Board Auckland Transport meeting
13 September	Meet Bryan Haggitt from Parnell Cricket club re site development
13 September	Michaels Avenue Reserve Community Liaison Committee meeting
14 September	Parks meeting re Dumping and road maintenance issues in Ngahue Reserve Ōrākei Local Board Workshop
17 September	Attended Remuera Rotary planting day in Waiatarua reserve
18 September	Ōrākei Local Board Agenda Run Through meeting Sub-Regional Council Meeting
19 September	Meet Simon Jones re Waiheke to Tāmaki Drive update Parks Portfolio (Community Services) meeting Parks Portfolio (Community Facilities) meeting Leases Portfolio meeting
20 September	Attended Auckland Transport Glen Innes to Tāmaki Drive Shared Path (section 4) and Ngapipi Bridge Widening consultation at Lilliput Mini Golf car park
21 September	CMP Meeting Ōrākei Local Board Business Meeting
22 September	Men’s Shed AGM and site visit to Asplund Building
23 September	Attended Auckland Transport Glen Innes to Tāmaki Drive Shared Path (section 4) and Ngapipi Bridge Widening consultation at Ōrākei Bay Village
26 September	Meeting with new Strategic Broker and Manager Strategic Broker
27 September	Met with incoming OBAG Chair
28 September	Chair/Deputy Chair Meeting Meeting with Sports Auckland catch up Ōrākei Local Board Workshop Mission Bay Tree Lights Meeting
30 September	Tahapa & Tahapa East Reserve Development Consultation Event

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Ōrākei Basin Walkway Draft Concept Plan	221
b ⇩	Ōrākei Basin Access Road and Car Park Report	233
c ⇩	Snapshot - Ōrākei Local Board, August 2017	273

Signatory

Author

Kit Parkinson - Ōrākei Local Board Councillor

Date: 11 September 2017

Ōrākei Local Board

19 October 2017

Board Member Report - Troy Churton

File No.: CP2017/21808

Purpose

1. To update the Ōrākei Local Board Members on projects, activities and issues since the last Ōrākei Local Board meeting.

Recommendation

a) That the report be received.

Portfolio Lead: Resource Consenting and Regulatory

Kepa Bush

2. Liaison with representatives for Kepa Bush indicates strong appreciation for our Ōrākei Local Board input and oversight, with a lead representative saying:

"I am delighted and hope that our Friends of Kepa Bush mighty have some input into the process. It seems to me that most of the decision are made by people who have never been to our wonderful bush. I always make it clear I will be delighted to show them around”

Liquor Licence for Benson Road shop area - ex maple Room

3. In response to enquires about what objectors can do, an extract of my advice was:

The critical thing is that people who have filed objections on the basis they have the requisite standing consider taking some counsel, perhaps a specialist liquor licensing agent, to help furnish evidence to the hearing committee. That person could also help submitters harness whatever is best under the proposed Local Alcohol Policy for the Ōrākei Area. Like all quasi-judicial processes, advocating certain points to suit certain local conditions may help you influence the eventual conditions of the licence. The Council position in a policy is one thing. How an applicant might seek to extend beyond it is another, and that is where well put together objecting submissions can sustain a status quo or better it! https://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/plans-projects-policies-reports-bylaws/our-policies/Pages/draft-local-alcohol-policy-areas.aspx

Productivity Commission submission

4. My input included that:

5. Q1 and 21 - The Commission can add value by stating what regulatory assessment reviews it will link its recommendations to, which will clarify whether it expects to influence ministerial policy advisors to recommend legislative change or not.

6. Q5 - No amount of options for encouraging alternative low-emissions in land uses can be achieved unless the Government changes the Resource Management Act to allow local councils to set by laws for tree protection across the board, be it in residential or rural zone areas. Trees, whether they are in forests, reserves or back-yards, are an important emission managing tool.

7. Q9 Policies assuring fuel powered car owners to redeem schedulised values of fuel powered cars when trading in for electric ones.

