Agenda of Waiheke Local Board

1 Welcome

Kua uru mai a hau kaha, a hau maia, a hau ora, a hau nui,

Ki runga, ki raro, ki roto, ki waho

Rire, rire hau…pai marire

Translation (non-literal) - Rama Ormsby

Let the winds bring us inspiration from beyond,

Invigorate us with determination and courage to achieve our aspirations for abundance and sustainability

Bring the calm, bring all things good, bring peace….good peace.

2 Apologies

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

3 Declaration of Interest

Members are reminded of the need to be vigilant to stand aside from decision making when a conflict arises between their role as a member and any private or other external interest they might have.

4 Confirmation of Minutes

That the Waiheke Local Board:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Thursday, 14 December 2017, as a true and correct record.

5 Leave of Absence

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

6 Acknowledgements

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

7 Petitions

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

8 Deputations

Standing Order 3.20 provides for deputations. Those applying for deputations are required to give seven working days notice of subject matter and applications are approved by the Chairperson of the Waiheke 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.

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

9 Public Forum

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

9.1 Putiki Road Rehabilitation - Erica Week

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. Erica Week will be in attendance to speak to the board about the Putiki Road rehabilitation.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation

That the Waiheke Local Board:

a) thank Erica Week for her attendance and presentation.

9.2 Flood Mitigation - John Freeman

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. John Freeman will be in attendance to speak to the board about flood mitigation.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Waiheke Local Board:

a) thank John Freeman for his attendance and presentation.

Attachments

a 9.2 Flood Mitigation - John Freeman................................................... 279

9.3 All-weather path through the Pohutukawa reserve - Graeme Couper

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. Graeme Couper will be in attendance, on behalf of the Onetangi Residents Association, to speak to the board about an all-weather path through the Pohutukawa reserve from 3rd Avenue to the top gate on Waiheke Road.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Waiheke Local Board:

a) thank Graeme Couper for his attendance and presentation.

9.4 Wharetana Bay - Carl and Nikki Dalton

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. Carl and Nikki Dalton will be in attendance to speak to the board about Wharetana Bay.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation

That the Waiheke Local Board:

a) thank Carl and Nikki Dalton for their attendance and presentation.

10 Extraordinary Business

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

11 Notices of Motion

Under Standing Order 2.5.1 (LBS 3.11.1) Notices of Motion have been received from member’s J Meeuwsen and S Brown for consideration under items 12 and 13 respectively.

Waiheke Local Board

22 February 2018

Process for the Integration of the Auckland Council District Plan Hauraki Gulf Islands Section into the Auckland Unitary Plan

File No.: CP2018/00009

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To seek the Waiheke Local Board views on the high level process for incorporation of the Auckland Council District Plan Hauraki Gulf Islands Section into the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in part) (the Unitary Plan).

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. Currently, the Regional Policy Statement, Regional Plan and Coastal Plan provisions of the Unitary Plan apply to the Hauraki Gulf Islands, while the district plan provisions are found in the separate Hauraki Gulf Islands Section.

3. Four options were developed for integrating the Hauraki Gulf Islands Section into the Unitary Plan. The options recognise key influencing factors including existing statutory and non-statutory planning documents, known implementation issues with the operative Hauraki Gulf Islands Section, the council’s spatial planning programme and the Waiheke Local Board Governance Framework Review Pilot project.

4. The four options involved combinations of a plan change to the Hauraki Gulf Islands Section, area planning undertaken from a ‘fresh-start’, area planning that builds on the community-led plan Essentially Waiheke, or a plan change to the Unitary Plan.

5. Staff analysis identified that a plan change to the operative Hauraki Gulf Islands Section is not necessary. Known issues with the operative plan can continue to be managed by the consents department in the short term. In the long term, any issues will be addressed through the Unitary Plan integration plan change.

6. The analysis also identified that developing an area plan using a ‘fresh-start’ approach is not necessary. The existing community-led plan, Essentially Waiheke, articulates the community vision and priority issues for the island. The plan was developed with community input and is supported by the local board. These options formed the basis of a workshop with the local board. It was agreed that building an area plan from this base of existing information would be considered the most efficient way to carry out the area planning work on Waiheke that will then inform the Unitary Plan integration plan change. Accordingly, this approach is recommended for formal local board agreement.

7. The local board position will be provided to the Planning Committee when the process for the integration of the Hauraki Gulf Islands Section into the Unitary Plan is considered by that committee later in 2018.

8. A similar workshop was held last year with the Great Barrier Local Board on 7 November 2017 and formal approval for the same approach will be sought from that board at its meeting on 20 February 2018.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation

That the Waiheke Local Board:

a) recommend to the Planning Committee that Option 2 - Area plan using existing plans, followed by a plan change to the Auckland Unitary Plan, be the process used for the incorporation of the Hauraki Gulf Islands Section into the Auckland Unitary Plan.

Horopaki / Context

Background

9. The Hauraki Gulf Islands District Section provisions were specifically excluded from the development of the Unitary Plan by a council decision in 2013. This decision recognised that the plan had largely been finalised following a lengthy submission and appeal process. However, no date was proposed for when the islands would be fully incorporated into the Unitary Plan. Until integration occurs, the Regional Policy Statement, Regional Plan and Regional Coastal Plan sections of the Unitary Plan apply to the islands, but the district plan continues to sit outside of the Unitary Plan. This has the potential to create inconsistencies, uncertainties and policy gaps in planning decisions.

Existing Context

10. Four options for how to incorporate the Hauraki Gulf Islands Section into the Unitary Plan have been developed that take into consideration existing statutory and non-statutory plans, projects and legislation applicable to the Hauraki Gulf.

11. Other influencing factors that have informed the development of the options include the Unitary Plan appeals to the RUB on Waiheke; a small number of policy and operational issues with the operative Hauraki Gulf Islands Section identified by the resource consents team; the Matiatia Directional plan process, the Plans and Places future place-based planning work programme, and the Waiheke Local Board Governance Framework Review Pilot project.

Options

12. The four options, are:

· Option 1: Plan change to the Hauraki Gulf Islands Section, development of an raea plan (fresh-start), plan change to the Unitary Plan

· Option 2: Development of an area plan using existing plans (Essentially Waiheke), plan change to the Unitary Plan

· Option 3: Plan change to the Hauraki Gulf Islands Section, development of an parea plan using existing plans (Essentially Waiheke), Plan change to the Unitary Plan

· Option 4: Development of an area plan (fresh-start), plan change to the Unitary Plan.

13. An assessment table considering each option is shown below:

Option 1 - Plan change to the Hauraki Gulf Islands Section, development of area plan from (fresh-start), plan change to the Unitary Plan
Pros	Cons	Risks
· Greatest potential for complete understanding of community views at all steps of the process. · Will provide regulatory certainty on existing plan issues in the shorter term.	· Three step process will take longer and require more resources from the council and the community. · Potential for repetition of Essentially Waiheke content.	· Community and council consultation fatigue · Greatest risk of re-litigation of same issues through two plan changes. · By not utilising existing plans community buy-in may be diminished · Likely overlap in timing of the processes which could delay final integration of Hauraki Gulf Islands Section into the Unitary Plan.
Option 2 – Development of an area plan using existing plans, plan change to the Unitary Plan
Pros	Cons	Risks
· Process supports and builds on the existing community vision in Essentially Waiheke document. · Two step process requires less time and cost of the council and the community. · Processes will not overlap	· Formal review of known operative plan issues occurs as part of an Unitary Plan plan change · Does not provide regulatory certainty on existing plan issues in the shorter term.	· Operative plan issues may become less manageable through regulatory means.
Option 3 – Plan change to the Hauraki Gulf Islands Section, development of an area plan using existing plans, plan change to the Unitary Plan
Pros	Cons	Risks
· Will provide regulatory certainty on existing plan issues in the shorter term. · Supports and builds on the existing community vision in Essentially Waiheke	· Three step process will take longer and require more resources from council and the community.	· Community and council consultation fatigue · Greatest risk of re-litigation of same issues through two plan changes. · Likely overlap in timing of the processes (including appeals) which could delay final integration of Hauraki Gulf Islands Section into the Unitary Plan.
Option 4 – Development of an area plan (fresh-start), plan change to the Unitary Plan
Pros	Cons	Risks
· Allows for complete framing and development of the area plan issues with input from plans and places. · Two step process requires less time and cost of the council and the community. · Processes will not overlap	· Potential for repetition of Essentially Waiheke content · Formal review of known operative plan issues occurs as part of an Unitary Plan plan change · Does not provide regulatory certainty on existing plan issues	· By not utilising existing plans, community buy-in for process may be diminished. · Operative plan issues may become less manageable through regulatory means.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

14. A plan change to the operative Hauraki Gulf Islands Section is not considered necessary as the identified policy and operational issues are not considered to be of a scale and extent that require immediate action through a plan change. The issues can continue to be managed by the resource consents team on a case-by-case basis using best practice and guidance notes to ensure a consistent approach.

