I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Upper Harbour Local Board will be held on:
Date: Time: Meeting Room: Venue:
|
Thursday, 14 December 2017 9.30am Orewa Service Centre Council Chamber – Level 2 50 Centreway Road Orewa |
Upper Harbour Local Board
OPEN AGENDA
|
MEMBERSHIP
Chairperson |
Lisa Whyte |
|
Deputy Chairperson |
Margaret Miles, JP |
|
Members |
Uzra Casuri Balouch, JP |
|
|
Nicholas Mayne |
|
|
John McLean |
|
|
Brian Neeson, JP |
|
(Quorum 3 members)
|
|
Cindy Lynch Democracy Advisor
8 December 2017
Contact Telephone: (09) 4142684 Email: Cindy.Lynch@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
|
Upper Harbour Local Board 14 December 2017 |
|
1 Welcome 5
2 Apologies 5
3 Declaration of Interest 5
4 Confirmation of Minutes 5
5 Leave of Absence 5
6 Acknowledgements 5
7 Petitions 5
8 Deputations 6
8.1 Greenhithe Residents and Ratepayers Association - to address Item 13, Auckland Transport monthly update 6
8.2 Nga Maunga Whakahii o Kaipara Development Trust - to address Item 14, Approval for five new road names 6
9 Public Forum 7
10 Extraordinary Business 7
11 Notices of Motion 7
12 Minutes of the Upper Harbour Local Board meeting held, Thursday 16 November 2017 9
13 Notice of Motion - Te Wharau Creek 55
14 Notice of Motion - Hobsonville Marina (West Park) 59
15 Auckland Transport monthly report - December 2017 63
16 Approval for five new road names within the subdivisions at 2-68 Hobsonville Point Road, Hobsonville Point 69
17 Approval for four new road names within the subdivisions at 102-130 Clark Road and 194-220 Buckley Avenue, Hobsonville Point 79
18 Approval for one new road name within the subdivision at 102-130 Clark Road, Hobsonville Point 87
19 Disposals recommendation report 95
20 Application for a licence for dining and cafe at Hobsonville Landing 101
21 10-year Budget 2018-2028 consultation 119
22 Auckland Council’s Quarterly Performance Report: Upper Harbour Local Board for quarter one, 1 July - 30 September 2017 127
23 Report from Hearings Panel - Recommendations regarding proposal to issue new leases on Rosedale Park, Wainoni Park, Hooton Reserve and Oteha Valley Road 159
24 The Northern Corridor Improvements project - Granting of community leases and landowner approvals 203
25 Local board feedback on rates remission and postponement policy review 257
26 Decision making allocation 291
27 Governance forward work calendar - January to December 2018 309
28 Record of the Upper Harbour Local Board workshops held on Thursday 9 November, 23 November, 30 November, and 7 December 2017 313
29 Board Members' reports - December 2017 323
30 Consideration of Extraordinary Items
PUBLIC EXCLUDED
31 Procedural Motion to Exclude the Public 325
25 Local board feedback on rates remission and postponement policy review
d. All community and sporting remissions by local board area 325
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.
The Auckland Council Code of Conduct for Elected Members (the Code) requires elected members to fully acquaint themselves with, and strictly adhere to, the provisions of Auckland Council’s Conflicts of Interest Policy. The policy covers two classes of conflict of interest:
i) A financial conflict of interest, which is one where a decision or act of the local board could reasonably give rise to an expectation of financial gain or loss to an elected member; and
ii) A non-financial conflict interest, which does not have a direct personal financial component. It may arise, for example, from a personal relationship, or involvement with a non-profit organisation, or from conduct that indicates prejudice or predetermination.
The Office of the Auditor General has produced guidelines to help elected members understand the requirements of the Local Authority (Member’s Interest) Act 1968. The guidelines discuss both types of conflicts in more detail, and provide elected members with practical examples and advice around when they may (or may not) have a conflict of interest.
Copies of both the Auckland Council Code of Conduct for Elected Members and the Office of the Auditor General guidelines are available for inspection by members upon request.
Any questions relating to the Code or the guidelines may be directed to the Relationship Manager in the first instance.
4 Confirmation of Minutes
That the Upper Harbour Local Board: a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Thursday, 16 November 2017, including the confidential section, 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 Upper Harbour 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.
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
Under Standing Order 2.5.1 (LBS 3.11.1) or Standing Order 1.9.1 (LBS 3.10.17) (revoke or alter a previous resolution) Notices of Motion have been received from Members Nicholas Mayne and Brian Neeson for consideration under items 13 and 14 respectively.
Upper Harbour Local Board 14 December 2017 |
|
Minutes of the Upper Harbour Local Board meeting held, Thursday 16 November 2017
File No.: CP2017/24134
Purpose
The open unconfirmed minutes and minute attachments of the Upper Harbour Local Board ordinary meeting held on Thursday, 16 November 2017, are attached at item 12 of the agenda for the information of the board only.
That the Upper Harbour Local Board: a) note that the open unconfirmed minutes and minute attachments of the Upper Harbour Local Board meeting held on Thursday, 16 November 2017, are attached at item 12 of the agenda for the information of the board only, and will be confirmed under item 4 of the agenda.
|
No. |
Title |
Page |
a⇩ |
Upper Harbour Local Board open unconfirmed minutes - 16 November 2017 |
11 |
b⇩ |
Upper Harbour Local Board minutes attachments - 16 November 2017 |
23 |
Signatories
Authors |
Cindy Lynch - Democracy Advisor |
Authorisers |
Eric Perry - Relationship Manager |
14 December 2017 |
|
Notice of Motion - Te Wharau Creek
File No.: CP2017/25369
Executive summary
1. Elected Member Nicholas Mayne has given notice of a motion that the Upper Harbour Local Board wish to propose.
2. The notice is signed by Member Mayne and is appended as Attachment A.
That the Upper Harbour Local Board: a) request advice from the relevant council staff regarding the most appropriate and effective tools and methods to protect the freshwater ecology of Te Wharau Creek, including: i. the present understanding of the local and regional biodiversity significance of Te Wharau Creek ii. the extent of land owner control Auckland Council has over the tributaries of Te Wharau Creek iii. the legal status of land controlled by Auckland Council within the tributaries of Te Wharau Creek, including whether the land is owned as fee simple land held according to the Local Government Act, or as a reserve held according to the Reserves Act 1977 iv. what policy or plans apply to the protection of the freshwater ecology of Te Wharau Creek, including any Reserve Management Plan associated with the catchment v. the possibility of a bylaw, or amendment to current bylaws, to establish a strict no-take rule with regard to native plants and animals within any of the freshwater tributaries of Te Wharau Creek (both those on public and private land), with exceptions agreed by mana whenua, or approved by the local board for research or ecological stewardship purposes vi. the possibility of enhancing planning provisions, such as the Unitary Plan and/or TP90, so as to minimise disturbance and pollution within the catchment of Te Wharau Creek from development vii. any other mechanisms that may be effective in protecting the freshwater ecology of Te Wharau Creek. b) that any proposed solutions for the protection of the freshwater ecology of Te Wharau Creek, provides a process for additional freshwater ecosystems of significance to achieve the same protection, by way of a resolution of the relevant local board.
|
Attachments
No. |
Title |
Page |
a⇩
|
Notice of Motion - identification of bylaw for protection of native freshwater ecology |
57 |
Signatories
Authors |
Cindy Lynch - Democracy Advisor |
Authorisers |
Eric Perry - Relationship Manager |
14 December 2017 |
|
Notice of Motion - Hobsonville Marina (West Park)
File No.: CP2017/26355
Executive summary
1. Elected Member Brian Neeson has given notice of a motion that the Upper Harbour Local Board wish to propose.
2. The notice is signed by Member Neeson and is appended as Attachment A.
That the Upper Harbour Local Board: a) oppose the sale of any and all parts of Hobsonville Marina (West Park) and that the said area remain in Auckland Council ownership. b) does not support the development plan proposed by Panuku Development and does not consider the proposed plan to be in the public interest or in the interest of the West Harbour community.
|
No. |
Title |
Page |
a⇩
|
Notice of Motion - oppose plans proposed for the sale and development of Hobsonville Marina (West Park) |
61 |
Signatories
Authors |
Cindy Lynch - Democracy Advisor |
Authorisers |
Eric Perry - Relationship Manager |
14 December 2017 |
|
Auckland Transport monthly report - December 2017
File No.: CP2017/24135
Purpose
1. The purpose of this report is to:
· respond to resolutions and requests on transport-related matters
· provide an update on the current status of the Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF)
· provide a summary of consultation material sent to the local board
· provide transport-related information on matters of specific application and interest to the Upper Harbour Local Board and its community.
Executive summary
2. In particular, this report covers:
· progress reports on the board’s advocacy initiatives in creating well-connected and easily accessible public transport networks, improvements to the road network, access to walkways and cycleways, and connecting Westgate to the North Shore
· the announcement that funding has been approved for new road projects in Albany:
o a new link road between Gills Road and Oteha Valley Road
o a new link road between Medallion Drive and Fairview Avenue
o an upgrade of the Dairy Flat Highway between Stevenson Crescent and Gills Road
o an upgrade of the Dairy Flat Highway intersection with The Avenue and Lucas Creek Bridge
· implementation of the New Public Transport Network enhanced timetables on both the Hobsonville and Beach Haven routes
· progress on the Gills Road pedestrian bridge and a gravel footpath with a structural timber boardwalk.
That the Upper Harbour Local Board: a) receive the Auckland Transport update for December 2017. b) approve the allocating budget based on a Rough Order of Costs of $740,000 from the Upper Harbour Local Board Transport Capital Fund, to implement the upgrade of an S-bend on Greenhithe Road to 15 Rame Road, and an S-bend on Windfall Grove to 81 Rame Road. c) approve the sum of $45,000 to consult with schools and implement the installation of ‘School’s Stay-put’ signs, in seven schools in the Upper Harbour Local Board Area. d) approve the Rough Order of Costs of $56,000 to implement a new shared path at 8 Chester Avenue to 170 Albany Highway.
|
Comments
Albany projects update
Dairy Flat Highway
3. Three project workshops were held with key stakeholders during September and October 2017. Key project stakeholders were invited to the workshops, including representatives from the Upper Harbour Local Board.
4. The purpose of the workshops was to define problem statements, investment objectives and benefits, and to develop longlist and shortlist options.
5. The draft report will be circulated to key stakeholders in December for their comments.
Gills Road Link
6. A professional services contract was awarded to a consultant to develop specimen design for the project. The design will be presented to the Upper Harbour Local Board in February 2018.
7. The consultants will also prepare the necessary regional resource consent and Outline Plan of Works applications for the project. Under the designation, Auckland Transport (AT) need to replant the trees requiring removal for the construction of the road at a 3:1 ratio (i.e. three trees planted for every tree removed). There will not be enough space within the designation boundaries, therefore AT will need to work closely with the local board and parks department to identify opportunities for this planting to be carried out.
Medallion Drive Link
8. A professional services contract was awarded to a consultant to develop detailed design for the project. The consultants will prepare the necessary regional resource consent and Outline Plan of Works applications for the project. AT anticipate the applications to be lodged with Auckland Council early 2018. AT has had an initial pre-application meeting with the Resource Consents department and will continue to engage with them as the applications are prepared.
Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF) update
9. AT has completed the Rough Order of Costs for the following requests from the Upper Harbour Local Board:
· upgrade of (S-bend) Greenhithe Road to 15 Rame Road and (S-bend) on Windfall Grove to 81 Rame Road – $740,000
· installation of ‘School’s Stay-put’ signs in seven schools in the Upper Harbour Local Board area – $45,000
· a new shared path at 8 Chester Avenue to 170 Albany Highway – $56,000.
10. AT requests that the Upper Harbour Local Board consider and approve the three requests above.
Project |
Description |
Current status |
Gills Road footpath |
To construct a footpath along Gills Road between the Living Stream intersection and the one-way bridge |
Footpath and boardwalks · October – January 2018 – lodgment and processing of the building and resource consent application · February 2018 – construction contract award · March 2018 – physical works commence · June 2018 – construction complete. |
Gills Road pedestrian bridge |
To construct a footbridge adjacent to the road bridge. |
Footbridge · December 2017 - construction contract award and Karakia (predawn blessing) · January 2018 – physical works commence · April 2018 – construction of the bridge complete. |
Upper Harbour Local Board Transport Capital Fund financial summary |
|
Total funds available in current political term |
$1,835,080 |
Amount committed to date on projects approved for design and/or construction |
$297,222 |
Remaining budget |
$1,537,858 |
Upcoming projects and activities
Austin Road caution signs
11. As there is no footpath on Austin Road, the local board received a request to install caution signs in the road corridor to warn when members of the public are walking on the road.
Update
12. At the time of writing this report, AT had not finished investigating this request and will report back once there is an update.
Maintenance contract complaints
13. The local board has received multiple complaints about the way maintenance contracts are carried out in relation to road berms.
Update
14. AT’s Project Manager has directed the contractor to give specific attention to the road corridor areas mentioned in the Upper Harbour Local Board area. The contractor has undertaken to get these areas up to standard by the end of November.
Albany Highway - driveway safety
15. The local board has received a complaint about a resident at 389 Albany Highway having difficulty entering and leaving their property since the upgrade of Albany Highway.
Update
16. The median island near 389 Albany Highway was installed during the upgrade, and this was consulted on with residents prior to construction.
17. Regarding concerns for vehicles following behind when turning into a driveway, AT note that residents are entitled to use a transit lane for 50 metres prior to making a turn. AT suggest that if residents are concerned with this behaviour, the Transit 2 (T2) lane be used in this way when turning into their driveways.
18. Further to the request to have the entrance to this driveway widened, AT have reviewed the driveway and do not consider there is an operational need for it to be widened.
19. As pedestrians and cyclists travel past this driveway, it is important that the speed of vehicles entering and exiting the driveway are controlled and kept slow.
Kyle Rose Park and Kyle Road footpath request
20. AT supports walking as part of making Auckland a desirable place to live.
21. AT has a Regional New Footpaths programme to address an infrastructure deficit and improve accessibility through the provision of a basic network of footpaths where key gaps are identified.
22. This request has previously been added to the Regional Footpath Programme’s candidate list and will be considered for inclusion in AT’s annual programme. Work to rank and identify projects for the next annual programme is currently underway and should be completed before the end of 2017. This process will identify the projects that proceed to investigation and design in 2018.
23. AT currently have a candidate list of approximately 520 requests for new or improved footpath segments. Existing funding will support about five to six per cent of these requests to be constructed annually. As there are currently more requests on the candidate list than funding available, AT is required to prioritise and select the projects to be included in its annual programme of works.
24. The programme focuses on constructing footpaths that improve safety near busy roads, connect to local facilities such as schools, transport hubs and town centres, and to complete missing links between other footpaths. AT also considers the total cost of the project and the number of users affected relative to the cost of construction. Investigation and design will soon begin on projects selected for delivery this financial year, through to June 2018.
Consultation documents on proposed safety improvements
25. Consultation documents for the following proposals have been provided to the Upper Harbour Local Board for its feedback. The material below is included for general information purposes only:
· Waka Moana Drive/Penihana Road, Hobsonville – road construction
· Te Uru subdivision, Hobsonville – no stopping at all times (NSAAT)
· 165 Clark Road in Scott Point, Hobsonville:
o proposed median and right turn bay on Clark Road to allow access into the site
o bus stops on Road 1
o shared path along Road 8
o cycle path along Road 1
o traffic calming devices
o give-way controls.
· P120 parking restrictions in Rosedale
· Jade Court NSAAT restrictions
· Stage 2 development area is located west of Squadron Drive, between Mapou Road and Clark Road – give way proposal at the intersection and proposed traffic calming
· pedestrian safety improvements – Corinthian Drive.
Traffic Control Committee (TCC) report
26. Decisions of the TCC over the month of November 2017, affecting the Upper Harbour Local Board area, are shown in the following table:
Constellation Drive, Home Place, Apollo Drive, East Coast Road, Vega Place, Atlas Place, Ascension Place, Parkway Drive, Centorian Drive, Whetu Place |
Rosedale
|
No right turn, lane arrow markings, transit lane, cycle lane, NSAAT, clearway, bus stop, bus shelter, traffic island, traffic signal control, give-way, flush median
|
Totara Road, McCaw Avenue, Lilley Terrace, Kopuru Road, Wicket Lane, Bomber Lane, Camp X Road, Dale Road, Maramara Road, Timbermill Road, Nils Anderson Road, Hangar Lane |
Whenuapai |
Lane arrow markings, cycle lane, NSAAT, bus stop, bus shelter, traffic island, delineators, give-way, road hump, pedestrian crossing, flush median
|
Consideration
Local board views and implications
27. The views of the Upper Harbour Local Board will be incorporated during consultation on any proposed schemes.
Māori impact statement
28. No specific issues with regard to impacts on Māori are triggered by this report and any engagement with Māori will be carried out on an individual project basis.
Implementation
29. All proposed schemes are subject to prioritisation, funding and consultation.
There are no attachments for this report.
Signatories
Authors |
Owena Schuster – Elected Member Relationship Manager, Auckland Transport |
Authorisers |
Jonathan Anyon – Manager Elected Member Relationship Unit, Auckland Transport Eric Perry - Relationship Manager |
Upper Harbour Local Board 14 December 2017 |
|
Approval for five new road names within the subdivisions at 2-68 Hobsonville Point Road, Hobsonville Point
File No.: CP2017/25549
Purpose
1. To seek approval from the Upper Harbour Local Board for road names for one new public road and four new private accessways, within the subdivision development at 2-68 Hobsonville Point Road (Te Uru Stage 1) within The Village Precinct at Hobsonville Point.
Executive summary
2. Auckland Council has road naming guidelines that set out the requirements and criteria of the council for proposed road names. These requirements and criteria have been applied to ensure consistency of road naming, except in this instance, only two names are offered for each road. This is due to their relationship to each other in telling a story, which is outlined in the comments section of this report.
3. The applicant, Nga Maunga Whakahii o Kaipara Development Trust (NWoK) (the Post Settlement entity for Ngati Whatua o Kaipara), has submitted the following road names:
Superlot |
Type |
Preferred |
Alternate |
Te Uru Stage 1 |
|||
Road 1 |
Road |
Te Aho Matua |
Whakapoti |
Access 1 |
Lane |
Piko |
Ahopaati |
Access 2 |
Lane |
Whatu |
Aho Rua |
Access 3 |
Not named as no property access – pedestrian link only |
||
Access 4 |
Lane |
Raranga |
Ahopaati |
Access 5 |
Lane |
Whiri |
Whakakitaratara |
4. All proposed road names are deemed to meet the criteria and are acceptable to both New Zealand Post and Land Information New Zealand (LINZ).
That the Upper Harbour Local Board: a) approve a new road name for the new public road ‘Road 1’ within the subdivision development at 2-68 Hobsonville Point Road, Hobsonville Point: i. Te Aho Matua Road (preferred) ii. Whakapoti Road. b) approve a new road name for the new private accessway ‘Accessway 1’ within the subdivision development at 2-68 Hobsonville Point Road, Hobsonville Point: i. Piko Lane (preferred) ii. Ahopaati Lane. c) approve a new road name for the new private accessway ‘Accessway 2’ within the subdivision development at 2-68 Hobsonville Point Road, Hobsonville Point: i. Whatu Lane ii. Aho Rua Lane. d) approve a new road name for the new private accessway ‘Accessway 4’ within the subdivision development at 2-68 Hobsonville Point Road, Hobsonville Point: i. Raranga Lane ii. Ahopaati Lane. e) approve a new road name for the new private accessway ‘Accessway 5’ within the subdivision development at 2-68 Hobsonville Point Road, Hobsonville Point: i. Whiri Lane ii. Whakakitaratara Lane.
|
Comments
5. A combined Te Uru Stage 1 and 2 road name application report was submitted to the Upper Harbour Local Board meeting on 16 November 2017, which resolved the following (resolution number UH/2017/185):
That the Upper Harbour Local Board:
a) defer the report until alternate names, with relevant justification, are provided and that consideration be given to the use of names that have historical significance to the area.
