Agenda of Hibiscus and Bays Local Board

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 Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Wednesday, 18 October 2017, as a true and correct record.

5 Leave of Absence

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

6 Acknowledgements

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

7 Petitions

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

8 Deputations

Standing Order 3.20 provides for deputations. Those applying for deputations are required to give seven working days notice of subject matter and applications are approved by the Chairperson of the Hibiscus and Bays 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 Te Araroa - New Zealand's Trail and Okura

Mr David McGregor and Mr Rob Wakelin from Te Araroa – New Zealand’s Trail have requested a deputation to present on Te Araroa – New Zealand’s Trail and Okura.

Recommendation/s

That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:

a) thank Mr McGregor and Mr Wakelin for their presentation.

8.2 Future Whangaparaoa

Kym Burke, John Davies and Daphne McKerras of Future Whangaparaoa will be in attendance to provide an update on the activities of Future Whangaparaoa.

Recommendation/s

That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:

a) thank the representatives of Future Whangaparaoa for their presentation.

8.3 East Coast Bays Community Project

Representatives from the East Coast Bays Community Project will be in attendance to provide an update on the 2017/2018 work programme of the East Coast Bays Community Project.

Recommendation/s

That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:

a) thank the representatives from the East Coast Bays Community Project for their presentation.

9 Public Forum

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

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

10 Extraordinary Business

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

11 Notices of Motion

There were no notices of motion.

Hibiscus and Bays Local Board

15 November 2017

Land owner application for the use of the classified local purpose (service lane) reserve at 4 Bute Road, Browns Bay for construction purposes.

File No.: CP2017/23524

Purpose

1. To request land owner approval to use the service lane at 4 Bute Road, Browns Bay for approximately eighteen months during the construction of The Victor - a mixed use development at 6 Bute Road, Browns Bay.

Executive summary

2. The applicant, Ian Green, Project Manager on behalf of The Victor development, is requesting permission to block off the service lane at 4 Bute Road, Browns Bay to allow for placement of construction containers to provide a noise mitigation barrier during building works associated with the construction of a mixed use development at 6 Bute Road, Browns Bay. The service lane is situated between the proposed development and the East Coast Bays Library and Service Centre.

3. The use of this service lane has an approved Auckland Transport traffic management plan. If an acoustic fence was placed on the existing boundary between the service lane and the applicant’s boundary there will be insufficient width for cars to manoeuvre into the car parks outside the library at 4 Bute Road, Browns Bay.

4. At the conclusion of the works the developer will vest the land at 6 Bute Road to Auckland Council and landscape the service lane.

5. Any approval to use any part of 4 Bute Road, Browns Bay, would be by way of a permit issued by Community Facilities, Auckland Council, in the form of a letter under Sections 40 (1) and 61 (1) of the Reserves Act 1977. This would allow the contractor to use 4 Bute Road, Browns Bay, during the construction period and to be reinstated when construction was completed.

Recommendation/s

That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:

a) approve the landowner application from the applicant Ian Green, Project Manager on behalf of The Victor development, for the use of the service lane at 4 Bute Road, Browns Bay for the construction at the adjoining property, 6 Bute Road, Browns Bay.

Comments

6. The property at 4 Bute Road, Browns Bay, legally described as Lot 4 DP 60476 comprising 766 square metres is currently held in fee simple by the Auckland Council as a classified local purpose (service lane) reserve and subject to the provisions of the Reserves Act 1977.

7. The following site specific details have been obtained for the classified local purpose reserve:

· road

· airspace restriction designation

· key retail frontage

· additional height controls sea spray zone

· flood sensitive

· no notable trees

· not a significant ecological area

· not a site or place of value to mana whenua

· not a closed landfill

· not a contaminated site

8. Local board approval to block off the service lane between 6 Bute Road Browns Bay and the East Coast Bays Library will allow containers to be positioned to provide a barrier to restrict noise transmission during building construction works. If the service lane was operational throughout the construction this would have to be remarked as one way system. It is a narrow space as indicated in Attachment A.

9. The existing 17 car park spaces adjacent to the library will be temporarily removed. The three mobility card holder spaces will be relocated to the library car park to the north of the library. The service lane would be closed to through traffic.

10. A traffic management plan approved by Auckland Transport is attached as Attachment B.

11. Construction including landscaping, which will be completed by the applicant, is expected to be completed by September 2019.

Consideration

Specialist recommendations

12. Auckland Council’s parks and places specialist, senior arboricultural and eco specialist and maintenance delivery coordinators have been consulted and support the closing of the service lane for safety reasons during construction.

Options and analysis

Option 1 - Hibiscus and Bays Local Board approves the application for the developers use of the service lane during construction.

13. The following are the potential effects of this approach:

· this provides a solution for access to the applicant

· the container option provides an effective noise barrier to mitigate noise effects on library patrons during the construction.

· this approach separates the public from the construction site and is a safer option than the alternative

· the applicant is vesting the service lane with landscaping at the completion of construction planned for September 2019 as outlined in condition 24 of resource consent number: LUC 60028774.

Option 2 – Hibiscus and Bays Local Board declines the application

14. The following are the potential effects of this approach:

· a fast response for the applicant

· access will be difficult for the applicant

· the service lane will become unusable due to the inability for cars to turn safely

· realignment of the car parking bays to a 60 degree angle could potentially be undertaken however this could cause liability issues for council.

Local board views and implications

15. The Hibiscus and Bays Local Board has not reviewed this landowner application previously. The Hibiscus and Bays Local Board has delegated authority to approve or to decline a landowner application.

16. On completion of this development it will support the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board Outcome: Thriving town centres attracts people and business investment and provide opportunities for local people to work closer to where they live.

Māori impact statement

17. The applicant has taken into account Te Aranga Māori design principles founded on Māori cultural values for the proposed development at 4 Bute Road, Browns Bay. The principles have arisen from a widely held desire to enhance mana whenua presence, visibility and participation in the design of the public realm. These values are outlined in the Architectural and Urban Design Assessment by Clinton Bird Urban Design Limited (pages 24 -27) in Attachment C.

Implementation

18. If approved the permit will be organised through Community Facilities, Auckland Council and the traffic management plan implemented with appropriate signage by Auckland Transport and the applicant.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Attachment A: Photo – Edge of private property	13
b ⇩	Attachment B: The Victor Apartments – Auckland Traffic Management Plan by Lautrec, dated 16 September, 2016.	15
c ⇩	Attachment C: Architectural Design Assessment – prepared by Clinton Bird Urban Design Limited, dated 20 February 2016.	17

Signatories

Authors

Raewyn Sendles - Land Use Advisor

Authorisers

Rod Sheridan - General Manager Community Facilities

Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager

Hibiscus and Bays Local Board

15 November 2017

Land owner approval for weed control and enhancement planting within the esplanade reserve adjoining Nukumea Stream

File No.: CP2017/23554

Purpose

1. To request land owner approval from the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board for Coastal Properties Orewa Limited to undertake weed control and enhancement planting along the esplanade reserve adjoining Nukumea Stream.

Executive summary

2. Coastal Properties Orewa Limited, the applicant, has applied to undertake weed control and enhancement planting along the esplanade reserve adjoining Nukumea Stream.

3. The applicant will be undertaking this planting as part of a proposed coastal retirement development at 25-35 Annalise Place and 488/496C Hibiscus Coast Highway.

4. The retirement village site adjoins the esplanade reserve along its northern boundary, which is part of the Nukumea Stream environment and varies in width between and 3.6 and 7.2 metres. This site is legally described as Lot 4 DP 44260 and is held by Auckland Council in fee simple as an unclassified local purpose esplanade reserve subject to the Reserves Act 1977.

5. An ecological restoration plan will be implemented by the applicant (as part of an Ecological Impact Assessment that has been undertaken) for restoration of the esplanade reserve.

6. This application supports in part the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board Plan 2017, outcome for our community to enjoy access to quality parks, reserves and facilities for leisure, sport and recreation.

7. Staff recommend that the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board support the application subject to the approval of resource consent and the recommendation for the applicant to plant the riparian margin to a 10 metre average width to achieve improvements in ecological function along this reach.

Recommendation/s

That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:

a) approve Coastal Properties Orewa Limited to undertake weed control and enhancement planting along the esplanade reserve of Nukumea Stream legally described as Lot 4 DP 44260, subject to the approval of resource consent

b) recommend that the applicant plants the riparian margin to a 10 metre average width along the northern boundary that runs parallel to the Nukumea Stream and is adjacent to the site at 25-35 Annalise Place and 488 Hibiscus Coast Highway to achieve improvements in ecological function along this reach.

Comments

8. Auckland Council has received a proposal for a development for a retirement village adjoining a narrow esplanade reserve at Nukumea Stream that is held by Auckland Council in fee simple as an unclassified local purpose esplanade reserve and identified as an open space conservation zone in the Auckland Unitary Plan.

Ecological context

9. The Nukumea Stream is of high ecological value in the Auckland region and is a habitat for numerous at risk native freshwater fish species. The riparian planting as indicated in the Ecological Impact Assessment attached as Attachment A (dated December 2015) will improve the condition of the existing riparian environment and once established, will contribute to providing essential shade to the stream. Table 1 indicates the native species planned for planting.

Table 1: Plant species for the riparian planting

Zone	Common name	Relative density
Viewing platform	Carex	0.5m densities
Stream edge	Oioi	0.5m densities
Riparian Cluster	Cabbage tree	9 individual trees in clusters of 3
	Mahoe	4 individual trees
	Pigeonwood	1 or 2 specimen trees
	Puriri	1 or 2 specimen trees
	Kowhai	6 individual trees
	Whau	2 individual trees
	Nikau	9 individual trees
	Karaka	2 individual trees
	Wiggy-wig	1m densities
Understorey edge	Hangehange	1m densities
	Coastal five fingers	1m densities
	Rangiora	1m densities
	Koroio	1m densities

10. The Ecological Impact Assessment includes a general description of weed control methodologies and maintenance that are suitable to the site.

11. There are recent records of copper skink, ornate skink and elegant gecko in close proximity to the site. All native lizards are protected under the Wildlife Act 1953. The Ecological Impact Assessment includes a Lizard Management Plan to address the removal of potential lizard habitat. Auckland Council’s ecologist considered that this plan is suitable for the proposal. The Lizard Management Plan suggests Alice Eaves Scenic Reserve as a possible relocation site for any lizards rescued.

12. On the other side of the stream is the Alice Eaves Scenic Reserve. This area is identified as a significant ecological area under the Auckland Unitary Plan (operative in part). Due to the proximity of the site to the Alice Eaves Scenic Reserve it is likely that a number of common native bird species frequent the subject site opportunistically for feeding and roosting, but are more likely to be resident within the higher quality habitat at the reserve.

Planning context

13. The retirement village consists of three separate apartment blocks of three, four and five storeys (120 units), basement car parking and associated works including access, communal facilities and landscaping attached as Attachment B. A revised height in relation to boundary drawing is attached as Attachment C.

14. The retirement village development has been publicly notified and a hearing is planned for late November, 2017 to consider the submissions and specialist assessments.

15. Auckland Council’s specialists are providing an assessment of effects as part of the regulatory Resource Management Act 1991 process including but not limited to:

· height in relation to the boundary

· maximum building height

· yard setbacks

· protection of fauna and flora

· sediment and erosion methodology.

16. The site is identified as a low lying coastal inundation area that will be taken into consideration during the regulatory resource consent process by the development engineer.

17. Directly adjacent to the esplanade reserve and within the 10 metre riparian yard set-back, there is a bowling green, pathways, seating and barbeque area and decking for the historical Rose Cottage. Rose Cottage is to be relocated with a proposed new deck protruding 1metre into the 10 metre riparian yard set-back.

18. The Hibiscus and Bays Greenways – Local Paths Plan, which was adopted in December 2016, includes Alice Eaves Bush Scenic Reserve to West Hoe Heights, along Nukumea stream as priority six.

Specialist recommendations related to weed control and enhancement planting

19. Auckland Council’s parks and places specialists, ecologist, parks resource consent planner, senior planner, area manager operational management and maintenance, the maintenance delivery coordinators and coastal management services have been consulted and support the weeding and planting enhancement with the following conditions that:

§ the planting must result in 75 percent canopy closure, with a 90 percent plant survival rate following a five year maintenance period

§ there is no increase to maintenance costs for council.

20. The ecologist recommends that a minimum of a 10 metre riparian margin is restored which would include land on the subject site beyond just the narrow reserve land. Ten metres would be a minimum width of planting required for the vegetation to achieve improvements in ecological function along this reach.

21. It is understood that the planting is proposed to be maintained as part of the amenity planting maintenance of the development as it is considered part of the overall landscaping.

Options and analysis

Option 1 - Hibiscus and Bays Local Board approve the weed control and enhancement planting along the esplanade reserve adjoining Nukumea Stream with the additional recommendation to plant to a 10 metre width.