15. A ‘fresh-start’ approach to area planning is not considered necessary as this may duplicate the vision and priority issues already articulated in Essentially Waiheke, which has been developed with considerable community input and is supported by the local board.

16. This report recommends that a process that builds on Essentially Waiheke’s visions and aspirations and develops a spatial component for these, be developed in collaboration with the local board and community. The outputs of this process should include key moves (broad strategies for achieving the vision) and maps that support Essentially Waiheke and will inform the Unitary Plan zoning, overlays, precincts and relevant rules to be included in the plan change to the Unitary Plan. The option that best reflects this analysis is Option 2.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe / Local impacts and local board views

17. The local board were briefed on the four options at a workshop on 26 October 2017. The views of the board members from that workshop have been taken fully into consideration in the preparation of this report and the local board will make a formal recommendation for inclusion in a report to the Planning Committee.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

18. There are a number of iwi with mana whenua connections to the Hauraki Gulf who have a role and responsibility to exercise kaitiakitanga on Waiheke, in accordance with their kawa and protocols. A key to enabling kaitiakitanga is to ensure mana whenua representation at the table. The development of the area plan and Unitary Plan integration plan change methodology will provide opportunities to recognise and provide for the unique cultural heritage of Waiheke, to promote kaitiakitanga and to support Mataawaka and Māori organisations that provide for the social and cultural needs of the Waiheke communities.

19. Discussions will take place with mana whenua and other iwi groups represented on the islands at an early stage to consider and agree how best to work together on the development of the Area plan and the wider Unitary Plan plan change methodology and process.

20. Discussions with Ngāti Paoa are ongoing, particularly in relation to the Matiatia Directional Plan, and a verbal update on these discussions may be provided when this item is considered.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

21. Plans and Places three-year place-based spatial planning programme identifies “Waiheke Area planning” in years two and three – 2018/19 and 2019/20, and can be covered by departmental budgets for those years. The area plan is timed for completion by September 2019.

22. The plan change for the integration of the Hauraki Gulf Islands Section into the Unitary Plan will occur post 2020 and can be factored into the department budget for that period.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

23. An assessment of the risks associated with options 1 to 4 is included in the assessment table at section 13 of this report.

24. Option 1 – Plan change to the Hauraki Gulf Islands Section, development of an area plan (fresh start), plan change to the Unitary Plan identified risks include consultation fatigue, re-litigation of same issues through two plan changes, not using existing community plans, and potential timing delays. This option has the greatest number of risks.

25. Option 2 – Development of an area plan using existing plans, plan change to the Unitary Plan has one identified risk - that known operative plan issues may become less manageable through regulatory means.

26. Options 3 - Plan change to the Hauraki Gulf Islands Section, development of an area plan using existing plans, plan change to the Unitary Plan identified risks are consultation fatigue, re-litigation of same issues through two plan changes, and operative plan issues becoming less manageable.

27. Option 4 – Development of an area plan (fresh-start), plan change to the Unitary Plan identified risks are delays in timing and operative plan issues becoming less manageable.

28. Option 2 (recommended) has the least risk. The risk of the identified policy and operational issues becoming unmanageable is considered minor. The issues are not considered to be of a scale and extent that require immediate action through a plan change. The issues can continue to be managed by the resource consents team on a case-by-case basis using best practice and guidance notes to ensure a consistent approach.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

29. The development of the methodology and timeframes for the area plan and Unitary Plan integration process has been agreed but will require co-ordination between the local board, relevant council and council-controlled organisation units and key community stakeholders.

30. The recommended timeframe is that a designed work programme for undertaking area planning should begin in 2018-2019, once the appeal to the Rural – Urban Boundary and the Matiatia Directional plan are resolved.

31. The recommendation of the local board as to which process to use for this project will be reported to the Planning Committee in due course, and a more detailed programme developed. This is likely to occur towards the middle of 2018.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Alison Pye - Principal Planner

Anna Papaconstantinou - Planner

Authorisers

John Duguid - General Manager - Plans and Places

Helgard Wagener - Relationship Manager Great Barrier and Waiheke Local Boards

Waiheke Local Board

22 February 2018

Auckland Transport Waiheke Local Board update - February 2018

File No.: CP2018/00016

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. The purpose of this report is to seek approval for new Local Board Transport Capital Fund Projects, respond to resolutions and requests on transport-related matters and provide transport related information on matters of specific application and interest to the Waiheke Local Board and its community.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. This report covers matters of specific relevance for the Waiheke Local Board and its community; matters of general interest relating to Auckland Transport activities or the transport sector.

3. In particular, this report covers:

· update on the trial of changes to passenger vehicle operations at Matiatia

· update to the bus new network

· quarterly report.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation

That the Waiheke Local Board:

a) note the Auckland Transport Waiheke Local Board update - February 2018.

Horopaki / Context

Matiatia Trial Update

4. At the October 2017 meeting of the Waiheke Local board a request was made to Auckland Transport to provide minor infrastructure changes to the car park at Matiatia. These changes were to provide space for small and large passenger vehicles to wait and/or collect passengers.

5. Currently the keyhole outside the Matiatia Wharf is too small to provide sufficient space to meet all the needs of transport providers on the island. The demand for this space more than doubles during the summer months, particularly over the Christmas and January holidays and there is simply not enough room for everyone to operate safely. There have been many conversations about this situation, over many years but these have failed to yield an appropriate solution. Therefore, the board asked Auckland Transport to consider a trial that created space within the Matiatia carpark, near the harbour master’s office, for large pre-booked passenger vehicles, taking them out of the keyhole.

6. To make these changes possible minor earth works were required and a power pole needed to be replaced. These works were completed on 19 December 2017.

7. The trial began on 1 February 2018, it has been working relatively well, with some minor adjustments having already been made. Adjustments will continue to be made as the need arises.

8. The trial is being completed under a temporary traffic management plan, which enables any adjustments to the operation to be made without requiring formal resolutions.

9. The trial has required the relocation of some car parks and unfortunately, there has been an unforeseen delay in converting the carparks in the rental car area to general parking. These delays have seen a number of concerns raised about the temporary loss of parking at Matiatia. This is due to contractual issues and Auckland Transport and Panuku are working to solve these as soon as possible.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

10. There is nothing to add to this area.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe / Local impacts and local board views

Regional Land Transport Plan (RLTP)

11. The Auckland Transport Board requested a number of revisions to the draft Regional Land Transport Plan (RLTP) presented to it at the February AT Board meeting. This means that Auckland Transport will not be a position to present the draft RLTP to cluster workshops of local boards on 19 & 26 February. Instead, it is planned to present to all local boards on the afternoon of 26 February. This will be followed by the release of the draft RLTP, with local boards being able to present on the draft RLTP, to representatives of the Regional Transport Committee on March 7. Local boards can, as is usual, also develop formal written submissions on the draft RLTP.