6. According to the Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines, where a new public or private road needs to be named because of a subdivision or development, the subdivider / developer shall be given the opportunity to suggest their preferred new road name for local board approval.
7. Auckland Council’s road naming criteria typically requires that road names reflect:
· a historical or ancestral linkage to an area
· a particular landscape, environmental or biodiversity feature
· an existing (or introduced) thematic identity in the area.
8. The criteria encourage the use of Māori names. Names also need to be easily identifiable and intuitively clear, thus minimising confusion.
9. The one new public road and four new private accessways to be named each service properties within the subdivision.
10. Maps showing the new roads with surrounding streets in the subdivision are attached (refer Attachments A and B).
11. All names meet the criteria through having a historic or ancestral linkage to the area. The following additional background information has been supplied by the applicant:
· NWoK have mana whenua status over this land, which is acknowledged in the Treaty Settlement (Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara Claims Settlement Act 2013). Through NWoK’s Post-Settlement entity, Te Uru Limited, NWoK is the beneficial owner of the 9 ha of Te Uru Precinct land (renamed by NWoK with approval by the Hobsonville Land Company, now Homes, Land, Community 2017). The purchase of the Te Uru Precinct from the Crown is a significant early investment and milestone for NWoK and is the long-awaited (re)entry into the property industry by NWoK, and importantly is within its own rohe (traditional area).
· It is therefore important to NWoK that they remain imprinted in the whenua, and the Te Uru Precinct in particular. This can effectively be achieved though road names and would recognise the mana whenua of NWoK.
· Following are the names proposed by the Chair of NWoK kaumatua. The kaumatua have advised that they ‘do not take naming of streets lightly. Naming of roads, streets access ways for Māori is a taonga gifted to us from our ancestors’, and have provided the following:
In pre-literate Māori culture, there was a huge dependence on memory and the careful transmission of history from generation to generation. The names in the landscape were like survey pegs of memory, marking the events that happened in a particular place, recording some aspect or feature of the traditions and history of a tribe. If the name was remembered, it could release whole parcels of history to a tribal narrator and those listening. The daily use of such place names meant that the history was always present, always available.
· NWoK stress that approval for the preferred names is specifically sought as the names all relate to each other, and follow a specific korero (narrative/words) encompassing the whole plant of Pa Harakeke (whole Te Uru block). Ngati Whatua o Kaipara kaumatua advise that providing two alternative names to the preferred would take away the mana of the names. Mana is defined in English as authority, control, influence, prestige or power. It is also honour. For Māori, there are three kinds of traditional mana:
o the mana a person is born with
o the mana that the people give you
o group mana – given to a group from their marae, hapu, iwi.
· As alternative names have been requested, they are provided below. However, the preference remains to be for the original names provided to reflect the korero being told across all the road/laneway names.
· The harakeke plant has been chosen for the theme of road and laneway names in this superlot for three reasons:
o Harakeke is a plant populating much of Hobsonville Point and relates to the natural environment theme of other roads at Hobsonville Point e.g. Ponga Road, Kanuka Road. Harakeke is one of the main plants used to replace areas of exotic scrub that has been removed as part of a management plan, and restore it as indigenous habitats.
o Harakeke is traditionally used to weave. The harakeke (flax bush) is a living whakapapa and represents a whānau, hapū and iwi. The rito (centre blade) is the baby. It is surrounded by its parents, siblings, cousins, aunties, and uncles, and they are surrounded by grandparents.
o As in many things Māori, the words should not always be translated literally. While on the surface it draws on the harakeke, both the plant (which grew there in the past) and the weaving, are also allegories for Ngati Whatua being woven into the fabric of Te Uru.
12. The following names are proposed:
Road |
Proposed name |
Meaning |
Road 1 |
Te Aho Matua Road (preferred) |
Main thread |
Whakapoti Road |
To turn into a corner |
|
Accessway 1 |
Piko Lane (preferred) |
To bend |
Ahopaati Lane |
Single pair twinning in weaving |
|
Accessway 2 |
Whatu Lane (preferred) |
Weft of the weave |
Aho Rua Lane |
Double pair twinning |
|
Accessway 4 |
Raranga Lane (preferred) |
To weave |
Ahopaati Lane |
Single pair twinning in weaving |
|
Accessway 5 |
Whiri Lane (preferred) |
Build the kete (or whatever you are weaving) |
Whakakitaratara Lane |
Picket top of kete |
13. The road naming criteria suggests that the road types could be referred to as:
Owner |
Type |
Guideline description |
Preferred |
Public |
Road |
Open roadway primarily for vehicles |
Road |
Private |
Lane |
Narrow roadway between walls, buildings or a narrow country roadway |
Lane |
Consideration
Local board views and implications
14. The Auckland Council, by way of the Auckland Council Long-term Plan 2012-2022, allocated the responsibility for naming new roads, pursuant to section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974, to local boards. A decision is sought from the Upper Harbour Local Board in this report.
15. The decision sought for this report does not trigger any significant policy and is not considered to have any immediate impact on the community.
Māori impact statement
16. Consultation was carried out with the Hobsonville Point Placemaking Advisory Committee, which includes representatives of Te Kawerau a Maki and Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara. They advised they have no issues with the proposed names.
Implementation
17. The cost of processing the approval of the proposed new road names is recoverable for the applicant in accordance with Auckland Council’s administrative charging policies.
18. The applicant has responsibility for ensuring that appropriate signage will be installed accordingly once approval is obtained for the new road names.
Attachments
No. |
Title |
Page |
a⇩
|
Location plan - Te Uru Stage 1 |
75 |
b⇩
|
Site plan - Te Uru Stage 1 |
77 |
Signatories
Authors |
Philip Steven - Senior Subdivision Advisor |
Authorisers |
Ian Smallburn - General Manager Resource Consents Eric Perry - Relationship Manager |
14 December 2017 |
|
Approval for four new road names within the subdivisions at 102-130 Clark Road and 194-220 Buckley Avenue, Hobsonville Point
File No.: CP2017/24587
Purpose
1. To seek approval from the Upper Harbour Local Board for road names for three new public roads and one new private road, within two subdivision developments at 102-130 Clark Road (Buckley Precinct BB5) and 194-220 Buckley Avenue (Hudson Precinct SB4-SB10) at Hobsonville Point.
Executive summary
2. Auckland Council has road naming guidelines that set out the requirements and criteria of the council for proposed road names. These requirements and criteria have been applied in this situation to ensure consistency of road naming.
3. The applicant, Classic Builders Limited, has submitted the following road names:
Superlot |
Type |
Preferred |
Alternate 1 |
Alternate 2 |
Buckley BB5 |
||||
Access 1 |
Lane |
Contact |
Fan |
Chatterbox |
Hudson SB4-10 |
||||
Road SB4 |
Lane |
Chichester Cottage |
Windover |
Cutty Sark |
Road SB7-10 |
Road |
Cutty Sark |
Saro |
Seaplane |
Road SB5 |
Road |
Cinema |
Assembly |
Walrus |
4. All proposed road names are deemed to meet the criteria and are acceptable to both New Zealand Post and Land Information New Zealand (LINZ).
That the Upper Harbour Local Board: a) approve a road name for the new private road ‘Lot 100’ within the subdivision development at 102-130 Clark Road, Hobsonville Point, from the following options: i. Contact Lane (preferred) ii. Fan Lane iii. Chatterbox Lane. b) approve a road name for the new public road ‘SB4’ within the subdivision development at 194-220 Buckley Avenue, Hobsonville Point, from the following options: i. Chichester Cottage Lane (preferred) ii. Windover Lane iii. Cutty Sark Lane. c) approve a road name for the new public road ‘SB7-10’ within the subdivision development at 194-220 Buckley Avenue, Hobsonville Point, from the following options: i. Cutty Sark Road (preferred) ii. Saro Road iii. Seaplane Road. d) approve a road name for the new public road ‘SB5’ within the subdivision development at 194-220 Buckley Avenue, Hobsonville Point, from the following options: i. Cinema Road (preferred) ii. Assembly Road iii. Walrus Road.
|
Comments
5. According to the Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines, where a new public or private road needs to be named because of a subdivision or development, the subdivider / developer will be given the opportunity to suggest their preferred new road name for local board approval.
6. Auckland Council’s road naming criteria typically requires that road names reflect:
· a historical or ancestral linkage to an area
· a particular landscape, environmental or biodiversity feature
· an existing (or introduced) thematic identity in the area.
7. Names need to be easily identifiable and intuitively clear, thus minimising confusion. The three new public roads and one new private road to be named each service properties within their respective subdivisions.
8. Maps showing the new roads with surrounding lots in the two subdivisions are attached (refer Attachments A and B).
9. The applicant has proposed the road names listed in the table below. All names meet the criteria through having a historic or ancestral linkage to the area. The names have an Air Force theme, which reflects the site having once been a Royal New Zealand Air Force (RNZAF) air base.
Proposed new road name |
Meaning |
|
Buckley BB5 Lot 100 |
Contact Lane (preferred) |
The command called by a pilot to the ground crew member of an aircraft who spins the propeller, starting the aircraft's engine. ‘Contact’ is shouted to ensure the aircraft mechanic knows that all checks are complete, and magnetos are switched on ready to start the engine. ‘Contact’ is also the national magazine of the RNZAF. |
Fan Lane |
Slang for propeller. |
|
Chatterbox Lane |
Slang for machine gun. |
|
Hudson SB4-10 Road SB4 |
Chichester Cottage Lane (preferred) |
Named after the cottage this lane leads to. |
Windover Lane |
The original name given to ‘Mill House’ by Doug and Audrey Mill, who built Chichester Cottage in the former grounds of Mill House. |
|
Cutty Sark Lane |
See below. |
|
Hudson SB4-10 Road SB7-10
|
Cutty Sark Road (preferred) |
The name of a seaplane that was based at Hobsonville Airbase. Cutty Sarks feature early in the history of the former air force base, appearing from 1929. One was involved in a search and rescue mission to Great Barrier Island in 1930, flown by Sidney Wallingford and Len Isitt (both of whom have local streets named after them). |
Saro Road |
Abbreviated name for Saunders-Roe Cutty Sark. |
|
Seaplane Road |
Acknowledges the seaplanes that were assembled, maintained and flew from the former airbase. |
|
Hudson SB4-10 Road SB5 |
Cinema Road (preferred) |
The new road runs behind the existing Sunderland Lounge building, which at one time was the airbase cinema. The building is owned by Auckland Council and available for hire by the community. |
Assembly Road |
Acknowledging aircraft assembled at the former airbase. |
|
Walrus Road |
The Walrus was an amphibious reconnaissance aircraft and has an association with Hobsonville as a former airforce base. A quote in Bee Dawson’s book ‘Hobsonville: Portrait of a Seaplane Station’ refers to the seaplanes as ‘ducks’ by the Navy and were sometimes ‘flown to Great Barrier and when they returned we’d be told to be very careful because the hull would be full of crawling crayfish!’ |
10. The road naming criteria suggests that the road types could be referred to as:
Owner |
Type |
Guideline description |
Applicant preferred |
Public |
Road |
Open roadway primarily for vehicles. |
Road |
Public and private |
Lane |
Narrow roadway between walls, buildings or a narrow country roadway. |
Lane |
Consideration
Local board views and implications
11. Auckland Council, by way of the Auckland Council Long-term Plan 2012-2022, allocated the responsibility for naming new roads, pursuant to section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974, to local boards. A decision is therefore sought from the Upper Harbour Local Board in this report.
12. The decision sought for this report does not trigger any significant policy and is not considered to have any immediate impact on the community.
Māori impact statement
13. Local iwi were consulted as part of the Hobsonville Point Placemaking Advisory Committee but declined to comment as none of the names use the Māori language.
Implementation
14. The cost of processing the approval of the proposed new road names is recoverable from the applicant in accordance with Auckland Council’s administrative charges.
15. The applicant has responsibility for ensuring that appropriate signage will be installed accordingly once approval is obtained for the new road names.
No. |
Title |
Page |
a⇩
|
Location - BB5 and Hudson Precinct |
83 |
b⇩
|
Site plans - BB5 and SB4-10 |
85 |
Signatories
Authors |
Philip Steven - Senior Subdivision Advisor |
Authorisers |
Ian Smallburn - General Manager Resource Consents Eric Perry - Relationship Manager |
14 December 2017 |
|
Approval for one new road name within the subdivision at 102-130 Clark Road, Hobsonville Point
File No.: CP2017/24700
Purpose
1. To seek approval from the Upper Harbour Local Board for a name for one new private road within the subdivision development at 102-130 Clark Road (Buckley Precinct BB7) at Hobsonville Point.
Executive summary
2. Auckland Council has road naming guidelines that set out the requirements and criteria of the council for proposed road names. These requirements and criteria have been applied in this situation to ensure consistency of road naming.
3. The applicant, Fletcher Residential, has submitted the following road names:
Superlot |
Type |
Preferred |
Alternate 1 |
Alternate 2 |
Buckley Precinct BB7 |
Lane |
Danga |
Adjutant |
Flak |
4. All proposed road names are deemed to meet the criteria and are acceptable to both New Zealand Post and Land Information New Zealand (LINZ).
That the Upper Harbour Local Board: a) approve a name for the new private road ‘New Road’ within the subdivision development at 102-130 Clark Road, Hobsonville Point, from the following options: i. Danga Lane (preferred) ii. Adjutant Lane iii. Flak Lane.
|
Comments
5. According to the Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines, where a new public or private road needs to be named because of a subdivision or development, the subdivider / developer will have the opportunity to suggest their preferred new road name for local board approval.
6. Auckland Council’s road naming criteria typically requires that road names reflect:
· a historical or ancestral linkage to an area
· a particular landscape, environmental or biodiversity feature
· an existing (or introduced) thematic identity in the area.
7. Names need to be easily identifiable and intuitively clear, thus minimising confusion. The new private road to be named services properties within the subdivision.
8. Maps showing the new road with surrounding lots in the subdivision are attached (refer Attachments A and B).
The applicant has proposed the road names listed in the following table. All names meet the criteria through having a historic or ancestral linkage to the area. The names have an Air Force theme, which reflects the site having previously been a Royal New Zealand Air Force (RNZAF) base.
Proposed new road name |
Meaning |
|
Buckley BB7 New Road |
Danga Lane (preferred) |
A Danga, also seen spelled as Dangar, (the full name was Dangaroo) was, according to RNZAF Contact magazine, an RNZAF word originating in the Pacific theatre, meaning ‘a new boy just arrived from home with news, information, speculations and wax matches.’ |
Adjutant Lane |
An officer in a position of responsibility, mainly in an administrative capacity, such as Squadron Adjutant, or Station Adjutant (now known as Base Adjutant or Base Adj in the modern RNZAF) who was in charge of the orderly room. |
|
Flak Lane |
Anti-aircraft fire, shells fired from the ground into the air, set to explode at a certain altitude, spreading shrapnel in all directions. Flak can work in two ways, either directly hitting the aircraft and exploding, or exploding first at the pre-set altitude and spraying it with deadly shrapnel. The word flak is an abbreviation of the German term ‘Fliegerabwehrkanone’ (meaning aircraft defence cannon). Allied gun crews later added their own interpretation of the abbreviation with the words 'fondest love and kisses', a jokey term addressed from the gunners to the aircrew. |
9. The road naming criteria suggests that the road types could be referred to as:
Owner |
Type |
Guideline description |
Applicant preferred |
Private |
Lane |
Narrow roadway between walls, buildings or a narrow country roadway. |
Lane |
Consideration
Local board views and implications
10. Auckland Council, by way of the Auckland Council Long-term Plan 2012-2022, allocated responsibility for the naming of new roads, pursuant to Section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974, to local boards. A decision is therefore sought from the Upper Harbour Local Board in this report.
11. The decision sought for this report does not trigger any significant policy and is not considered to have any immediate impact on the community.
Māori impact statement
12. Local iwi were consulted as part of the Hobsonville Point Placemaking Advisory Committee but declined to comment as none of the names are using the Māori language.
Implementation
13. The cost of processing the approval of the proposed new road names is recoverable from the applicant in accordance with Auckland Council’s administrative charging policies.
14. The applicant has responsibility for ensuring that appropriate signage will be installed accordingly once approval is obtained for the new road name.
No. |
Title |
Page |
a⇩
|
Location plan - BB7 |
91 |
b⇩
|
Site plan - superlot BB7 |
93 |
Signatories
Authors |
Philip Steven - Senior Subdivision Advisor |
Authorisers |
Ian Smallburn - General Manager Resource Consents Eric Perry - Relationship Manager |
14 December 2017 |
|
Disposals recommendation report
File No.: CP2017/23519
Purpose
1. This report seeks the Upper Harbour Local Board’s endorsement for Panuku Development Auckland (Panuku), to recommend to the Finance and Performance Committee the disposal of a council owned property in the Upper Harbour Local Board area.
Executive summary
2. Proposed Lot 14, 61-117 Clark Road, Hobsonville, is part of a council owned property that has been identified as potentially surplus to council requirements. Consultation with council departments and its council-controlled organisations (CCOs), iwi authorities and the Upper Harbour Local Board has now taken place. No alternative service use has been identified for the site through the rationalisation process. Due to this, Panuku recommends disposal of the site.
3. A resolution approving the disposal of the site is required from the Finance and Performance Committee, before the proposed divestment can be progressed.
That the Upper Harbour Local Board: a) endorse Panuku Development Auckland’s recommendation to the Finance and Performance Committee to dispose of Proposed Lot 14, 61-117 Clark Road, Hobsonville, for urban renewal purposes.
|
Comments
4. Panuku and Auckland Council’s Stakeholder and Land Advisory team in Community Facilities work jointly on a comprehensive review of council’s property portfolio. One of the outcomes of the review process is to identify properties in the council portfolio that are potentially surplus to requirements and may be suitable to sell. The subject site is identified as potentially saleable through the review process.
5. Once a property has been identified as potentially surplus, Panuku engages with council departments and its CCOs through an expression of interest process, to establish whether the property must be retained for a strategic purpose, or is required for a future funded project. Once a property has been internally cleared of any service requirements, Panuku then consults with local boards, mana whenua and ward councillors. All sale recommendations must be approved by Panuku’s board before it makes a final recommendation to council’s Finance and Performance Committee.
Property information
6. Proposed Lot 14, 61-117 Clark Road, Hobsonville, comprises approximately 3,370m2. It is vacant land remaining from land originally transferred from the Crown to the former Waitakere City Council, in accordance with Section 50 of the Public Works Act 1981, for the purpose of a future public work in 2004. While the nature of the public work was not specifically defined, the purchase of the land was seen as a strategic land acquisition, due to its proximity to the proposed future Hobsonville town centre.
7. Approximately 4,160m2 of 61-117 Clark Road, Hobsonville, and approximately 5,127m2 of Clark Road were approved for disposal by the Finance and Performance Committee in June 2016. Following the 2016 approval, a road stopping process was undertaken for the relevant section of Clark Road and those sites were transferred to Homes, Land, Community (HLC) and its development partner, AVJ Hobsonville Proprietary Limited (AV Jennings), to develop into residential housing.
8. The remaining area of 61-117 Clark Road, Hobsonville, comprising of approximately 3,370m2, was to be retained by council for open space purposes, and to mitigate the effects of surrounding residential development on the sightlines for the adjacent historic settler’s church, in accordance with the Buckley B Precinct, Hobsonville Point, Stages 2 and 3 scheme plan.
9. In 2017, HLC and AV Jennings approached council, with HLC seeking to acquire Proposed Lot 14, 61-117 Clark Road, Hobsonville, for urban renewal purposes. HLC confirmed that it would support a revision of the development outcomes in the Buckley B Precinct, Hobsonville Point, Stages 2 and 3 scheme plan, with less open space land required, should the subject site be approved for disposal.
10. Following the approach from HLC and AV Jennings, council’s Parks and Recreation Policy department reviewed the subject site and advised that there is adequate parks provision in the locality, with the creation of the nearby 4,453m² Western Park. Including the subject site in the open space provision would be an overprovision in terms of council’s Open Space Provision Policy. As such, it was proposed that the subject site be rationalised.