22. The potential effects of this approach are:

· that the planned restoration is likely to have some positive ecological effects on the immediate stream reach given its current state

· the extra width could provide more inclusive public access to support the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board Plan 2017, Outcome:

o Our community enjoys access to quality parks, reserves and facilities for leisure, sport and recreation

o Our positive relationship with developers help ensure there is enough open space to serve residents’ needs in our high growth area

o The Hibiscus and Bays Greenways (Local Paths) will guide the extension of the network of walking and cycling connections for commuting, fitness and leisure.

Option 2 - Hibiscus and Bays Local Board decline the weed control and enhancement planting along the esplanade reserve adjoining Nukumea Stream.

23. This does not support the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board Plan 2017 outcomes highlighted above or the Greenways (Local Paths) plan. This would be a missed opportunity to provide enhancement planting and weed control. Staff do not support this approach.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

24. The Hibiscus and Bays Local Board has not reviewed this landowner application previously. The Hibiscus and Bays Local Board has delegated authority to approve or to decline a landowner application.

25. Feedback is sought from the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board regarding this proposal.

Māori impact statement

26. The applicant has engaged with mana whenua regarding this proposal. This involved email contact containing detailed information and inviting iwi representatives to hui and/or for a kaitiaki site visit to comment on any spiritual, cultural or environmental impact with respect to the proposal. Cultural Impact Assessments were received from Ngāti Manuhiri (Ngāti Manuhiri Settlement Trust) and Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki (Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki Trust). They are in support of the proposal and in summary requested additional filtering of stormwater and eco sourced native plants for the riparian margins.

Implementation

27. If approved by the local board, a formal land owner approval letter will be forwarded to the applicant for weed control and enhancement planting with the condition that this must result in 75 percent canopy closure, with a 90 percent plant survival rate following a five year maintenance period with no increase to long term maintenance costs for council. Any local board approval will be subject to the approval of the resource consent for the site.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Attachment A: 25-35 Annalise Place, Orewa - Ecological Impact Assessment, by Golder Associates, dated December 2015	95
b ⇩	Attachment B: Orewa Coastal Retirement Resort- 25-35 Annalise Place- Coastal Retirement Orewa Limited, by Ashton Mitchell, dated 20 April 2017	115
c ⇩	Attachment C: Orewa Coastal Retirement Resort – 25 – 35 Annalise Place – Coastal Retirement Orewa Limited, Elevations North, by Ashton Mitchell, dated 20 April 2017	119

Signatories

Authors

Raewyn Sendles - Land Use Advisor

Authorisers

Rod Sheridan - General Manager Community Facilities

Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager

Hibiscus and Bays Local Board

15 November 2017

Request to extend alcohol ban hours on Manly Esplanade, Browns Bay

File No.: CP2017/22278

Purpose

1. To determine whether to extend the existing night time alcohol ban to 24 hours, seven days a week on Manly Esplanade, Browns Bay.

Executive summary

2. Alcohol bans prohibit the consumption or possession of alcohol in specified areas during specified times. Alcohol bans are enforced by the New Zealand Police.

3. Manly Esplanade, Browns Bay currently falls within the Browns Bay night time alcohol ban of 10pm to 7am during daylight savings and 7pm to 7am outside daylight savings. A resident has requested the existing alcohol ban on Manly Esplanade be extended to 24 hours, seven days a week) to address on-going anti-social issues.

4. The Hibiscus and Bays Local Board has delegated authority to extend alcohol bans in its local board area under the Auckland Council Alcohol Control Bylaw 2014.

5. In determining whether to extend the current alcohol ban the local board must be satisfied on several points, the most important of which are:

· the alcohol ban area is subject to a high level of alcohol related crime or disorder

· the alcohol ban is appropriate and proportionate in light of the evidence, and can be justified as a reasonable limitation on people’s rights and freedoms.

6. There are two reasonably practicable options available to the local board:

· Option one: decline to extend the existing Manly Esplanade night time alcohol ban to 24 hours, seven days a week. The existing night time alcohol ban will continue to apply

· Option two: extend the existing Manly Esplanade night time alcohol ban to 24 hours, seven days a week.

7. Staff recommend Option one: that the local board decline the request to extend the existing night time alcohol ban on Manly Esplanade, Browns Bay. The evidence provided does not meet the legislative and bylaw threshold of a high level of alcohol related crime or disorder outside of the existing night time alcohol ban hours. The better use of existing police powers in relation to crime or disorder and council powers in relation to noise, is a more appropriate and proportionate response.

Recommendation/s

That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:

a) decline to extend the existing night time alcohol ban on Manly Esplanade, Browns Bay to 24 hours, seven days a week. The existing night time alcohol ban will continue to apply.

Comments

A resident requested an extension the existing alcohol ban to 24 hour, seven days a week alcohol ban on Manly Esplanade, Browns Bay

8. On 10 April 2017 a request was received from a resident of Manly Esplanade, Browns Bay. The resident requested that the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board (the local board) extend the existing night time alcohol ban on Manly Esplanade to 24 hours, seven days a week (see map in Attachment A). The request has been made to address on-going anti-social issues occurring on Manly Esplanade, Browns Bay.

9. The initial request was not progressed on the basis that the evidence provided was insufficient. Further evidence was gathered between April and October 2017. This evidence is consolidated in a document dated 16 October 2017 (Attachment B).

10. Manly Esplanade, Browns Bay currently falls within the Browns Bay night time alcohol ban of 10pm to 7am during daylight savings and 7pm to 7am outside of daylight savings (Attachment C).

Alcohol bans prohibit alcohol in public places, are adopted by local boards and enforced by Police

11. Alcohol bans prohibit the consumption or possession of alcohol in specified public places (areas) during specified times.

12. The local board has delegated authority to extend alcohol bans in its local board area under the Auckland Council Alcohol Control Bylaw 2014 (the bylaw) (GB/2014/121).

13. Local Government Act 2002 and bylaw criteria requires any extension to the existing Manly Esplanade night time alcohol ban to be:

· in response to evidence of a high level of alcohol related crime or disorder caused or made worse by alcohol consumption in the area:

o before the time the existing alcohol ban starts (e.g. before 10pm during daylight saving)

o during the existing night time alcohol ban caused by persons consuming alcohol in the alcohol ban area before the alcohol ban starts.

· an appropriate and proportionate response in light of the evidence

· a justifiable limitation on people’s rights and freedoms.

14. The bylaw also requires consideration of:

· appropriate community-focussed solutions as an alternative / compliment to an alcohol ban

· the views of police, Māori, owners, occupiers or persons that council has reason to believe are representative of the interest of owners or occupiers of premises within the alcohol ban area.

15. Alcohol bans are enforced by the New Zealand Police. Under sections 169 and 170 of the Local Government Act 2002, police have powers of search, seizure, infringement notice and arrest for the specified times and places that an alcohol ban applies.

16. Council has no role in police response or enforcement of alcohol bans. The requester considers that the police response to their complaints during the existing alcohol ban hours is inadequate (Attachment D).

“Police very rarely come out when called due to high work load in other areas of policing which we understand as they have to prioritise”

“If and when they [the police] do come out it is 1 and 1/2 hours to 2 hours after we call”

“Many times they have gone by the time the police show up if they even turn up at all”

(Attachment D)

17. Police also have powers to address any incidents of crime or disorder under the Summary Offences Act 1981 whether or not alcohol is involved. Under this Act, the police have powers of arrest.

Evidence has been provided from the requester, Police and noise control

Incident log

18. The requester has provided a record of 55 alcohol related incidents between December 2016 and March 2017 (Attachment B).

19. Of the 55 incidents, 33 occur during the existing night time alcohol ban hours, and two have no time recorded.

20. The 20 incidents listed that occur outside of the current alcohol ban hours (before 10pm) all include noise nuisance. There was also one instance of urination, one instance of trespass, one instance of tampering with mail, one instance of cars leaving screeching tyres and racing up the road, and one instance of playing soccer in the street.

21. This equates to one non-noise incident per month over the four month summer period. The requester correspondence notes that the incidents are worse during summer months.

Letters in support

22. The requester provided copies of numerous letters dating back to 2007 referring to alcohol related issues on Manly Esplanade, Browns Bay (Attachment B). These letters detail anti-social incidents that range in severity.

23. Noise related incidents were recorded as occurring during the day; shouting, skateboarding, fighting, yelling, balls being kicked up the road, verbal abuse and rude comments.

24. A number of incidents raised in the letters referred to incidents occurring during the existing night time alcohol ban; damage to private property, assault and threats of violence.

25. The requester also expressed concern regarding existing alcohol ban signage, stating people either don’t see the sign or don’t know what ‘time restrictions apply’ means, as the alcohol ban hours are not stated. A photo of the current alcohol ban sign is in Attachment E.

Police data

26. A letter from the NZ Police in response to an Official Information Act 1982 request dated 2 August 2017 has been provided (Attachment F). The letter refers to 23 complaints received regarding behaviour or crime committed at Manly Esplanade, Browns Bay between 15 July 2016 and 23 June 2017. None of these incidents are documented as being alcohol related.

27. NZ Police have also provided an additional list of 81 incidents recorded as taking place on Manly Esplanade also between 15 July 2016 and 23 June 2017 (Attachment F).

28. Of the 81 incidents listed, 29 occured during the existing night time alcohol ban hours. Of the remaining 52 incidents, only one is documented as being alcohol related. However, this incident is incorrectly categorised as an alcohol ban breach. The incident was logged at 7:50pm on 26 December 2016. This is before the existing night time alcohol ban start time of 10pm during daylight saving. Further, the incident does not indicate any alcohol related crime or disorder occurring as a result of the consumption of alcohol.

Council noise complaints

29. Two noise incidents were logged with council from 1 October 2016 to 16 October 2017 (Attachment G).

30. Neither incident was recorded as being alcohol related. The 5 February 2017 incident was deemed not excessive. The other on 14 September 2017 was referred to NZ Police.

Options and risks

31. The following reasonably practicable options have been identified:

· Option one: decline to extend the existing Manly Esplanade night time alcohol ban to 24 hours, seven days a week. The existing night time alcohol ban will continue to apply

· Option two: extend the existing Manly Esplanade night time alcohol ban to 24 hours, 7 days a week.

32. The tables below assesses the advantages, disadvantages and risks associated with each option.

Table 1: Assessment of option one: decline to extend the existing Manly Esplanade night time alcohol ban to 24 hours, 7 days a week

Advantages

· no risk of legal challenge in terms of whether the evidential threshold has been met, or that the ban is appropriate, proportionate, and a justified limitation on people’s rights and freedoms in light of the evidence provided

· no implementation costs for new signage.

Disadvantages and risks

· residents may continue to experience problems with noise, similar to those detailed in the evidence provided.

Risk mitigation

· Hibiscus and Bays Local Board could:

o facilitate dialogue between police and residents to address concerns about police response and enforcement of crime, disorder and alcohol bans

o encourage residents to contact noise control to address noise nuisance

o encourage residents to record incidents to support a future request

o investigate residents’ concerns about the adequacy of alcohol ban signage.

Table 2: Assessment of option two: extend the existing Manly Esplanade night time alcohol ban to 24 hours, 7 days a week

Advantages

· a 24 hours, seven days a week alcohol ban on Manly Esplanade would be supported by the requester.

Disadvantages and risks

· potential for successful legal challenge if court considers that the evidential threshold has not been met, or that the alcohol ban is not appropriate, proportionate or justified in light of the evidence provided

· implementation costs for new signage

· will not address residents’ concerns about the perceived inadequacy of police response

· new signage unlikely to result in voluntary compliance given that current signage does not state times, and the number of incidents occurring during the existing night time alcohol ban hours.

Risk mitigation

· the risk of legal challenge is considered low

· Hibiscus and Bays Local Board could facilitate dialogue between NZ Police and residents to address concerns about police response and enforcement of crime, disorder and alcohol bans.

Staff analysis and recommendation

Staff do not consider that the evidence meets the required threshold to justify extending the existing alcohol ban to 24 hours, 7 days a week

33. Staff have assessed the evidence against the legislative and bylaw criteria and consider that:

· the evidence provided by residents is predominantly noise related or occurring within the current night time alcohol ban hours.

· the frequency and severity of this evidence is not considered to indicate a high level of crime or disorder

· noise nuisance is a low level form of disorder unless proven to be excessive or unreasonable

· better use of council’s noise complaints service is a viable alternative control mechanism to address a key concern documented in the resident’s evidence without imposing additional restrictions on people’s rights and freedoms

· NZ Police data has not documented any alcohol related crime or disorder incidents that occurred outside of the current alcohol ban hours. The evidence documents crime or disorder occurring, yet does not identify whether it is alcohol related

· NZ Police can use existing powers under the Summary Offences Act 1981 to address any incidents of crime or disorder when they occur and whether or not alcohol is involved.

34. Staff recommend that the local board decline the request to extend the existing Manly Esplanade, Browns Bay night time alcohol ban to a 24 hours, seven days a week (Option one). The evidence provided does not demonstrate the presence of a high level of alcohol related crime or disorder outside of the existing night time alcohol ban hours. The better use of existing police powers in relation to crime or disorder and council powers in relation to noise, is a more appropriate and proportionate response.