New Network Consultation

12. The consultation for the Waiheke new bus network will begin in March. This will involve extensive consultation will all Waiheke bus users and will contribute to a significant investment by Auckland Transport in the Waiheke bus network at the end of 2018.

Quarterly Report

13. Auckland Transport’s quarterly report is attached to the agenda. It covers local and regional projects currently being undertaken.

Putiki Road Reconstruction

14. Auckland Transport is currently undertaking reconstruction work on Putiki Road. There has been two meetings with residents and business to discuss their concerns and compromises have been reached to allow for an additional 15 parking spaces on Putiki Road, while still allowing for a footpath to be installed.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

15. Ngati Paoa views and cultural impacts on the land at Matiatia are considered in the current trial and will be a valuable part of the feedback for any permanent solutions for the Matiatia area.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

16. Transport capital fund update

Project Name	Problem or Opportunity Being Addressed	Current Status
Walking/Cycle paths – The causeway to Shelley Beach	There is insufficient connection from the path by the boat yard towards Shelley Beach Road. Requirement for a shared path to improve school walking and cycling connections	‘Rough Order of Cost’ requested by the WLB in 2016. Request from the board to review and reduce the cost as it is too high for the boards budget
Precinct Plan for Ostend.	The development of the countdown has created greater traffic to Ostend area. The request was to look at improvements to pedestrian and cycling facilities and traffic flow	‘Rough Order of Cost’ approved by WLB in December 2016. ‘Draft Design’ presented to the WLB in June and August 2017 Consultation to begin mid-August 2017. Putiki Road improvements will be included in the maintenance rehabilitation job in the current financial year. Funded by AT. Design will begin once consultation has been received.
Speed reduction – Driver feedback signs	There are concerns for the speeds on Waiheke roads. Due to the nature of the island, there is little or no options for engineering solutions. This is an affordable and effective way to manage speed.	Rough Order of Cost’ approved by WLB in August 2017
Matiaita Keyhole Changes

17. Financial Update

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

18. All risks are dealt with at a project level.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

19. N/A

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Auckland Transport Waiheke Local Board Quarterly Report	33
b ⇩	Auckland Transport School Community Transport	43

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author	Melanie Dale, Elected Member Relationship Manager, Auckland Transport
Authoriser	Jonathan Anyon, Manager Elected Member Relationship Unit, Auckland Transport

Waiheke Local Board

22 February 2018

Waiheke Governance Pilot

File No.: CP2017/26798

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To approve the proposed Waiheke governance pilot scope, principles and priority issues and projects list.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

1. Late last year Auckland Council completed a review of its governance arrangements including how the Auckland Council model empowers local boards.

2. One of the results of the review was a decision to commence a three-year pilot project on Waiheke to trial some of the review’s findings and to test an increased level of devolved decision-making to the Waiheke Local Board.

3. The pilot’s scope includes operational, finance, policy and governance matters. It will be formally evaluated and will aim to identify changes that can be applied to local boards elsewhere in Auckland. A pilot programme manager role has been established to lead and coordinate on pilot delivery.

4. The role’s governance oversight sits with the Waiheke Local Board. This report discusses a Waiheke Pilot projects list for consideration and approval by the board.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation

That the Waiheke Local Board:

a) approve the proposed Waiheke governance pilot scope, principles and issues and projects list.

Horopaki / Context

5. Commencing in 2016 the Auckland Council Governance Division led a review of the council’s governance arrangements and in particular how, whether and to what extent these arrangements empowered local boards as intended when the Auckland Council shared governance model was created in 2010.

6. The review resulted in a report being presented to the outgoing council just prior to the elections and agreement by the new council in December 2016 to establish a working party charged with:

· considering governance framework review recommendations

· overseeing a work programme to address the review’s findings

· making recommendations to local boards and the governing body on giving effect to the review’s findings.

7. The working party considered the governance review report suggestion that Waiheke could be treated differently and recommended that a three-year governance pilot be trialled on Waiheke. This was supported by formal resolutions from all local boards and adopted at the governing body meeting held on 28 September 2017. The report that led to this decision is included at Attachment A and is the core document which directs the implementation of the Waiheke Pilot.

8. Waiheke was chosen as the location for the governance review pilot for a number of reasons including:

· its physical separation from the rest of Auckland means different decision-making approaches could be tested without impacting on other local board areas

· it gives effect to the idea of running a pilot on Waiheke Island that was promoted in the 2016 report and by incoming Mayor Phil Goff

· it is a clear community of interest, there is a clearly stated desire from the Waiheke community for more autonomy and there was a strongly articulated view by some on Waiheke that Auckland Council and its council-controlled organisations weren’t delivering what the Waiheke community wanted.

9. The following sections provide more detail on the proposed pilot.

Pilot purpose

10. The purpose of the Waiheke governance pilot is to test an increased level of devolved governance decision making on Waiheke from the Auckland Council governing body to the Waiheke Local Board. The intention is to see if increased local decision-making will result in better local outcomes, a stronger and more participative local community, and greater satisfaction with council’s activities on Waiheke Island. The pilot will be formally evaluated to assist these questions to be answered.

11. Examples of areas where greater local leadership could be trialled under the pilot include area planning, community development and safety, developing local visitor infrastructure, managing the stormwater network, some transport decision making and catchment management. While some of these functions are already legislatively allocated to local boards, boards do not always have access to resources to support them. This has been a common experience for boards around the region.

Pilot structure and reporting

12. The Waiheke Pilot will operate for three years until 30 September 2020. A full time Waiheke and Hauraki Gulf Islands Programme Manager role has been established from 1 November 2017 to implement the pilot, reporting directly to Auckland Council’s Governance Director. The title ‘Waiheke and Hauraki Gulf Islands’ recognises that the Waiheke Local Board area also includes Rakino Island, the similarities in council’s approach between Waiheke and Great Barrier Island, and the potential that any different way of working could apply to both the Waiheke and Great Barrier local board areas.

13. Key to the pilot’s success is having a dedicated senior position to help progress the wide range of issues, projects and ideas that haven’t been addressed or advanced on Waiheke, due in part to a lack of resource or priority. Also important, are the relationships formed with key Auckland Council and council-controlled organisation staff. A reference group of senior managers from all key departments/units is being established with the role of supporting the programme manager to deliver agreed outcomes and to provide assistance where agreed.

14. The council’s Research, Investigation and Monitoring Unit (RIMU) will formally evaluate the pilot, record the current state from discussions with staff and interviews with local board members and others. This is the baseline from which actions resulting from and attributable to the pilot can be recorded, and their impact analysed. The programme manager will also be keeping a detailed record of interactions on projects and issues and expects to use this in regular updates to the Waiheke Local Board and others.

15. Pilot governance reporting and oversight is primarily to the Waiheke Local Board with additional reporting as agreed to the newly formed Auckland Council Governance Working Party. It is proposed that the programme manager will meet with the Waiheke Local Board monthly at a workshop to report informally on pilot progress and to enable the board to consider and influence priorities, actions and direction. Formal quarterly or tri-annual reports on the Waiheke Local Board agenda will enable the board to formally resolve on matters as it sees fit and provide transparency for the Waiheke community. Pilot updates to all local boards as needed are also intended, as one of the reasons for testing different approaches on Waiheke is to see what might be able to apply elsewhere.

Pilot scope

16. To effectively test an increased level of devolved governance decision making on Waiheke, the pilot’s scope needs to be open-ended and able to be modified as things change and investigations suggest different priorities and approaches. It is proposed that the pilot’s scope covers the following categories:

· operational matters

· policy and planning matters

· funding and finance

· community matters

· council-controlled organisation relationships

· governance matters

· evaluation, reporting and communications.