8. Q10 and Q19 and 21 - Making filters mandatory on all heavier vehicle and public transport exhaust systems, and then transitioning in the same on private cars and bikes

Snapshot of Planning and Regulatory Matters

9. Some examples of regulatory files dealt with over the last few weeks include:

10. In depth analysis and comments supplied regarding notification options for developments in 31B Waimarie Street, St Heliers, 702 Remuera Road, Remuera, 35 unit apartment in Burwood Crescent, Remuera, set of towers at 20 Pukerangi Crescent, Ellerslie, 40-44 Tāmaki Drive and 12 Westborne Road, Remuera.

228 Ōrākei Road

11. Ongoing liaison with local resident, council staff and resident association executive members about the state of the building at this site. The lateral support for the building was independently assessed at 34 per cent NBS whereas the developer had indicated a report somewhere rating it 66 per cent. Council has given the developer a period up to a year to resolve the matter in accordance with a generous time frame set by the governing statute.

43-45 Benson Road

12. Collating Board feedback using s15 Local Government Auckland council Act regarding this intensive infill proposal. Planners argue no need was required for input regarding notification, so this was the only remaining option we had.

Other Activities

13. I attended a range of community and usual resident association meetings.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Kepa Bush Reserve Signs	277

Signatory

Author

Troy Churton - Ōrākei Local Board Member

Date: 2 October 2017

Ōrākei Local Board

19 October 2017

Board Member Report - Carmel Claridge

File No.: CP2017/21809

Purpose

1. To update the Ōrākei Local Board Members on projects, activities and issues.

Recommendations

a) That the report be received.

b) That Community Facilities staff provide a timely report on Ventia’s first three months performance within the Ōrākei Local Board area and present to the Board with opportunity for feedback to contractors.

c) That Healthy Waters provide Ōrākei Local Board with a copy of the CANOPY report and the Board be provided with opportunity for feedback on the report to LTP.

d) That a meeting with Ngati Whatua Ōrākei be facilitated to explore joint venture opportunites for health improvement projects for our local waterways.

e) Request Auckland Transport to provide a memo detailing the background and history of both the formed and unformed sections of Ballarat St between Marua Rd and Abbotts Way as well as plans for completing the unformed section of Ballarat Road given the opportunity it presents to improve the transport network in Ellerslie.

f) That the Board’s submission on the Glen Innes - Tāmaki Drive Shared Pathway Stage 4 & Ngapipi Bridge Widening be formally endorsed.

Portfolio Lead: Environment and Transport

Other (alternate portfolio holder): Parks and Reserves, Community Leases

Eastern Songbird Project – Eradication of Pests to protect Native Birds

This project is led by John LaRoche and John Laurence, and is gaining momentum with a joint enterprise with the Men’s Shed making rat traps which are being distributed through Residents’ Association networks. I have also put John in touch with Nicky Elmore and they are in discussions on how to incorporate the project into the Enviroschool program. The Meadowbank/St Johns Residents Association are keen to see the expansion of the project’s geographical boundary to include their catchment area. I have had a number of anecdotal reports from constituents about an increase in the number of rats being caught by their pet cats. It would be useful to obtain some reliable data on our rat population. Overgrowth in our parks and reserves could be contributing to the problem and this should be a factor raised when we have the opportunity to feedback on Project 17.

The Men's shed of Mission Bay/Kohimarama Residents Association has been busy making trap boxes to support community rat trapping with the goal to increase numbers of native birds in the Eastern Bays. Find out how you can be involved in projects like this at: https://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/environment/what-we-do-to-help-environment/our-biodiversity-projects/Pages/pest-free-auckland-2050.aspx

Ōrākei Local Board #pestfreeakl

EnviroSchools Presentation

Colin Davis and I presented signage on behalf of the Local Board to Meadowbank Primary School recognising its achievements in the Enviroschools programme. Students led us on a guided tour showing us their ‘garden to table’ facilities including kitchen, plant nursery, and nature trail. Pictured here with Nicky Elmore who has been instrumental in rolling out the Enviroschool programme and been involved with Meadowbank School for over 22 years. I also took the opportunity of discussing the Eastern Songbird project with Nicky and the potential to get rat traps into private residences across the Ward, through engagement with children in schools.