35. Staff note that police evidence could be strengthened by recording whether incidents outside the current alcohol ban hours are alcohol related.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

36. The Hibiscus and Bays Local Board previously approved the current night time alcohol ban for Browns Bay, which encompasses Manly Esplanade, on October 2015 (HB/2015/54). This decision was based on police evidence of alcohol related crime and disorder occurring at night time.

Māori impact statement

37. Alcohol bans have the potential to reduce alcohol related harm and to increase opportunities for health and wellbeing. These goals are consistent with the desired outcomes of the Māori Plan for Tāmaki Makaurau. Iwi have been widely consulted on the use of alcohol bans and have previously been supportive of their use.

Implementation

a) If the request is declined (Option one) council will notify affected residents of the decision.

b) If the request is adopted (Option two) council will:

· notify affected residents of the decision

· install new alcohol ban signage

· update the council website.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Manly Esplanade, Browns Bay map	127
b ⇩	Consolidated alcohol ban request and resident evidence	129
c ⇩	Current Browns Bay alcohol ban map	145
d ⇩	Requester email correspondence	147
e ⇩	Alcohol ban signage in Manly Esplanade, Browns Bay	155
f ⇩	NZ Police data	157
g ⇩	Auckland Council noise complaint data	163

Signatories

Authors

Ashleigh Pihema - Policy Analyst

Bonnie Apps - Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Kataraina Maki – General Manager - Community and Social Policy

Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager

Hibiscus and Bays Local Board

15 November 2017

Input to the Review of Citizens Advice Bureaux services

File No.: CP2017/23797

Purpose

1. To seek local board feedback on the draft options for supporting the future provision of Citizens Advice Bureaux services to Auckland’s communities.

Executive summary

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

3. The review will determine the appropriate level of Auckland Council support for Citizens Advice Bureaux services from 2018/2019 onwards.

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

5. Auckland Council fund Auckland Citizens Advice Bureaux Incorporated $1.839 million a year which then distributes the funds to bureaux.

6. Local boards have provided input to the review on the local relationships, services and funding. Staff have developed draft options to address the issues and opportunities raised. The options are in the table below:

Option 1: Enhanced status quo	Enhancements are a refined funding model, reporting improvements and strengthened local relationships
Option 2: Locally driven	Transfers responsibility for existing budget to local boards
Option 3: Regional service provision	Collective review of funding levels and number and location of service sites

7. Staff consider Option 3 to be the best option to achieve consistent regional service delivery. If Citizens Advice Bureaux and Citizens Advice Bureau New Zealand do not agree with Option 3, then Option 1 provides for greater consistency of service delivery than Option 2.

8. Staff will incorporate feedback from local boards on the draft options in to the review findings to be reported to the Environment and Community Committee in early 2018.

Recommendation/s

That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:

a) provide feedback on the draft options for supporting the future provision of Citizens Advice Bureaux services to Auckland’s communities by 1 December 2017.

Comments

Background

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

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

10. The review scope includes:

· alignment to council policy, strategic priorities, local board plans and policies

· equitable service provision – Aucklanders having access to the services they need across the region, responding to growth and change in Auckland’s communities

· equity of funding for bureaux across Auckland – the basis for how funding is distributed

· how Auckland Council interacts and engages with bureaux across Auckland

· communicating the impact and value of Citizens Advice Bureaux (CABx) services

· council’s governance needs and role with regard to reporting and accountability.

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

12. ACABx received $1.839 million for 2017/2018, which includes an annual inflation provision. This expenditure is included in the Long-term Plan 2015-2025.

13. Some local boards provide funding to their local bureaux in addition to the core funding allocated through ACABx. Local boards provide support to CABx through accommodation as the majority of bureaux are located in council facilities.

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

Current Auckland Citizens Advice Bureaux services and alignment with local board plans and council strategies

15. Currently there are 31 Auckland CABx sites in 18 local board areas, with over 900 trained volunteers fielding approximately 300,000 enquiries per annum; 75% of the service is delivered face-to-face.

16. Support for CAB services aligns with the following:

· local board plan outcomes, such as connected communities, employment and housing

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

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

17. The first annual review of the Auckland Council-ACABx Strategic Relationship Agreement (2016-2018) noted the following achievements and issues:

· agreed relationship principles, established a governing group and secured Citizens Advice Bureau New Zealand (CABNZ) involvement to support the relationship

· work is still in progress to improve measurement and the CABx reporting model

· both parties acknowledged that the current arrangements limit the collective ability to achieve regional level change, including closure, rationalisation or new sites and influencing local service provision

· currently ACABx will not address the overall number and location of service sites operated by member bureaux, which is based on legacy council models. They will not consider opening new sites unless there is an increase in the overall funding envelope. Based on current information shared by CAB it is difficult to determine the value of the service in order for the council to review its funding commitment.

The review of Citizens Advice Bureaux Services in Auckland

18. Local boards provided input to the review during July and August 2017. A comprehensive information pack was provided to resource and support their input. The full summary of local board input is provided in Attachment A.

19. Feedback from local boards highlighted what is working well:

· Most local boards consider the services are of high value to the community.

· Leverage of council funding as services are delivered by well trained, approachable, multi-lingual and knowledgeable volunteers.

· Connecting people with information and services otherwise out of reach, especially for migrants, older people, international students and lower socioeconomic groups.

20. The review has identified a number of issues, including:

· Inequity in funding of bureaux and service provision across the region – service needs to be responsive to growth and community need.

· The need for better connections between local boards and bureaux to support improved two-way communication.

· The need for bureau data and information on trends and emerging issues at regional and site level.

· Future service sustainability, including awareness of service and better outreach to targeted groups that currently are under-represented as users (e.g. Māori, some migrant groups, young people, rural communities).

21. Some local boards have raised deprivation as a factor that should be taken into account in allocating funding to bureaux. These local boards consider that areas of high deprivation should get more funding as there is increased and more complex need. Further investigation is needed and staff are seeking evidence from CAB on what they deliver and from which sites, and where their clients live before deprivation can be considered within the funding model.

Draft options for feedback

22. Three draft options have been developed that respond to the issues and opportunities raised by local boards and the review of the Strategic Relationship Agreement.

Table 1: Review of CAB services: Draft options

Option

Description

Pros

Cons

Implementation

Option 1: Enhanced status quo

· Overall funding envelope unchanged

· Governing Body remains the decision maker for funding

· Council has funding agreement with ACABx

· The funding agreement includes:

- A review of the population-based funding model with up-to-date local board population estimates, current CAB sites and exploring the use of deprivation as a proxy for need

- Improved reporting with consistent trend information at regional and site level

- A local relationship framework developed to support strengthened and more strategic relationships between local boards and bureaux

· Valued community service is maintained

· Continued contribution to regional strategies and improved contribution to local board plan outcomes

· Updated funding model to include some aspects of need, including population growth and potentially deprivation

· Improved reporting on the use and value of the service regionally and locally (who is using the service, why and where)

· Community intelligence is shared to support local decision making and advocacy

· Efficient bulk funding model because Governing Body would allocate bulk funding to ACABx to distribute to the bureaux

· No change to the fixed funding envelope

· Does not address the overall number and location of service sites or opening of new sites in high growth areas

· No strategic approach to the region’s service needs

· Does not address that some local boards are providing additional funding for bureau services from LDI budgets

· Does not address the CAB as a largely passive service with limited resources to undertake outreach to vulnerable groups that are currently underrepresented as users

· Does not address responsiveness of the service to changing demographics and evolving community needs

· Could be implemented for 2018/2019 with a two-year funding agreement (July 2018 - June 2020)

· This is the most achievable of the options

Option 2: Locally driven

· CAB operates as a local service rather than a regional service

· Governing Body transfers responsibility for existing budget to local boards. Locally driven initiatives (LDI) budgets adjusted accordingly

· It would be up to each local board to decide if local bureaux are funded and to what level. From the bureaux perspective, their funding agreement would be with Auckland Council instead of ACABx

· Local boards govern the relationship with bureaux

· The funding agreement includes:

- Meeting local board priorities

- Improved reporting and local relationship framework as under Option 1

· Opportunity to strengthen alignment of bureaux services with local board plan outcomes and with other local community services

· Local boards and bureaux work together to respond to growth and local changes

· Council funding of the service can be more responsive to local need, e.g. seek rationalisation of bureau sites at a local or cluster level, outreach to vulnerable groups that are currently underrepresented as users

· Boards can direct funding to providers best placed to serve the local community

· Improved reporting on the use and value of the service regionally and locally (who is using the service, why and where)

· Community intelligence is shared to support local decision making and advocacy

· The fixed funding envelope constrains the ability to open new sites

· No strategic approach to the region’s service needs

· Significantly higher administrative burden on CAB which will need to seek local board support for funding arrangements

· Would require increased dedicated resource from council (Community Empowerment Unit) to administer multiple funding agreements and accountability reports

· Could be implemented for 2018/2019

· Funding could be ring fenced for the 2018/2019 during phased implementation

· From 2019-2021, local boards could fund on an annual or multi-year basis and could also fund on a local board cluster basis

· This option is achievable but would require significant change for bureaux and local boards

Option 3: Regional service provision

· Assessment undertaken to understand the value of the service which would also determine the appropriate level of Auckland Council support required

· This option requires active participation from CABNZ and Auckland bureaux

· Regional Network Provision Framework developed by council, CABNZ and bureaux that reviews the location of bureau sites across the region to address service gaps and opportunities around accommodation

· Could also include potential for a single CAB entity for whole of Auckland with a mandate to develop the service regionally – requires major constitutional change for bureaux

· Comprehensive review of the CAB service going forward and role for Auckland Council in supporting the service

· Only option that allows for a review of the level of council funding for the service

· Strengthened contribution to regional strategies and local board plan outcomes

· Only option that would be able to comprehensively address the overall number and location of service sites, including new sites

· Strategic approach to the region’s service needs and addresses responsiveness of local service delivery

· Requires significant commitment and change from a volunteer-based organisation

· Relies on substantial council involvement and increased dedicated resource

· The new approach would be developed during 2018/19 and implemented in 2019/2020

· Enhanced status quo would apply in 2018/2019

· This option is the most difficult to achieve and would require long term commitment from all parties and council resourcing to implement

23. Overall Option 3: Regional service provision provides the most likelihood of achieving regional consistency of service delivery to meet changing community need and for this reason staff considers this to be the best option. However, without the agreement of the CABx and CABNZ Option 3 is not achievable. Discussions between council staff, the ACABx board and CABNZ are still ongoing.

24. If Option 3 is not achievable Option 1: Enhanced status quo will provide for greater consistency of service delivery than Option 2: Locally driven.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

25. Local boards have detailed knowledge of both local bureau delivery and of their local communities’ needs. Local boards have provided input to the review on their relationship with the local bureau, services and funding, indicating that for most local boards there is good alignment of the CABx services with local board plan outcomes.

26. Staff have developed draft options that respond to the issues and opportunities raised by local boards and are seeking feedback on these options.

27. Under Option 1 (Enhanced status quo) the funding model is reviewed and an improved local relationship framework would be available to support reporting and discussions between boards and bureaux. Under Option 2 (Locally driven), local boards would take on responsibility for funding local bureaux. Under Option 3 (Regional service provision) a fuller assessment would be undertaken with local board involvement to determine a new approach for future CAB service provision across the region.

Māori impact statement

28. For 2016/2017, Māori users of CABx services comprised between 2.5% of users in the central Auckland/Waiheke cluster to 13.2% in south/east Auckland cluster (Source: ACABx Accountability Report to Auckland Council July 2016-June 2017).

29. Options 2 and 3 are more likely to improve Māori engagement with CAB services as they would support more responsive local service provision.

Implementation

30. Staff request local boards provide feedback on the draft options by 1 December 2017. Staff will incorporate this feedback in to the review findings which will be reported to the Environment and Community Committee in early 2018.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Summary of local board input July - August 2017	171

Signatories

Authors

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

Authorisers

Graham Bodman - General Manager Arts, Community and Events

Carol McKenzie-Rex – General Manager, Local Board Services

Hibiscus and Bays Local Board

15 November 2017

Adoption of a regional membership structure across council operated pools and leisure centres

File No.: CP2017/24077

Purpose

1. To endorse the introduction of a regional membership structure across Auckland Council operated pools and leisure centres and approve new membership prices for Stanmore Bay Pool and Leisure Centre and East Coast Bays Leisure Centre.

Executive summary

2. The Active Recreation team have developed a strategic “Game Plan” to support the vision of the Auckland Sport and Recreation Strategic Action Plan – inspiring more Aucklanders to be more active, more often – and to achieve local board priorities.

3. Deploying a single consolidated operating system across all council operated leisure facilities is a key project in this work programme. The new system supports improved operational and business processes. It also enables Auckland Council to offer a new range of affordable and accessible memberships across all council operated leisure centres.

4. A new membership structure was piloted in three leisure centres in June: Moana-Nui-a-Kiwa, Stanmore Bay and East Coast Bays (Albany Stadium Pool opened in February with the same membership categories).

5. The response to the pilot was overwhelmingly positive, with increases in membership, member satisfaction and staff engagement. Active Recreation intends to offer the new memberships at council operated pools and leisure centres, beginning in November 2017.