Pilot principles

17. Within this scope the following principles are suggested to determine the priority for action:

· action is supported by the Waiheke Local Board, and broadly, the Waiheke community

· it can be practically advanced by the programme manager

· it can be resourced and supported by council and council-controlled organisation staff if this is needed

· it is within the pilot’s scope in terms of governing body governance review decisions

· it is consistent with the outcomes and initiatives in the 2017 Waiheke Local Board Plan and Essentially Waiheke

· action on the issue or project has been wanted over a lengthy period without progress

· the proposed action is proportionate to the outcome sought

· work needed is cost effective.

Proposed pilot priority issues and projects list

18. Based on these categories and principles, Attachment B lists matters considered to be a priority for action over the life of the pilot. Some are/will become more urgent than others or will gain more traction than others for a variety of reasons. Priorities will be reviewed regularly in discussion with the local board.

19. No attempt to list lower priority matters for consideration is being made at this point and over time a longer list may be developed.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

20. The approach to the pilot is based on the report approved by the governing body (see Attachment A), subsequent discussions with officers and workshops with the Waiheke Local Board. Board members influenced all aspects of the pilot from input into the 2016 governance review report, representation on the subsequent working party and ongoing discussions at board workshops as to how to address Waiheke issues they felt weren’t being adequately addressed by council.

21. The programme manager appointee was previously the Relationship Manager for the Waiheke and Great Barrier local boards and so has a strong prior knowledge of the projects and issues that the pilot will seek to progress. With handover from the previous role, the programme manager has been on the job since 15 January 2017.

22. Reflections at this early stage are that raising awareness of the role, its purpose and seeking support and assistance are core work, along with engagement with the local board and testing approaches that might not be business as usual or easily fit into council’s ways of working.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe / Local impacts and local board views

23. The Waiheke Pilot has been instigated in part in response to the board’s advocacy on a wide range of matters, dissatisfaction with the way the wider Auckland Council family has responding to/delivering on Waiheke matters and its aspirations for more local decision-making and leadership. The pilot’s programme manager will report to the board and take guidance from the board on work programme priorities.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

24. Mana whenua have not been specifically consulted on the establishment of the pilot or the proposed work programme. It is anticipated that the programme manager will work closely with mana whenua where there is a known area of interest, or to ascertain what level of involvement is sought.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

25. The Waiheke Pilot has established a three-year full time programme manager role to progress agreed outcomes. Beyond that it has no specific budget. It is anticipated that budget may be required over time for a range of purposes and this will have to be obtained in discussion either with the local board, through annual work programmes or where existing budgets can be accessed.

26. A different way of working may also have financial implications. The local board and community stakeholders tend to hold the view that things can be done cheaper locally while officers dealing with council systems tend to find this more challenging and take the view that economies of scale will result from taking a regional approach (eg contracts). These contrasting views need to be further tested against whether there is an increase in local board/community satisfaction and trust resulting from the pilot. A funding and finance workstream is included in the pilot and the formal RIMU evaluation will also provide some answers to these matters.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

27. The main risks identified with the pilot are likely to be around obtaining organisation support and resources to deliver on key outcomes. While the pilot has a dedicated programme manager role, it cannot succeed without wider support from others who will have different priorities. Regular reporting of progress, relationships with management and the formal evaluation are all tools which are intended to assist with achieving outcomes.

28. The lack of a specific dedicated Waiheke pilot budget to assist with delivering on outcomes was flagged early on as a potential issue. The funding and finance workstream will include enquiry into what is spent on Waiheke, how effective that is and whether the approach taken is the most efficient. The programme manager intends to investigate other sources of funding, for example a visitor levy to fund infrastructure impacts of growing tourism numbers.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

29. The Waiheke Pilot has been underway since 1 November 2017 and the programme manager position has been up and running since 15 January 2018. The programme manager will progress projects and issues as agreed by the Waiheke Local Board. Regular reporting to the board will provide the basis to review, modify or adapt the work programme as circumstances change. An evaluation workstream will report formally on pilot progress annually.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Attachment A - Report approving Waiheke Pilot	51
b ⇩	Attachment B - Waiheke Pilot priority issues and projects list	75

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author	John Nash - Programme Manager,Waiheke & Gulf Islands
Authoriser	Phil Wilson - Governance Director

Waiheke Local Board

22 February 2018

Matiatia Strategic Plan development and implementation

File No.: CP2018/00262

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To update the Waiheke Local Board on progress on the development of the Mātiatia Strategic Plan and outline an approach to successful implementation of the plan.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. Since its creation in 2010, the Waiheke Local Board has been seeking resolution of the well-known issues at Mātiatia. Despite Auckland City Council purchasing the bulk of land in the Mātiatia bay in 2005 to prevent a level of development that was considered excessive, no substantive progress has been made on agreeing coordinated actions and outcomes.

3. Even a 2009 Auckland City Council agreed Mātiatia Directional Plan hasn’t been pursued, with contributing factors being the 2010 council reorganisation, fragmented land management in the bay, and a lack of budget and agreement as to outcomes.

4. The Waiheke Local Board has engaged Direction Mātiatia Inc. to run a community led process to develop a Mātiatia Strategic Plan and is seeking sufficient ten-year plan funding from Auckland Council and Auckland Transport to enable implementation. It is anticipated that plan completion and funding decisions to support implementation will be made in 2018.

5. The recent Auckland Council decision to establish a Waiheke Governance Pilot Programme to test more devolved decision-making to the Waiheke Local Board provides the best opportunity since 2005 for the local board to take ownership of Mātiatia decisions and outcomes and a delegation to achieve that is sought.

6. Working in partnership with Ngāti Paoa on plan development and implementation is recommended given the significant interests Ngāti Paoa have in this area.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendations

That the Waiheke Local Board:

a) confirm its intention that the Mātiatia Strategic Plan be completed in 2018

b) reiterate its formal position that adequate Auckland Council and Auckland Transport funding to implement the Mātiatia Strategic Plan is the board’s number one priority and asks that this be confirmed as part of both agencies’ ten-year plans.

c) request that the governing body delegate land use and development decision-making over the undeveloped and Panuku Development Auckland managed parts of the public land at Matiatia to the local board to enable it to lead and make decisions on future public land use at Mātiatia as agreed under the Mātiatia Strategic Plan, noting that this is consistent with the Auckland Council Governance Review decision to test more devolved decision-making on Waiheke.

d) agree to pursue planning for and implementation of the Mātiatia Strategic Plan in partnership with Ngāti Paoa and to meet with Ngāti Paoa representatives as soon as possible to advance this proposal.

e) accept the October 2017 Direction Mātiatia Inc. survey results report and findings as key inputs into the development of the Mātiatia Strategic Plan and will further consider these at the next Mātiatia Strategic Plan Project Management Group meeting to be held in March 2018.

Horopaki / Context

Background

7. In 2005, Auckland City Council purchased the majority of land in the Mātiatia Bay for $12.5m. The purchase of around 8ha included an expectation of achieving a return on investment by a combination of land sale, commercial development and paid parking with parts of the bay retained for public enjoyment. Various planning processes have subsequently been commenced to deliver these outcomes but none have achieved this result to date.

Public land at Mātiatia is managed by the following Auckland Council entities (see Attachment A):

· Church Bay Esplanade Reserve (the narrow strip of land immediately on the Mātiatia foreshore) - Waiheke Local Board

· Mātiatia wharf, keyhole, associated road reserve and public carparks - Auckland Transport

· Harbourmaster area and kayak hire leases - Panuku Development Auckland

· undeveloped foreshore land and the bush finger to the south – foreshore area maintained by Community Facilities

· Owhanake wastewater treatment plant and surrounding undeveloped land - Watercare Services Ltd.

8. These land management arrangements were largely inherited with the creation of Auckland Council and in the case of the Panuku leased areas and the undeveloped land, represent a holding pattern pending future decisions being made. While the respective management agencies are meeting immediate needs, this fragmentation is also a constraint on agreeing and delivering a comprehensive plan for Mātiatia Bay.