Project 17 Reporting:

Some reserves and parks within the Ōrākei Local Board area are currently waterlogged and unusable for recreational purposes. The failure to keep the grass at a reasonable length has exacerbated the problem and the issue has now reached a point where specialist treatment may be required to restore rather than simply maintain those grassed areas so they can be used by the public. The anticipated reporting from Community Facilities has at the date of this report not been received nor has a future date been set. The new contracts regime under Project 17 was supposed to provide Local Boards with regular reporting and give them opportunity to address concerns about service levels with both staff and contractors directly. It is disappointing that we are needing to chase up that reporting accountability instead of it occurring as a matter of course. The standard of a recent mowing in Waiatarua Reserve (1st week of October) was simply unacceptable. (see attached email sent by myself to Colin Davis, Attachment A).

Improving Health of our Waterways / SafeSwim:

SOSAC – Stop Auckland Sewerage Overflow Coalition

I was contacted by this organization recently. SOSAC was formed in March 2017 and is a coalition of community groups concerned about sewerage in storm-water overflows. It intends to conduct research and lobby for a more efficient sewerage system. The group believes that polluted overflows need to be eliminated by separating storm-water from sewerage – into separate pipes. SOSAC seeks as large a removal of the storm-water from the combined networks as feasible. The planned Central Interceptor (cost estimate $1.825 Billion) will increase the capacity of the predominantly combined pipe network in central Auckland, however notwithstanding its construction overflows cannot be entirely ruled out and it is SOSAC’s view that similar major collector pipes will be required in the future to relieve overflows in the Western catchment and a Remuera Interceptor may be required for Ōrākei and Parnell.

The Central Auckland Stormwater and Wastewater Optimisation Programme (CANOPY) is a recently formed project team and joint initiative by Healthy Waters and WaterCare. This team was to provide a report due to go to Council in August reporting on a long term stormwater/wastewater solution to be included in the LTP. It is SOSac’s view that the team’s conclusions should be available for early public consultation, and it is also a report that I would like to see as it becomes available.

The effect of the Unitary Plan on the ability of our sewerage and storm-water systems will be profound. Impermeable land surface area is permitted to increase from 42 per cent to 62 per cent in some designated areas. Maintaining the current health of our waterways will be challenging – improving it even more so. We must bear that in mind when making decisions around allocation of budgets, and look at creative ways to get projects in motion working with other organisations.

The funding level for our Board to achieve discernible results in improving the health of local waterways is simply inadequate to meet the task presently, let alone moving into a future where pressures will grow exponentially due to increased density of housing. Our local board area has seen the highest number of building consents issued in the central isthmus. We need to be mindful of the added stressors on existing infrastructure, and plan accordingly to do what we can as local governors to mitigate effects. In their submission to our Local Board Plan, Ngati Whatua Ōrākei expressed an interest in working collaboratively with the Board on water quality improvements within the Ward. We need to investigate further where those common areas of interest lie and how we can engage with Ngati Whatua Ōrākei to achieve aligned outcomes.

Meeting with Elizabeth Steward of STEPS / SOSAC for discussion of stormwater issues and walkover of Meola & Oakely Creek catchment sites.

Transport:

AT Collation of Board Feedback

Due to a lack of clarity around feedback process with AT the Board did not meet the deadline for feedback on the initial design for the Tāmaki Drive Shared Pathway. Views expressed verbally at a presentation were neither recorded or collated despite that being the stated purpose of that presentation. The first Southern side of Tāmaki Drive orientated design was met with considerable negative feedback from the public and was unacceptable from the Board’s perspective. A large number of submissions expressed concern with the original design, and as a result a comprehensive redesign with a renewed focus on activating the northern side of Tāmaki Drive was presented. A decision was made at senior management level that there would be no consultation on that redesign. This was a decision contrary to advice given to the Board that they would have an opportunity to comment on the redesign, particularly given that their views were lost in this project’s feedback. Given the less than optimum communication and lack of clarity round process for this piece of feedback I have clarified that in future, the Board’s views on AT projects within the local board area must be clearly sought in writing and a deadline stipulated.