6. The recommended membership model will provide more choice and membership features, improved benefits and allow full members access to more activities in more centres throughout the region. It will also provide lower cost options for people that predominantly enjoy one activity at their home centre.

Recommendation/s

That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:

a) endorse the introduction of a regional membership structure across council operated pools and leisure centres.

b) approve revised membership prices for local pools and leisure centres for the 2017/2018 financial year:

Full “Get Into It” membership

Single function membership:

Gym It, Move It or Swim It

Stanmore Bay Pool & Leisure Centre

Silver, at $19.50/week

$16.00/week

East Coast Bays Leisure Centre

Bronze, at $16.00/week

$14.00/week

Comments

Impact in the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board area

7. Stanmore Bay Pool and Leisure Centre will become a silver centre. New members will pay $19.50 per week for full membership and access to all functions at Stanmore Bay and at fourteen silver and bronze centres across Auckland. Currently approved membership for 2017/2018 is $19.60 per week and access is restricted to Stanmore Bay only.

8. East Coast Bays Leisure Centre (ECB) will become a bronze centre. New members will pay $16.00 for full membership at ECB and nine other bronze centres across Auckland. Currently approved membership for 2017/2018 is $18.70 and includes access to four other North Shore centres.

9. Alternatively, new members can choose single function memberships at each location:

· Gym It (gym access) –Stanmore Bay at $16.00/week, East Coast Bays at $14.00/week

· Move It (group fitness) – Stanmore Bay at $16.00/week, East Coast Bays at $14.00/week

· Swim It (swimming) – Stanmore Bay at $16.00/week.

10. Concessions for seniors, students, families, disabled, community services card holders and green prescription will apply to these prices. The Stanmore Bay senior offer is not affected.

11. Existing members are welcome to retain their memberships until:

a. their current fixed term membership period ends, at which time they will be offered one of the new fixed or open-term memberships, or

b. they choose to upgrade or cancel their open-term direct debit membership.

12. These changes only apply to membership-based products and services. There will be no impact on the cost, features or availability of other activities, including pool entry, Learn-To-Swim, spa/sauna/steam access, casual fitness, OSCAR after school care, Early Childhood Education (ECE), recreation or holiday programmes.

Background – enabling more Aucklanders to be more active, more often

13. Council manages 44 aquatic, leisure and ECE facilities across the Auckland region. Nineteen pools and leisure centres are operated under contract or lease agreements by third parties. The remainder are managed and operated by council’s Active Recreation team.

14. The Active Recreation “Game Plan” is a three year transformation programme designed to achieve outcomes aligned to the Auckland Sport and Recreation Strategic Action Plan (ASARSAP):

· inspiring more Aucklanders to be more active, more often

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

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

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

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

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

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

New Auckland-wide leisure membership

17. One significant advantage of the consolidated operation system – for both customers and council – is the ability to simplify and standardise products (memberships), services (courses and programmes) and prices across the leisure network.

18. It will also enable us to offer a new range of affordable and accessible “Get Active Your Way” memberships that include access to many more of our council operated leisure centres and activities. We have ensured that within each membership tier there is a mix of services including pool, gym and group fitness programmes for customers with “Get into it” membership and that all prices are attuned to the local community.

19. If members want access to centres or services that don’t fall within their home centre’s tier they are welcome to purchase a membership for a tier above.

20. Active Recreation has also introduced a new single function (swimming, fitness, group fitness) membership at each centre to offer a cheaper, more targeted alternative.

21.

Screenshot%202017-09-27%2020

Get Active Your Way Membership Structure:

22. The table below outlines the proposed changes to individual membership:

Type of membership	Description	Replaces	What’s the change?
Get Into It	Full membership, offers access to all activities within each centre and to other council operated centres across the region according to three tier groupings: Gold (17 centres, including silver & bronze) Silver (15 centres, including bronze) Bronze (10 centres)	Over 50 different full access memberships. Offered in single or small clusters of centres across the region. Currently prices, services, terms and benefits vary across the region and from centre to centre. Full membership: Stanmore Bay = $19.60/week East Coast Bays = $18.70/week	Simplicity, clarity and consistency of prices, services and benefits. Access to a much wider range of Auckland Council operated leisure centres. Improved range and quality of services offered. Get Into It membership: Stanmore Bay, silver = $19.50/week East Coast Bays, bronze = $16.00/week
Gym It Swim It Move It	Activity based membership option. Offers access to a specific activity at the local centre: Gym It – gym/fitness centre Swim It – pool/spa/sauna Move It – group fitness	Off-peak and restricted single-centre memberships. NA	This is a new, cheaper membership category meeting the demands of customers who only wish to use the gym, pool or group fitness. Gym It/Swim It/Move It memberships: Stanmore Bay = $16.00/week East Coast Bays = $14.00/week
Concessions	Senior, disabled, student, youth and green prescription concessions are available for all membership types	Existing concession offers	Membership concessions will be carried forward. Both new and current offers will be applied more consistently.

Membership pilot and positive feedback

23. The membership framework has been extensively researched, developed and tested prior to piloting in three sites (Stanmore Bay, East Coast Bays and Moana-Nui-a-Kiwa) in June and July 2017. Albany Stadium Pool opened in February with the same membership categories. These sites represent a diverse range of customers, services and functions. This allowed Active Recreation to test the membership model across a range of local communities, functions and facilities.

24. Feedback from new members who signed up during the pilot period was overwhelmingly positive (e.g. over 90% opted for the “Get Into It” full access bronze membership at Moana-Nui-a-Kiwa).

25. All three pilot centres experienced similar benefit from the new membership structure and have continued with the new membership offering past the end of the period. This has allowed Active Recreation to continue to evaluate the new membership model against the existing membership offering in other centres.

26. Results remain positive. Sales have increased in all pilot centres and both customer and staff experience measures have improved. This is shown in the tables below.

27. New membership growth at pilot leisure centres:

Membership Totals	30 May 2016	30 May 2017	Membership Pilot Begins	30 June 2017	30 July 2017	27 Aug 2017
MNAK Total members	956	985		988	1039	1062
Get Into It members	na	0		+59	+143	+210
ECB Total members	553	571		597	590	576
Get Into It members	na	0		+83	+106	+128
Stanmore Bay Total	1784	2095		2126	2115	2148
Get Into It members	na	0		+117	+191	+260

Customer feedback on the recommended changes

28. Active Recreation performs regular customer research, using Net Promoter Score (NPS) surveys – which provide a quantitative measurement of customer satisfaction. This benchmarks the quality of our customer engagement and service standards.

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

30. Customer experience results at pilot sites:

Average NPS Scores	3 months, March to May 2017	3 months, June to Sept 2017
Pilot centres	43.6	48.7
Auckland Council Pools & Leisure	28.9	27.4

31. The survey also enquires about the key attributes that customers valued. The top attributes across the pilot sites are:

a. programme suitability.

b. good instructors/teachers.

c. friendliness.

d. value for money.

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

Inclusions of contracted pools and leisure centres

32. These new membership options will only apply to council operated facilities at this time, with one exception. Staff have an agreement in principle with Community Leisure Management (CLM), one of our three contracted operators, that Auckland Council membership will also include Otahuhu Pool and Leisure Centre (Toia) as a bronze centre.

Impact on existing members of the recommended changes

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

34. Active Recreation are confident that the new Get Active Your Way membership model, coupled with improvements to the service offering and a more integrated network of pools and leisure centres will provide Auckland residents with better access to quality facilities, expert staff and engaging recreation opportunities.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

35. Hibiscus and Bays and Mangere-Otahuhu local boards were notified before piloting and updated in July 2017, in workshops after the pilot.

36. The new membership structure and prices were presented and discussed in a workshop with the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board on 5^th October 2017.

37. This recommendation will not increase membership prices in the Hibiscus and Bays local board area.

38. The Howick, Waitemata, Mangere-Otahuhu and Otara-Papatoetoe local boards have approved the new membership prices.

39. To date, this has also been presented in workshops to Devonport-Takapuna, Henderson-Massey, Manurewa, Orakei and Upper Harbour local boards. They have all expressed their support for the new membership model.

40. The pools and leisure network is a regional asset-based service, so the recommendation carries no financial risk to the local board.

Māori impact statement

41. The Active Recreation Game Plan and the membership model have been presented to the Northwest Iwi hui. The Iwi representatives were very supportive of these initiatives.

42. Recreation, leisure and aquatics programmes, provided for local communities through pools, leisure centres and recreation teams, contribute to improving wellbeing among Māori communities. Some programmes, such as free swimming for under 16s, are intended to benefit local Māori as a targeted population.

Implementation

43. The membership model and changes to access are being presented to local boards for approval during September through November. Meanwhile the Active Recreation support team are developing and delivering staff training to support the new membership structure and customer activation process. Communications for existing members and marketing materials for the new memberships are being created. Active Recreation is aiming, with local board approval, to introduce these membership options in November.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Garth Dawson - Leisure Business Manager

Authorisers

Mace Ward - General Manager Parks, Sports and Recreation

Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager

Hibiscus and Bays Local Board

15 November 2017

Auckland Transport Update to the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board for November 2017

File No.: CP2017/23371

Purpose

1. To respond to resolutions and requests on transport-related matters, provide an update on the current status of the Local Board’s Transport Capital Fund projects, a summary of consultation material sent to the local board and information on transport-related matters of specific application and interest to the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board and its community.

Executive summary

2. This particular report provides updates and information on:

· The Local Board’s Transport Capital Fund Projects;

· Consultations on regulatory processes;

· Traffic Control Committee results;

· Issues Raised by Elected Members;

· 19 Anzac Road, Browns Bay;

· Millwater Parkway, Silverdale;

· Quarterly Report Materials;

· Safer Communities future programme;

· Public transport numbers.

Recommendation/s

That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:

a) notes the Auckland Transport Update to the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board for November 2017.

Comments

Update on the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board Transport Capital Fund Projects

Hibiscus and Bays Local Board Transport Capital Fund Financial Summary
Total Funds Available in current political term	$2,610,647
Amount committed to date on projects approved for design and/or construction	$265,610
Remaining Budget left	$2,345,037

3. The available funding shown above comprises $1,656,335 which must be spent before 30 June 2019 and $688,702 which may be spent before 30 June 2020.

4. The $265,610 committed to date on projects approved for design and/or construction comprises funding allocated to completion of Project 091, Mairangi Bay Art Walk; Project 411, Torbay Revitalisation; and funding recently allocated to Project 558, Orewa Pedestrian Crossings (see paragraph 5. below).

5. At its meeting on 20 September 2017 the local board approved the allocation of $127,510 from its Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF) towards Project 558, the upgrade of four crossings on Hibiscus Coast Highway, Moana Avenue and Moenui Avenue (HB/2017/154).

6. The project includes the installation of road marking, tactiles, light poles and belisha beacons to improve pedestrian safety at informal crossing points on Hibiscus Coast Highway at its intersections with Moana and Moenui Avenues. The treatment selected by the local board around the tactile pavers features contrasting stone setts to provide assistance for the visually impaired.

7. Auckland Transport (AT) staff are currently finalising the design for these works, anticipate awarding the tender in November and completing construction prior to the end of December, subject to approval of the traffic management plan and favourable weather during the construction.

8. A workshop to discuss a range of potential LBTCF projects is scheduled for 8 November 2017. Projects selected by the local board during those discussions may be brought to this meeting by way of a Chairperson’s Recommendation for confirmation and formal request for provision of rough order costs by AT staff.

Consultations on Regulatory Processes

9. Documentation describing AT's plans to improve safety on the Hibiscus Coast Highway between Fowler Access Road and Otanerua Bridge, where signage and road markings are in need of an upgrade to provide consistency along the route, was sent to members on 16 October 2017. No objections to the proposal were received.

10. A proposal to install No Stopping at all Times (NSAAT) and P60 restrictions on East Coast Road at its intersection with Carlisle Road, Northcross, to address concerns about parking, visibility and accessibility, was forwarded to Transport Interest Group members and Members Holmes and Bettany on 4 October 2017. No objections to the proposal were received.

11. Documentation describing the proposed speed limit reduction from 60km/h to 50km/h on Whangaparaoa Road between Hibiscus Coast Highway and Red Beach Road, where the Whangaparaoa Road dynamic lane trial will take place, was forwarded to Hibiscus Coast subdivision members on 30 October 2017 with a request for comments no later than 10 November 2017. The proposed change will take effect when the dynamic lane trial is installed and remain in place for the duration of the trial period, reverting to 60km/h at the end of the trial period (no later than 31 December 2018), unless a further decision to amend the speed limit or to extend the duration of the trial is made before that date.