9. In 2009 Auckland City Council endorsed and approved a 20-year directional plan including a draft Mātiatia Transport Plan, agreement to land-bank the site and to stage delivery based on funding and a viable market. The establishment of Auckland Council in 2010 resulted in this plan not being pursued further.

10. The 2011, 2014 and 2017 Waiheke Local Board Plans all include outcomes prioritising the development of a plan for Mātiatia and seeking funding and support to deliver on that plan. Despite this and strong, continuous advocacy by the local board, no substantive progress has been made. Lack of funding, other council priorities as the new council and its independent arms such as Auckland Transport became established, and the disconnected land management structure, have all contributed to this.

11. The 2017 local board plan recognises that developing a strategic plan for Mātiatia is an important focus for the board, given Mātiatia’s function as a busy transport hub with values and importance for commuters, visitors residents and ratepayers. It notes there are challenges in developing a strategy which reflects the Waiheke community’s aspirations, embraces the area’s cultural significance and provides for future infrastructure needs. These challenges include:

· coordinating the wide range of inputs needed

· addressing long-standing issues and providing for future needs

· addressing traffic, public transport, pedestrians’ and cyclists’ issues

· providing easily accessible visitor services and information

· providing for future open space needs and aspirations

· protecting and enhancing heritage and environmental values

· funding the plan using existing resources and by advocating for new council funding.

12. The Essentially Waiheke 2016 refresh notes land development at Mātiatia is both an opportunity and a challenge. It sets the scene and outlines key elements that the strategic plan needs to include, if it is to meet the needs of the Waiheke community.

Developing a Mātiatia Strategic Plan

13. In February 2016, the Waiheke Local Board allocated funding to Direction Mātiatia Incorporated Direction Mātiatia Incorporated (DMI) to develop the Mātiatia Strategic Plan in six phases, in partnership with the community, the council and mana whenua. Engaging DMI both reflected the board’s wish for a community lead approach to plan development and the absence of any resource within Auckland Council to do this work.

14. During 2016, DMI completed phases one and two (literature review and scoping, a review of existing plans and documents and key stakeholder consultation) and in November 2016 the board approved DMI progressing the next phases starting with the development of the draft strategic plan.

15. Draft plan development is on hold pending completion of two crucial work streams. The first is an Auckland Transport business case to support funding to deliver agreed transport outcomes at Mātiatia. Although Auckland Transport manages a range of public assets at Mātiatia including the wharf, roads and public carparks, only the landward area, not the wharf infrastructure, is in scope for the Mātiatia Strategic Plan. The second is advice from Ngāti Paoa as to what its aspirations for land at Mātiatia of cultural significance to it mean on the ground, and what it would like to see happen.

16. The key elements to completing and implementing a strategic plan for Mātiatia are considered to be leadership and funding.

Leadership

17. Past experience and the history outlined above suggest that development at Mātiatia which doesn’t meet the aspirations of the Waiheke community and isn’t led by the local board will be difficult to implement. It is considered that to successfully develop, agree, fund and implement a Mātiatia Strategic Plan, the Waiheke Local Board needs to lead on this matter.

18. While the board is leading on the development of the strategic plan, it has no decision-making in terms of implementation of the plan which relies on decisions by the Auckland Council governing body, Auckland Transport and to a lesser extent Watercare Services Ltd, including allocation of budget.

19. Panuku Development Auckland manages inherited commercial leases at Mātiatia, and the rest of the open/undeveloped public land is maintained by Community Facilities in a holding pattern until such time as governing body decisions are made on land use, sale and/or development. A delegation from Auckland Council’s governing body to the local board to enable it to make land use and development decisions over this land is considered to be the best way to achieve the above objectives. This report therefore recommends that the local board seek such a delegation which would be advanced through a separate report to the governing body. That report would cover rationale, implications, issues, costs and risks.

20. No delegation is sought over the Auckland Transport managed land on the basis that Auckland Transport and the Waiheke Local Board committed to jointly agree outcomes through the recent governance review and work is already underway to advance this. No specific decision-making role over Watercare land is sought, provided current Watercare and Auckland Transport discussions to transfer Owhanake land that Watercare no longer needs to Auckland Transport proceed as intended.

21. In 2017, Auckland Council made decisions from a year-long governance review which included agreement to commence a three-year Waiheke Pilot to test a more devolved decision-making approach on Waiheke. The board this delegation as a test case for the intent of the governance review and Waiheke pilot.

22. A programme manager role was established from 1 November 2017 to lead on the Waiheke Pilot. The Mātiatia Strategic Plan development is one of this role’s priority areas agreed with the Waiheke Local Board (see separate report on this meeting agenda) and the programme manager has already begun investigating what needs to be done to progress this project, in discussion with a wide variety of stakeholders.

Funding

23. Obtaining sufficient Auckland Council and Auckland Transport funding to implement the Mātiatia Strategic Plan is critical to success.

24. In terms of Auckland Council funding, all local boards have identified one single high priority area for capital funding in the 2018-2028 long-term plan and the Waiheke Local Board has identified funding Mātiatia development as its number one priority. The board is seeking sufficient budget to enable development of land at Mātiatia in accordance with agreed directions from the Mātiatia Strategic Plan.

25. Officers presented their advice on this to the council’s Finance and Performance Committee in November 2017. The advice contained a range of options including a do nothing/no specific funding and the board’s preference which was for funding capped at $36.85m (which included the land valued at $21m). The board’s preferred option would fund the completion of the strategic plan, resolve the key transport and stormwater issues, and enable construction of some form of development in the bay e.g. a visitor/cultural centre and associated commercial services. Officers recommended that around $11m in funding be made available for development, including transport outcomes in years 2019/20 and 2020/21.

26. The local board will seek community support for its preferred option as part of long-term plan consultation during February/March 2018. Decisions on what funds each board will get will be made by Auckland Council’s governing body prior to the Long-term Plan being confirmed in July 2018.

27. In terms of Auckland Transport funding to deliver agreed transport outcomes at Mātiatia, this will be determined as part of the 2018-2028 Auckland Regional Land Transport Plan. This will also be publicly consulted on in conjunction with Auckland Council’s Long-term Plan. The amount of funding sought will be identified through development of a strategic and business case led by Auckland Transport and supported by the New Zealand Transport Authority which would also be part funding some elements.

28. To support the Auckland Transport case, a number of workshops were held with key stakeholders throughout 2017 to agree Mātiatia problems and identify benefits. These form the fundamental pillars of the strategic case. The draft strategic case will be available around the same time as this report is considered but needs to be discussed with the local board in confidence in the first instance.

29. The strategic case makes the case for investment. It sets a platform for the next stage, the indicative/detailed business case. This identifies a long list for options to address the problems and deliver the benefits identified in the strategic case. These will be developed by stakeholders/partners, supported by a consultant and publicly consulted on.

Addressing historic land purchase conditions

30. As noted above, a specific report to the Auckland Council governing body requesting a delegation would be needed. That report will need to address the Auckland City Council’s 2005 expectation of a return on its $12.5 million land purchase which was subject to a series of conditions to achieve this return including:

· consideration being given to introducing a full user-pays regime for parking at Mātiatia

· selling the long-term lease (i.e. not freehold sale) of at least 8,000m² of developable land with a target return of $7million on the purchase cost

· selling Lot 51 (the finger of land running south of the main bay)

· investigating other funding mechanisms such as wharf charges and a targeted rate.

31. It is considered that some return on investment from commercial development will still be necessary. However, any expectation of wholesale development and/or land sale is probably unrealistic if the current and historic issues preventing development are to be resolved.