Glen Innes – Tāmaki Pathway Stg 4 / Ngapipi Bridge Widening

OLB feedback was provided on 6th October 2017 (see attached feedback copy, attachment B).

Glen Innes Cycleway Links

This project covers both Ōrākei & Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Boards with public consultation now open until October 25th. It is an ambitious project which will affect some major roads, particularly in the Stonefields area, and could potentially have huge effects of the availability of parking in streets leading to the Glen Innes township. Given the geographical spread and huge cost implications of this project, ideally the two Boards would be presenting similar feedback. I will be in contact with Maungakiekie-Tāmaki prior to deadline to ascertain where their priorities lie with this piece of work.

Ballarat St Road Extension

I have referenced this in my July Board Report. Members of both Ellerslie Residents’ Association and Meadowbank St Johns Residents’ Association have approached me to enquire about plans for this stretch of what is currently a ‘paper road’. Even if it is not feasible currently for the construction of a road for vehicular access, activating this route for walkers/cyclists through installation of a shared pathway is another option that should be looked at.

Speeding Swainston St

One constituent has been in very regular contact with me this month, and AT staff, with a concern about speeding vehicles in Swainston St, St Johns. This matter has been assessed comprehensively by Auckland Transport and this road is not currently considered a high priority for speed calming measures. The Board does have the option of allocating Transport Capital funds towards such a project but at this stage the lack of wider public support, and limited funds already committed elsewhere such a spend would not be justified.

Broken Yellow Lines Consultations

There seems to have been a rather voracious appetite for installation of broken yellow lines within the local board area. Representatives from the Ellerslie Residents’ Association contacted me with a query on some painted in on Amy St which were having a detrimental effect on parking for a couple of small businesses (see attached email, attachment C). It transpired these were installed without any supporting resolution and it remains a mystery why they were put there in the first place. I asked for their removal and this was done within 48 hours. Conversely the Ellerslie Business Association, Ros Rundle and myself have been consistently asking for the installation of yellow lines in a stretch of Ladies Mile outside Mexico Restaurant for some months now to no avail. The lack of lines there poses safety issues given the proximity of the busy intersection with Ladies Mile. It would be good to see the enthusiasm extended to painting the lines where they are needed now.

Broken yellow lines have also been proposed for traffic islands and across driveways where the road code clearly stipulates parking is not permitted. This is unnecessary and a waste of resources.

Road Markings Removal

The removal of road markings after completion of traffic works is sometimes less than thorough, creating confusing patterns on the road surface particularly on wet nights. The Allum St intersection is one such example.

Glen Innes - Tāmaki Pathway Stage 1

There has been recent weed control and new paint markings on Stg 1 Glen Innes – Tāmaki Pathway. It is unfortunate that the viewing structure approximately 100 downhill has already been ‘tagged’ with graffiti.

Pictured with David Wong and the Consultation team for the Glen Innes – Tāmaki Shared Path Stage 4 / Ngapipi Bridge Widening.

Problem Tree Roots:

Footpaths along Grand/Norman Lessor Drive are becoming increasingly dangerous and difficult to use as the tree roots growing underneath cause buckling and disintegration of the gravelled surface. I alerted Auckland Transport about the problem and they were there within a week to carry out remedial work on two of the worst areas. The problem however is widespread along this long stretch of road and these works have addressed only a very small part of the problem.