Traffic Control Committee Results

12. Decisions made by AT’s Traffic Control Committee in relation to regulatory processes relevant to the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board during October are listed below:

Street Name, Suburb	Report Type	Nature of Restriction	Decision
Braemar Road, Castor Bay	Permanent Traffic and Parking changes	NSAATs	Carried
Channel View Road, Campbells Bay	Permanent Traffic and Parking changes	NSAATs, Give Way	Carried
Glenvar Road, Watea Road, Torbay	Permanent Traffic and Parking changes	NSAATs, Give Way	Carried
John Downs Drive, Valdese Rise, Montclair Rise, Browns Bay	Permanent Traffic and Parking changes	NSAATs, Edge Lines	Carried
Moera Place, Rishworth Avenue, Stanmore Bay	Permanent Traffic and Parking changes	NSAATs	Carried
Hibiscus Coast Highway, Moffat Road, Red Beach	Permanent Traffic and Parking changes	NSAATs, Footpath, Lane Arrow Markings, Bus Stop, Traffic Island, Flush Median, Stop Control	Carried
Kiteroa Terrace, Rothesay Bay	Permanent Traffic and Parking changes	NSAATs, Loading Zone, Pedestrian Crossing, Give-Way Control	Carried

Issues Raised by Elected Members

13. The following table lists issues raised by elected members and local board services staff to 30 October 2017:

	Location		Issue	Status
1	Mairangi Bay Town Centre	Pavers in Mairangi Bay Town Centre.		Member Cooper raised concerns about the slip-resistance of pavers in the Mairangi Bay Town Centre on 10 August 2017, asking that, as this issue is identical to the situation in Papakura where remedial action has been requested, whatever remedy is approved for Papakura also be applied to Mairangi Bay CBD. Referred to AT's Roading Asset Team for investigation.
2	97 Pacific Parade, Army Bay	New work dug up to lay drains outside 97 Pacific Parade, Army Bay.		Mark Mitchell MP asked on 30 August 2017 why two days after the road outside 97 Pacific Parade, Army Bay was upgraded, contractors came back to lay drains in the area, suggesting that better coordination between teams was necessary. A response from AT's North Road Corridor Delivery Manager, sent direct to the resident, was forwarded to the MP's Office on 12 October 2017, explaining that repairs were carried out to address failures in the road surface by AT's contractors immediately prior to unplanned work by Auckland Council's Stormwater contractors to upgrade a stormwater pipe.
3	Hibiscus Coast and Dairy Flat	Complaints regarding public transport on the Hibiscus Coast and Dairy Flat.		Member Caitlin Watson forwarded complaints regarding public transport on the Hibiscus Coast and Dairy Flat on 30 August 2017. A response to these complaints was provided on 3 October 2017 and included in AT’s update report for October 2017. In response to Member Watson’s additional enquiry about pedestrian access on Dairy Flat Highway, on 22 October 2017 she was advised that AT is proposing to improve pedestrian facilities at the intersection of Blackbridge Road and Dairy Flat Highway, in response to a customer request to improve access for children dropped off on Blackbridge Road for the school bus who walk on muddy ground to reach the bus stop on Dairy Flat Highway. This project, to add a short section of new footpath, is currently being investigated and will be consulted on before the end of 2017. AT has also received requests for a new footpath connecting all the way through to Dairy Flat School, which it is unable to fund. Regarding the lack of pedestrian crossings at the State Highway 1 interchange, these could only be provided with major civil works. A footpath needs to be constructed prior to a pedestrian crossing to allow for safe access to the crossing point. Further, as this is a high speed environment, it would be difficult to provide a safe pedestrian crossing close to the roundabouts at the interchange. Pedestrian volumes are also low compared to other higher priority sites and AT is therefore unable to justify proceeding with any changes at this time.
4	Weatherly Road, Torbay	Request for NSAAT restrictions on Weatherly Road, Torbay.		Member Parfitt asked on 22 September 2017 that the existing NSAAT restrictions on Weatherly Road, Torbay, near its intersection with Glamorgan Drive, be extended. On 23 October 2017 East Coast Bays subdivision members were advised that AT’s engineers had assessed the feasibility of extending the NSAAT restrictions, taking into account road width and topography, traffic flow, residents’ off-street parking and the availability of neighbouring on-street parking spaces, visibility and other safety concerns and crash statistics. The initial assessment concluded that extending the parking restrictions would be beneficial so consultation will be carried out with affected parties, implementation being subject to feedback from those consulted and approval by AT’s Traffic Control Committee. If successful, implementation can be expected before the end of the 2017/2018 financial year.
5	142 Whangaparaoa Road, Whangaparaoa	Request for Bus Shelter at 142 Whangaparaoa Road, Whangaparaoa.		The Hon Mark Mitchell MP’s Electorate Agent asked on 20 September 2017 that a request for a bus shelter at 142 Whangaparaoa Road, Whangaparaoa, signed by 130 residents at Northaven Village, be escalated. A copy of the response from AT's Group Manager Metro was forwarded to the MP's Office and to elected members on 19 October 2017. The response indicated that the bus stops within the Hibiscus Coast area were reviewed as part of the first implementation of the New Network programme for the Auckland region, and AT staff are aware that some still needed improvement. There are approximately 6,500 bus stops on the existing network so the current focus is on those required during implementation of the New Networks, rather than trying to correct all existing bus stop deficits. However, when the New Network has been fully implemented, bus stops on Whangaparaoa Road and others in the Hibiscus Coast area will be subject to a second review to determine their suitability for shelters, subject to available funding. The following link to information about funding was also provided: https://at.govt.nz/about-us/working-with-at/how-we-are-funded/.
6	Hibiscus Coast Busway Station, Silverdale	Parking enforcement at the Hibiscus Coast Busway Station, Silverdale.		The Hon Mark Mitchell MP’s Electorate Agent advised on 9 October 2017 that constituents had indicated that disabled parking spaces at the Hibiscus Coast Busway Station in Silverdale were being used by drivers not displaying disability cards, asking also how many disability parks would be available on completion of Stage II of the station construction. On 11 October 2017 AT advised that the overall concept plan shows 13 disability spaces, all located close to the station for easy access. Parking enforcement issue referred to Parking Enforcement staff for investigation and follow up.
7	Vaughans Road, Okura	Urban upgrade of Vaughans Road, Okura		At a Hibiscus and Bays Local Board meeting on 18 October 2017 Member Parfitt asked whether the urban upgrade of Vaughans Road, Okura, would be brought forward in AT’s programme because of the increased level of development, noting that it needed kerb, channel and footpaths and a more stable road to cope with the increased traffic volumes and its use by pedestrians etc. Referred to AT’s Planning and Strategy Team.
8	Hibiscus and Bays areas	Maintenance concerns in the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board's area.		At the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board meeting on 18 October 2017 Members Fitzgerald, Vicki Watson and Bettany raised concerns about the standard of road maintenance in the Hibiscus and Bays area, noting that they had seen examples of pot holes failing within a few days and repeat temporary repairs being carried out where more permanent repairs were clearly required. Examples of these repeat temporary repairs included areas of slumping on Whangaparaoa Road in the vicinity of Vipond Road and another near Karepiro Drive, Whangaparaoa. Member Vicki Watson said the left hand lane southbound on Hibiscus Coast Highway, Silverdale, between the BP and Tavern Road, was badly rutted and becoming dangerous, and there was another similar situation on Whangaparaoa Road in the slow passing lane. Member Bettany spoke about recently patched areas on the road edges of Carlisle Road, Browns Bays, on the southern side at its eastern end, which were poorly finished and already breaking away. Responses to the specific concerns raised have been requested from AT’s Road Corridor Delivery team. General concerns will be discussed with members at a future workshop.
9	Whangaparaoa Road, Whangaparaoa	Cars for sale on Whangaparaoa Road, Whangaparaoa.		The issue of vehicles parked for sale in the vicinity of the Peninsula Retirement Club on Whangaparaoa Road, Whangaparaoa, has been investigated previously from a safety point of view, and in terms of the AT Bylaw, no changes agreed to. Member Fitzgerald asked on 22 October 2017 whether it would be possible to place a time restriction on the area the vehicles are parking in to deter the practice. Referred to AT’s Parking Design Team.

19 Anzac Road, Browns Bay

14. At the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board meeting on 20 September 2017 in relation to the Browns Bay Parking Study and specifically to the proposed disposal of the property at 19 Anzac Road, Browns Bay by Panuku Development Auckland, the board resolved to (HB/2017/154):

c) continue to express its concerns to the Governing Body regarding the disposal of 19 Anzac Road, Browns Bay as it considers:

i. no justification for the sale of 19 Anzac Road, Browns Bay has been provided by Auckland Transport to confirm that the site is surplus to requirements and that there is no need for the car parking that the site currently provides.

ii. that the Auckland Transport commissioned Car Parking Review Report clearly indicates that the car parking area is required to meet the existing car parking capacity noting that the Browns Bay central business district area already reaches and in some instances exceeds, the 85% average occupancy standard set by Auckland Transport

iii. that the Auckland Transport commissioned Car Parking Review Report fails to address or provide any views on the impacts of the removal of 58 car parking spaces (19 Anzac Road) or the resultant loading (up to an extra 58 car parks) in the Browns Bay central business district area, which if removed, would result in regularly exceeding parking capacity levels

iv. that the Auckland Transport commissioned Car Parking Review Report fails to address that:

A) a 31% reduction in “off-street” car parks and a 7.5% reduction in the total public parking availability would result from the sale of 19 Anzac Road

B) the remaining “off-street” carparks would be at capacity on more occasions and at peak times if the land was sold

C) an estimated 26 vehicles would be added to the vehicles trying to find “on-street” parking at the southern end of Browns Bay central business district area

v. the reduction in car parking capacity spaces could have a significant negative impact on Browns Bay economic performance, especially for businesses at the southern end of the Browns Bay business area

vi. the “total car parking capacity” of Browns Bay will be reduced from 791 to 733 as a result of the potential disposal of 19 Anzac Road and this would result in a 30% reduction in the overall total of on street/off street public car parks and at peak times parking would be far worse than currently

vii. noting the new developments being completed or being built currently in Browns Bay, and the resulting off street car parking requirements under the Unitary Plan, will greatly increase the pressure on public car parking spaces in the central business district area.

d) requests that Auckland Council does not dispose of the land at 19 Anzac Road, Browns Bay, as the land is an essential part of the public off street car parking in the town centre.

e) requests that Panuku Development Auckland undertake an assessment of the site for future development as illustrated by the Browns Bay Centre Plan, September 2016

15. In response to paragraphs 13. c) i. of the resolution, AT advises:

· AT is not leading the discussion whether 19 Anzac Road should be sold or remain as a carpark. AT has a programme for town centre parking reviews and the Browns Bay Town Centre parking study is one of a number of town centre reviews for which parking plans were prepared during the last financial year.

· This Browns Bay Town Centre review was based on data analysis involving different actions such as a parking utilisation and turnover survey, local business perception survey and consulting with internal and external stakeholders. The 19 Anzac Road car park was included in AT’s review. The scope of this parking study was:

o Review the existing parking;

o Identify the location and nature of parking problems; and

o Identify and evaluate potential measures to address the problems and improve the overall parking management.

· Accordingly, if Auckland Council decides to dispose of 19 Anzac Road, AT would recommend specific short-term actions for implementation and medium-term options for future parking management to keep supporting existing commercial activities and assisting future growth.

16. In response to paragraphs 13. c) ii. of the resolution, AT advises:

· According to point 3.2: Overall Parking Occupancy of the AT parking study, overall parking utilisation within the Browns Bay Town Centre area did not reach 85% during the survey period. The AT Parking Strategy recommends changes to the parking management approach when parking utilisation is regularly above this threshold. These were the main findings in the parking survey:

o The Average Occupancy (AO) was 67% and Average Peak Occupancy (APO), which is the average of the four busiest hours, reached 75%

o On average 597 parking spaces out of 791 were occupied during the four busiest hours of the day and 194 remained available.

17. In response to paragraphs 13. c) iii. of the resolution, AT advises:

· The scope of the Browns Bay Town Centre parking review was to:

(i) Review the existing parking demand and determine the public parking supply in the Browns Bay Town Centre.

(ii) Identify the location and nature of parking problems.

(iii) Identify and evaluate potential measures to address the problems and improve the overall parking management.

(iv) Recommend specific short-term actions for implementation and medium-term options for future parking management.

· AT’s Browns Bay parking study has identified that almost 27% (212 out 791 parking spaces) of the total parking supply in the study area remain unrestricted.

o 30% on street parking - 180 spaces

o 17% off-street parking - 32 spaces.

· This unrestricted parking is mainly being utilised for long term purposes and some of it can be reprioritised for short stay use to mitigate the loss of 58 parking spaces (refer to section 4 of the Browns Bay parking review report 2016-17).

18. In response to paragraphs 13. c) iv. A), B) and C) of the resolution, AT advises:

· Refer to Figure 19 – Off-street Parking Occupancy Data in Browns Bay Parking Review report 2016-17. The average peak occupancy in all off-street car parks is well below the 85%. The only car park above this threshold is 31 Anzac Road which is currently unrestricted.

· AT is confident that the loss of 58 parking spaces can be accommodated by the current supply. Furthermore, opportunities exist in the area to better manage the existing supply of unrestricted parking.

19. In response to paragraphs 13. c) v., vi, and vii of the resolution, AT advises:

· AT is confident that the impact of the loss of parking at 19 Anzac Road car park can be managed by reprioritising existing unrestricted parking for short stay use to ensure it continues to support the economic activity in the area.