32. While these matters can be discussed in detail in the proposed report to the governing body, the following comments are made for illustrative purposes:

· since purchase, parking charges alone have been a considerable income source for council bodies. Background work for the 2009 Mātiatia Directional Plan showed there were 205 sealed carparks with 100 charged at $6/day and the rest charged at $3/day. The 170 leased carparks were charged at $65/month. If these carparks were full 100 per cent of the time over ten years at these charges, they would have generated over $5 million in revenue

· a wharf fee of 45.33 cents/trip is added to some ferry ticket prices via an Auckland Council bylaw which funds wharf infrastructure around the region. This levy doesn’t fund land-based infrastructure at Mātiatia

· no attempts have been made to sell Lot 51. The district plan development areas map at Attachment E shows that only a small part of this lot is developable under the plan’s mixed-use development area

· commercial leases are in places for uses near the Harbourmaster’s building and kayak hire business

· no attempts have been made to introduce a targeted rate.

Mātiatia community use survey results and analysis

33. As noted above, Direction Mātiatia Inc. (DMI) is unable to progress a draft Mātiatia Strategic Plan due to other workstreams not being completed. In order to maintain momentum, in mid-2017 DMI undertook a community survey to test themes which came from earlier workshops on how Mātiatia should be sustainably developed and managed for the Waiheke community’s benefit.

34. The survey ran during June/July 2017 using a Survey Monkey online system linked to the DMI website and publicized via 12,000 flyers, advertisements in local newspapers, the DMI website and the Waiheke Facebook Community page. 806 responses were received. The initial summarized findings were independently peer reviewed by a professional data scientist, presented to the board in early August 2017 and subsequently released to the community.

35. Since then DMI has further analysed the 1,100 plus comments against survey questions five and eleven, reported these to the board and released them to the community. DMI’s Survey Analysis Report October 2017 is included at Attachment B. Appendices to this report covering an independent analysis of survey results, a set of principles to guide the preparation of the draft plan and actions and timeframes to complete Phases 3 and 4 of the project are included at Attachment C.

36. The analysis of the survey results and the survey comments provide essential information on what the community wants, doesn’t want and is equivocal about. These are listed here as a significant element of the DMI report:

· The community wants;

- increased parking

- improved public transport services

- an efficient and safer keyhole

- a visitor centre

- the grassland and general natural environment protected in any development at Mātiatia

· The community doesn’t want;

- residential and visitor accommodation

· The community is equivocal about;

- the need for commercial development and recreational, historical and cultural activities perhaps indicating they need to be quantified and defined in greater detail to achieve community consensus support.

37. The proposed set of principles are also listed here, again as a significant element of the DMI report:

· Mātiatia as an efficient and safe multi-model transport hub for Waiheke

· Mātiatia as an attractive and welcoming gateway to Waiheke with a ‘sense of arrival’

· Mātiatia as a significant coastal landscape where the natural environment and ecology is sustainably protected and enhanced

· Mātiatia as a place of special, cultural, historic and spiritual value to Ngāti Paoa and other Manu Whenua

· Mātiatia as a place where development is sustainable and reflects the economic, social, cultural and environmental well-beings.

38. Formal acceptance of the DMI survey findings (Attachment C - appendices 1-3) and suggested principles (Attachment C - appendix 4) via resolutions on this report is sought. DMI’s proposed project plan timelines (Attachment C - appendix 5) has been extended due to delays outlined in this report, which are not of DMI’s making.

Ngāti Paoa values, aspirations and proposed partnership

39. Understanding Ngāti Paoa’s position, aspirations and expectations is central to the development of the Mātiatia Strategic Plan, as is its relationship with the Waiheke Local Board in terms of plan development and implementation. For this reason, it is recommended that the local board agree to partner with Ngāti Paoa in these matters and a recommendation proposing that is included in this report.

40. The Ngāti Paoa Iwi Trust was funded by Panuku Development Auckland to prepare a cultural values assessment (CVA) for Mātiatia which was completed in March 2016. The CVA provides a high-level assessment of the cultural significance of Mātiatia to Ngāti Paoa, including specific sites, features and values, and recommendations to achieve Ngāti Paoa aspirations. The CVA is intended to help inform Auckland Council decisions on Mātiatia.

41. The CVA referenced earlier ground penetrating radar surveys which indicated the likelihood of human remains and other artifacts over quite a wide area at the foreshore and further inland. Discussion of establishing ‘No Go Zones’ resulting from these findings are included in the assessment. The assessment made a series of recommendations relating to:

· Ngāti Paoa involvement in Council planning processes

· the importance of reflecting Ngāti Paoa values and aspirations when making decisions

· the establishment of mechanisms to protect these values and history

· physical structures which help interpret and inform these values.

42. Due to the CVA’s high level nature, Ngāti Paoa were further engaged by council in late 2016 to hold hui with whanau to provide a more detailed response as to what these aspirations mean for it on the ground, the outcomes it would like to see, what it would support and what it feels should not happen. Due to structural and staffing changes in the Trust’s office and personal circumstances, work on this has been delayed.

43. Ngāti Paoa will have an approved Mātiatia specific document available for consideration by Auckland Council in February 2018. It is expected that this work will identify foreshore areas that Ngāti Paoa would like to see remain undeveloped, have carparking removed from, and/or cultural interpretation enabled over. This information will provide guidance for the development of the strategic plan and for associated funding, development and use decisions by Auckland Council and Auckland Transport.

Mātiatia non-transport uses

44. The bulk of the public land in the Mātiatia Bay with the exception of the main formed public carparks fronting Ocean View Road is managed by Panuku Development Auckland on behalf of Auckland Council. As no decisions have been made on development since purchase in 2005, a range of historical leases primarily around the Harbourmaster’s facility and adjoining carparking areas are in place.

45. Some key commercial leases are due to expire in 2019 and beyond the above request for wider decision-making, the local board has been seeking a greater say in decisions on next steps for these premises to ensure these are consistent with its wider strategic plan directions. At its December 2017 business meeting, the board passed a series of resolutions aimed at it being the decision-maker in terms of these leases. Discussions are planned between Panuku and Auckland Council around the transfer of the Harbourmaster lease-management from Panuku to council’s Community Facilities Department which would give effect to this request.

Owhanake long-term carpark

46. Watercare Services Ltd manages the 7.6 hectare block of land further up the hill from the bay. The land includes the Owhanake long-term carpark leased at a peppercorn to Auckland Transport, and Watercare’s wastewater treatment plant which treats sewage from Oneroa businesses which are connected to it.

47. Watercare considers the non-treatment plant part of the site which contains the carpark (approx. 3.6ha) to be surplus to requirements and is in discussion with Auckland Transport about transferring this area to Auckland Transport. A plan showing the area being considered for transfer is included at Attachment D. The transfer would occur at a market rate and Watercare expects it to be completed before June 2018.

48. Transfer of this 3.6 hectare from Watercare to Auckland Transport at market value may have an impact on Auckland Transport’s ten-year budget bid from which investment in implementing Mātiatia Strategic Plan transport outcomes would be funded. It is expected these matters will be clarified in the next few months.

49. Vehicle access to the treatment plant has historically been provided via the adjoining Owhanake Scenic Reserve at 67 Ocean View Road which is a local park under the Waiheke Local Board’s decision-making authority. Watercare intends to seek an easement over the reserve to formalize vehicle access and this will come to the board for consideration.

Trial tour-vehicle parking area

50. With effect from 1 February 2018, a trial tour-vehicle parking area was established by the local board and Auckland Transport next to the Harbourmasters building for use by all pre-booked vehicles which currently use the keyhole. The purpose of the trial is two-fold. Firstly, it aims at reducing congestion in the keyhole that has been experienced during the busy summer peak times and secondly, it seeks to test the value and effectiveness of orienting some activities away from the wharf.