Date	Activities
9^thAugust 2017	Attended meeting at Oceania – Meadowbank Village to discuss extension of bus route and potential addition of bus stop at Meadowbank Train station. Representatives from Meadowbank St Johns Residents’ Assoc, Oceania Management, Meadowbank Village Residents’ Assoc, Auckland Transport and Richard Roxburgh author of petition in attendance. Petition presented to AT.
10^th August 2017	OLB visit by Deputy Mayor Bill Cashmore. OLB Workshop 12.00 – 5.00pm. Eastern Songbird Project -Attended Public Meeting at OBC clubrooms.
11^th August 2017	Enviroschools – Accompanied Chairman Colin Davis at presentation of signage to Meadowbank School at Assembly and participated in guided tour by students.
12^th August 2017	Kupe South Development Consultation event at Ōrākei Community Centre.
14^th August 2107	Ellerslie Residents’ Assoc Meeting.
15^th August 2017	Auckland Transport Meeting Parks Meeting Attended Ellerslie Mix – Ellerslie Business Association social event for local business networking.
21^st August 2017	Ngapipi Rd/Tāmaki Drive Intersection Karakia – attendance with fellow Board member Ros Rundle and Chairman Colin Davis. Meeting and Walkover of Meola / Oakley Creek catchment areas with SOSAC (Stop Auckland Sewerage Overflow Coalition) representative Elizabeth Walker
21^st August 2017	Ellerslie Residents’ Association AGM – Leicester Hall.
22^nd August 2017	Finance & Performance Committee Workshop / LB input.
24^th August 2017	OLB Workshop.
29^th August 2017	Attendance at Remuera Heritage evening hosted by Megan Jaffe Real Estate.
30^th August 2017	Presentation of Awards with Chairman Colin Davis at “Win with Words” event at Remuera Library.
1^st Sep 2017	Gowing Drive Walkover with AT staff and Christine Watson.
10^th Sept 2017	Brief attendance at Ellerslie Fairy Festival.
11^th Sept 2017	Ellerslie Residents’ Association meeting.
12^th Sept 2017	Auckland Transport Meeting.
14^th Sept 2017	OLB Workshop 12.00- 5.00.
18^th Sept 2017	Local Boards Regional/SubRegional Cluster Workshop – Council Chambers.
19^th Sept 2017	Parks Meeting – Bledisloe House. Attendance at commemorative event for Suffrage Day at Lower Khartoum / Te Ha o Hine Place with fellow Board Member Ros Rundle.
21^st Sept 2017	OLB Business Meeting.
23^rd Sept 2017	Public Consutation – Stage 4 GI2TP & Ngapipi Bridge Widening at Ōrākei Bay Village with Fellow Board members Kit Parkinson & David Wong.
25^th Sept 2017	AT Quarterly Briefing – Auckland Town Hall
26^th Sept 2017	Finance & Performance Committee Workshop – Auckland Town Hall.
28^th Sept 2017	OLB Workshop.
30^th Sept 2017	Public Consultation Event– Tahapa Reserves East & West
1^st Oct 2017	Attendance at Open Day for Purewa Cemetery & Crematorium.
2^nd Oct 2017	Local Boards Briefing – Infrastructure & Funding. Auckland Town Hall.
3^rd Oct 2017	Conflict of Interest Training – OLB Office Health & Safety Training- OLB Office
3^rd Oct 2017	Meadowbank St Johns Residents’ Association monthly meeting– Presentation of Ōrākei Local Board update and Year 1 OLB Achievements.
5^th Oct 2017	OLB Workshop

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Email Correspondence: Parks Maintenance	297
b ⇩	Ōrākei Local Board feedback on the Tāmaki Drive area improvements	299
c ⇩	Email Correspondence: Proposed extension of Ballarat Street in Ellerslie	303

Signatory

Author

Carmel Claridge - Ōrākei Local Board Councillor

Date: 9 October 2017

Ōrākei Local Board

19 October 2017

Board Member Report - Ros Rundle

File No.: CP2017/21810

Purpose

1. To update the Ōrākei Local Board Members on projects, activities and issues.

Recommendation

a) That the report be received.

Portfolio Lead: Economic Development

Other (alternate portfolio holder): Community

Economic Development

Remuera Business Association

To follow up on several on-going issues with Auckland Transport.