· Overall, existing supply at 19 Anzac Road car park is only 7.5% of the total parking supply.

Millwater Parkway/Bankside Road, Silverdale

20. At the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board meeting on 18 October 2017, following a presentation by the Silverdale Community Action Group on pedestrian safety in the Millwater Parkway/Bankside Road area, the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board resolved to (HB/2017/181):

b. request a report from Auckland Transport addressing the concerns raised by the Silverdale Community Action Group giving some guidance on how Auckland Transport intend addressing those concerns

21. The Silverdale Community Action Group:

· believes that it would be prudent, from a health and safety perspective, that a traffic engineer be invited to examine the situation at the intersection during the morning and afternoon school drop-off and pick-up times, produce a report and make recommendations for improving road safety, particularly for the children.

· recommends that the traffic engineer involve the schools’ management teams in the examination and recommendations.

· further suggests that any proposals for improvement of pedestrian safety include the possibility of all traffic lights turning red simultaneously during the morning and afternoon school times (sometimes referred to as a ‘Barn Dance Crossing’ or ‘X Crossing’), an idea already used successfully on some busy intersections in Auckland City and elsewhere, to remove the pedestrian dangers associated with turning on the green arrow.

22. AT’s Traffic Engineering staff are investigating the concerns raised and will respond to the local board’s request at its December 2017 meeting.

Quarterly Report Materials

23. AT’s Quarterly Report Materials for the period July - September 2017 are attached, comprising:

· Attachment A – Report from AT departments on activities in the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board area over the past quarter

· Attachment B – Report on TravelWise Schools activities.

Upcoming projects and activities of interest to the board

Auckland Transport Launches Safer Communities future programme

24. In recent years Auckland has become a more challenging place for people getting around on foot. AT considers that people have the right to a safe walking environment so over the next three years will be working with communities around Papakura, Mt Roskill and Mangere Bridge on ways to make the areas better and safer for walking.

25. These three communities were selected for AT’s Safer Communities future programme through a thorough investigation process, with AT staff considering a range of factors including pedestrian crash rates and the number of existing good crossing facilities in communities around Auckland. It was a difficult task when there are many places that need this kind of investigation and attention, but these areas have not had recent upgrades and there are currently no plans for other work that would mean changes could be made.

26. The aim of the project is to better understand the opportunities available to create an environment where more people want to walk as part of their daily journeys. AT is also working with community groups and other stakeholders such as Police to help establish the issues and opportunities.

27. AT will return to each community during 2018 with a set of designs for possible physical changes based on their feedback, including new crossings and traffic calming devices to make it safer for pedestrians.

28. Funding will be sought from the NZ Transport Agency and Auckland Council, with construction and physical changes set to take place in 2019/20. The plan is to invest approximately $16.5 million in these communities over three years.

Public transport numbers the best in more than 60 years

29. Auckland’s public transport users have clocked up 90 million trips on buses, trains and ferries over the past year. The last time Auckland saw that many trips was way back in 1956 when Auckland was a totally different city, much smaller, with a population of approximately 400,000. It was the last year the trams were running, trolley buses were very popular and ferry numbers were high because the Harbour Bridge was still three years away.

30. It was also the beginning of the era of the car in Auckland, the North-western and Southern Motorways had partially opened and people were buying cars, so public transport usage was dropping by around 8 million trips a year.

31. The numbers using public transport in Auckland bottomed out at 28 million and stayed low until 2002.

32. Since then public transport usage has grown steadily with train patronage rising from 3 million trips a year to 20 million. The 90 million mark is an increase of 6 million on the previous year, a growth of 6.7 percent.

33. Customer satisfaction also continues to rise, reaching 90.5 percent for bus customers, 93.7 percent for train and 91 percent for ferry.

34. The following chart displays this information graphically:

Consideration

Local board views and implications

35. The local board’s views will be considered during consultation on any proposed schemes.

Māori impact statement

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

Implementation

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

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Report on AT activities in the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board are over the past quarter	249
b ⇩	Travelwise School Activities	261

Signatories

Authors	Ellen Barrett – Elected Member Relationship Manager North, Auckland Transport
Authorisers	Jonathan Anyon – Manager, Elected Member Relationship Unit, Auckland Transport

Hibiscus and Bays Local Board

15 November 2017

Amendment of the Auckland Transport Election Signs Bylaw 2013 and its impact on local parks

File No.: CP2017/23240

Purpose

1. To update the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board on the changes to the Auckland Transport Election Signs Bylaw and to propose a nine week time restriction on public election sign sites.

Executive summary

2. On 1 August 2017 the Auckland Transport Board amended the Auckland Transport Election Signs Bylaw 2013 which removed the nine week time restriction on the display of election signs. This change came about due to concerns that the time restrictions may limit the right to freedom of expression in the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.

3. Due to the bylaw amendment, public sites, including those in local parks and reserves, can now be used for election signs for longer than nine weeks. Signs must relate to a specific election, and must be removed prior to the day of the election. However, there is no limit on the length of time that they can be erected prior to the election.

4. Under section 14 (freedom of expression) of the Bill of Rights Act 1990 everyone has the right to freedom of expression. Under section 5 (justified limitations) of the Bill of Rights Act 1990 the rights and freedoms contained in the Bill of Rights may be subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.

5. Local boards must balance the need to provide adequate advertising locations to allow the democratic process to run smoothly, while ensuring that parks and reserves are not overly encumbered with election signage.

6. Election signs restrict the public use of parks, have an impact on amenity and create potential safety issues. Increasing the amount of time that election signs can be erected for will lead to additional compliance and maintenance costs.

7. Staff recommend that local boards limit the time period for election signs on parks and reserves to a nine week period. This option would still provide for election signs in parks and reserves and meet community expectations. These changes would apply to the upcoming by-elections in February 2018 and any future elections, unless the decision is revisited.

8. A nine week period is also consistent with the Electoral Act 1993, which provides that no limitation contained in a bylaw restricts election advertising for a period of nine weeks prior to a general election. This legislation contemplates that local authorities may seek to limit the display of election signs, but provides an override for a nine week period. Further, a nine week restriction for public sites has been in place in Auckland since the bylaw was made in 2013, and therefore continuation of this restriction is in line with community expectations. A complaint to the Minister of Transport in 2016 concerned private sites, which are not affected by the proposal to reintroduce a time restriction on public sites.

Recommendation/s

That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:

a) amend landowner approvals for election signs to provide a nine week time restriction on local parks and reserves identified in the List of Election Sign Sites.

b) request that Auckland Transport’s Traffic Control Committee provide a nine week time restriction for election signs on road reserve to provide a consistency for public sites across Auckland.

c) request that Auckland Transport’s Traffic Control Committee consider updating their List of Election Sign Sites to reflect these time restrictions in accordance with clause 6 of the Election Signs Bylaw 2013.

Comments

Background

9. On 1 August 2017 the Auckland Transport Board amended the Auckland Transport Election Signs Bylaw 2013 (“the Bylaw”). This amendment, among other things, removed the nine week time restriction on the display of election signs.

10. During the 2016 local body election, a private citizen requested the Minister of Transport to disallow the Bylaw under the provisions of the Land Transport Act 1998. This was due to the time restrictions on the display of election signs, the Bylaw breached the right to freedom of expression in the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 (“BoRA”). The Minister took no action at the time, but required Auckland Transport to review the time restriction in 2017.

11. Prior to the amendment, Auckland Transport consulted with the public and stakeholders. Of the 51 submissions received, 40 disagreed with the proposed removal of the time restriction. They raised concerns over visual pollution issues (loss of amenity if signs remained longer than a nine-week period) and increased safety risk associated with the lack of maintenance and the temporary nature of such signage and supporting structures.

12. Auckland Transport specifies which public sites are suitable for the display of election signs. The report to the Auckland Transport Board (1 August 2017) concluded that time restrictions could be imposed through this process (by only permitting public sites to be used for limited periods of time). This was thought sufficient to address concerns raised by submitters on this issue. Auckland Transport will be seeking feedback from local boards on signage sites prior to the 2019 local body elections. The Auckland Transport website provides a list of the current election sign sites (https://at.govt.nz/about-us/bylaws/election-signs-bylaw/#v).

13. Local boards have the jurisdiction of local parks and reserves. Prior to the 2016 local body elections, Auckland Transport sought feedback from local boards about the use of local parks and reserves for the use of temporary election signs. Auckland Transport updated the List of Election Sign Sites (located on the Auckland Transport website) following consideration of local board feedback. Due to the Bylaw amendment, these sites, including those in local reserves, can now be used for election signs for periods longer than nine weeks, and this needs review.

Existing issues caused by election signs

14. During the run up to the 2017 general election (1 July 2017 to 29 Sep 2017), council received 131 complaints about election signs. Of those complaints received 63 were about signs being placed in the wrong location, 20 were about oversized signs, 17 raised maintenance issues and 11 complaints were about early placement. There were also a small number of complaints about signs being erected on private property without permission, multiple signs being located on one site and safety hazards. Twenty percent of the complaints were associated with signs on parks and reserves. Community Facilities noted that existing issues with election signs relate to broken signs, which are often abandoned and become an eyesore or hazard.

15. Council staff anticipate that if election signs are erected for a period longer than nine weeks, there will be additional issues with amenity and safety. Safety concerns include risks of associated signs collapsing or blowing down and broken hoardings creating hazards like sharp edges.

16. There will also be additional complaints and increased council costs associated with compliance and park maintenance.

Freedom of expression

17. The following analysis of considerations under the BoRA has been prepared by council’s Legal and Risk Department.

18. Under section 14 (Freedom of expression) of the BoRA everyone has the right to freedom of expression, including the freedom to seek, receive, and impart information and opinions of any kind in any form. Restricting the time period that parties and candidates for election can erect signs promoting their election campaigns restricts the freedom of expression.

19. Under section 5 (Justified limitations) of the BoRA the rights and freedoms contained in the Bill of Rights may be subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.

20. The section 5 inquiry has been summarised in a leading Supreme Court case (R v Hansen [2007] NZSC 7) as follows:

(a) does the limiting measure serve a purpose sufficiently important to justify some limitation of the right or freedom?

(b) If so, then:

(i) is the limit rationally connected with the objective?

(ii) does the limit impair the right or freedom no more than is reasonably necessary for sufficient achievement of the objective?

(iii) is the limit in due proportion to the importance of the objective?

21. In considering the approach to determining whether a limiting measure impairs a right "no more than is reasonably necessary", the Court of Appeal in Ministry of Health v Atkinson [2012] 3 NZLR 456 endorsed the following approach from a Canadian case:

"The law must be carefully tailored so that rights are impaired no more than necessary. The tailoring process seldom admits of perfection and the courts must accord some leeway to the legislator. If the law falls within a range of reasonable alternatives, the courts will not find it overbroad merely because they can conceive of an alternative which might better tailor objective to infringement. On the other hand, if the government fails to explain why a significantly less intrusive and equally effective measure was not chosen, the law may fail."

22. The Court of Appeal agreed that if there is an alternative option that will have less impact, it does not follow that the option adopted is necessarily outside the range of reasonable alternatives.

Purpose of restriction

23. The purposes of the proposed time restriction on public sites are set out above and can be summarised as:

· minimising the risk to public safety (e.g. signs collapsing or blowing down, broken hoardings creating hazards like sharp edges);

· allowing the public to have access and use of public reserves with minimal disruption;

· maintaining visual amenity in public places; and

· limiting the amount of public expenditure that must be spent on compliance monitoring and enforcement, and the maintenance of parks and reserves.

24. These are legitimate concerns that justify some limitation on the freedom of expression.

Connection with objective

25. The proposed time restrictions are rationally connected with the achievement of these purposes. Limiting the amount of time that an election sign may be displayed (and therefore limiting expression on such signs) is intended to promote and protect public safety and/or amenity, protect access to public parks and reserves, and minimise expenditure on compliance and maintenance.

Restriction no more than reasonably necessary

26. The proposed nine week restriction is a reasonable limit on the freedom of expression for signs in public places. The restriction applies only to signs on the designated public sites. Elections signs may be displayed without time restriction on any private property (including commercial billboards and poster board sites). Further, the election signs to which the restriction applies are located in public places, where there is no general right to have the structure in any event - the bylaw therefore effectively authorises the sign (and the expression) when it would not otherwise be allowed.

27. Election signs are only one means of advertising a candidate or party in an election. Other options open to candidates include the internet (e.g. social media advertising), radio or television advertising, pamphlets, letterbox drops, public meetings, and advertising on vehicles.

28. A nine week period is also consistent with the Electoral Act 1993, which provides that no limitation contained in a bylaw restricts election advertising for a period of nine weeks prior to a general election. This legislation contemplates that local authorities may seek to limit the display of election signs, but provides an override for a nine week period. Further, a nine week restriction for public sites has been in place in Auckland since the bylaw was made in 2013, and therefore continuation of this restriction is in line with community expectations. The complaint to the Minister of Transport in 2016 concerned private sites, which are not affected by the proposal to reintroduce a time restriction on public sites.

29. Given the wide range of advertising and promotional opportunities open to candidates, the proposed restriction on public parks and reserves does not restrict the freedom of expression more than reasonably necessary.