11. The Unitary Plan zoning of Proposed Lot 14, 61-117 Clark Road, Hobsonville, is Residential – Mixed Housing Urban Zone; Hobsonville Point sub-precinct B, and has a desktop valuation of $6 million.
Consideration
Local board views and implications
12. Panuku attended a workshop with the Upper Harbour Local Board regarding the rationalisation of Proposed Lot 14, 61-117 Clark Road, Hobsonville, in November 2017. The board provided informal advice that it was opposed to a disposal that would result in the loss of open space for the area, and that it would present a case to the Finance and Performance Committee to retain the subject site.
13. This report provides the local board with an opportunity to formalise its views regarding the subject properties.
Māori impact statement
14. Twelve mana whenua iwi authorities were contacted regarding the potential sale of Proposed Lot 14, 61-117 Clark Road, Hobsonville. The following feedback was received:
· Ngāti Manuhiri – no feedback received for this site
· Te Runanga o Ngāti Whatua – no feedback received for this site
· Ngāti Whatua o Kaipara – have confirmed they are interested in potentially acquiring the property. If approved for disposal to HLC, Panuku will follow up with Ngāti Whatua o Kaipara advising that the lot has been divested for urban renewal purposes
· Ngāti Whatua Ōrākei – no feedback received for this site
· Te Kawerau a Maki – the land is within an area of cultural significance to Te Kawerau a Maki who advised they will require engagement on any development. However, there are no known site-specific issues of a cultural nature. Panuku replied to Te Kawerau a Maki confirming their cultural interests had been noted on the disposal file, and the information will be considered by council’s Finance and Performance Committee as part of any decision on the site. It will also be provided to potential purchasers. If approved for disposal to HLC, Panuku will follow up with Te Kawerau a Maki advising that the lot has been divested for urban renewal purposes
· Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki – advised there is no interest in this property
· Te ākitai – Waiohua – no feedback received for this site
· Ngāti Te Ata – Waiohua – no feedback received for this site
· Ngāti Paoa – Panuku received advice that Ngāti Paoa does not have a 'lead cultural interest' in this area, and will defer to the iwi mana whenua of the area. Ngāti Paoa also confirmed their general interest in commercial opportunities for any council property approved for disposal, however again advised that they will take direction from those lead iwi mana whenua for this specific site
· Ngāti Whanaunga – advised that the site could be an opportunity for a future Kokiri Development for community benefit. Panuku replied to Ngāti Whanaunga confirming their cultural interests had been noted on the disposal file, and the information will be considered by council’s governing body as part of any decision on the property. If approved for disposal to HLC, Panuku will follow up with Ngāti Whanaunga advising that the lot has been divested for urban renewal purposes
· Ngāti Maru – no feedback received for this site
· Ngāti Tamatera – no feedback received for this site.
Implementation
15. Consent holder obligations for AV Jennings, under LUC-2016-1582 and SUB-2016-1673 Buckley B Precinct, Stage 2 and 3, final decision relating to ongoing maintenance of the Proposed Lot 14, 61-117 Clark Road, Hobsonville, as a park in perpetuity, will require a variation to the consent to enable the development of the subject site into residential housing.
16. Following receipt of the Upper Harbour Local Board’s resolutions, the site will be presented to the Finance and Performance Committee with a recommendation to divest. If the Finance and Performance Committee approves the proposed disposal of the site, Panuku will seek to divest the site to HLC, while still providing an optimal outcome and return to council. HLC will utilise the subject site for a housing outcome.
17. The terms and conditions of any disposal would be approved under appropriate financial delegation.
No. |
Title |
Page |
a⇩
|
Images of Proposed Lot 14, 61-117 Clark Road, Hobsonville |
99 |
Signatories
Authors |
Anthony Lewis - Senior Advisor Portfolio Review |
Authorisers |
Letitia Edwards - Team Leader Portfolio Review, Panuku Development Auckland Eric Perry - Relationship Manager |
14 December 2017 |
|
Application for a licence for dining and cafe at Hobsonville Landing
File No.: CP2017/25703
Purpose
1. To seek approval to:
· Publicly notify, pursuant to section 54 of the Reserves Act 1977, a commercial licence for Catalina Bay Holdings Limited Partnership, and its tenant, to occupy part of the deck constructed over a strip of reserve (to be vested) at The Landing, Hobsonville, by Homes Land Community (2017) Limited (formerly Hobsonville Land Company Limited). The proposed term of the licence is 10 years and the purpose is for outdoor dining
· Grant the licence on terms and conditions to be approved by the head of Stakeholder and Land Advisory, Community Facilities, provided there are no significant objections.
Executive summary
2. Homes Land Community (2017) Limited (HLC), as part of its development of the former Hobsonville Airbase on behalf of the Crown, is soon to complete the subdivision of The Landing, also known as Catalina Bay.
3. The Landing has largely been sold to Catalina Bay Holdings Limited Partnership (CBH), a company owned by the Willis Bond Group.
4. The north end of the Fabric Bay Building in the north-western end of The Landing is currently being improved as a café/restaurant, and adjoins the deck that HLC has constructed partly over a small strip of reserve (Lot 10), to be vested on subdivision of The Landing (see Attachment A) and partly in the Coastal Marine Area (CMA).
5. The intention of HLC and CBH was that the latter would be granted a licence to occupy approximately half of the deck (see Attachment B).
6. The deck is held by HLC under a coastal permit (resource consent for items in the CMA). As it is envisaged by HLC that the coastal permit for the deck will be transferred to Auckland Council in due course, CBH has approached the council for a licence.
7. Due to the deck being constructed over a reserve, Legal Services has advised that the proposed licence must be notified under section 54 of the Reserves Act 1977.
8. Where the local board supports the application to publicly notify, it is also recommended that the board grants approval for the licence to be granted on terms and conditions to be approved by the head of Stakeholder and Land Advisory, Community Facilities, provided there are no significant objections.
That the Upper Harbour Local Board: a) approve the public notification of a licence for Catalina Bay Holdings Limited Partnership, and its tenant to occupy part of the deck constructed over a strip of reserve (to be vested on subdivision) and partly in the Coastal Marine Area at The Landing, Hobsonville, by Homes Land Community (2017) Limited (formerly Hobsonville Land Company Limited), for a term of 10 years for outdoor dining. b) approve granting of the licence on terms and conditions to be approved by the head of Stakeholder and Land Advisory, Community Facilities, if there are no objections, or no objections of significance to the granting of the licence, or no objections that cannot be resolved with the submitter. c) approve occupation of the deck, commencing under an agreement to grant a licence, prior to the public notification period due to the previous arrangements made between Hobsonville Land Company Limited and the proposed licensee, but with termination or suspension provisions if notification results in an adverse reaction from the public, and otherwise on terms and conditions to be approved by the head of Stakeholder and Land Advisory, Community Facilities.
|
Comments
9. The proposed licence will contain conditions requiring strict adherence to any bylaws and any consents or regulatory licences, required for the operation of the café/restaurant.
10. The Reserves Act 1977 provides for licences to be granted for up to 40 days without notification. An agreement to grant a licence and occupation ahead of notification would have the same effect as a 40-day licence.
11. In addition to the deck, a boardwalk for public access extends to the west, and a five-metre-wide esplanade reserve will be vested by HLC to the east along the top of the seawall. Staff consider that the proposed operation on the deck will leave ample room for the general public to enjoy the coastal walkway unhindered.
12. The recreation reserve to be vested, and over which the deck has been constructed, is inaccessible because of the structure.
13. As this report is being drafted, a valuation is being prepared by the council’s valuer for determination of the commercial licence fee payable by CBH.
Background
14. HLC is in the process of subdividing The Landing at Hobsonville and has sold a substantial part of the site to the Willis Bond Group.
15. HLC’s consent application to subdivide The Landing (which was heard and granted by a commissioner) presumed the licence would be granted and the strip of land beneath the deck (Lot 10) approved to be vested as recreation reserve, rather than esplanade reserve, to facilitate the proposed commercial operation. An extract from the decision follows:
A 7m-wide esplanade reserve is also to be created along the majority of the existing 315m long seawall. 5m of this extends from the inner face of the seawall to the landward boundary. However, between the Fabric Bay building and Mean High Water Springs (MHWS), it is proposed to waive the requirement for an esplanade reserve and instead form a recreation reserve to be vested to Auckland Council (Lot 10). This is to enable a licence to occupy to be placed over the area for outdoor dining purposes.
16. The council will receive a five metre esplanade reserve on The Landing, between Launch Road and the ferry wharf. The esplanade reserve is to be vested on subdivision.
17. HLC holds a separate coastal permit (the name given to a resource consent in the Coastal Marine Area) for the deck that has been constructed on the north side and adjoining the Fabric Bay Building.
18. HLC has indicated that it wishes to transfer the coastal permit to Auckland Council in due course.
19. A Willis Bond company, Catalina Bay Holdings Ltd (CBH), is currently improving the northern end of the Fabric Bay Building for operation as a restaurant/café, and has entered into an agreement to lease with an operator, which relies on use of part of the deck constructed by HLC at the north end of the building.
20. Another part of the deck on the western side is on land acquired by Willis Bond (refer Attachment B).
21. Willis Bond has requested that council confirms the licensing of part of the deck to CBH as landowner of the Fabric Bay Building, but with provision for occupation by its tenant.
Assessment of licence application
22. The following table provides an assessment of the application for the proposed licence:
Pros |
· Provides an opportunity for the public to make the most of the surroundings while seated on the deck, with a northerly aspect, facing the upper harbour |
· Activates the area around the ferry wharf |
|
· Provides non-rates revenue by way of a commercial licence fee, in accordance with council’s strategic imperative |
|
· Cost of maintenance of the deck, under the terms of the licence, is to be shared with the licensee (which is also part-owner of the deck) |
|
Cons |
· The operation, as a commercial activity, could create a sense of privatisation of public space, which may be perceived negatively by some members of the public |
· Patrons at the café/restaurant may create noise |
23. Overall, staff support the granting of the proposed licence.
Reserves Act requirements and options
24. The small strip of land (shown as Lot 10 on Attachment A) over which the deck is constructed, is to be vested as recreation reserve by HLC.
25. The Reserves Act 1977 allows for commercial activities on reserves, only after notification.
26. It is noteworthy that the deck completely covers the reserve to be vested, leaving the reserve inaccessible. However, the deck provides better access and is wider at that point on the waterfront than the reserve itself, even with part taken up with tables and chairs.
Option to refuse
27. In considering the application, the local board has an option not to proceed with the application. However, it needs to be considered that no other operator could use the position on the deck as effectively. Further, agreements have been made (between HLC and Willis Bond, and Willis Bond and the café operator) on the assumption that the deck will be used for outdoor dining. In effect, the council is inheriting this arrangement.
Option to consult
28. Where the local board considers the application, the board would then approve the public notification as required by section 54 (2) of the Reserves Act 1977, and iwi consultation as required by section 4 of the Conservation Act 1987.
29. The process requires that:
· public notice is published in a local paper which is in circulation in the area directly neighbouring the reserve
· a submission period of not less than one month be offered, noting that public notice given after 10 December requires extension of that period to 10 February
· full consideration be given to all objections and submissions through the board, a committee, or person(s) as appointed by the board
· either the committee or appointed person(s) make a recommendation back to the board for a decision, or the committee or board make the final decision.
30. CBH is eager to have its application considered as soon as possible, so that its tenant can operate this summer, if the licence is approved.
31. Given the timing of this report, the earliest public notification that could take place is mid-January. The one-month submission period would mean a hearing, if required, could take place in late February or early March 2018.
32. Staff recommend that the board also approves the operation commencing in mid-January under the agreement to grant a licence, or on a separate temporary 40-day licence. This will be subject to the licence being terminated upon overwhelmingly unfavourable feedback from the notification. Such temporary licences do not require notification.
33. This decision is not considered to be significant under the criteria set out in council‘s Significance and Engagement Policy. The land is not a strategic asset and a proposal to grant a licence to operate on a reserve is not an activity that exceeds the threshold on activities set out in the policy.
34. However, the proposed public engagement, which is required under the Reserves Act 1977, and iwi consultation to be undertaken in accordance with the Conservation Act 1987, are of an equivalent level of consultation that would be required under the council’s Significance and Engagement Policy, if the decision was of medium significance.
Consideration
Local board views and implications
35. The local board has allocated decision-making to approve activities undertaken on parks and open space in its area.
Māori impact statement
36. Should the board approve public notification, iwi will also be consulted and invited to make submissions on the proposal.
Implementation
37. If approval is given by the local board, the council will enter into an agreement to grant a licence to enable the proposed café operator to commence the interior fit-out of the café/restaurant. Once complete, the proposed café operator will be able to commence operation on the deck, pending a final decision for the permanent licence after the public consultation process.
38. Should the board approve public notification, the council’s Community Facilities department will carry out public notification and consultation with iwi in late January 2018. Costs involved with the public notification and hearings process (if any) will be met by the applicant.
39. Upon the submission period closing, staff will report back to the local board on details of a hearing if necessary, or to seek a final decision regarding the granting of the licence.
No. |
Title |
Page |
a⇩
|
The Landing Subdivision |
107 |
b⇩
|
2017-11-29 licence area plan updated |
109 |
c⇩
|
Fabric Building licensed area plan |
111 |
d⇩
|
Artist view of the deck from northern aspect |
113 |
e⇩
|
Deck details |
115 |
f⇩
|
Overall plan of The Landing |
117 |
Signatories
Authors |
Allan Walton - Principal Property Advisor |
Authorisers |
Kim O’Neill - Head of Community Relations Eric Perry - Relationship Manager |
14 December 2017 |
|
10-year Budget 2018-2028 consultation
File No.: CP2017/25860
Purpose
1. To agree local engagement events, and adopt local content and supporting information for consultation as part of the 10-year Budget 2018-2028 process.
Executive summary
2. Consultation on the 10-year Budget 2018-2028 (Long-term Plan) will take place from 28 February – 28 March 2018. Local boards will be consulting on their areas of focus and advocacy for their 2018/2019 Local Board Agreement. The Local Board Agreement is part of the budget setting process for the first year of the 10-year Budget 2018-2028.
3. There will also be concurrent consultation on the Auckland Plan Refresh (APR), Regional Land Transport Plan (RLTP), Regional Pest Management Plan (RPMP) and the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan (WMMP).
4. This report seeks agreement from local boards on spoken interaction events that will be held in their local board area during the consultation period, and to adopt their local content and supporting information for consultation, including:
· areas of focus for 2018/2019
· the key advocacy project.
5. The Governing Body will agree regional items for consultation on 11 December and local boards will agree their items by 14 December. The regional and local consultation items will then be incorporated into the consultation document and supporting information, which will be adopted by the Governing Body on 7 February 2018.
That the Upper Harbour Local Board: a) agree, subject to approval by the Governing Body, to hold the following spoken interaction events during the consultation period: i. existing event – Saturday 3 March 2018 at 7pm, Movies in Parks at Rosedale Park ii. drop-in session – Thursday 8 March 2018 at 6.30pm, Community Forum at Upper Harbour Local Board office iii. drop-in session – Thursday 15 or 22 March 2018, after workshop/business meeting at the Upper Harbour Local Board office iv. drop-in session – Saturday 17 or 24 March 2018 at 10.30-2.30pm, Upper Harbour Local Board office. b) delegate to the following elected members and staff the power and responsibility to hear from the public through ‘spoken/NZ sign language interaction’ in relation to the local board agreement at the council’s public engagement events during the consultation period for the 10-year Budget 2018-2028: i. Local Board Members and Chairperson ii. General Manager Local Board Services, Local Board Relationship Manager, Local Board Senior Advisor, Local Board Advisor iii. any additional staff approved by the General Manager Local Board Services or the Chief Financial Officer. c) adopt Attachment A to this agenda report, local content for consultation and Attachment B to this agenda report, local supporting information for consultation, including the key advocacy project. d) delegate authority to the Chairperson to approve any final minor changes required following review by council’s legal team and/or Audit New Zealand, of the local consultation content for the 10-year Budget 2018-2028 prior to publication, including online consultation content, and should any changes be made they are to be reported to the next business meeting.
|
Comments
6. The 10-year Budget sets out the priorities and funding for council activities that are planned over a 10-year period. It includes financial and non-financial information for the whole Auckland Council group. The Long-term Plan is reviewed and consulted on every three years.
7. As part of the 10-year Budget 2018-2028 process, the council is required to produce a consultation document. This will cover any significant or important issues proposed to be included in the 10-year Budget 2018-2028. The consultation document and supporting information will also include information on local board issues and priorities.
8. As part of the consultation on the 10-year Budget 2018-2028, local boards will consider and be consulting on their areas of focus and advocacy for their 2018/2019 Local Board Agreement. The Local Board Agreement is part of the budget setting process for the first year of the 10-year Budget 2018-2028.
9. Public consultation on the 10-year Budget 2018-2028 will take place from 28 February – 28 March 2018. There will also be concurrent consultation on the Auckland Plan Refresh (APR), Regional Land Transport Plan (RLTP), Regional Pest Management Plan (RPMP) and the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan (WMMP).
10. Aucklanders will be able to provide feedback during the consultation process through a variety of channels that include verbal (or face to face), written, social media and digital. A report on how council will receive verbal feedback from the public was considered by the Finance and Performance Committee on 21 November 2017. At a high level, the report outlines several different types of events that are planned for specific audiences and communities, as well as those planned for general Auckland residents. At that meeting, the Finance and Performance Committee resolved to:
· approve the approach to receive all feedback from Aucklanders on the Long-term Plan and Auckland Plan from 28 February 2018 to 28 March 2018 comprising of:
o up to 25 Have-Your-Say events targeting general Auckland residents are held in local board areas across the region
o four regional stakeholder events (traditional hearing style)
o an independently commissioned quantitative survey
o community specific events to collect feedback from different demographic and interest groups. Demographic events will target Youth, Seniors, Pacific, Ethnic, Rainbow and Disability communities
o hui with mana whenua and mataawaka.
and
· require the Mayor and councillors to attend a minimum of three Have-Your-Say events each to hear the views of Aucklanders and all regional stakeholder events.
11. The final consultation process for the 10-year Budget 2018-2028 will be approved by the Governing Body on 7 February 2018.
12. Spoken interaction constitutes any opportunity where Aucklanders have a dialogue with decision makers or their official delegations on the themes relating to the consultation. The spoken interaction events recommended to be held in the Upper Harbour Local Board area are:
· existing event – Saturday 3 March 2018 at 7pm, Movies in Parks at Rosedale Park
· drop-in session – Thursday 8 March 2018 at 6.30pm, Community Forum at Upper Harbour Local Board office
· drop-in session – Thursday 15 or 22 March 2018, after workshop/business meeting at the Upper Harbour Local Board office
· drop-in session – Saturday 17 or 24 March 2018 at 10.30-2.30pm, Upper Harbour Local Board office.
13. Local boards are requested to agree their key priorities and key advocacy project for 2018/2019 and adopt their local content and supporting information for consultation, as attached in Attachments A and B.
14. Any new local Business Improvements District (BID) targeted rates must be consulted on before they can be implemented. Local boards are therefore also requested to agree any new proposals for consultation.
Consideration
Local board views and implications
15. Local board decisions are being sought in this report.
16. Local boards will have further opportunities to provide information and views as council progresses through the 10-year Budget 2018-2028 process.
Māori impact statement
17. Many local board decisions are of importance to and impact on Māori. Local board agreements and the 10-year Budget are important tools that enable and can demonstrate council’s responsiveness to Māori. Local board plans, which were adopted in September and October of 2017, form the basis for local priorities.
18. Bespoke consultation material for the Māori community is being developed. This material will explain how the LTP and APR have relevance to Māori. Engagement advisors will have access to this collateral to support local engagement.
19. Specific regionally supported local engagement with Māori is being targeted for south and west Auckland.
20. An integrated approach to mana whenua engagement is being taken, with LTP and APR discussions already happening through the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum.
21. There is a need to continue to build relationships between local boards and iwi, and where relevant, the wider Māori community. Ongoing conversations will assist local boards and Māori to understand each other’s priorities. This in turn can influence and encourage Māori participation in council’s decision-making processes.
Implementation
22. The Governing Body will approve the consultation document, supporting information and consultation process for the 10-year Budget 2018-2028 on 7 February 2018.