There has been an on-going problem in Remuera with dog owners allowing their dogs to defecate on footpaths and not picking up after their dogs specifically in the shopping centre. For many months discussion between Auckland Transport and Remuera Business Association has largely fallen on deaf ears as no solution to the problem has been forthcoming, however Auckland Transport advise that

“Cleaning timeframes in relation to cleaning up dog poo which puts faeces under the emergency 1 hour category - This means the AT contractor has to respond with in these timeframes to such requests.”

It is necessary for shop owners to phone 3010101 to report problems.

Regarding the Maintenance Plan for Clonbern Lane this is expected be reported back to the Board from Auckland Transport at the next Business Meeting 19 October.

Discussion between RBA and Auckland Transport regarding a charging station for electric cars and electric bikes in the Clonbern Car Park is ongoing, but we are hopeful of a quick decision from Auckland Transport.

New Christmas decorations for Remuera coming soon.

St Heliers Business Association

AGM held 3 October.

The committee was re-elected and BID’s charter adopted.

There are still on-going concerns regarding the cleaning of St Heliers footpaths and although Auckland Transport consider they are done to an appropriate standard, many of the local businesses do not agree.

Children’s Art Competition at the St Heliers Library month of October with prize giving on Saturday 18 November at 11am.

Last month it was noted there were several complaints regarding weeds growing out of the seawall at St Heliers.

Before and after photos

Ros4-

Mission Bay Business Association

Ongoing maintenance for the fairy lights on Selwyn Reserve is still in discussion

There is a proposed night market to be held on Selwyn Reserve on 11 November 2017

Still awaiting Auckland Transport to consult on the possible changed parking limits in Mission Bay.

A new compacting rubbish bin has been installed on Selwyn Reserve as a trial.

Ros4-2316

Ellerslie Business Association

The Association has been very busy organizing for their AGM – Monday 16 October.

There are several BID requirements necessary including a Strategic Plan, Accountability Reporting and a Charter from the Association.

Still waiting for Auckland Transport to consult on the Parking time limits within Ellerslie.

Ōrākei Community Association

This is the month for the Photo Competition for Ōrākei.

Kepa Kupe Street Car Park

After many years of flooding in this car park there has been a much needed remedial work done. Happy to report that a new catchpit has been installed which will allow for easier maintenance for the connection pipes which appear to be the underlying problem. Since the new catchpit went in there has been much rain and the carpark has not flooded.

Before the fix

New catchpit in car park

Ros parking

Consultation Tahapa Reserve

The Ōrākei Local Board is planning to create shared paths through Tahapa Reserve linking the community to the Glen Innes to Tāmaki Drive shared path. The consultation was requesting feedback for the Reserve, some possibilities to keep, renew or replace the basketball court with other recreational ideas.

Kit Parkinson OLB, AT representative, Tim from Council organizing the consultation, Carmel Claridge OLB, Tim Duguid Meadowbank St Johns Residents Association, Ros Rundle OLB with Alfie

Suffragette Day in Auckland – 19 September 2017

Carmel Claridge and Ros Rundle attended the celebration

Activities attended

Date:	Activity:
14 September	Community Facilities update on Ōrākei Community Centre with Centre Manager Ōrākei Local Board (OLB) workshop Ōrākei Community Association meeting
15 September	Meet the Candidates hosted by Mission Bay/Kohimarama Residents Association
18 September	Regional and Sub-regional Meeting Auckland Netball Board Meeting
19 September	Parks update Auckland Suffrage Memorial celebration
21 September	OLB Business Meeting
22 September	Auckland Conversation Livable City BID’s workshop
26 September	Eastern Network meeting
28 September	OLB Workshop
29 September	Meeting at Auckland Netball with Dianne Lasenby and Kit Parkinson
30 September	Consultation at Tahapa Reserve, Meadowbank
2 October	Local Board briefing on Infrastructure and Funding
3 October	Economic Development meeting with John Norman Conflict of Interest workshop Health and Safety Training St Heliers Village Association AGM
5 October	OLB catch up with Cr Desley Simpson OLB Workshop

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatory

Author

Rosalind Rundle - Ōrākei Local Board Councillor

Date: 9 October 2017

Ōrākei Local Board

19 October 2017

Board Member Report - David Wong

File No.: CP2017/21812

Purpose

To update the Ōrākei Local Board Members on projects, activities and issues.