Proportionality

30. Overall, the proposed time restriction is not considered to be a disproportionate limit on freedom of expression, given the importance of the objectives. Ensuring the public safety of park users is a matter of very high importance, and there is also a high amenity value in regulating the proliferation of election signage that occurs prior to every election. A reasonably high level of interference with freedom of expression might therefore be justifiable. In fact, however, the time restriction involves only a reasonably modest limit on freedom of expression. It is a measured response, far from being a blanket ban, and candidates can still promote or otherwise express themselves using other means. The proposed restriction is consistent with community expectations and the Electoral Act, and many other councils around New Zealand similarly restrict election signage, suggesting the proposal is not out of step with what is considered reasonable regulation of election signs that are in or visible from public places.

31. The proposed time restriction is therefore not considered to be inconsistent with the BoRA. Such limits as there are on freedom of expression are reasonable and "can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society", in terms of section 5 of that Act.

Options

32. Local boards have the following options available to them, which are discussed in more detail below:

· continue without a time limit on public election signs;

· amend landowner approvals to limit the time period to nine weeks prior to an election;

· amend landowner approvals to limit the time period of shorter or longer than nine weeks; or

· revoke landowner approval for election signs on parks and reserves.

33. The pros and cons of each approach are provided in Table 1.

Option 1 - Continue without a time limit on public election signs

34. Under the do nothing option, local boards would continue to allow use of the parks and reserves as provided for in the List of Election Sign Sites. There would be no time limit on how long the signs could remain on parks and reserves. Staff do not recommend this option.

Option 2 - Limit time period to nine weeks on parks and reserves

35. Under this option, election signs on parks and reserves would be limited to a time period of nine weeks before the election date. This would be consistent with the timeframes that local boards agreed to when Auckland Transport sought feedback on the sites in the List of Election Sign Sites. It is also consistent with the time limitations imposed during the general elections. This option would still provide for election signs in parks and reserves and meet community expectations (as the nine week time period has been past practice).

36. If this option was selected, local boards would need to request that Auckland Transport to resolve to update the list sites that are suitable for the display of election signs under clause 6 of the Bylaw.

37. Staff recommend that the Local Board adopt this option.

Option 3 - Amend landowner approvals to limit the time period of shorter or longer than nine weeks

38. Under this option election signs on parks and reserves would be limited to a time period, with the length determined by the local board. The key disadvantage of this proposal is that if different sites have different time limits, this could lead to confusion for candidates and the public and lead to inadvertent non-compliance, therefore it is not recommended

39. As with option two, local boards would need to instruct Auckland Transport to resolve to update the list sites that are suitable for the display of election signs under clause 6 of the Bylaw.

Option 4 - Revoke landowner approval for election signs on parks and reserves

40. Under this option, landowner approval for election signs on parks and reserves would be revoked. While this option would remove the impacts of election signs on parks and reserves, it would also reduce the available locations for election signs, therefore it is not recommended.

Table 1 – Pros and cons of options for election signs on parks and reserves

Pros

Cons

Option 1 – Continue without a time limit on public election signs

· Consistent administration of the Bylaw across local boards

· Opportunity to update time limits is provided when Auckland Transport undertakes a review of public election sign sites.

· Provides the opportunity for candidates to erect signs at any time, and retain them there until the day prior to the election.

· Potential to “privatise” parks and reserves where signage is located over extended periods of time.

· Potential to increase maintenance costs (e.g. mowing around signage).

· Potential to increase the compliance costs of administering signage under the Bylaw.

· Increased risk to safety due to the temporary nature of signage and decay of signs over time.

· Increased opportunity to progressively impact on amenity, where signs become scruffy from prolonged exposure to the elements.

· Increased chance of public dissatisfaction and complaints.

Option 2 - Limit time period to nine weeks on parks and reserves

· Continues the status quo (prior to the Bylaw change), and is consistent with community expectation.

· Limits the adverse impacts of signage (visual amenity, safety).

· Limits the impact on maintenance contracts (e.g. mowing around signs).

· Limits safety and amenity concerns to a nine week timeframes.

· Consistent with the nine week Electoral Act timeframe.

· Small loss of amenity and use of parks and reserves due to election signage over a short period of time.

· Needs Auckland Transport to also impose a nine week time limit on road reserve to ensure consistency.

Option 3 - Amend landowner approvals to limit the time period of shorter or longer than nine weeks

· Limits the adverse impacts of signage (visual amenity, safety).

· Limits the impact on maintenance contracts (e.g. mowing around signs).

· Limits safety and amenity concerns to a specified timeframe.

· Inconsistent timeframe across local board areas would be confusing for candidates, the public and council staff.

· If the timeframes are shortened significantly, there may be freedom of expression implications under the BoRA.

Option 4 - Revoke landowner approval for election signs on parks and reserves

· Removes any effects caused by election signs on parks and reserves.

· The number of public places for election signs is decreased across the Auckland region.

· If there are very limited election sign locations, there may be freedom of expression implications under the BoRA.

41. Option 2 is the preferred option because it continues to provide for election signs on parks and reserves and is consistent with what local boards have previously agreed when making previous decisions on placement of election signs.

42. The inclusion of a nine week time limit provides some consistency with the Electoral Act. During the nine weeks before polling day the display of election advertisements are not subject to prohibitions imposed in other enactments or in bylaws imposed by local authorities.

43. Staff also consider that a consistent approach to time limits across all local board areas is important. This is because it will provide consistent rules and messaging across the region for candidates, the public and council staff.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

44. This report seeks direction from the local board on whether or not to impose a timeframe on election signs in parks and reserves under the Auckland Transport Election Signs Bylaw 2013. All local boards are considering the report to ensure there is a consistent set of rules for election signs across Auckland.

Māori impact statement

45. The impacts associated with election signs are considered to have a similar impact on Māori compared to the general population. There has been no specific engagement with iwi or mana whenua as part of this report.

Implementation

46. Information provided to candidates for the upcoming February 2018 by-elections will include the location of public election sign sites and time restrictions agreed by local boards and Auckland Transport.

47. These changes would apply to the upcoming by-elections in February 2018 and any future elections, unless the decision is revisited.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Carol Stewart - Principal Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Anna Bray – Policy and Planning Manager, Local Boards

Carol McKenzie-Rex – General Manager Local Board Services

Hibiscus and Bays Local Board

15 November 2017

Hibiscus and Bays Local Board Quick Response Round Two 2017/2018 grant applications

File No.: CP2017/22794

Purpose

1. To present applications received for round two of the Hibiscus and Bays Quick Response Grants 2017/2018. The local board is required to fund, part-fund or decline these applications.

Executive summary

2. The Hibiscus and Bays Local Board adopted the Hibiscus and Bays Local Grants Programme 2017/2018 on 20 April 2017. The document sets application guidelines for community contestable grants. See Attachment A.

3. The local board is required to allocate grants to groups and organisations delivering projects, activities and services that benefit Aucklanders and contribute to the vision of becoming the world’s most liveable city.

4. The Hibiscus and Bays Local Board has approved a total community grants budget of $493,000 for the 2017/2018 financial year. An additional $47,000 has been carried forward from the 2016/2017 budget increasing the grants budget for 2017/2018 to $540,000.

5. In Quick Response Round One, a total of $17,171 was allocated (HB/2017/157) and $138,700 was allocated to Local Grant Round One (HB/2017/177). A further $7,000 was allocated to Orewa Community Centre (HB/2017/155) and $3,500 to temporary signage and public notice advertising (HB/2017/169). A total of $373,629 remains to be allocated to Quick Response Round Three and Local Grant Round Two 2017/2018.

6. Twelve applications were received for the Quick Response Round Two 2017/2018 requesting a total of $17,205.

Recommendation/s

That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:

a) Consider the applications listed in Table One and agree to fund, part-fund or decline each application in this Quick Response Round Two.

Application ID	Applicant	Requesting funding for	Amount requested	Eligibility
QR1806-201	North Harbour BMX Club Incorporated	Towards costs of St Johns first aid support for the race meeting on the 18 March 2018 at North Harbour BMX Club.	$700.00	Eligible
QR1806-202	Royal New Zealand Plunket Society Incorporated.	Towards costs of venue hire for a play group for six months at Mairangi Bay.	$2,000.00	Eligible
QR1806-203	Hibiscus Coast Softball Club Incorporated.	Towards a contribution for uniforms for the Hibiscus Coast Softball Club Incorporated.	$2,000.00	Eligible
QR1806-204	Hibiscus Petanque Incorporated.	Towards costs of purchasing club uniforms for interclub teams for Hibiscus Petanque Incorporated.	$2,000.00	Eligible
QR1806-205	Youthline Auckland Charitable Trust	Towards costs of two driver license training workshops for young people in the Hibiscus and Bays area.	$1,676.00	Eligible
QR1806-206	Youth in Transition Charitable Trust	Towards facilitation costs for professional counsellors to run youth peer support workshops for youth in the Whangaparaoa area.	$2,000.00	Eligible
QR1806-207	Badminton North Harbour Incorporated	Towards costs associated with the purchase of trophies and shuttlecocks for the Badminton North Harbour international badminton tournament.	$1,000.00	Eligible
QR1806-209	Centrestage Theatre Company (Orewa) Limited	Towards costs of lighting equipment hire for the "Jesus Christ Superstar Musical" in March 2018 at Centrestage Theatre in Orewa.	$2,000.00	Eligible
QR1806-210	Empathy Group	Towards costs of design and printing of brochures and cards, and venue hire for the Empathy Group at Hibiscus Coast Community House, for programmes to support those who are bereaved by suicide.	$569.00	Eligible
QR1806-211	The Hibiscus Coast Elderly Peoples' Luncheon Club	Towards costs of a mid-winter party for the Hibiscus Coast elderly peoples' luncheon club at the Masonic Lodge, Centreway Road, Orewa in June 2018.	$ 400.00	Eligible
QR1806-213	Action Education Incorporated.	Towards costs of spoken word poetry workshops and performances for three schools in Hibiscus and Bays area, including Long Bay College, Orewa College and Whangaparaoa College.	$2,000.00	Eligible
QR1806-214	Browns Bay Racquets Club Incorporated	Towards costs of and exterior building wash for Browns Bay Racquet’s Club at Freyberg Park, Browns Bay.	$860.00	Eligible
		Total Request	$17,205.00

Comments

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

8. 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

9. The Hibiscus and Bays Local Board Grant Programme was adopted on 20 April 2017 and will operate three quick response and two local grant rounds for this financial year. Quick response round two 2017/2018 closed on 20 October 2017.

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

11. The Hibiscus and Bays Local Board has approved a total community grants budget of $493,000 for the 2017/2018 financial year. An additional $47,000 has been carried forward from the 2016/2017 budget, increasing the grants budget to $540,000 for 2017/2018.

12. For quick response round one, a total of $17,171 was allocated (HB/2017/157) and $138,700 was allocated to local grant round one (HB/2017/177).

13. A total of $7,000 was allocated:

e) allocate a further $7,000 from the Local Grants Locally Driven Initiatives budget to be used for subsidy on a case by case basis for community groups using the Orewa Community Centre (in addition to the $7,000 budget allocated HB/2017/87) (HB/2017/155).

14. A total of $3,500 was allocated:

b) allocate up to $3,500 from the “Local Community Grants” Locally Driven Initiatives operational budget to cover the costs of temporary signage and a public notice for the alcohol ban on 2 December and 3 December 2017 at the locations identified in a) above (HB/2017/1).

15. This leaves a total of $373,629 to be allocated to the remaining quick response round three and local grant round two 2017/2018.

16. Twelve applications were received for the quick response round two 2017/2018 requesting a total of $17,205.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

17. Local boards are responsible for the decision-making and allocation of local board community grants. The Hibiscus and Bays 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.

18. The local 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.”

19. A copy of each application for the local grant round one is attached (see Attachment B).

Māori impact statement

20. 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

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

22. Following the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board allocation of funding for quick response grants, commercial and finance staff will notify the applicants of the local board’s decision.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Hibiscus and Bays Grant Programme 2017/2018	275
b ⇩	Hibiscus and Bays Local Board Quick Response Round Two 2017/2018 grant applications	279

Signatories

Authors

Catherine Bolinga - Community Grants Advisor

Authorisers

Marion Davies - Community Grants Operations Manager

Shane King - Operations Support Manager

Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager

Hibiscus and Bays Local Board

15 November 2017

Auckland Council 's Quarterly Performance Report: Hibiscus and Bays Local Board for quarter one, 1 July - 30 September 2017

File No.: CP2017/23979

Purpose

1. To provide a quarterly performance report for quarter one, 1 July to 30 September 2017, against the 2017/2018 local board agreement work programme.

Executive summary

2. This report provides an integrated view of performance for the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board. It includes financial performance, progress against local key performance indicators, progress against work programmes, key challenges the local board should be aware of and any risks to delivery against the 2017/2018 work programme.

3. Of significance this quarter, the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board signed off its 2017 local board plan which sets the direction for the next three years and beyond.

4. The work programme snapshot (Attachment A), indicates performance against the agreed 2017/2018 work programmes is tracking positively.