23. Following consultation, the Governing Body and local boards will make decisions on the 10-year Budget 2018-2028 and Local Board Agreements 2018/19 respectively.
No. |
Title |
Page |
a⇩
|
Local Board consultation |
123 |
b⇩
|
Local Board supporting information |
125 |
Signatories
Authors |
Christie McFayden - Graduate Advisor |
Authorisers |
Carol McKenzie-Rex – Acting General Manager Eric Perry - Relationship Manager |
14 December 2017 |
|
Auckland Council’s Quarterly Performance Report:
Upper Harbour Local Board for quarter one, 1 July - 30 September 2017
File No.: CP2017/25940
Purpose
1. To provide the Upper Harbour Local Board with an integrated quarterly performance report for quarter one, 1 July to 30 September 2017.
Executive summary
2. This report includes financial performance, progress against local board key performance indicators, progress against work programmes, key challenges the board should be aware of and any risks to delivery against the 2017/2018 work programme.
3. The snapshot (Attachment A), indicates performance against the agreed 2017/2018 work programmes is tracking positively.
4. 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 the following which have a ‘red’ status (behind delivery, significant risk)/’amber’ status (some risk or issues, which are being managed):
· Albany Village Library – interior refurbishment.
· Gills Reserve – install concrete walkway.
· Gills Road Reserve – renew walkway.
· Hosking Reserve – demolish lower chicken sheds.
· Rosedale Park – renew sports fields 3 and 4.
5. The overall financial performance for quarter one 2017/2018 is favourable compared to the budget. There are some points for the board to note:
· Overall, the operational financial performance of the board is tracking above the revised year to date budget (109 per cent). Revenue is behind the revised budget by $63,000 due to a seasonal variance at the Albany Stadium Pool. The majority of locally driven initiatives (LDI) projects are yet to draw down on their financial allocations. Capital expenditure delivery for the first quarter includes renewals works at the Albany Coronation Hall and the Sunderland Lounge, and final project costs for the Albany Community Hub. Attachment C contains further detailed financial information.
6. The key performance indicators show a trend of delivery that is meeting the indicators, with the exceptions being the park, sports and recreation and community services activity areas. These are explained further in detail in the report.
That the Upper Harbour Local Board: a) receive the performance report for the financial quarter ending 30 September 2017
|
Comments
7. The Upper Harbour Local Board has an approved 2017/2018 work programme for the following operating departments:
· Arts, Community and Events; approved on 18 May 2017
· Parks, Sport and Recreation; approved on 18 May 2017
· Libraries and Information; approved on 15 June 2017
· Community Facilities: Build Maintain Renew; approved on 15 June 2017
· Community Leases; approved on 18 May 2017
· Infrastructure and Environmental Services; approved on 18 May 2017
· Local Economic Development; approved on 15 June 2017.
Risks identified in the 2017/2018 work programme
8. 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/’amber’ status – some risk or issues, which are being managed:
· Albany Village Library – interior refurbishment – project cancelled due to minor maintenance work being completed by the operations team, hence the renewal is no longer required.
· Gills Reserve – install concrete walkway – the budget is very low due to the fact that it is based on old unit rates.
· Gills Road Reserve – renew walkway – the installation of the furniture is delayed due to manufacturer delivery issues. All other works on track.
· Hosking Reserve – demolish lower chicken sheds – work is on hold until weather conditions improve.
· Rosedale Park – renew sports fields 3 and 4 – the project has been deferred to the 2018/2019 financial year.
Financial performance
9. Operating expenditure year to date relating to Asset Based Services (ABS) is tracking above budget while the LDI operations budget has been delivered at 74 per cent to date. This is due to a variety of projects yet to draw down on financial allocations.
10. The revenue variance at the pool looks to be seasonal as the budget is averaged over 12 months. This variance should be able to come back to budget over the summer months.
11. Capital spend of $541,000 represents investments renewals works at the Albany Coronation Hall and the Sunderland Lounge. The final project costs for the Albany Community Hub have also come through. The board has also allocated $235,000 from their LDI capital fund.
12. The complete Upper Harbour Local Board Financial Performance report can be found in Attachment C.
Key performance indicators
13. The 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 measure year-end outlook for Upper Harbour Local Board’s measures, showing how they are tracking after the first quarter of FY18.
14. The year-end outlook is that 40 per cent of measures will not achieve target.
15. Currently all performance measures are being reviewed as part of the development of the 2018-2028 Long-term Plan.
16. For the first and second quarter, the year-end outlook will be provided based on the 2016/2017 results or for any changes to the outlook based on results available. In the third quarter, council will be in a better position to accurately project the year-end outlook for all measures. This is due to the frequency of most measures data being collected annually through surveys.
Consideration
Local board views and implications
17. This report informs the Upper Harbour Local Board of the performance for the quarter ending 30 September 2017.
Māori impact statement
18. All Māori within the Upper Harbour Local Board area are able to participate in and have access to all projects and initiatives covered in this report.
Implementation
19. The Upper Harbour Local Board will receive the next performance update following the end of quarter two, December 2017.
No. |
Title |
Page |
a⇩
|
Work programme snapshot |
131 |
b⇩
|
Work programme update |
133 |
c⇩
|
Financial performance |
151 |
d⇩
|
Key performance indicators |
157 |
Signatories
Authors |
Karen Marais - Senior Local Board Advisor Upper Harbour |
Authorisers |
Eric Perry - Relationship Manager |
14 December 2017 |
|
Report from Hearings Panel - Recommendations regarding proposal to issue new leases on Rosedale Park, Wainoni Park, Hooton Reserve and Oteha Valley Road
File No.: CP2017/26489
Purpose
1. To provide the Upper Harbour Local Board with proposed recommendations from the Hearings Panel (the Panel) of independent commissioners regarding the grant of community leases to:
· the Harbour Hockey Charitable Trust, over an identified part of Rosedale Park West
· North Harbour BMX Association Incorporated, over part of Hooton Reserve and the adjoining land on Oteha Valley Road
· the Tennis Charitable Trust, over the part of the site it currently occupies on Oteha Valley Road
· the entity or entities to be formed that will occupy the site and equestrian facilities at Wainoni Park.
2. This report confirms that there is no legal impediment to the proposed leases being granted, should the local board wish to do so.
3. A further report is presented for the board’s consideration on this agenda that will outline the current status of resource consents, design briefs being prepared in conjunction with the lessees, and the necessary landowner consents to implement the development of the built assets to ensure the sites of the proposed leases are fit for purpose and make the best use of the resources available.
That the Upper Harbour Local Board: a) receive the report from the Hearings Panel containing recommendations on a notified application under the Reserves Act 1977 and the Local Government Act 2002, in respect of the proposal to issue leases to: i. Harbour Hockey Charitable Trust for Pt Allot 133 Parish of Paremoremo, Pt Allot 653 Parish of Paremoremo and Pt Sect 4 SO 444 7999, Rosedale Park, Albany ii. North Harbour BMX Association Incorporated for Pt Lot 2 DP 24754 and Pt Lot 1 DP 198079, Hooton Reserve, Oteha Valley Road, Albany iii. the Tennis Charitable Trust for Pt Lot 2 DP 24754, Oteha Valley Road, Albany iv. a new legal entity or entities to be formed to occupy Pt Allot 18 Parish of Paremoremo, Pt Lot 3 Deeds 34, Pt Lot DP 53735, Pt Lots 4, 5, and 6 DP 10508, Wainoni Park, Greenhithe, for the purposes of equestrian activities. b) note the finding of the Hearings Panel that, as the decision-making body in respect of the intention to grant the proposed leases on Rosedale Park, Wainoni Park, Hooton Reserve and Oteha Valley Road, Auckland Council has complied with the procedures and requirements of the Reserves Act 1977 and the Local Government Act 2002, applicable to the granting of each of the four leases, and that the correct procedures in respect of the statutory requirements outlined in these Acts have been followed. c) note that, in terms of the issues raised and the findings contained within the Hearings Panel’s report, the four leases in the proposal meet the statutory tests and criteria of the relevant legislation and may be granted for a period of 10 years, with two rights of renewal each for a period of 10 years, as proposed during the public notification process.
|
Comments
Introduction
4. At its meeting on 18 May 2017, the Upper Harbour Local Board considered a report regarding the proposed Northern Corridor Improvements (NCI) project and the implications of this on the site occupied by the Harbour Hockey Charitable Trust, managed as the North Harbour Hockey Stadium on Constellation Reserve.
5. The local board resolved to ‘approve the relocation of the Harbour Hockey Charitable Trust from Constellation Reserve to Rosedale Park West in principle as the best option investigated, and subject to the satisfactory conclusion of the lease hearing process’ (resolution number UH/2017/60).
6. The local board also resolved at this meeting to approve the public notification of Auckland Council’s intention to grant community leases on terms, in accordance with the Auckland Council’s Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012, to:
· the Harbour Hockey Charitable Trust over an identified part of Rosedale Park West
· North Harbour BMX Association Incorporated over part of Hooton Reserve and the adjoining land on Oteha Valley Road
· the Tennis Charitable Trust over the part of the site it currently occupies on Oteha Valley Road
· the entity or entities to be formed that will occupy the site and equestrian facilities at Wainoni Park (resolution number UH/2017/61).
7. The local board also resolved to note its intention to appoint an independent hearings panel to hear the submissions, and consider the proposed leases against the statutory framework and recommend a decision to the Upper Harbour Local Board as ultimate decision maker (resolution number UH/2017/62).
8. At its business meeting on 21 September 2017, the Upper Harbour Local Board appointed a hearings panel comprising three independent commissioners (resolution number UH/2017/152).
Summary of submissions
9. Public notification of the proposed leases was undertaken in July and August 2017. Advertisements were placed in the North Shore Times, the North Harbour News and the Nor-West News. Details of the proposal were also available on council’s Shape Auckland website and the Upper Harbour Local Board Facebook page.
10. The public hearing of submissions to the leasing proposal was held in the Council Chamber at the Takapuna Service Centre on Tuesday 17 and Wednesday 18 October 2017. The Hearings Panel (the Panel) visited all sites subject to the proposed leases on Thursday 19 October 2017.
11. Seventeen submitters were heard in support of their submission at the public hearing on 17 and 18 October 2017.
12. A total of 619 submissions on the proposed leases were received within the advertised timeframe. A full copy of the Hearings Panel’s report is presented as Attachment A, which contains a thorough assessment of the issues raised by submitters, the statutory context within which decisions must be made, a summary of findings, and recommendations to the local board.
13. Of the 619 submissions, 599 were from individuals and the other 20 from organisations.
14. Most of those who made a submission (594 submitters, or 96% of all submitters) responded on the intention to relocate the Harbour Hockey Charitable Trust and its implications for the incumbent tenants on the site at Rosedale Park West.
15. Twenty-seven submitters also commented on the proposed leases at Wainoni Park, and 20 expressed views on the Hooton Reserve/Oteha Valley Road changes.
16. A large number of the submissions (28%) were identified as being from residents in the Upper Harbour Local Board area. This figure increased to approximately 70% when the neighbouring local board areas were included.
17. Of the respondents who provided gender and age information, 53% were male, although women constituted the majority of respondents for in the 55-64 and 75+ age groups. Twenty per cent of all respondents were under age 25, 36% of respondents were aged 25-44, and 6% were aged 65 years and over.
Issues raised in submissions
18. The Panel noted that a very ‘wide and diverse range’ of issues were received from submitters, both before and during the hearing. In the report, the Panel noted appreciation for the positive and frank manner in which information and views had been shared, and the considerable time and effort that went into preparing submissions. The willingness of submitters to provide supplementary information was also acknowledged.
19. The attached report from the Panel (refer Attachment A) notes that approximately 30 different issues were raised as part of the consultation process, but many of the issues are interrelated and could be grouped under seven main headings for the ease of management. The Panel’s report goes into detailed discussion on each of these seven matters (refer to pages 7-31 of Attachment A), but are briefly canvassed in the table below. The issues have been presented in order of the level of response received:
Broad issue |
Commentary |
Support for the relocation of the Harbour Hockey Charitable Trust facility |
· The majority of submissions received in respect of the proposed relocation of the Harbour Hockey Charitable Trust (HHCT) facility to Rosedale Park West were very supportive of the move. Some of the 561 submitters in this group expressed general support without providing any specific reason. · The largest group of submitters who did detail their reasoning supported the retention of a centralised, high-standard hockey facility in this location, referring to the fact that Rosedale Park West is the only option of those offered for consideration that would allow this to happen. · Submitters commented variously on the benefits of a centralised venue in terms of ease of access, operational efficiencies, ease of maintenance, and security for the players and visitors using the facility. · Submitters noted that the proposed facility would be centrally located in an area that already has a strong focus. At this location, the stadium would be readily accessed from the main road network, especially once the benefits of the NCI project are realised. Better access to public transport and improved walking and cycling links to the site were also offered by submitters as positives. · Submitters commented that the development of a world class facility, able to host national and international events, would not only raise the profile of the sport and further enhance the Upper Harbour Local Board area as a centre of sporting excellence, but also bring significant economic benefits to businesses in the area. · Submitters noted that a new facility would benefit a wide range of ages and abilities in the sporting community, and would encourage people to become (and remain) more active. It would cater not only for the current and future needs of hockey, but also be available for use by other sports and afford players easy access to quality playing surfaces. · Submitters expressed the opinion that the proposal makes better use of the land available, and supports a significant number of participants in a sport that continues to grow in popularity. · The development of the proposed hockey facility aligns with priorities contained within the Auckland Plan, zoning provisions within the Auckland Unitary Plan, Auckland Council’s Parks and Open Spaces Strategic Action Plan 2013, Auckland Council’s Sport and Recreation Strategic Action Plan 2015, the Upper Harbour Local Board Plan 2017, and other strategic documents. |
Concerns about the relocation of the Harbour Hockey Charitable Trust facility |
· Thirty-three submitters expressed concern or direct opposition to relocation of the hockey facility to the Rosedale West site for a range of reasons. These included increased traffic congestion and parking problems; the effects of the development on the amenity of the reserve and on neighbours, a questioning of the need to move at all, the inadequate consideration of alternatives, and the costs involved. Other associated concerns are identified separately below. · Traffic and parking issues featured in 12 of the submissions from those concerned about the relocation of hockey, with particular reference to current periodic congestion on Bush Road, Rosedale Road, William Pickering Drive, and Paul Matthews Road. Reference was also made to the adverse impacts on local business from traffic and parking, the inadequate capacity of the proposed hockey parking, and safety concerns for children frequenting the area. · Adverse effects on the open space or passive recreation amenity values of the reserve were mentioned by eight submitters, including six residents of the Stonedge Estate. Concerns have been raised about the adverse visual impact of such a large facility at this location on neighbours, noise from major events, light spill from the use of floodlights, the impact on the natural landscape, loss of perceived passive recreation spaces, and adverse effects on identified ecological values associated with Alexandra Stream and its terrestrial vegetation within the Significant Ecological Area (SEA). · A number of submitters questioned the need for hockey to move at all, arguing for alternatives that would replace the two fields that will be lost, or suggesting other relocation options. · Criticism extended to the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA), Auckland Council, and Watercare Services Limited for their ‘incompetence’ in wasting resources on the motorway, with its consequences, rather than investing in rail and other more important infrastructure and social services. |
The process-information sharing, notification and decision making |
· Among the concerns of those opposing the intended changes were comments regarding the absence of appropriate public consultation, a lack of transparency, and improved process that (in their opinion) included negotiations behind closed doors. At the hearing, it was made clear this was not a criticism of the HHCT as a directly affected party, but it is directed at the local board and the NZTA as the initiating authority. · Associated with a perceived climate of mistrust towards the local board and NZTA, a number of submitters claimed that proper statutory processes have not been followed, in that the council had not met its statutory obligations under either the Reserves Act 1977 or the Local Government Act 2002, in the area of public consultation. One submitter referred to a lack of proper engagement with iwi and saw this as a deficiency in process. |
Contrary to the Reserves Act 1977 and the Rosedale Park Reserve Management Plan |
· Two submitters consider the proposal, as it applies to Rosedale Park West, is inconsistent with the provisions of the reserve management legislation, and they were joined by a further eight in expressing a similar view in respect of the reserve management plan for Rosedale Park. Six specifically asked that no decisions be made, in respect of the leases, until the management plan has been reviewed with full consultation. · Reference was made to the provision in section 41(4) of the Reserves Act 1977, in that the administering body of any reserve shall keep its management plan under continuous review so that it is adapted to changing circumstances. · A view was expressed at the hearing that it would also be premature to proceed with decisions on the leases before the resource consent process has been completed, i.e. that any decision should be delayed until the Environment Court has made a decision on the resource consent appeal to relocate HHCT to Rosedale Park West. |
Concerns about the disadvantages to other sporting codes |
· The Albany United Football Club and several other submitters are concerned that other sporting codes, and their need for additional or dedicated facilities at Rosedale Park West have not been given due consideration when assessing the needs of hockey. There was also criticism that other clubs had not been consulted. |
Relocation of Rosedale Pony Club |
· Nineteen of the 27 submitters who provided comment on the proposal to relocate the Rosedale Pony Club to an upgraded Equestrian Centre on Wainoni Park at Greenhithe were supportive. They noted that new facilities would benefit each of the equestrian groups and their members, catering not only for the current needs of the sport but also providing certainty for the future. · These submitters noted that the proposed facility would be centrally located, and would better suit the needs of the horses in a more rural setting than the Albany site. · They also suggested it was a ‘great idea’ to cluster or co-locate the clubs in an area already used for equestrian activities. Combining the pony clubs would make them stronger. This aligns with the concept of developing fewer sites with better facilities for major sporting codes, and would also raise the profile of the sport. · The eight submitters who registered concerns about the Wainoni Park proposal are worried about the capacity of the site to meet the needs of the four clubs, the health of the horses, the protection of the interests of Riding for the Disabled, and both current and future traffic congestion on Churchouse Road. · In the context of these matters, several submitters question the need for the Rosedale Pony Club to be relocated. The pony club’s submission is that it supports the granting of a new lease to Harbour Hockey at Rosedale Park, subject to agreement being reached between the parties to all the terms of relocation of the club to Wainoni Park. |
Relocation of North Harbour BMX Association Incorporated |
· Relatively few submitters (20) commented on the relocation of North Harbour BMX to the site at the Hooton Reserve. The 18 people who supported the proposal did so on the basis that they believe the proposed development on Hooton Reserve is a great opportunity for the Albany community in general, not only the BMX riders themselves. · The submission of North Harbour BMX Incorporated is that it is content with its current site and would prefer to avoid the inconvenience of relocation, but sees this relocation proposal as an opportunity to enhance the sport of BMX. It supports the combined proposals, being ‘happy to receive the benefits from what is being proposed.’ · Two submitters registered their concern with the BMX relocation, primarily on the grounds of the case not being made for hockey to displace BMX. One submitter however, indicated dissatisfaction with the potential adverse impact on the current tennis facilities adjoining the proposed site. |
Summary of commissioner’s findings
20. Upon consideration of the issues and concerns raised by the public as part of the lease consultation process, the Hearings Panel has provided a ‘summary of findings’ as part of its report to the local board (refer pages 31-33 of Attachment A). These findings are briefly canvassed here as follows:
· There is extensive public support for the changes proposed, and the granting of leases to facilitate this.
· Traffic and off-site parking, along with potential noise, light spill and safety issues associated with the development of a new hockey centre, are matters that are outside the statutory framework of what the Panel is able to consider. They are correctly matters to be addressed through the resource consent process.
· Auckland Council’s actions on consultation have been reasonable and appropriate, and the necessary statutory requirements of the Reserves Act 1977, and the Local Government Act 2002, applicable to the granting of each of the four leases have been met.
· No evidence has been put forward to support the argument that the proposal for a lease to hockey is inconsistent with the provisions of the Reserves Act. Correct process has been followed for a lease not “in conformity with and contemplated” by the management plan.
· Concerns about unfair bias in favour of hockey, with direct disadvantage to other codes, are not well founded and, in any case, is a matter for Auckland Council consideration, not the Panel’s.