51. Use of the keyhole has and is expected to increase as more visitors come to the island and existing vehicle support services grow or new ones establish. Auckland Transport and the board have agreed to restrict the use of the keyhole to small passenger service (SPS) vehicles and Auckland Transport Metro buses. Under legislative change effective 1 October 2017, SPS vehicles carry no more than twelve passengers and are available for hire, so these are principally taxis and shuttles.

52. Trialling a tour-vehicle parking area away from the keyhole is consistent with previous strategic plans for Mātiatia and the board’s aspirations to activate more public facing commercial activity near the Harbourmaster’s building. The success or otherwise of this trial will assist in options being considered during the development of the Mātiatia Strategic Plan.

53. Trial commencement on 1 February 2018 is later than anticipated due to delays in lining up all elements. The trial will run for around three months. Monitoring and review of the use of the area along with operator feedback will help determine next steps. Public parking lost by the establishment of this tour-vehicle area is being replaced by a reduction in the parking area leased to Waiheke Rentals.

Auckland Council planning support for Mātiatia and Waiheke planning

54. From a planning perspective, what can and can’t be done at Mātiatia is governed by provisions of the Operative Hauraki Gulf Islands District Plan 2013 (HGIDP). Mātiatia has its own land unit in the HGIDP covering all council owned land in the bay and the small triangle of private land on the northern side of Oceanview Road (see map at Attachment E). The land unit contains policies for transport, mixed use development and to ensure the area’s landscape character, Maori heritage values and natural features are maintained. Activity is provided for as follows:

· a transport area directly inland of the wharf for buses, taxis and wharf activities

· a mixed-use area covering the rest of the valley floor allowing residential and visitor development such as dwellings, carparks, retail, offices, restaurants, visitor accommodation, function facilities etc. Maximum building height is generally 8m with an allowance for up to 13m in the southern part of the area under certain circumstances

· a wetland area preserving the functions of the existing wetland at the rear of the bay.

55. The lack of an agreed plan for Mātiatia has meant no development proposals for public land have been put forward and so the appropriateness of the HGIDP provisions hasn’t been tested. However, the aspirations of the Waiheke community and the history of this area since public purchase in 2005 suggest that these planning provisions may well no longer be suitable.

56. Auckland Council intends to integrate the HGIDP into the Auckland Unitary Plan in future years and to this end its North-West Plans and Places team has begun engaging with the local board. As part of these discussions, the team has offered to lead on the development of an area plan; a non-statutory plan for the island that can help inform content for the unitary plan process. It is likely an area plan would cover the whole of Waiheke and more detailed precinct planning work may be used for places such as Mātiatia.

57. Officers and the board have agreed that the Plans and Places team will assist the board and Direction Mātiatia Inc. in providing planning advice and support for the development of the Mātiatia Strategic Plan. This will fill a potential gap in the project and enable the document to be better linked to, and relevant for the subsequent unitary plan process.

Visitor Levy

58. The Waiheke Local Board Plan 2017 and Essentially Waiheke both promote the idea of establishing a visitor levy to fund infrastructure impacted by the large and increasing numbers of visitors that come to Waiheke each year. Recent mobile phone and credit card data suggest that around 1.4 million visitors came to Waiheke last year. If a levy was (say) $1 per visitor, it would collect $1.4 million. $2 per visitor would collect $2.4million.

59. Work to investigate this idea will commence this year and include regulatory and collection mechanisms. Such a levy might be able to fund some development aspects of the Mātiatia Strategic Plan and assist with any funding gap to realise all key strategic plan outcomes.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe / Local impacts and local board views

60. The Waiheke Local Board is funding and leading the development of the Mātiatia Strategic Plan and has agreed to seek plan implementation capital funding as its number one priority in the ten-year plan. As noted above, a delegation to the local board to enable it to make key decisions on Mātiatia is considered to be essential if a Mātiatia plan with widespread Waiheke community support is to be delivered and if subsequent implementation is to be achieved. This relies both on resources being available and a cooperative approach being taken, both of which have and continue to be issues to some extent.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

61. This report seeks local board agreement to a partnership with Ngāti Paoa on Mātiatia plan development and implementation. Such a partnership would reflect mana whenua status, add value to the outcomes at Mātiatia and assist in building a working relationship between the parties.

62. As noted above, Ngāti Paoa has undertaken a project to identify what interests it has over public land in the Mātiatia Bay and what its aspirations for this are. This forms a key input into the strategic plan project and will help guide strategic plan land-use, planning and development decisions.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

63. The local board is funding development of the Mātiatia Strategic Plan. It is also funding various elements of some projects listed above such as the formation of the tour-vehicle carpark and any shortfall in funding associated with its request that decisions on Harbourmaster leases to come under the local board.

64. No funding is in place to implement outcomes agreed in the strategic plan. Auckland Transport is seeking funding for agreed transport outcomes for Mātiatia and the local board is seeking funding for non-transport outcomes, as part of the Auckland Council and Auckland Transport ten-year plan processes. Actual funding levels will be known in June/July 2018. The implications of this funding not being available are discussed in the risks section below.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

65. The following risks associated with matters covered in this report have been identified:

· the community/council can’t agree on a plan for Mātiatia

· there is inadequate leadership to develop an agreed plan or drive its implementation

· adequate funding is not available to implement the plan.

66. There is a risk that the community won’t agree on or support the content of a final Mātiatia Strategic Plan. There is a long history of disagreement about whether, where and how to develop the Mātiatia Bay and there are strong competing interests that the Mātiatia plan will seek to bring together. These risks should be reduced given that the plan is being developed by a community group under the leadership of the local board. Alignment of the plan with the vision and direction from Essentially Waiheke will assist with success.

67. A bigger risk exists with plan implementation. If decision-making for plan implementation is delegated to the local board and adequate funding is available over the life of the Auckland Council/Auckland Transport ten-year plans, then implementation of the strategic plan is much more likely. Either of those not being in place will make this a more significant risk.

68. Associated with this is the legacy Auckland City Council expectation for a return on the $12.5 million ratepayer investment from the purchase of the Mātiatia Bay land in 2005. It is considered that this matter needs to be resolved as part the local board’s request to the Governing Body for a delegation to make decisions over the Panuku-managed land in the bay.

69. If alternative funding mechanisms are needed, then all options will need to be on the table. If a visitor levy to fund infrastructure impacted by increasing visitor numbers to Waiheke is implemented, this may provide additional funding that can be used to achieve some agreed Mātiatia outcomes. The extent of commercial development at Mātiatia will also need to be agreed and this is linked to the coming district plan integration into the Auckland Unitary Plan. Other options such as a targeted rate could be considered which would test the strength of community support to resolve Mātiatia issues.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

70. Subject to key inputs identified above, including from Auckland Transport and Ngāti Paoa, being delivered as planned, Direction Mātiatia Inc. will be able to progress Stages 3 and 4 of the Mātiatia Strategic Plan in the next few months. Once a draft plan is developed and agreed with the Waiheke Local Board, in discussion with the stakeholder group, this will then be publicly consulted on.

71. Requests for funding to deliver agreed Mātiatia plan outcomes by Auckland Transport and Auckland Council through their respective ten-year plans, and in which year(s) will be known by June/July 2018. This will then determine plan implementation opportunities and constraints.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Attachment A - Matiatia Public Land Management Agencies	87
b ⇩	Attachment B - Matiatia Community Survey Analysis Report October 2017	89
c ⇩	Attachment C - Matiatia Community Survey Report Appendices October 2017	103
d ⇩	Attachment D - Plans showing Watercare surplus land at 65 Oceanview Rd	141
e ⇩	Attachment E - HGI District Plan Matiatia development area plan	143

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author	John Nash - Programme Manager,Waiheke & Gulf Islands
Authoriser	Phil Wilson - Governance Director

Waiheke Local Board

22 February 2018

Landowner approval for new infrastructure to be installed by Waiheke United Football Club on Onetangi Sports Park

File No.: CP2018/00972

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To approve the landowner approval application for the construction of new infrastructure on the Onetangi Sports Park by the Waiheke United Football Club.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. An application has been received from the Waiheke United Football Club for the construction of new infrastructure at Onetangi Sports Park including a storage container, and concrete pads for transportable shelters.