5. All operating departments with agreed work programmes have provided a quarterly update against their work programme delivery (Attachment B). All items are reported as ‘green’ status (on track) except for three which have a ‘red’ status (behind delivery, significant risk) and six with ’amber’ status (some risk or issues, which are being managed).

6. The overall financial performance for quarter one 2017/2018 is favourable compared to the budget. There are some points for the board to note:

· Hibiscus and Bays Local Board has invested $1.5m in capital expenditure and $3.1m net operating expenditure for the period ending 30 September 2017.

· The majority of capital investment to date has been in local parks, sport and recreation activity totalling $1.5m, with community services contributing $17k.

· The operating net cost of service is 92% of anticipated budget, with the variance predominantly due to a number of Locally Driven Initiative projects yet to commence.

· Positive revenue variance in revenue relates to income received from Stanmore Leisure Centre being greater than anticipated by budget.

Attachment C contains further detailed financial information.

7. Key performance indicators show a trend that 74 per cent of measures will achieve target by year-end. The exceptions are explained further in Attachment C.

Recommendation/s

That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:

a) note the performance report for the financial quarter ending 30 September 2017.

Comments

8. The Hibiscus and Bays Local Board approved 2017/2018 work programmes on 1 June 2017 for the following operating departments:

· Arts, Community and Events

· Parks, Sport and Recreation

· Libraries and Information

· Community Facilities renewals and capital projects

· Community Leases

· Infrastructure and Environmental Services

· Local Economic Development.

Key project updates from the 2017/2018 work programme

9. The following are progress updates against key projects identified in the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board Plan and/or Local Board Agreement:

· Ten community groups received funding from the Quick Response Grants, Round One in September totaling $17,171.

· Funding agreements for 2017/2018 were finalised with Estuary Arts Centre, Mairangi Arts Centre and Centrestage Theatre during quarter one.

Risks identified in the 2017/2018 work programme

10. The following are risks that have been identified by operating departments where the progress and performance indicator has been set to ‘red’ – significantly behind budget/time or achievement of outcomes, or /’amber’ status – some risk or issues, which are being managed.

· Red status:

o Project ID 2075, Hibiscus and Bays - Actions from centre plans - update incorrectly indicates ‘Current status: this is a confirmed duplicate record. Please refer to Hibiscus and Bays actions from Greenways plan, SharePoint ID 2065 for commentary. A correction has been requested.

o Project ID 1385, East Coast Bays Rugby League Club – ‘A building assessment has evaluated the building as being in poor condition. In addition, an asbestos survey has confirmed the presence of asbestos indicating a risk level of low to very low. Due to the poor building condition and the presence of asbestos, the building assessment report recommends an investigation into a new purpose built building. Council staff are currently investigating options. ‘

o Project ID 1386, New Zealand Red Cross Inc – ‘The New Zealand Red Cross (Silverdale Branch) has decided not to enter into a new lease for the premises and vacated the premises at the expiration of its lease. Council staff have completed the public notification seeking expression of interests from groups interested in leasing the vacant building and are currently assessing the applications. ‘

· Amber status:

o Project ID 3066, Mairangi Arts Centre - replace roof, gutters and remedy water-tightness – ‘Current status: we also discovered asbestos at the building (in the roof and elsewhere). We are waiting on pricing from an approved asbestos removal company to remove the asbestos roof. Next steps: once the price is received for the asbestos removal we will confirm that it is market related. Confirm a methodology of how the work will be done safely while the facility remains in operation. Agree on the best suitable time to do the project with the centre management.’

o Project ID 2088, Metro Park East - install cricket practice nets - ‘Programme for completing design was delayed while the request from the Metro Park East Project Steering Group for a covered facility was reviewed by the business owner before confirmation received to continue with original scope. Current status: project sent out for tender and one quote received. Further quotes to be obtained. Next steps: evaluate quotes and award contract.’

o Project ID 2100, Stanmore Bay Park #3 sand field renewal – ‘Current status: design is complete. Consent has been lodged. Next steps: tender construction of lights in summer 2018 and the sand field in financial year 2018/2019’.

o Project ID 2103, Tindalls Beach coastal structure renewals – ‘Risks/Issues structures on public land protecting private property Current status: review scope and programme. Next steps: consultation with Geotech, Auckland Council to liaise with community over programme.’

o Project ID 794, Centennial Park: Centennial Park Bush Society park maintenance grant FY17-18 – ‘Pending, Centennial Park Bush Society is still to provide programme of works. This will be provided to the board in the Q2 for approval. ‘

o Project ID 1387, Hibiscus Coast Radio Society Inc – ‘The Hibiscus Coast Radio Society has advised that it is amending its constitution which requires its members to fomarlly adopt the new constitution at a meeting. As such, the renewal will progress once the new constitution has been adopted. The Hibiscus Coast Radio Society have yet to provide council with its renewal application, including the groups financial accounts and its new constitution. ‘

Financial performance

11. Hibiscus and Bays Local Board has invested $1.5m in capital expenditure and $3.1m net operating expenditure for the period ending 30 September 2017.

12. The majority of capital investment to date has been in local parks, sport and recreation activity totalling $1.5m, with community services contributing $17k.

13. The operating net cost of service is 92% of anticipated budget, with the variance predominantly due to a number of Locally Driven Initiative projects yet to commence.

14. Positive revenue variance in revenue relates to income received from Stanmore Leisure Centre being greater than anticipated by budget. Further detail is provided in Attachment C.

Key performance indicators

15. Local board agreements include level of service statements and associated performance measures to guide and monitor the delivery of local services. This report provides information on the performance year-end outlook for Hibiscus and Bays Local Board’s measures, showing how they are tracking after the first quarter of FY18.

16. The year-end outlook is that 74 per cent of measures will achieve target.

17. All performance measures are being reviewed as part of the development of the 2018-2028 Long-term Plan.

18. The first and second quarter year-end outlook will be based on the results of 2016/2017 or any changes to the outlook based on latest results available. In the third quarter we will be in a better position to accurately project the year-end outlook for all measures. This is because the frequency of most measures is through data collected via annual

Consideration

Local board views and implications

19. This report informs the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board of the performance for the quarter ending 30 September 2017.

Māori impact statement

20. The local board’s 2017/2018 work programme includes a project to identify opportunities for Māori naming of parks and facilities and to engage with Mana Whenua to consider Māori place and recreation facility names in accordance with council’s Māori Language Policy 2016.

Implementation

21. The local board will receive the next performance update following the end of quarter two.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	HB Work programme snapshot	349
b ⇩	HB Work programme update	351
c ⇩	HB Financial performance	373
d ⇩	HB Kay performance indicators	381

Signatories

Authors	Michelle Sanderson – Senior Local Board Advisor
Authorisers	Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager

Hibiscus and Bays Local Board

15 November 2017

Hibiscus and Bays Local Board Meeting Schedule for 2018

File No.: CP2017/22718

Purpose

1. This report recommends the meeting schedule for the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board for 2018.

Executive summary

2. Local board meetings are open to the public and will be notified through public notices in appropriate media. It is prudent for the local board to adopt a meeting schedule as it ensures local board members have clarity about their commitments, gives an indication to the public of when meetings are to be held and meets the requirement of clause 19(5)(b), schedule 7 of the Local Government Act 2002. It also allows for a planned approach to workloads and ensures clarity about diary commitments.

3. A meeting schedule for each local board is adopted to schedule the meetings for the upcoming year. It is recommended that the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board adopt the proposed schedule.

4. The specific times and dates for the meetings, public engagements and any hearings which may be required for matters such as local board plans and local board agreements are yet to be finalised. Local board meeting schedules will therefore need to be updated and provision made if hearings are proposed.

Recommendation/s

That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:

a) adopt the business meeting schedule for 2018 as listed below:

Business Meetings

2018

DATE

TIME

VENUE

Business Meeting

Wednesday, 21 February 2018

4.30pm

Council Chamber

Orewa Service Centre

50 Centreway Road, Orewa

Business Meeting

Wednesday, 21 March 2018

4.30pm

Local Board Office

2 Glen Road

Browns Bay

Business Meeting

Wednesday, 18 April 2018

4.30pm

Council Chamber

Orewa Service Centre

50 Centreway Road, Orewa

Business Meeting

Wednesday, 16 May 2018

4.30pm

Local Board Office

2 Glen Road

Browns Bay

Business Meeting

Wednesday, 20 June 2018

4.30pm

Council Chamber

Orewa Service Centre

50 Centreway Road, Orewa

Business Meeting

Wednesday, 18 July 2018

4.30pm

Local Board Office

2 Glen Road

Browns Bay

Business Meeting

Wednesday, 15 August 2018

4.30pm

Council Chamber

Orewa Service Centre

50 Centreway Road, Orewa

Business Meeting

Wednesday, 19 September 2018

4.30pm

Local Board Office

2 Glen Road

Browns Bay

Business Meeting

Wednesday, 17 October 2018

4.30pm

Council Chamber

Orewa Service Centre

50 Centreway Road, Orewa

Business Meeting

Wednesday, 21 November 2018

4.30pm

Local Board Office

2 Glen Road

Browns Bay

Business Meeting

Wednesday, 12 December 2018

4.30pm

Council Chamber

Orewa Service Centre

50 Centreway Road, Orewa

b) notes that the dates and times for meetings, public engagement and any hearings and deliberations for local board plans and local board agreements are yet to be finalised and as such the meeting schedule may require alteration in the future.

Comments

5. Clause (5)(d), schedule 7 of the Local Government Act 2002 requires a local board to adopt a schedule of business meetings at its first meeting in the electoral term.

6. Adopting a meeting schedule allows for a planned approach to workloads and ensures local board members have clarity about their commitments. It also gives an indication to the public of when meetings are to be held and meets the requirement of clause 19, schedule 7 of the Local Government Act 2002.

7. Each local board develops a local board agreement annually and a local board plan every three years. Both documents are subject to public consultation, as part of the special consultative procedure process. The local board may hold hearings for the local board agreement and annual plan to give submitters the opportunity to express their views verbally.

8. The specific times and dates for the hearings process, if used, for the local board plan and agreements are yet to be finalised. Local board meeting schedules may therefore need to be updated and provision made for hearings, if used, once details are confirmed.

9. In addition to local board meetings, local boards will hold workshops that are closed to the public. The proceedings of every workshop are recorded and considered and confirmed at the next business meeting of the local board in accordance with current local board standing order provisions.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

10. This decision falls under the local board’s delegated authority.

Māori impact statement

11. There is no specific impact for Māori arising from this report.

General

12. Clauses 19(4), 19(5) and 19(6), schedule 7, of the Local Government Act 2002 states that:

“(4) A local authority must hold meetings at the times and places that it appoints.

(5) Unless clause 22 (extraordinary meeting) applies, the chief executive must give notice in writing to each member of the time and place of a meeting -

(a) not less than 14 days before the meeting; or

(b) if the local authority has adopted a schedule of meetings, not less than 14 days before the first meeting on the schedule.”

(6) If a local authority adopts a schedule of meetings, -

(a) the schedule –

(i) may cover any future period that the local authority considers appropriate; and

(ii) may be amended; and

(b) notification of the schedule or of any amendment to that schedule constitutes a notification of every meeting on the schedule or amendment.”

13. Similarly, the statutory requirement pursuant to clauses 46, 46(A) and 47 of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 mentions that:

· meetings of a local authority are publicly notified

· agendas and reports are available at least two working days before a meeting

· local board meetings are open to the public.

Implementation

14. Meetings of the local boards are supported by Auckland Council’s Local Board Services Department.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors	Vivienne Sullivan - Local Board Democracy Advisor
Authorisers	Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager

Chairperson	Julia Parfitt, JP
Deputy Chairperson	Janet Fitzgerald, JP
Members	Chris Bettany
	David Cooper
	Gary Holmes
	Caitlin Watson
	Vicki Watson
	Mike Williamson

Portfolio	Description	Local Board Members
Minor landowner approvals and landlord approvals including events	Confirm if the matter is minor for staff to exercise their delegation	Julia Parfitt -Chairperson Janet Fitzgerald - Deputy Chairperson
Transport Information Group	Discuss transport issues/projects	Janet Fitzgerald Julia Parfitt
Resource consent applications	Input into notification decisions for resource consent applications	Gary Holmes Janet Fitzgerald
Urgent Decision Making	To make decisions on matters that cannot wait until the next ordinary meeting of the local board	Julia Parfitt – Chairperson Janet Fitzgerald-Deputy Chairperson

Organisation	Local Board Member
Vaughan Homestead (Torbay Historical Society)	Julia Parfitt Chris Bettany - Alternate
Estuary Arts Charitable Trust
Victor Eaves Management Committee	Mike Williamson
Local Government New Zealand Zone One (Auckland and Northland)	Janet Fitzgerald
Business Improvement Districts (BIDS)
Destination Orewa Beach	Vicki Watson David Cooper - Alternate
Torbay	Chris Bettany Julia Parfitt - Alternate
Browns Bay	Gary Holmes Chris Bettany - Alternate
Mairangi Bay	David Cooper Julia Parfitt - Alternate