· In the context of the benefits arising from the development of the Wainoni Equestrian Hub, and the collaborative efforts of the clubs to make this work for them, there are no concerns that warrant not proceeding with the proposed lease for this site.
· In the context of the benefits arising from the development of a new quality BMX facility at Hooton Reserve, and the support of North Harbour BMX, there are no concerns that warrant not proceeding with the grant of a lease for this site.
21. No submissions were made in respect of the proposed lease to the Tennis Charitable Trust on the council freehold land, and no findings are made for this part of the overall proposal.
The Hearings Panel’s recommendations to the Upper Harbour Local Board
22. Having considered the requirements of the Reserves Act 1977, the Local Government Act 2002, information provided for the public hearing, the content and overall thrust of the public submissions received, and having undertaken site inspections and made appropriate enquiries subsequent to the hearing to properly inform recommendations, the Hearings Panel recommends that council (i.e. the Upper Harbour Local Board):
(i) receive its report, noting the number of submissions received and the range of issues and concerns raised.
(ii) note the findings that, as the decision-making body in respect of the intention to grant community leases to –
· the Harbour Hockey Charitable Trust over an identified part of Rosedale Park West
· North Harbour BMX Association Inc. over part of Hooten Reserve and adjoining Council land on Oteha Valley Road, Albany
· The Tennis Charitable Trust over Council freehold land on Oteha Valley Road, Albany
· The entity or entities to be formed that will occupy and use the equestrian facilities at Wainoni Park, Greenhithe.
Auckland Council has complied with the requirements of the Reserves Act 1977 and the Local Government Act 2002 applicable to the granting of each of the four leases, and correct procedures have been followed.
(iii) note that, in terms of the issues raised and the findings contained in this report, the four leases in the proposal meet the statutory tests and criteria of the relevant legislation and may be granted on appropriate terms and conditions.
(iv) confirm its intention to grant the various leases for the terms proposed in the public notice.
(v) considers the benefits to Auckland Council, its lessees, and the community of reviewing the management plans for Rosedale Park and Wainoni Park in 2018.
(vi) note the Panel’s advocacy Auckland Council freehold land on Oteha Valley Road, intended to be included in the BMX lease, to be declared a reserve.
(vii) note the Panel’s advocacy for Auckland Council to actively pursue the addition of the Pond 2 site to its public open space network, with its significant potential for active and passive recreation.
Matters for further consideration
23. Upon consideration of the views and preferences put forward from the public as part of the lease consultation process, the Panel has offered several recommendations for the local board to consider.
24. The Panel requested that the local board consider the benefits to Auckland Council, its lessees and the community of reviewing the reserve management plans for Rosedale Park and Wainoni Park.
25. The Upper Harbour Local Board has been advised by the Services and Asset Planning Team that there is currently a request through the Long-term Plan (LTP) to seek funds to develop an Open Space Network Plan for each local board area.
26. This is a new approach where one omnibus plan may be developed that will cover all reserve land together with land held as open space under the Local Government Act 2002.
27. If the Upper Harbour Local Board chooses to take advantage of this new process, all reserves contemplated in this report could be included in the review and preparation of an omnibus open space management plan.
28. The Panel also requested that the Upper Harbour Local Board consider that the freehold land intended to be included in the BMX lease be declared a reserve.
29. The Upper Harbour Local Board will have the opportunity to review this site through the master plan process that will be undertaken to consider the future governance and use of the land occupied by the Tennis Charitable Trust, The North Harbour BMX Association Incorporated and the Hooton Reserve car park.
30. The Panel requests that Auckland Council actively pursue the addition of the Pond 2 site to its public open space network, with its significant potential for active and passive recreation.
31. There has been significant work on the potential of this site when it was considered as a potential location for the relocation of the North Harbour Hockey facility. This will provide valuable information should the local board wish to pursue the acquisition or transfer of the Pond 2 site.
Consideration
Local board views and implications
Responsibility for decision-making
32. Under the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009, local boards have the statutory obligation to conduct and undertake community engagement, consultation and advocacy for matters which affect their communities, in addition to the statutory requirements under the Reserves Act 1977 which is discussed elsewhere in this report.
33. More specifically, local boards have been allocated decision-making for non-regulatory matters through the Allocation of Decision-Making Responsibility for Non-Regulatory Activities included as part of council’s Long-term Plan. When considering the matter at hand, the decision-making authority of the Upper Harbour Local Board can be derived from a range of themes included in this allocation as outlined in the table below:
Theme |
Local board non-regulatory responsibility |
Governance and support |
· Local governance, including decision-making and oversight of decisions on local activities |
Auckland Development |
· Local planning and development, including local place-shaping activities, including local leadership to create a local identity |
Parks, Community and Lifestyle |
· Community development and facilities, including the use of local community facilities, including leasing and changes of use · Local parks, sport and recreation, including the use of local recreation facilities and initiatives including leasing and changes of use · Parks, including local parks improvements and place-shaping, and the use of and activities within local parks |
Māori impact statement
Statutory requirements
34. The Reserves Act 1977 requires that any decisions made under the Act must give effect to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi. This obligation derives from section 4 of the Conservation Act 1987, and the schedule to the Conservation Act 1987 includes the Reserves Act itself.
35. The most relevant Treaty principles are:
i. Good faith and partnership – the duty to interact in good faith and in the nature of a partnership. There is a sense of shared enterprise and mutual benefit where each partner must take account of the needs and interests of the other
ii. Active protection – the duty to proactively protect the rights and interests of Māori, including the need to proactively build the capacity and capability of Māori, as is reasonable under the circumstances.
36. Consultation is also relevant, as there is an obligation to consult Māori where Treaty principles arise for consideration under the Reserves Act 1977. Consultation requires the Crown, and Auckland Council as the administering body, to (in summary):
i. Provide Māori with access to relevant information on the matter, the purpose of the consultation and the scope of the decision to be made
ii. Invite Māori to present their views, and provide an opportunity to present views in an appropriate manner
iii. Receive views with an open mind and consider them when making a decision, and provide information on the decision.
Mana whenua participation in lease notification process
37. There are 11 mana whenua groups identified by council with interests in the Upper Harbour Local Board area:
· Ngāti Manuhiri
· Te Runganga o Ngāti Whātua
· Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara
· Ngāti Whātua o Orakei
· Ngāti Tai Ki Tāmaki
· Te Kawerau a Maki
· Te Akitai Waiohua
· Ngāti Paoa
· Ngāti Maru
· Ngāti Whanaunga
· Ngāti Tamaterā.
38. The information listed below was e-mailed to mana whenua 18 July 2017:
· a copy of the report considered by the Upper Harbour Local Board at its meeting 6 April 2017, which gives details of the sites and background information on the proposal
· a copy of the minutes of the Upper Harbour Local Board meeting held 6 April 2017
· a site plan of the proposed Hockey Stadium at Rosedale Park West, together with an artist impression of the stadium ready for a major event and a key facts summary
· a site plan of the proposed Equestrian Hub at Wainoni Park, together with a key facts summary
· a site plan of the proposed BMX Facility at Oteha Valley Road, together with an artist impression of the development and a key facts summary
· a copy of the advertisement content that was later published in the North Shore Times (published 18 July 2017), the North Harbour News and the Nor-West News (both published 20 July 2017)
· a list of key facts for each site.
39. An Auckland Council staff contact was given in case any further information was required, together with an offer of hard copy management plans for Rosedale Park West and Wainoni Park.
40. Mana whenua representatives were invited to visit the sites if they wished, although it is understood that many had already taken the opportunity to do so in July 2016 and again in April 2017 on visits arranged by NZTA through its iwi engagement process.
41. A further email was sent 13 September 2017, containing the same background information and attachments. Mana whenua were advised in this e mail that the lease submission period had closed, and that the information was being collated and analysed anticipating a hearing mid-October 2017. A request was made for objections or comments so that they could be included in the agenda report to the commissioners.
42. One response was received from mana whenua. A representative from Ngāti Manuhiri commented that, during consultation with NZTA, it was indicated by all iwi on the NZTA consultation group that the relocation of the hockey stadium to Rosedale Park West was not the preferred option due to concerns regarding of the modification of land bordering the Alexandra Steam.
43. The Manuhiri Kaitiaki Charitable Trust indicated in a letter to council received 29 November 2017 that, whilst Pond 2 would have been its preferred option, it supports the Harbour Hockey Charitable Trust in its plans to develop a new facility on Rosedale Park West and will move forward and engage with the NCI Alliance and the affected sports clubs to ensure the best possible cultural and environmental outcomes are gained at Rosedale Park West, Hooton Reserve and Wainoni Park.
Implementation
44. If the board approves the proposed leases under a separate item on this agenda, drafts will be forwarded to the lessees that will include any specific requirements relating to design, operation, or as a result of a resource consent condition.
45. The draft documents will be presented to the lessees for consideration, approval and execution.
No. |
Title |
Page |
a⇩
|
Report from Hearings Panel – proposal to issue leases over Rosedale Park and other reserves at Albany and Greenhithe as a consequence of current leasing arrangements being impacted by the Northern Corridor Improvements (motorway) project. |
169 |
Signatories
Authors |
Ron Johnson - Lease Advisor |
Authorisers |
Kim O’Neill - Head of Stakeholder and Land Advisory Eric Perry - Relationship Manager |
14 December 2017 |
|
The Northern Corridor Improvements project - Granting of community leases and landowner approvals
File No.: CP2017/26467
Preamble
1. Due to the complexity of the New Zealand Transport Agency’s (the agency) Northern Corridor Improvements (NCI) project and the decisions sought from the local board, this report is written in two sections.
2. Section one of the report assumes that the Upper Harbour Local Board (the board) has adopted the recommendations from the Hearings Panel report and sees no legal impediment to granting new leases at Rosedale Park, Hooton and Oteha Valley Reserve and Wainoni Park.
3. Section one provides background of the NCI project, the response from council and affected stakeholders.
4. It sets out the status of the resource consents for Rosedale Park, Wainoni Park and Hooton and land at Oteha Valley Road.
5. Staff recommends that the board approve the new leases for Harbour Hockey Charitable Trust (HHCT), the North Harbour BMX Association Incorporated (BMX) and the new equestrian entity or entities to be formed as lessees at Wainoni Park.
6. Section two of the report seeks approval from the board to grant the landowner applications for the construction of:
· the North Harbour Hockey Stadium
· the BMX facility
· the Wainoni Park equestrian facility
7. Section two of the report is dependent on the board approving the granting of new leases to: HHCT, BMX, Tennis Charitable Trust (TCT) and the new equestrian entity at Wainoni Park.
8. The Hearings Panel concluded that the council has complied with the requirements of the Reserves Act in terms of the procedures to be followed and that, in terms of the issues raised and the findings contained in this report, there is no valid impediment to the granting of the leases on appropriate terms and conditions.
9. Note that if the board defers a decision to award the required leases, then the agency have indicated that the completion of the NCI project will be delayed by 6-12 months at an additional cost to the taxpayer of $10-30 million.
10. Note that if the board declines the new leases, the agency has indicated that this will result in a delay to the start of the NCI by 6-12 months and the completion of the project by 2-3 years.
11. This will result in a write-off of $5-7 million already invested in planning and design and add an additional cost to the taxpayer of $50-100 million.
Purpose
Section one
12. Provide the members of the Upper Harbour Local Board with information that will support its consideration of all matters pertaining to grant of the undernoted leases to:
· Harbour Hockey Charitable Trust for Pt Allot 133 Parish of Paremoremo, Pt Allot 653 Parish of Paremoremo and Pt Sect 4 SO 444 7999, Rosedale Park, Albany
· North Harbour BMX Association Incorporated for Pt Lot 2 DP 24754 and Pt Lot 1 DP 198079, Hooton Reserve, Oteha Valley Road, Albany
· the Tennis Charitable Trust for Pt Lot 2 DP 24754, Oteha Valley Road, Albany
· a new legal entity or entities to be formed to occupy Pt Allot 18 Parish of Paremoremo, Pt Lot 3 Deeds 34, Pt Lot DP 53735, Pt Lots 4, 5, and 6 DP 10508, Wainoni Park, Greenhithe for the purposes of equestrian activities.
13. The term of each of the proposed lease to be 10 years with two rights of renewal each for a period of 10 years.
Section Two
14. Seeks the approval of the Upper Harbour Local Board to:
· approve the landowner application from the Harbour Hockey Charitable Trust for the construction of the North Harbour Hockey Stadium and supporting infrastructure on Rosedale Park West
· approve the landowner application from the New Zealand Transport Agency for the construction of a BMX facility and supporting infrastructure on land at Oteha Valley Road and part of the car park at Hooton Reserve (BMX site)
· approve the landowner application from the New Zealand Transport Agency for the construction of the proposed Wainoni Park Equestrian Development
· approve the landowner application for the early construction of the aforementioned facilities prior to formal lease agreements being finalized, if required
· approve the landowner application for any associated works required in the resource consent process for land that falls outside of the three proposed leased areas, such as mitigation planting and noise cancelling structures.
Executive summary
15. The agency is developing the NCI project, which includes the delivery of a new motorway connection between State Highway 18 (SH18) and State Highway 1 (SH1), and requires the acquisition of part of Constellation Reserve and Rosedale Park South.
16. HHCT currently holds a lease at Constellation Reserve, Rosedale Park South. Consequently, a project group consisting of Auckland Council, the agency, HHCT, Watercare and Auckland Transport (AT) has been working together to look at various options available to provide a solution to mitigate the effects of the NCI project on HHCT.
17. Auckland Council has authorised negotiations with the agency to provide a ‘land for land agreement’ for the loss of open space at Constellation Reserve.
18. Regular updates on the progress of the NCI project have been provided to the board via workshops and formal reporting over a two-year period since 2015.
19. The project group’s preferred option to mitigate the effects on HHCT is to relocate HHCT from Constellation Reserve to Rosedale Park West.
20. Rosedale Pony Club and the North Harbour BMX Association currently hold leases at Rosedale Park West, and will be impacted by the proposed relocation of the HHCT facility.
21. The project group has identified Wainoni Park as an alternative location for Rosedale Pony Club, where facilities can be developed and optimised across equestrian clubs.
22. Land has been identified at Oteha Valley Road, that includes part of Hooton Reserve and a portion of the site occupied by the TCT, as an alternative location for BMX.
23. These options were presented to the board at a workshop on 3 August 2016. A report was considered by the local board at its business meeting on 23 August 2016. The board resolved:
Resolution number UH/2016/159
That the Upper Harbour Local Board:
a) request that staff work with affected lessees to find a suitable solution to the impacts and revert to the local board at the earliest opportunity with the outcomes of the discussions.
b) recommend a land for land agreement with New Zealand Transport Agency be pursued, as compensation for the loss of land required by the New Zealand Transport Agency at Constellation Reserve.
24. Staff have worked with affected lessees, all of whom have agreed in principle to continue working with the agency and Auckland Council, to find the most suitable solution to the proposed relocations.
25. Following the business meeting on 9 April 2017, informal discussions were held between the project team, members of the board, and affected lessees to explain the process and to identify any gaps in information.
26. Following these discussions, the project team held a workshop with the board on 28 April 2017 to confirm:
· Auckland Council’s needs and long term strategic requirements to accommodate sports and recreation, in response to the future growth of Auckland
· the agency’s requirement to progress the NCI, and Watercare’s long-term strategic requirements at the Rosedale waste water treatment plant, in response to the future growth of Auckland.
27. The project team confirmed that it would seek a resolution from the board at its business meeting on 18 May 2017 to support the preferred option of Rosedale Park West, and to notify Auckland Council’s intention to grant new leases to affected lessees.
28. At the workshop on 28 April 2017, the board requested staff investigate whether the Pond 2 Watercare site could be included as an option to accommodate Rosedale Pony Club.
29. A formal response from Watercare confirmed that it would only support this option provided all leases and any land sales to council are on a full commercial basis.
30. At the 18 May 2017 business meeting, the board resolved to:
Resolution number UH/2017/60:
The Upper Harbour Local Board:
a) approve the relocation of the Harbour Hockey Charitable Trust from Constellation Reserve to Rosedale Park West, in principle as the best option investigated, and subject to the satisfactory conclusion of the lease hearing process.
Resolution number UH/2017/61:
b) approve the public notification of Auckland Council’s intention to grant community leases to:
1. Harbour Hockey Charitable Trust
2. North Harbour BMX Association Incorporated
3. The Tennis Charitable Trust
4. The entity or entities to be formed that will occupy and use the equestrian facilities at Wainoni Park
31. At its business meeting on 21 September 2017, the board appointed a Hearings Panel comprising three independent commissioners (resolution number UH/2017/152).
32. The public hearing of submissions to the leasing proposal was held in the Council Chamber on Level 3, 1 The Strand, Takapuna, on Tuesday, 17 October and Wednesday, 18 October 2017.
33. The
Hearings Panel visited all sites subject to the proposed leases on Thursday,
19 October 2017.
34. The Hearings Panel public deliberation day was held in the Council Chamber on Level 3, 1 The Strand, Takapuna, on Tuesday, 14 November 2017. The Hearings Panel report concluded that:
· having considered the requirements of the Reserves Act 1977, the relevant information provided for the hearing, along with the content and overall thrust of written and oral submissions; and having visited the sites, and made enquiries subsequent to the hearing on matters of fact to properly inform the decision; and having made findings on the various matters and concerns raised in the submissions;
· the Council has complied with the requirements of the Reserves Act in terms of the procedures to be followed;
· Notes that, in terms of the issues raised and the findings contained in this report, there is no valid impediment to the granting of the leases on appropriate terms and conditions;
· Confirms its intention to grant the various leases for the terms proposed in the public notice.
35. The
full Hearings Panel report can be viewed as a separate item on the agenda of
the
14 December 2017 business meeting, under the title ‘Report from Hearings
Panel - Recommendations regarding proposal to issue new leases on Rosedale Park
West, Wainoni Park, Hooton Reserve and Oteha Valley Road’.
36. Note that if the board defers a decision to award the required leases, then the agency have indicated that the NCI project will be delayed by 6-12 months, at an additional cost to the taxpayer of $10-30 million.
37. Note that if the board declines the new leases,
the agency has indicated that this will result in a delay to the start of the
NCI by 6-12 months, and the completion of the project by
2-3 years.
38. The agency view is that this could result in a write-off of $5-7 million already invested in planning and design, and add an additional cost to the taxpayer of $50-100 million.
39. Section one of this report recommends the granting of new leases at Rosedale Park West, Hooton and Oteha Valley Reserve, and Wainoni Park.