Recommendation

That the report be received.

Portfolio Lead: Community

Other (alternate portfolio holder): Economic Development

Significant Points

· ASB Stadium – in capacity as Trustee – follow up on sponsorship and health and safety programme; request from Physio rehab group for rental discount – not deemed viable

· Follow up on damaged vehicles parked on side of Ōrākei Road for two weeks; liaison with Auckland Transport & police

· Liaison with Board member Churton on developments on 43/45 Benson Road sites – and potential for notification

· Attended Youth Advisory Panel to assess what initiatives could be deployed in Ōrākei ward (unfortunately Olivia Cen was not present).

Community

East City Community Trusts (ASB Stadium)

· Continuation of seeking alternate naming sponsor; continue to use ASB as a marketing/profile until alternative secured. There is overhead to pull ASB from website/brochures et al.

· Discuss options of Auckland Council naming rights protocols

· A review is underway to develop the health and safety obligations – to ensure compliance with newly implemented legislation.

Mission Bay Kohimarama Residents Association continue to seek resolution to:

· 3 October meeting attended by Constable Todd Martin – provided informative overview and insights to disorderly behavior and benefits of cameras on Selwyn Reserve

· Discussion on profile of Tāmaki Drive Master plan and a greater integrated approach and strategy required; concern that current approach to projects and works is fragmented; Alan Minson to work with Mike Padfield for strategic options

· Alan Minson has drawn sectional diagrams of Tāmaki Drive

· Consideration was discussed to develop a vision and some underlying detail as to the Tāmaki Drive areas of integration – and potentially spend some allocated funding to build a proposition (circa $5k)

· Initiative to develop pest traps in conjunction with Men’s Shed (prototype designed by Alan Minson; estimated cost $15); traps built and register now available for distribution

· Successful Meet the Candidates – Friday 15 September 2017; Selwyn College.

Ōrākei Community Association

· Discussion on photographic competition; allocation of funding agreed by previous board 2013/16.

Activities for the period: September 2017 – October 2017

Date	Activities
11 September 2017	Ellerslie Residents Association
14 September 2017	Communities Facilities catch up with Susan Ropati Ōrākei Local Board workshop
18 September 2017	ASB Stadium Board meeting Youth Advisory Panel meeting – Town Hall
21 September 2017	Ōrākei Local Board business meeting
23 September 2017	Tāmaki Drive consultation – Ōrākei Village
24 September 2017	Distinguished Gentleman’s Ride – Glover Park (motorcycle ride fundraiser for Prostrate cancer & Men’s Mental Health awareness)
26 September 2017	Eastern Bays Network meeting
28 September 2017	Ōrākei Local Board workshop
30 September 2017	Tahapa Reserve Development consultation
3 October 2017	Mission Bay /Kohimarama Residents Association meeting
5 October 2017	Ōrākei Local Board workshop

Youth Advisory panel 18 Sept – town hall; discussion on carbon emission & scout movement

Over 300 motorcycles assembled at Glover Park courtesy of OLB for Distinguished Gentlemans Ride; 24 Sept

Ōrākei Village – Tāmaki Drive consultation on Ngapipi bridge & Stage 4 crossing; 23 Sept

Rat traps organised by Alan Minson - MBKRA

Tahapa Reserve Consultation – ideas from residents on recreational transformation – 30 Sept

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatory

Author

David Wong - Ōrākei Local Board Councillor

Date: 9 October 2017

Chairperson	Colin Davis, JP
Deputy Chairperson	Kit Parkinson
Members	Troy Churton
	Carmel Claridge
	Toni Millar, QSM, JP
	Ros Rundle
	David Wong

Author	Kim Lawgun - Democracy Advisor
Authoriser	Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Ōrākei Local Boards