That the Upper Harbour Local Board: a) grant community leases to: i. the Harbour Hockey Charitable Trust to occupy Pt Allot 133 Parish of Paremoremo, Part Allot 653 Parish of Paremoremo and Pt Section 4 SO 444 7999 on Rosedale Park, Bush Road, Albany: a. proposed term: 10 years commencing from the date of the final approval by the Minister of Conservation (or her delegate) with two rights of renewal for a further 10 years; b. rent: $1.00 plus GST per annum if requested; and c. provision in the head lease document to enter into a sub-lease with North Harbour Hockey Association Incorporated, that will continue to manage the facility. ii. North Harbour BMX Association Incorporated to occupy Pt Lot 2 DP 24754 and Pt Lot 1 DP 198079, Hooton Reserve, Oteha Valley Road, Albany: a. proposed term: 10 years commencing from the date of the final approval by the Minister of Conservation (or her delegate) with two rights of renewal for a further 10 years; and b. rent: $1.00 plus GST per annum if requested. iii. the Tennis Charitable Trust to occupy Pt Lot 2 DP 24754, Oteha Valley Road, Albany: a. proposed term: 10 years commencing from the date of the final approval together with two further rights of renewal for a further 10 years; b. rent: $1.00 plus GST per annum if requested; and c. provision in the head lease document to enter into a sub-lease with Tennis Northern Region Incorporated, that will continue to manage the facility and further sub-letting or sub-licensing arrangements required to manage and document the activities at the site. All sub-lease/sub‑license arrangements will require the approval of the Upper Harbour Local Board, and accord with the terms of the head lease; d. note that the Tennis Charitable Trust will formally surrender that area of its lease required to accommodate the proposed BMX facility, together with the existing car park and the stormwater area to the rear of the site; e. if a formal surrender cannot be signed in the required timeframe, the Upper Harbour Local Board approve giving notice to the Tennis Charitable Trust to take back the land required to be leased to North Harbour BMX Association, and terminate the Tennis Charitable Trust’s lease in respect of this part only. iv. the entity or entities to be formed that will
occupy and use the equestrian facilities at Wainoni Park, described
as Pt Allot 18 Parish of Paremoremo, a. proposed term: 10 years commencing from the date of the final approval by the Minister of Conservation (or her delegate) with two rights of renewal for a further 10 years; and b. rent: $1.00 plus GST per annum if requested. b) approve the landowner application from the Harbour Hockey Charitable Trust, for the construction of the North Harbour Hockey Stadium at Rosedale Park West, Rosedale. c) approve the landowner application from the New Zealand Transport Agency, for the construction of the North Harbour BMX Association Incorporated facility at Hooton Reserve and 259 R Oteha Valley Road, Albany. d) approve the landowner application from the New Zealand Transport Agency, for the construction of the Equestrian Development at Wainoni Park, Greenhithe. e) approve the early access application for the Harbour Hockey Charitable Trust site at Rosedale Park West, which allows early construction works prior to a formal lease agreement, subject to agreement from the current lessee. f) approve the early access application for both Wainoni Park and the BMX site at Hooton Reserve and 259 R Oteha Valley Road, which allows early construction works prior to a formal lease agreement. g) approve that the assets, as agreed, will be left on the current North Harbour Hockey Stadium site, at Rosedale Park South, until the future of the area is established. h) approve the landowner application for the associated operational requirements set by council during the resource consent process. i) approve the landowner application for any associated works required in the resource consent process for land that falls outside of the three proposed leased areas, such as mitigation planting and noise cancelling structures. j) note that if the board defers the decision to award the required leases, then the Agency have indicated that the NCI project will be delayed by 6-12 months, at an additional cost to the taxpayer of $10-30 million. k) note that if the board declines the new leases, the agency has indicated that this will result in a delay to the start of the Norther Corridor Improvement Project by 6-12 months, and the completion of the project by 2-3 years.
|
Comments
Background to the Northern Corridor Improvement (NCI) project
40. The Northern Corridor Improvement (NCI) project is part of the accelerated Auckland programme funded by the New Zealand Government, and will be delivered by the agency. It aims to provide better links and more travel choices for the local community, and provide the final link in the Western Ring Route, Auckland’s new alternative route for regional travel.
41. The NCI project offers huge benefits for the Upper Harbour, the North Shore and neighbouring areas in north and north-west Auckland. The proposed motorway upgrades support the population’s greater traffic and freight volumes, reduce travel times, and decrease congestion. It also provides an alternative route for travel and new travel options. The associated busway, and walking and cycling upgrades, support the Auckland Plan’s encouragement of modal shift.
42. The NCI project will build a new, direct motorway connection from the Western Ring Route via SH16, and an upgraded Upper Harbour Highway (SH18) to SH1 near the Constellation Drive interchange, heading north.
43. As part of the project, SH18 will be upgraded to full motorway status, increasing the current 50-80km speed to 100km and requiring the redesign of local road intersections (Paul Matthews Drive, Unsworth Drive and Caribbean Drive) along SH18 - separating local traffic and motorway traffic.
44. More lanes will be added to SH1 between Constellation and Greville interchanges in both directions, and Greville Road interchange will also be upgraded from a part-roundabout to a full intersection.
45. The project is a multi-modal project, and includes the extension of the northern busway from Constellation bus station to Albany bus station, an upgrade to Constellation bus station, and a new bus bridge into Albany bus station.
46. It also includes significant investment in walking and cycling. A 5km shared walking and cycling path (similar to the north-western cycle way) will be built alongside SH1 and SH18, to encourage an increased uptake of active modes, and better connect the community with public transport, employment, schools and shopping areas.
47. As the population continues to grow in the Albany Metropolitan Centre and further north, the NCI project will assist with improving the efficiency and resilience of the motorway network. The local road network will also benefit, with time savings achieved, and traffic predicted to reduce by between 10-24 per cent on many surrounding local roads, including Constellation Drive.
http://www.the Agency.govt.nz/projects/the-western-ring-route/auckland-northern-corridor
Auckland Council response to NCI project
Constellation Reserve
48. The agency, in developing the NCI project, plans to include the delivery of a new motorway connection between SH18 and SH1. This requires the acquisition of approximately nine hectares of council land in Constellation Reserve and Rosedale Park South.
49. The HHCT currently holds a lease over part of Constellation Reserve, on which it has developed three hockey turves, clubrooms, changing facilities, storage sheds and parking. The lease area has space to accommodate a fourth artificial turf.
50. The HHCT has secured resource consent and funding to further develop the facility and extend the building. These plans have been put on hold given the impact of the NCI on the facility.
51. A significant area of undeveloped land within Constellation Reserve has been identified for future sportfields development. In order for council to meet demand and satisfy capacity for sports field development as part of the projected future growth - this loss of land will need to be recouped.
52. A project group consisting of council, the agency, HHCT, Watercare and Auckland Transport has been looking at various options available to provide a solution to mitigate the effects of the NCI project on HHCT and for the loss of land Constellation Reserve.
53. Council has authorised negotiations with the agency to provide a ‘land for land agreement’ to compensate for the loss of open space at Constellation Reserve, and these are currently ongoing.
54. Regular updates on NCI project progress have been provided to the board via workshops and formal reporting over a two-year period from 2015.
55. The project group’s preferred option to mitigate the effects on HHCT is to relocate HHCT from Constellation Reserve to Rosedale Park West.
56. The Rosedale Pony Club and the North Harbour BMX Association currently hold leases at Rosedale Park West, and will be impacted by the proposed relocation of the HHCT facility.
57. The project group has identified Wainoni Park as an alternative location for the Rosedale Pony Club, where facilities can be optimised to the benefit of a number of equestrian groups.
58. Land has been identified at Oteha Valley Road, that includes part of Hooton Reserve and a portion of the site occupied by the Tennis Charitable Trust, as an alternative location for the North Harbour BMX Association.
59. These options were presented to the board at a workshop on 3 August 2016. A report was considered by the local board at its business meeting on 23 August 2016. The board resolved:
Resolution number UH/2016/159
That the Upper Harbour Local Board:
c) request that staff work with affected lessees to find a suitable solution to the impacts and revert to the local board at the earliest opportunity with the outcomes of the discussions.
d) recommend a land for land agreement with New Zealand Transport Agency be pursued, as compensation for the loss of land required by the New Zealand Transport Agency at Constellation Reserve.
http://infocouncil.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/Open/2016/08/UH_20160823_AGN_4399_AT_WEB.HTM
60. A subsequent report detailing progress that had been made with affected lessees (as per resolution (a) UH/2016/159), and with a request to publicly notify community leases was considered at an extraordinary meeting on 6 April 2017.
http://infocouncil.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/Open/2017/04/UH_20170406_AGN_7476_AT_EXTRA.PDF
61. The board rejected the recommendation voting 3-2 against publicly notifying leases and resolved:
Resolution number UH/2017/40
That the Upper Harbour Local Board:
a) request officers further investigate alternate options for addressing the impact on affected current leaseholders at Rosedale Park in detail as a consequence of the Northern Corridor Improvements project, and report back to the board as soon as possible.
62. The project team re-considered the three site options that were assessed against a multi criteria analysis, initially presented to the local board at its business meeting on 23 August 2016.
http://infocouncil.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/Open/2016/08/UH_20160823_AGN_4399_AT.PDF
63. The three options considered were:
· Pond 2 (Watercare Services site)
· Rosedale Park South (split site for Harbour Hockey Charitable Trust)
· Rosedale Park West.
64. Further consideration by the project team confirmed that Rosedale Park West is the only viable option to meet all stakeholders’ strategic long-term needs.
Preferred Option
Relocation of HHCT to Rosedale Park West
65. Rosedale Park West was assessed as having the top score for strategic sports outcomes, in line with population growth, providing the opportunity to reconfigure the use of Rosedale Park.
66. At the 18 May 2017 business meeting, the local board resolved to:
Resolution number UH/2017/60:
The Upper Harbour Local Board:
a) approve the relocation of the Harbour Hockey Charitable Trust from Constellation Reserve to Rosedale Park West, in principle as the best option investigated, and subject to the satisfactory conclusion of the lease hearing process.
· A division was called for, with the motion was declared CARRIED by 4 votes to 2.
Resolution number UH/2017/61
b) approve the public notification of Auckland Council’s intention to grant community leases to:
1. Harbour Hockey Charitable Trust
2. North Harbour BMX Association Incorporated
3. The Tennis Charitable Trust
4. The entity or entities to be formed that will occupy and use the equestrian facilities at Wainoni Park
· The motion was declared EQUAL. The chair exercised her casting vote FOR so the motion was CARRIED.
http://infocouncil.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/Open/2017/05/UH_20170518_AGN_7145_AT.PDF
Stakeholder engagement with affected lessees
67. Staff continue to work with affected lessees from HHCT, BMX, Pony Clubs and Greenhithe Riding for the Disabled, all of whom are part of a design review process for each of their proposed facilities, and have agreed to work in good faith with the agency and council to find the most suitable solution to the proposed relocations.
· The Tennis Charitable Trust has agreed to relinquish part of its leased area. This will still require a formal deed of partial surrender to be entered into between the Tennis Charitable Trust and the council.
· Had no agreement been reached, there is provision in the existing lease with the Tennis Charitable Trust that the undeveloped part of the site may revert to council to control on the provision of formal written notice to the lessee.
· The board may invoke this provision at any time. It is recommended that the board authorise council staff to invoke this provision and serve notice on the lessee, should a formal deed of partial surrender not be signed in the required timeframe to enable the BMX works to proceed.
Equestrian Groups
68. Volunteers from the equestrian groups have committed to working with staff from the council and the agency on two separate work streams – Design of the facility, and Strategic Partnering. These meetings are held on an alternate weekly basis.
69. Due to the complexities of merging three pony clubs and a riding for disabled equestrian group, additional support has been provided in the form of an external facilitator, who assisted in guiding the parties through the strategic partnering and operational elements of the proposed merger.
Equestrian Design Group
70. Currently the equestrian design group meets fortnightly with the newly formed project ‘Alliance’ and consists of staff from the Agency, Fulton Hogan, HEB Construction and two nominated representatives from each of the equestrian groups.
71. The group work through the practicalities relating to each of the proposed assets being constructed at Wainoni Park, such as arenas, access, parking and storage, with the project manager.
72. Once a solution has been identified and agreement has been reached on the design, each proposed asset is signed off and progressed through to detailed design.
73. The purpose of these meetings is to work collaboratively as a group to ensure a good design outcome is achieved.
74. The group have now confirmed the final design of the assets to be built on Wainoni Park (Attachment A).
75. The final agreed design forms part of the works agreement, which is in an advanced state and is currently being circulated to the respective committees of the equestrian groups for approval prior to signing.
Equestrian Strategic Partnership Group
76. The equestrian strategic partnership group, consisting of two representatives from each equestrian group, meets fortnightly with an external facilitator, council and the agency staff.
77. The purpose of these sessions focuses on creating an operational framework for the new equestrian entity.
78. It is envisaged that these sessions will not be completed before decisions on the new leases are confirmed. However, it should be acknowledged that as difficult as this process has been, the equestrian groups have committed to working together to secure an outcome that will ensure the long-term future of equestrian activity at Wainoni Park for generations of young riders.
Offsite Grazing
79. A lot of time and effort has been spent trying to find a solution to issues relating to proportional grazing allocated between the four merging equestrian organisations, although council is not obligated to provide grazing for pony clubs on public land.
80. In response, council has offered the option of offsite grazing, in order to mitigate the increased number of grazing members expected at Wainoni Park.
81. Offsite grazing will be offered at Rosedale Park North and Jack Hinton Drive (currently leased to Rosedale Pony Club) for a period of 5-10 years.
82. Further offsite grazing will be available at 121 Clark Road (currently leased to Whenuapai Pony Club until 2019).
83. It is expected that the confirmed tenure for offsite grazing will be covered in the new lease for the entity or entities at Wainoni Park.
North Harbour BMX
84. The design group meets regularly with the newly formed project ‘Alliance’, and consists of volunteer staff from BMX, the council, the agency, Fulton Hogan and HEB Construction.
85. The design for the BMX facility at Hooton Reserve is in an advanced state of completion (Attachment B).
86. BMX has taken a collaborative approach throughout this process, and have continually contributed in a positive manner. They are fully committed to finding the best outcomes for young riders in the sport.
87. The final agreed design forms part of the works agreement, which is in a very advanced form, and is currently being circulated to both BMX and council for approval prior to signing.
Tennis Charitable Trust
88. Negotiations between the council, the agency and TCT have been ongoing since October 2016. During this time, TCT they have been involved in the concept design of the BMX track, as part of the design team.
89. TCT asked for certain concerns to be addressed, namely:
· potential for the impact of dust generated from the BMX Track
· lighting impact
· increased stormwater runoff
· access from the tennis car park through to BMX, creating a left turn onto Oteha Valley Road
· confirmation that works be halted, or kept to a low impact, during tournaments.
90. The agency has confirmed that all of these issues will be addressed as part of the detailed design, and will not impact the TCT future operations (Attachment C).
Harbour Hockey
91. In parallel with the hockey facility's resource consent process, the project team has continued to work closely with HHCT and North Harbour Hockey to agree and develop the design for the new hockey facility, through ongoing weekly design meetings (Attachment D).
92. Parks staff have engaged closely with hockey to discuss final plans for car park ownership and lease responsibilities, and were also consulted on all mitigation measures proposed as part of the mediation for the facility's resource consent, to ensure alignment with overall parks and recreation objectives.
93. A works agreement is now signed between HHCT and the agency for the delivery of the construction phase, should it be approved.
94. The agency supported hockey with funding for temporary upgrade works on their current site in November 2017, to allow the Women's World League Series to run successfully on the current site in the interim.
Section Two
Landowner Approvals
Harbour Hockey Charitable Trust
Site details
95. The proposed Harbour Hockey Charitable Trust facility (HHCT) is to be located on the western portion of Rosedale Park, with access via Bush Road.
96. The proposed location of the HHCT falls within the following titles, with the respective legal descriptions:
· Pt Allotment 133 PSH of Paremoremo; 8.58ha
· Lot 76 DP 174619; NA107A/866; 0.47ha
· Pt Allotment 653 PSH of Paremoremo; NA42A/237; 23.19ha
· Section 4 Survey Office Plan 444799; 4.49ha
· Lot 76 DP 174616; NA107A/866; 0.29ha
· Lot 76 DP 174617; NA107D/372; 0.32ha.
97. The proposed site is zoned as open space – Sport and Active Recreation Zone in the Auckland Unitary Plan, operative in part 15 November 2016 (Auckland Unitary Plan).
98. The proposed site also falls within the Auckland Council District Plan, Operative North Shore Section 2002 (operative only in relation to the parts of the Unitary Plan that are under appeal) and is zoned as recreation 4.
99. The operational requirements for constructing a facility such as the HHCT include a number of necessary mitigation measures to protect the surrounding environment. These include:
· the construction of noise cancelling walls
· mitigation planting
· upgrading the existing infrastructure.
100. A comprehensive assessment of the environmental and ecological effects of the proposed North Harbour Hockey Stadium was undertaken as part of the resource consenting process. The details of which can be found at http://temp.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/EN/AboutCouncil/meetings_agendas/hearings/Pages/NorthHarbourHockeyStadiumRosedalePark.aspx for information purposes.
101. The future of the current HHCT site is still to be established, but it is proposed that all of the agreed assets will be left on the current North Harbour Hockey Stadium site, at Rosedale Park South, and be secured until such time as a decision is made.
New assets
102. In summary, the proposed construction includes:
· four new water-based artificial hockey turves
· a two storey pavilion building
· parking
· floodlighting
· ancillary facilities and infrastructure that will support the proposed HHCT site.
103. The proposed development will also consist of a new timber shared-use path bridge, which will span Alexandra Stream, to provide pedestrian connectivity between the proposed HHCT site and the existing sand turf located to the east and its associated parking area.
104. The proposed main features of the HHCT construction are as follows:
· four water-based artificial hockey turves:
o Field 1 shall be designed in accordance with the Global Elite Category surface grading requirements, in accordance with the draft FIH Handbook of Performance, Durability and Construction Requirements for Synthetic Turf Hockey Pitches (or relevant subsequent revision)
o It will be supported by lighting to international competition standards, with the ability to install temporary event seating (grandstands for up to 5,000 and 10,000 seat spectator events)
o Fields 2 - 4 are expected to be designed as per either the Global or National surface grading requirements as set out by FIH (to be confirmed during detailed design).
· a two storey pavilion building of approximately 1,939m2 and 11.1m high, which will provide clubrooms, function rooms, changing rooms, office space and various other amenities
· ‘Village Green’ space to provide for a pedestrian plaza, as well as warm up area for the junior players
· landscaped parking areas for users of the facility, including one main carpark located to the north which has a drop off area, and one smaller carpark to the south (providing for an overall total of 370 car parks);
· the parking areas include nine mobility parks and two loading spaces. The separate smaller parking area to the south will be utilised for staff parking, and during large events for media, team coaches and officials, and service vehicles
· this separate parking area is to be accessed via a separate access/entrance. In addition, 12 short term stay cycle parks and four long-term stay cycle parks will be provided
· eight floodlighting towers per pitch ranging in height from 16.5m to 25m, for different requirements. Four sets of lights will be installed on the pavilion canopy to provide sufficient in-fill lighting for the main camera position during international televised events
· permanent spectator seating, provided around the pavilion building, as well as temporary event seating (grandstands) for up to 5,000 and 10,000 seat spectator capacity events (to be installed around Pitch 1)
· the grandstand, which seats 5,000 people, will be approximately 9.09m high and will extend the eastern side of Pitch 1, approximately 10m towards Alexandra Stream;
· the temporary grandstand, which seats 10,000 people, will be approximately 17.25m high, and will extend another 10m towards the Alexandra Stream
· ancillary facilities including team dugouts, video towers, a separate toilet block, water storage tanks and an irrigation pump room
· footpaths connecting the hockey pitches, carparks and the pavilion building
· retaining walls and structures that support the facility (including timber pole retaining walls and mechanically stabilised earth structures)
· permanent dry stormwater pond and two outfalls into Alexandra Stream. The northern discharge will comprise a headwall with a rip-rap stillage basin. The southern discharge will comprise a headwall with rip-rap apron, and a rock lined overland flow path constructed for the dry pond spillway
· vegetation planting and landscaping
· a timber shared-use bridge structure and path, linking the proposed facility to the existing sand turf and associated parking area located on the eastern side of Alexandra Stream;
· a new pedestrian crossing on Bush Road.
105. A full asset list, including proposed ownership and maintenance responsibilities is currently being finalised, and may be subject to variations before final sign off.
Indicative methodology
106. The indicative construction staging is as follows:
· site preparation, including installation of erosion and sediment control measures
· demolition of existing BMX and pony club structures
· utilities and services installation and relocation
· vegetation removal, with works undertaken within the Significant Ecological Area during summer months where practicable
· earthworks, including the pre-loading of Field 1 area, for approximately 6-8 months, in order to settle the ground to achieve suitable tolerances to meet FIH surface grading design requirements
· field construction
· pavilion construction
· bridge construction (during summer season where practicable)
· ancillary structures construction
· installation of Bush Road pedestrian crossing
· commissioning of the facility.
107. It is proposed to service the site via a range of measures in order to convey a portion of stormwater flows.
108. These measures include kerb and channel, sumps, strip drains and underground pit and pipe systems and subsoil drains, including swales in the parking areas. Stormwater will ultimately be conveyed by these mechanisms to either a proposed outlet to Alexandra Steam located to the north, or to a proposed dry pond to the south east of the site, that drains via a second outlet into Alexandra Stream.
109. The dry pond will also capture stormwater flows that enter the site from elsewhere within the catchment.
110. The proposed development will retain an amount of the stormwater that falls on the non-contaminant generating areas, such as the pitches themselves, in water storage tanks for reuse on site in order to service the four water-based artificial turves.
111. It is proposed to connect to the existing 150mm diameter water rising main running along the eastern side of Bush Road, to supply water to the proposed hockey site. It has been assumed that there will be adequate capacity and pressure to meet the requirements of the development. This will be confirmed with Watercare Services Limited during detailed design.
112. Wastewater is to be connected into an existing 150mm UPVC pipeline, located south of Fields 3 and 4. It is proposed to realign the sewer system to the south of Fields 3 and 4, in order to avoid maintenance and performance issues in the future. It has been assumed that there will be adequate capacity to meet the requirements of the development. This will be confirmed with Watercare Services Limited during detailed design.
Early access
Existing Lessees
113. Early access to the proposed HHCT site will allow contractors to start construction on the new facility prior to a formal lease agreement.
114. BMX will still hold a lease on their current site until 31 December 2025. Rosedale Pony Club hold a lease on their current site until 28 February 2018, after which it will roll over on a month by month basis until their respective facilities are constructed at Oteha Valley Road and Wainoni Park. At that point, they will sign a new lease for the new facility.
115. Consequently, early access to the areas needed for works on their existing leased areas will be subject to permission from both lessees.
116. Early access will be processed as a standard land owner approval application and will be subject to relevant conditions and undergo the standard assessment and internal consultation process.
117. Conditions will include, but not be limited to:
· full reinstatement of the area if a formal lease agreement is not reached within six (6) months of the LOA issue date;
· sediment and environmental controls, and complying with all relevant consent conditions.
118. A full conditions list is attached in the form of an example early access landowner approval letter (Attachment E).
North Harbour BMX Association
Site details
119. North Harbour BMX Association (BMX), which is currently located on Rosedale Park West, will be relocated to make way for the Northern Corridor Improvements (NCI) project.
120. The proposed location for the BMX club is addressed as 259 and 321 Oteha Valley Road, Albany, Auckland, and legally described as Pt Allot 28 PSH of Paremoremo and Part DP 24754, NA93D/249 (part-cancelled) and Pt Lot 2 DP 24754, NA93D/249 respectively.
121. The area is zoned as open space – informal recreation, and special purpose – major recreation facility in the Auckland Unitary Plan, operative in part 15 November 2016.
New assets
122. The main features of the proposed BMX facility are as follows:
· a 400m long BMX track, which is to include a starting ramp structure of 5m, and a platform to enable the construction of an 8m ramp structure
· a 3m roofing structure is proposed to enclose the ramps. The track is to be constructed in a switchback arrangement, with turns and straights out of compacted dirt with tarmac around the turns.
123. A bike storage locker, in the form of a container, is proposed at the eastern and western end of the track. These containers are to be used for short and long-term storage of bikes, with some bikes available for hire. Containers for the storage of a jeep and maintenance equipment are also proposed at the western end of the track.
124. A clubroom is proposed in the form of a converted container, which is to be located adjacent to the proposed gear locker, with a deck between them. It is proposed that the clubroom contains a small kitchenette and toilet facilities, and is to be utilised for the sale of refreshments during BMX’s hours of operation.
125. A car parking area with 64 spaces, including two accessible spaces, is proposed to the north of the BMX track. Entry will be from the existing access via Mills Lane. This car park will be outside the BMX leased area.
126. An additional car parking area with 64 spaces, including two accessible spaces, is envisaged to the south of the BMX track, and will be built once funding becomes available. The proposed car park will be an extension of the existing Northern Tennis car park. As part of this project, the agency will build a left turn only access from the existing Northern Tennis car park.
127. Landscaping in the form of planting along the southern length of the site is proposed, and a swale along the length of the proposed northern car park will be constructed.
128. Lighting for the BMX track and car parking areas will be installed, and utilities will be connected.
129. A full asset list, including proposed ownership and maintenance responsibilities, is currently being finalised, and may be subject to variations before final sign off.
Indicative methodology
130. The indicative construction staging is as follows:
· site preparation, including installation of erosion and sediment control measures
· removal of existing car parking area and lighting structures
· vegetation removal
· earthworks
· installation of services
· BMX track construction
· ancillary structures construction
· commissioning of the facility.
131. A carrier drain is proposed through the centre of the site, with several subsoil drainage pits to collect stormwater generated from impervious areas throughout the operation of the project. The drainage system will then connect to the existing stormwater pipe, which discharges via a 1,500mm pipe to Lucas Creek.
132. The discharge to Lucas Creek will be covered by Auckland Council’s Network Discharge Consent (NDC).
133. It is proposed that a cluster of trees is removed to accommodate the works along the southern end of the site. Of the trees to be removed, 18 are either more than 4m in height or 400mm in girth, with the remaining 13 being below these thresholds. Works are also required within the drip line of a small Box Alder tree to the south-east. Twelve specimen trees are proposed to be planted in various locations around the new facility.
134. Areas to be landscaped will only be stripped of their upper surface layers or vegetation immediately prior to work being programmed at the location, to avoid areas being exposed for unreasonable lengths of time. Once works in an area are complete, topsoil will be re-spread and planting, grassing and/or mulching will be carried out, as soon as practicably possible.
Early access
135. Early access to the proposed BMX facility site will allow contractors to start construction on the new facility, and will allow the BMX club to transition to the new site in the competition off season.
136. Early access will be processed as a standard landowner approval application, and will be subject to relevant conditions and undergo the standard assessment and internal consultation process.
137. Conditions will include, but not be limited to:
· full reinstatement of the area if a formal lease agreement is not reached within six (6) months of the LOA issue date
· sediment and environmental controls and complying with all relevant consent conditions.
138. A full conditions list is attached in the form of an example early access landowner approval letter as Attachment F.
139. It is recommended that the early access landowner approval for the new facility be granted to allow the contractor to start the site preparation and early construction, prior to the formal lease agreement. This will allow construction of the proposed BMX facility in time for the next season commencement date.
140. It is recommended that landowner approval is granted for the construction of the proposed BMX facility. This would allow the relocation of the North Harbour Hockey Club and would allow the NCI project to progress.
Wainoni Park equestrian development
Site details
141. The proposed Wainoni Park Equestrian Development (WPED) is necessitated by the agency’s NCI project. The proposed relocation site of the HHCT is within the current leased area of the Rosedale Pony Club (RPC) on Rosedale Park West.
142. Wainoni Park is currently occupied by two equestrian clubs; Greenhithe Pony Club (GPC) and Greenhithe Riding for the Disabled (GRDA). These clubs currently share resources, although GPC typically operates from the southern end of the park and GRDA operates from the northern end.
143. As a result of a different project and through separate processes, it was also determined that Whenuapai Pony Club would establish their club at Wainoni Park. Therefore, Wainoni Park will become an equestrian hub, and home to four separate equestrian groups.
144. The proposed location of the Wainoni Park Equestrian Development falls within the following titles with the respective legal descriptions:
· Pt Lot 3 Deeds Plan 34, 2.89ha
· Pt Allot 18 Parish of Paremoremo, 6.20ha;
· Lot 1 DP 53735 NA29A/670, 4.06ha
· Pt Lot 4 DP 10508, 1.89ha
· Lot 5 DP 10508 NA312/47 2.85ha
· Lot 6 DP 10508 16ha
· Lot 2 DP 69817 3.94ha.
145. The proposed WPED site is zoned as open space – Sport and Active Recreation Zone, Conservation Zone, Informal Recreation Zone and Coastal – General Coastal Marine Zone in the Auckland Unitary Plan, operative in part 15 November 2016 (AUP).
146. The proposed site also falls within the Auckland Council District Plan, Operative North Shore Section 2002 (operative only in relation to the parts of the Unitary Plan that are under appeal) and is zoned as recreation 4.
New assets and indicative methodology
147. The following assets will be constructed on Wainoni Park, and will be owned and maintained by the amalgamated equestrian clubs:
· one 80m x 70m all weather arena (lit Southern Wainoni Park)
· one 50m x 70m all weather arena (unlit on Northern Wainoni Park)
· one 60m x 20m arena (unlit)
· four 4m x 4m uncovered yards attached to the large arena and two 8m x 4m uncovered yards adjacent to the existing yards (comprising a wooden post and rail)
· one roofing structure (no more than 5m in height) over the existing hardstand area (measuring approximately 20m x 16m)
· preparation and surfacing of an area measuring 12m x 5m for the relocation of existing storage containers from the existing RPC site
· a formalised turning circle around the existing storage shed
· a race of approximately 100m in length and 3m in width
· small outhouse building containing two toilets adjacent to existing clubroom
· replacement and extension of an existing 225mm stormwater culvert (approximately 25m)
· service connections to the existing clubroom:
o power supply through the installation of solar panels on site
o wastewater treatment and disposal through an onsite wastewater treatment application
o potable water supply through connection to the mains supply on Churchouse Road.
148. A full asset list, including proposed ownership and maintenance responsibilities, is currently being finalised, and may be subject to variations before final sign off.
Works Agreement
149. Once the designs are finalised and ownership of all assets is determined, the council and the agency will enter into a works agreement(s) relating to any assets to be built outside of leased areas or that are to vest in council. This will be done in conjunction and with the approval of the relevant council department responsible for maintenance of such assets.
Proposed leases and staging
150. The recommended lease term referenced in this report relates to ground leases in the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines July 2012.
151. The proposed leases would be for a period of 10 years, with two 10-year rights of renewal. The term reflects the lessee’s obligations in terms of capital expenditure, ongoing maintenance and renewal of the developed improvements on the sites.
152. The local board may consider alternative terms up to a maximum period of 11 years, with two 11-year rights of renewal, should it wish to do so.
Consideration
Local board views and implications
153. The recommendations within this report fall within the local board’s delegated authority relating to local, recreation, sport and community facilities. This report recommends that the board adopts the Hearings Panel’s recommendations and grant new community leases.
154. The board have been provided with regular project updates, and have facilitated various workshops with project members from Auckland Council, the New Zealand Transport Agency, Watercare and HHCT. The board have been involved as a major stakeholder since the project planning started in 2015.
155. Members attended project meetings with council staff, and have been provided with regular verbal and email updates, portfolio meetings and full board workshops.
156. Members attended the lease notification hearings on 17 and 18 October 2017, and the Hearings Panel public deliberation day on 14 November 2017.
157. Note that if the board declines the new leases, the agency has indicated that this will result in a delay to the start of the NCI by 6-12 months, and the completion of the project by 2-3 years.
158. It is the agency’s view that this could result in a write-off of $5-7million already invested in planning and design, and add an additional cost to the taxpayer of $50-100 million.
159. Section one of this report recommends the granting new leases at Rosedale Park, Hooton and Oteha Valley Reserve, and Wainoni Park.
Māori impact statement
160. Consultation has occurred with mana whenua, primarily through the Central – Northern Iwi Integration Group (IIG), which comprises a forum of iwi who have expressed an interest in several New Zealand Transport Agency projects within the central and northern parts of Auckland. A project hui was created as part of the wider NCI project consultation and engagement strategy.
161. This forum has been convening since August 2015, throughout the development of the NCI project.
162. Through hui, mana whenua have been made aware of and provided views on the proposed relocation of the hockey facility.
163. No expressions of concern or specific interests have been raised at these hui regarding the project.
164. The Manuhiri Kaitiaki Charitable Trust, on behalf of Ngāti Manuhiri, have the largest ‘rohe’ over the affected area of land, and have provided a letter in support of Harbour Hockey and their plans to establish an international facility, as well as the new facilities proposed for BMX and the pony clubs at Wainoni Park (Attachment G).
Implementation
165. If the board approved the new leases, it is recognised that there will need to be a process for agreements to lease and lease terms, to be negotiated between the respective clubs and the council.
166. The agreements to lease are likely to be conditional on certain points such as final design being agreed and resource and building consents being finalised, where not already so.
167. It should be noted that there will be a period of time while the documents are finalised, readied for signature and passed through the various club committees for endorsement.
No. |
Title |
Page |
a⇩
|
Wainoni Pony Club design |
225 |
b⇩
|
North Harbour BMX design |
229 |
c⇩
|
NZTA letter to Tennis Charitable Trust |
231 |
d⇩
|
North Harbour Hockey design |
233 |
e⇩
|
Early access hockey landowner approval report |
235 |
f⇩
|
Early access BMX landowner approval report |
245 |
g⇩
|
Iwi hockey support letter |
255 |
Signatories
Authors |
Maureen Buchanan – Local Board Advisor Grant Jennings - Principal Sports Parks Advisor |
Authorisers |
Mace Ward - General Manager Parks, Sports and Recreation Eric Perry - Relationship Manager |
14 December 2017 |
|
Local board feedback on rates remission and postponement policy review
File No.: CP2017/24383
Purpose
1. Seek preliminary feedback from local boards on the review of the rates remission and postponement policy and in particular the legacy schemes. Feedback will be considered by Finance and Performance Committee when agreeing a rates remission and postponement policy, and any options, for consultation.
Executive Summary
2. The council is required to review its rates remission and postponement policy every six years.
3. Rates remissions are a reduction in rates, usually by a set percentage. Rates postponement defers the payment of rates to a future point in time, usually the sale of the property.
4. The current policy includes six regional schemes and eleven legacy schemes inherited from the former councils that are only available within the former districts. Only minor changes are proposed to the regional schemes.
5. Officers recommend Option 1 that the legacy schemes (excluding the postponement for Manukau sports clubs) be replaced with grants because:
· funding decisions are more transparent
· spending for each activity is within an annual budget
· level of support for each organisation is more visible.
6. A three-year transition is proposed for current recipients during which they will receive their current funding via a grant. At the end of transition, they would need to apply for renewal.
7. Current legacy remissions and postponements funding would move to grant budgets:
a) regional grants programmes: remissions for natural heritage and community/sporting remissions for regional/sub-regional facilities
b) local board grants programmes: all other legacy remissions in the relevant area and the Great Barrier Island postponements.
8. Each board will be funded to provide the same level of grants as is presently provided in b) above. After three years, boards can choose to continue the grants if they wish. While some boards will get more funding than others, this will be smoothed over time by the local board funding policy.
Alternative options
9. The other three options were considered and rejected because:
· Option 2: keeping the current remissions schemes is inequitable
· Option 3: extending the remissions in their current form is costly and does not provide the same level of transparency and oversight as is achieved with grants
· Option 4: removing the schemes with no replacement could present some ratepayers/community groups with affordability issues.
10. Local boards feedback on the review will be included in the report to the Finance and Performance Committee in February 2018. Public consultation on the proposed Rates remission and postponement policy and any options will occur in April 2018. Local boards will be able to consider public feedback, and provide their formal views on the proposed policy at their May 2018 meetings. Local board and public feedback will be reported to the 31 May 2018 meeting of the Finance and Performance Committee when the adoption of the policy will be considered.
That the Upper Harbour Local Board: a) resolves feedback on the options to address the legacy council remission and postponement schemes.
|
Comments
Background
11. The current rates remission and postponement policy includes:
· six regional schemes available to all ratepayers with the objectives to:
o provide ratepayers with some financial or other assistance where they might otherwise have difficulty meeting their obligations
o address circumstances where the rating system results in anomalies in the incidence of rates.
· eleven legacy schemes supporting community objectives set by the former councils and only available in some areas:
o five remission schemes for natural and in some cases historic heritage
o six remission schemes for community and sporting organisations
o a rates postponement scheme for sports clubs in Manukau
o a rates postponement scheme for businesses on Great Barrier Island.
12. A summary of the regional and legacy schemes and the amount of remission or postponement granted in 2016/2017 is in Attachment A. The full rates remission and postponement policy is in Attachment B.
Assessment of Regional Schemes
13. Officers have reviewed the regional schemes and identified that the schemes are operating in accordance with expectations. The only amendment proposed to the regional schemes is to simplify the remission scheme for rates penalties. This amendment will be designed to maintain ratepayers’ existing level of access to penalty remissions.
Assessment of Legacy Schemes
14. Four options were considered for the legacy schemes:
· Option 1: integrate with grants schemes with three-year transition for current recipients
· Option 2: retain the status quo
· Option 3: extend to entire region
· Option 4: remove.
15. A summary of the options can be found in Table 1 at the end of this report.
16. The following criteria were used to assess options for the legacy remissions and postponements policies.
· equity – same treatment for all ratepayers in all areas across Auckland
· transparency
· cost
· minimise the effects of change
· administrative simplicity.
Option 1: Integrate remissions and postponements with grants schemes with three-year transition (excluding the Manukau postponement scheme for sports clubs)
17. This option would remove the present remission and postponement schemes. Up to the current amount equivalent of the 2018/2019 remission would be transferred to grants expenditure in the relevant areas over the next three years. The amount of grants will be adjusted for the increase in rates in the subsequent two years.
18. This option will increase the council’s grants and other budget lines by $900,000. This increase is offset by the increase in rates revenue of $900,000 resulting from remissions no longer being applied. There is no net cost to ratepayers of converting rates remissions to grants.
Allocating grants
19. Integration of remissions into wider regional, or local, grants schemes is preferable because:
· allocation of rates expenditure will be transparent
· spending via grants is public and assessed against other comparable demands on public money in terms of efficacy. Value for money is regularly assessed.
· administrative systems for grants are already in place although there will be a change in volume
· proposed transition will result in no change for recipients over the three years
· regional equity will be achieved over time as the legacy grants are integrated into the wider grants programme
· enables equity between community organisations that own land and those that do not.
20. Legacy schemes have been assessed against local and regional responsibilities. From this it is proposed that grants budgets be allocated as follows:
Remission/Postponement for |
Aligns with |
Grant allocates to |
Natural heritage |
Regional |
Regional Environment and Natural Heritage Grants Programme |
Historic Heritage |
Regional |
Regional Historic Heritage Grants Programme |
Regional or sub-regional sports facilities |
Regional |
Regional Sports and Recreation Grants Programme |
Local sports clubs and facilities |
Local |
Local Board where property receiving remission is located |
Regional or sub-regional community facilities |
Regional |
Regional Community Development Grants programmes |
Local community organisations and facilities |
Local |
Local Board where property receiving remission is located |
Great Barrier businesses |
Local |
Great Barrier Local Board |
21. Remissions for community and sporting organisations have been split between regional and local, based on the area served by the property receiving the remission. For example, Eden Park, St John’s ambulance stations, IHC care homes and the SPCA have been classed as regional. Remissions for the Scouts Association and Plunket NZ have been classed as local because they relate to local scout halls and Plunket centres.
22. The value of remissions by local board area can be found in Attachment C. A list of all community and sporting remissions by local board showing the ratepayer and amount of remission, can be found in Attachment D.
Three-year transition
23. The relevant decision maker, e.g. the Governing Body Committee for regional grants, and local boards for local grants, would be required to provide a grant to the level of the existing remission, for a period of three years. The present recipient would therefore be protected from any change to their current funding for that period. At the end of the three years the decision maker can then decide whether to continue the grants on the existing basis or release the funds to the wider grants pool.
Option 2: Retain the status quo
24. This option would retain the remissions and postponement schemes in their current form in the former council areas. Properties in other parts of the region would not be able to apply for them.
25. This option is administratively simple for the council and recipients. It minimises change. Costs will depend on applications but have been relatively stable over time. The option is not equitable because the schemes are only available to ratepayers in some areas.
26. Rates remissions and postponements are not a transparent mechanism for supporting wider council goals because they:
· are recorded as a charge against revenue
· do not appear as a cost in the council’s accounts
· do not increase the rates requirement and hence do not impact the headline rates increase[1] (They still increase the rates burden on other ratepayers)
· are not prioritised against other expenditure proposals or subject to the same value for money scrutiny.
Option 3: Extend to entire region
27. This option would extend the current policies to apply to the entire Auckland Council area. Extending the policies in their current form is equitable, and simplifies administration. However, this option:
· increases costs to ratepayers without being compared to other council proposals that may offer greater benefits
· lacks evidence as to how much benefit will be returned by this investment
· is not transparent as described in Option 2 above.
28. The cost of extending existing legacy remission schemes regionally will depend on the criteria for eligibility. Costs for extending the current remission schemes have been estimated at $4.5-$6 million as follows:
· extending remission for natural heritage to properties with a covenant managed by the Queen Elizabeth the Second Trust: $40,000. There are just over 100 properties in Auckland with a QEII covenant. If the criteria are extended to include other types of covenant, such as a covenant with a council, then the number of eligible properties will increase significantly. For example, there are 4,500 properties with a bush-lot covenant from Rodney Council.
· extending remissions for historic heritage: $3 million. This is derived from the rates for properties that are scheduled Category A in the Auckland Unitary Plan, where the status is associated with a building. This ignores archaeological sites such as middens and pa, but will capture the whole value of properties where the heritage status only applies to part of the property.
· extending remissions for community and sporting organisations: $1.5 million for 50 per cent remission to $3 million for 100 per cent remission. This is estimated by applying a full remission to properties currently receiving a five per cent remission for the Auckland Regional Council scheme for community and sporting organisations. This is likely to under estimate the value of remissions, as offering a more generous remission is likely to significantly increase the number of applicants.
Option 4: Remove the schemes
29. Removing the schemes would lead to immediate financial impacts for a number of organisations presently receiving support from council. While the sums remitted are in many cases small, it is not clear that all the current recipients would be able to adequately accommodate change in a short time period.
Postponement for sports clubs in the district of the previous Manukau City Council
30. It is not recommended that the rates postponements for Manukau Sports clubs be converted to remission. This is because the postponement is currently set to be cost neutral. This is achieved by interest being charged, and by the postponement being secured against the title of the property. The council can require the full amount of postponed rates and interest be paid before any sale of the property can proceed. It would not be effective or efficient to try and replicate the postponement through a grants process.
31. The clubs are accruing a major liability against their land under this scheme. The total current liability, including interest, is $880,000. If the policy is not changed then rates will continue to accrue as the rates are never remitted. While the postponements are cost-neutral when they end, in the meantime they represent a significant debt liability at a time when the council is debt constrained. For this reason, officers prefer that the schemes be removed after a suitable transition period. (The outstanding liability at the time the scheme is removed would remain a liability on the land until its sale or transfer of ownership.)
32. The two clubs receiving the postponement are zoned for residential development. Both clubs have significant (around 240 per cent) increases in capital valuation following changes in zoning under the unitary plan. One club has repaid a portion of its liability following the sale of part of the property, and has chosen to pay rather than postpone the current year’s rates.
33. Officers propose to do further work to understand the individual circumstances of these two golf courses, before developing formal recommendation and options for addressing this postponement scheme. Next steps and a timeline for actions will be included in the report to the February Finance and Performance Committee.
Next steps
34. Preliminary feedback from local boards will be attached to the report to the February Finance and Performance Committee. The committee will agree a rates remission and postponement policy, and any options, for consultation.
35. Public consultation will occur in April. All current recipients of the legacy rates remission and postponement schemes will be notified of any proposed changes, to enable them to submit feedback.
36. Local boards will be able to consider the results of the public consultation, and provide formal feedback on the proposed policy, at their May meetings.
37. The Finance and Performance Committee will consider feedback from the public and local boards, and adopt a final rates remission and postponement policy by 31 May 2018. This enables the council’s budgets to be updated for the adoption of the Long-term Plan 2018-2028.
Review of the rates remission and postponement policy: Options for legacy remission and postponement schemes
Option |
Description |
Pros |
Cons |
Implementation |
Option 1: Integrate with grants schemes
|
· Legacy remission and postponements schemes (excluding MCC postponement for sports clubs) transfer to regional or local grants schemes. · Three-year transition – same level of support given as provided in remission or postponement |
· Increased transparency and accountability – grants assessed for value for money · Can cap costs · No change for three years for current recipients – time to adjust · Greater flexibility in application – not restricted to organisations that own land, level of support can reflect outcomes not property rates · Reduced rates administration |
· Increased grants administration |
· Administrative systems already in place for grants · Increase in grants volume |
Option 2: Retain the status quo
|
· Legacy remission and postponement schemes continue unchanged |
· Minimises change |
· Inequitable – only available in some areas, and only available to groups that own land · Lacks transparency – spending not reviewed against other council priorities · No cap on costs |
· No change to current processes |
Option 3: Extend to entire region
|
· Schemes expanded to regional schemes. Costs will depend on the criteria applied |
· Increases equity across the region |
· Cost – estimated at $4.5m to $6m · No cap on costs · Lacks transparency – spending not reviewed against other council priorities · Lack of evidence this would improve outcomes · Only available to groups that own property |
· Increases volume of remissions to process |
Option 4: Remove the schemes |
· Legacy schemes removed without transition |
· $700,000 reduction in cost of rates for 2018/2019 |
· No time for recipients to adjust |
· Reduces rates administration |
Consideration
Local board views and implications
38. Implications for local boards are set out in the report. Under the proposal, local boards will be provided with additional funding to maintain the existing level of support for local community and sports groups in their board area that currently receive remissions. However, local boards will have more grant applications to appraise in the future, and potentially more decisions to make at the end of the three-year transition.
39. This report seeks feedback from local boards to inform the consideration of this issue by the Finance and Performance Committee in February.
Māori impact statement
40. None of the properties presently receiving remissions or postponements under the legacy schemes are known to be Māori owned or operated.
41. The only reference to Māori in the legacy remission and postponement schemes is the provision for remissions for Māori reservations in the Rodney District. No properties applied under this criterion. Such properties would be eligible for remission under the council’s Māori freehold land (MFL) rates remission and postponement policy. The council is not required to review its MFL rates remission and postponement policy until 2019. No changes are proposed for this policy.
42. Under the principles for the Community Grants Policy, all grants programmes should respond to Auckland Council’s commitment to improving Māori outcomes.
Implementation
43. Differences in implementation for each of the options are set out in the table above.
No. |
Title |
Page |
a⇩
|
Summary of Auckland Council rates remission and postponement policy scheme |
265 |
b⇩
|
Rates remission and postponement policy |
271 |
c⇩
|
Value of legacy schemes by local board area remissions for community sporting are split by regional and local |
289 |
d⇩ |
All community and sporting remissions by local board area (Under Separate Cover) - Confidential |
|
Signatories
Authors |
Beth Sullivan - Principal Advisor Policy Andrew Duncan - Manager Financial Policy |
Authorisers |
Ross Tucker - Acting General Manager, Financial Strategy and Planning Carol McKenzie-Rex – Acting General Manager Eric Perry - Relationship Manager |
14 December 2017 |
|
File No.: CP2017/25790
Purpose
1. This report seeks local board input on the allocation of non-regulatory decision-making as part of the 10 Year Budget 2018-2028.
Executive summary
2. The Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 requires the Governing Body to allocate decision-making responsibility for non-regulatory activities, either to the Governing Body or to local boards. This must be undertaken in accordance with certain legislative principles and after considering the views and preferences of each local board. There is a presumption that local boards will be responsible for making decisions on non-regulatory activities, except where decision-making on a region-wide basis will better promote the wellbeing of communities across Auckland because certain criteria are satisfied.
3. Each long-term plan and annual plan must identify the non-regulatory activities allocated to local boards.
4. A significant review of this decision-making allocation was undertaken during the 2015-2025 Long-term Plan (LTP) cycle. The allocation was also recently considered during the Governance Framework Review, over the period 2016-2017. A comprehensive review is, therefore, not being undertaken in this LTP cycle.
5. One substantive change to the allocation is proposed in order to implement a policy decision from the Governance Framework Review: allocating certain local service property optimisation decisions to local boards. There are various other minor wording amendments to improve clarity and consistency.
6. Local board feedback is sought on this proposed allocation. It will be considered by the Governing Body during its adoption of the 10 Year Budget 2018-2028.
That the Upper Harbour Local Board: a) endorse the proposed allocation of non-regulatory decision-making as attached to this report.
|
Comments
Background
7. The Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 sets out the functions and powers of the Governing Body and local boards. Local board functions and powers come from three sources:
· those directly conferred by the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009
· non-regulatory activities allocated by the Governing Body to local boards
· regulatory or non-regulatory functions and powers delegated by the Governing Body or Auckland Transport to the local boards.
8. The Auckland Transition Agency (ATA) was given the task of determining the initial allocation of the council’s non-regulatory activities using the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 (the Auckland Council Act). In undertaking this exercise, the question considered by ATA was not ‘why should the activity be allocated to local boards?’ but ‘why not?’ This was in line with the Auckland Council Act.
9. The non-regulatory decision-making allocation has been reviewed twice since the ATA first developed it, as part of the Long-term Plan 2012-2022 and the Long-term Plan 2015-2025.The current non-regulatory decision-making allocation was determined as part of the 2015-2025 Long-term Plan. It is written on an inclusive basis; it does not contain an exhaustive list of all elements that might make up an allocated activity.
10. A significant review of the allocation was undertaken during the 2015-2025 Long-term Plan. The review concluded that a number of clarifications and text changes were required, but no substantive changes were needed to the allocated responsibilities. The review also concluded that the then allocation had worked well and there had been a growing understanding and increasing sophistication of how to use it.
11. The 2016 independent Governance Framework Review report also considered the decision-making allocation as part of the respective roles of the Governing Body and local boards, and what is working well and not working well in Auckland Council’s governance. As with the Long-term Plan 2015-2025 review, the Governance Framework Review found that the current allocation is well understood, sensible, and generally works well. It did recommend that one minor technical change be made to the allocation to more accurately describe the current practical limitations of local board roles in park acquisitions. Further analysis and consultation demonstrated that this recommended change was not necessary.
12. In responding to the Governance Framework Review report, and considering how local boards could be further empowered, the Governing Body decided on a policy change that requires the allocation table to be amended. This is described below.
13. Local boards were extensively consulted during the Governance Framework review.
14. Due to the recent timing of the Governance Framework Review and the consideration of the allocation of non-regulatory decision-making as part of it, no comprehensive review of the allocation table is being undertaken this Long-term Plan cycle.
15. The Governance Framework Review did identify other decision-making opportunities for local boards, e.g. around service levels. No change is required to the allocation table to provide for this; local boards already have the necessary responsibilities allocated to them. Rather, the organisation needs to be in a position to provide local boards with quality advice when making those decisions.
Summary of proposed amendments
16. The current allocation with proposed amendments is attached as Attachment A.
17. The only substantive amendment to the allocation is to allocate decision-making for disposal of local service properties and reinvestment of sale proceeds to local boards where this falls within the service property optimisation policy. This policy was adopted in 2015 by the Governing Body and sets out the purpose and principles for optimisation of underperforming or underutilised service property. A key element is that sale proceeds from underperforming service property are locally reinvested to advance approved projects or activities on a cost neutral basis.
18. Under the current allocation the Governing Body makes the final decision on disposal and acquisition of all property assets, including local service properties that may be optimised. Through the Governance Framework Review process the Governing Body agreed that these local service property optimisation decisions should be made by local boards.[2] This amendment to the allocation implements this decision. This issue was canvassed with local boards during consultation on the Governance Framework Review and they were supportive of local boards holding this decision-making.
19. The current allocation has one specific allocation for the Governing Body on acquisition and disposals - ‘acquisition and divestment of all park land, including the disposal of surplus parks.’ This was introduced to the allocation table in 2012 to provide clarity of decision-making responsibility in this space. This allocation would conflict with the new allocation given to local boards (disposal and reinvestment of property assets in line with the Service Property Optimisation Policy). In order to retain clarity an amendment has been made to the parks allocation to make it clear that the Governing Body’s responsibility for acquisition and divestment of parks does not apply in the case of the Service Property Optimisation Policy applying.
20. Other minor changes to wording include:
· Amending ‘Auckland-wide’ to ‘regional’ in several instances to maintain consistency throughout the allocation table.
· Updating various names (such as Panuku Development Auckland and various parks and maunga) to bring them into line with Auckland Council style.
· Updating descriptions of governance arrangements for several reserves to more accurately describe the current arrangements.
· Renaming themes and activity groups to bring them in to line with the new LTP nomenclature.
· Updating the planning language to bring it in line with Auckland Plan refresh nomenclature.
21. Whilst not part of the allocation of decision-making, the preamble to the allocation table that describes what powers have been delegated to local boards has also been updated to note the recent decision to delegate certain Reserves Act powers to local boards. This delegation was an outcome of the Governance Framework Review.
Consideration
Local board views and implications
22. Local board views on the proposed allocation are being sought via this report.
23. There was extensive consultation with local boards about their decision-making roles and powers during the Governance Framework Review. This included:
· workshops with each local board during the independent review phase;
· workshops and one business meeting with each local board during the response phase.
24. The review found that the allocation table was generally working well and no substantive changes to the allocation were recommended. This was specifically discussed with local boards during workshops. Feedback from local boards was generally supportive of this position.
Māori impact statement
25. There are no particular impacts to Maori in relation to this report.
Implementation
26. As the changes proposed to the decision-making allocation are not significant it is not necessary to publicly consult on them. Local board feedback will be reported to the Governing Body in 2018. Changes to the allocation would come into effect on 1 July 2018.
No. |
Title |
Page |
a⇩
|
Proposed allocation of decision-making for local board feedback |
295 |
Signatories
Authors |
James Liddell - Portfolio Manager |
Authorisers |
Carol McKenzie-Rex – Acting General Manager Eric Perry - Relationship Manager |
14 December 2017 |
|
Governance forward work calendar - January to December 2018
File No.: CP2017/24136
Purpose
1. To present the updated governance forward work calendar.
Executive Summary
2. The governance forward work calendar for the Upper Harbour Local Board is in Attachment A. The calendar is updated monthly, reported to business meetings and distributed to council staff.
3. The governance forward work calendars were introduced in 2016 as part of Auckland Council’s quality advice programme and aim to support local boards’ governance role by:
· ensuring advice on meeting agendas is driven by local board priorities
· clarifying what advice is expected and when
· clarifying the rationale for reports.
4. The calendar also aims to provide guidance for staff supporting local boards and greater transparency for the public.
That the Upper Harbour Local Board: a) receive the Upper Harbour Local Board governance forward work calendar for the period January to December 2018, as set out in Attachment A to this agenda report.
|
No. |
Title |
Page |
a⇩
|
Governance forward work calendar, January to December 2018 |
311 |
Signatories
Authors |
Cindy Lynch - Democracy Advisor |
Authorisers |
Eric Perry - Relationship Manager |
14 December 2017 |
|
Record of the Upper Harbour Local Board workshops held on Thursday 9 November, 23 November and 30 November 2017
File No.: CP2017/24137
Executive summary
1. The Upper Harbour Local Board workshops were held on Thursday 9 November, 23 November and 30 November 2017. Copies of the workshop records are attached.
That the Upper Harbour Local Board: a) receive the record of the Upper Harbour Local Board workshops held on Thursday 9 November, 23 November and 30 November 2017 (refer to Attachments A, B, and C to this agenda report).
|
No. |
Title |
Page |
a⇩
|
Upper Harbour Local Board record of workshop - 9 November 2017 |
315 |
b⇩
|
Upper Harbour Local Board record of workshop - 23 November 2017 |
317 |
c⇩
|
Upper Harbour Local Board record of workshop - 30 November 2017 |
321 |
Signatories
Authors |
Cindy Lynch - Democracy Advisor |
Authorisers |
Eric Perry - Relationship Manager |
14 December 2017 |
|
Upper Harbour Local Board Workshop Record
Workshop record of the Upper Harbour Local Board held in the Upper Harbour Local Board office, Kell Drive, Albany Village, on 23 November 2017, commencing at 9:30 am
Chairperson: Lisa Whyte
Deputy Chairperson: Margaret Miles (arrived at 9.45am)
Members: Uzra Casuri Balouch, Nicholas Mayne, John McLean (arrived at 9.45am and left at 1.53pm), Brian Neeson (left at 1.52pm)
· Workshop Item |
· Governance role |
· Summary of Discussions |
Community Facilities work programme (renewals / project delivery) Presenters: · Rodney Klaassen Stakeholder Advisor · Oliver Kunzendorff Manager Project Delivery |
· Input into regional decision making · Local initiatives / specific decisions · Oversight and monitoring |
The Manager Project Delivery was in attendance to provide an update on the renewals programme and the delivery status of current projects. Members requested that staff investigate an appropriate solution for signage on the fitness equipment in Bill Moir Reserve, and to arrange a community event once this is installed. |
Community Places work programme Presenters: · Marilyn Kelly Programmes & Partnerships Advisor |
· Input into regional decision making · Local initiatives / specific decisions · Oversight and monitoring |
The Programmes and Partnerships Advisor was in attendance to discuss some of the ongoing operational issues at Albany House and the Albany Hub. Members requested some more meaningful statistics on usage of the Albany Hub as those provided did not provide adequate clarity on the usage of the Hub. Members also asked the Advisor to investigate when appropriate way-finding signage would be installed. |
Update from Northern Corridor Improvements Alliance Presenters: · Aimee Brock Communications Manager · Simon Paton Owner Interface Manager · Andrew Johnson Project Manager · Keith Morris Acquisitions Manager |
· To inform board members about this project of regional and national significance, and the scale of its impact on the area from 2018 onwards |
Representatives of the Northern Corridor Improvements Alliance were in attendance to introduce their team and provide an update on the project. A report on the outcome of the independent commissioner hearings process will be coming to the December business meeting. |
Wai Ora – Healthy Waterways Programme Presenters: · Theresa Pearce Relationship Advisor · Timothy Hopley Healthy Waters Specialist · Janet Kidd Healthy Waterways Programme Lead |
· To introduce Auckland Council’s integrated watershed planning process and current state of water quality in the local watershed. · To seek feedback on the freshwater values and proposed next steps. |
Staff from Infrastructure and Environmental Services were in attendance to provide members with an overview on the current state of water quality in the local board area. The Relationship Advisor requested guidance from board members concerning their engagement approach throughout the integrated watershed planning process, and advice on what level of involvement the local board would like to have. |
Local Board Agreement: Workshop Three (advice from departments) Presenters: · Karen Marais Senior Advisor · Various key departmental staff |
· Departments to provide information responding to direction from local boards (to follow same format as Workshop One) · Key projects or areas of focus for 2018/19 to be discussed |
Various key staff from multiple council departments were in attendance to continue the discussion from Workshops 1 and 2 around areas of focus for 2018/19. Workshop 4 is to be held next week which will focus on consultation material. |
The workshop concluded at 2.26pm
14 December 2017 |
|
Board Members' reports - December 2017
File No.: CP2017/24138
Executive summary
An opportunity is provided for members to update the Upper Harbour Local Board on projects and issues they have been involved with since the last meeting.
[Note: This is an information item and if the board wishes any action to be taken under this item, a written report must be provided for inclusion on the agenda.]
That the Upper Harbour Local Board: a) receive the verbal board members’ reports.
|
There are no attachments for this report.
Signatories
Authors |
Cindy Lynch - Democracy Advisor |
Authorisers |
Eric Perry - Relationship Manager |
Upper Harbour Local Board 14 December 2017 |
|
Exclusion of the Public: Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987
b)
That the Upper Harbour Local Board:
a) exclude the public from the following part(s) of the proceedings of this meeting.
The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter, and the specific grounds under section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution follows.
25 Local board feedback on rates remission and postponement policy review - Attachment d - All community and sporting remissions by local board area
Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter |
Particular interest(s) protected (where applicable) |
Ground(s) under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution |
In particular, the report contains information about arrears, remissions, or postponed rates that are not available for public inspection in accordance with the Local Government Rating Act 2002 Section 38(1)(e).. |
n/a |
s48(1)(b) The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information which would be contrary to a specified enactment or constitute contempt of court or contempt of the House of Representatives. |
Upper Harbour Local Board 14 December 2017 |
|
[1] The headline rates increase in an annual plan, or long-term plan, is a comparison of the annual rates requirement to the previous years budgeted rates requirement. Moving a charge against revenue to an expenditure item like grants will increase the council’s costs and inflate the apparent rates increase. However, remissions and postponements are a cost already borne by those ratepayers not receiving them. Therefore an adjustment will be made to the 2017/2018 budgeted rates requirement for the purpose of calculating the rates increase proposed for 2018/2019.
[2] The Governing Body resolved to delegate this power to local boards. However, this was in error, as it was always intended that the power should be allocated to local boards by Governing Body and it was discussed by the Political Working Party in this context.