3. The construction of the new infrastructure will help to improve the club’s use of the park without impinging on the public’s use or enjoyment of the area.

4. The recommendation is for the Waiheke Local Board to approve the three applications for the landowner approval from the Waiheke United Football Club.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendations

That the Waiheke Local Board:

a) approve the landowner approval application for the concrete pads on site.

b) approve the landowner approval application for the storage container on site.

Horopaki / Context

5. The Waiheke United Football Club has been accepted to compete in the Northern League First Division in 2018. As part of the conditions of entry they are required to have shelter on site for coaches and players.

6. The applicant has proposed laying two concrete pads sized two metres by five metres on which the portable shelters can be positioned. However, the shelter structure itself can be removed when not in use by the club.

7. The concrete pads would be located between the car park area and the football field as shown in Appendix A.

8. Without the addition of the concrete pads, it is likely that the floor areas of the shelters will become muddy and wet over time. This would be a negative outcome for the park, as it would mean that the space becomes unusable by the public, whereas concrete pads can still be used by the public when not in use by the football club.

9. In future, if it is decided that the concrete pads are no longer needed by the club, they could easily be removed and the ground reinstated to better or existing condition.

Storage container

10. The applicant has stated the need for more storage on site for their junior players due to the increase in the number of teams this year. They have requested approval for a storage container to be placed on site.

11. The applicant has proposed locating the storage container close to pitch 3 which is where the junior players train. This puts it out of view for spectators watching a game on pitch 1, or from the pavilion.

12. The storage container location has been approved by the Westpac helicopter Trust, and will have reflective strips attached to the edges to allow helicopter pilots to see the container at night time when they are landing on site. This removes any health and safety concerns.

13. A condition will be added to the landowner approval to clad the exterior of the container in wood panelling approved by the Waiheke Local Board to reduce negative impact on the visual amenity of the park. The cladding would effectively minimise the industrial look of the container, and can be painted in a colour approved by the Waiheke Local Board, and that fits in with the surroundings at the Onetangi Sports Park.

14. The storage container would be placed on timber runners rather than a concrete pad, which means that it can easily be moved to another location on site if deemed necessary in future, or alternatively removed from site if no longer required. Full reinstatement of the ground would be undertaken in these cases.

15. The applicant may need a resource consent or building consent to install the storage container on site as the storage container is a semi-permanent structure.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

16. The Parks and Places Specialist supports both applications for the infrastructure on site, and has liaised with the Sport Parks team in regards to this.

17. The Land Use Advisor supports both applications for the infrastructure on site as it will improve the club’s use of the area while minimising any negative impacts on the sports park.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe /
Local impacts and local board views

18. The board has the authority to determine matters requiring landowner approval.

19. The board has not provided their views on this application prior to this report.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

20. The proposal does not trigger the council’s Significance and Engagement Policy and no iwi engagement has taken place.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

21. There would be no financial implications to the Waiheke Local Board or council from the construction of this infrastructure on site.

22. Maintaining the status quo would mean ongoing maintenance costs where the ground gets muddy overtime. Whereas the installation of the concrete pads and removes this risk and cost to council.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

23. There are no foreseeable risks to the Waiheke Local Board in approving the infrastructure on site at the Onetangi Sports Park.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

24. The Waiheke United Football Club would be looking to install the infrastructure on site prior to the upcoming 2018 football season.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Attachment A Site Plan	149

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Nikki Clendinning - Land Use Advisor

Authorisers

Rod Sheridan - General Manager Community Facilities

Helgard Wagener - Relationship Manager Great Barrier and Waiheke Local Boards

Waiheke Local Board

22 February 2018

Wharetana Bay concept plan

File No.: CP2017/24200

Purpose

1. To approve the Wharetana Bay Concept Plan and seek the Waiheke Local Board’s views on its implementation.

Executive summary

2. The Wharetana Bay Concept Plan has been developed in response to concerns about perceived privatisation of the Wharetana Bay reserve. It sets out actions which will make the boundaries of the reserve clear, protect and recognise history within the bay, return the area with pine trees to bush and improve public use of the reserve.

3. Because of the coastal and archaeological values of the reserve, it is expected the costs of implementing the concept plan will be considerable as there is a need to closely follow cultural, heritage and planning protocols before commencing work.

Recommendations

That the Waiheke Local Board:

a) approve the Wharetana Bay concept plan.

b) note that the anticipated cost of design and consent for the recommended works is expected to be between $20,000 and $30,000, due to consent and compliance processes and advises whether it wishes to allocate funding from its Local Driven Initiative opex budget for this purpose.

Comments

Location

4. Wharetana Bay is a small west-facing bay on the Te Whau peninsula on Waiheke Island. The bay has a rich history with buildings, graves, archaeology and a historic well site. It has a shelly, tidal beach with a sandspit and lagoon at one end and a flat, grassy reserve by the foreshore. The bay can be accessed by a public walking track from Rothschild Terrace or at low tide from Okoka Bay.

Issues within the bay

5. Wharetana Bay has been a focus for the community since the 2011 development of a neighbouring private property at 88 Vintage Lane. This included the location of a building immediately next to the flat grassy reserve area in the bay. Some parties felt the proximity of the new building to the reserve and the lawn-like nature of the grassed area makes this part of the reserve appear private and inhibits the public use of the bay.

6. The Waiheke Local Board wishes to address these issues and to recognise and protect the historic values and other features of the reserve. At its March 2016 business meeting the board allocated $10,000 to develop a concept plan to address these concerns.

Objectives of the plan

7. The board has funded the development of a concept plan (Appendix 1 – Wharetana Bay Concept Plan) that identifies details and costs of future improvements to Te Whau Esplanade Reserve within Wharetana Bay. The objectives of the plan are:

· make the boundaries clear

· recommend landscaping work where necessary

· protect and recognise the history in the reserve

· return the area with pine trees to native bush over time

· increase public use of the reserve, including:

o access

o signage

o park furniture and other assets

8. The concept plan outlines a number of actions and potential projects within the bay which would help achieve these objectives.

Consultation

9. Consultation with neighbours and interested parties was a key part of the development of the plan. During March 2017, each interested neighbour was interviewed prior to the development of the plan. They were then asked for feedback on the first draft of the plan. On 1 May 2017 the Waiheke Local Board held a meeting for neighbours and interested parties in an effort to obtain a consensus on reserve development. During May 2017 members of the same group each gave feedback on a second draft of the plan. Following this a third draft of the plan was developed.

10. By the third draft, nearly all elements of the plan had broad support. The exceptions were the placing of an entrance from 88 Vintage Lane to the reserve, where support was split between two different locations and the choice between low planting and a two meter fence along the boundary with 88 Vintage Lane, with the majority supporting the low planting option.

11. The owners of 88 Vintage Lane gave feedback on the first and second drafts of the concept plan, helping shape its contents. However, they decided to withdraw their support for the concept plan and its contents at the end of the consultation process.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

12. The Waiheke Local Board commenced this project as a way of resolving the issues it had seen and heard about with the reserve at Wharetana Bay. The concept plan development process has been more protracted and complex than anticipated. The board has also been made aware that the process and costs of implementing the plan are considerable and this raises the question of whether implementation is realistic. It now needs to balance the costs of due process and the implementation of works with the ongoing confusion of visitors and tension amongst neighbours of the reserve.

Māori impact statement

13. Heritage is of fundamental importance to Tangata Whenua, their culture and traditions established through Whakapapa. Mana Whenua were consulted on the plan and Ngati Paoa have proposed that a cultural values assessment would be necessary before any detailed design, consent or implementation phases begin.

Implementation

14. Implementation of the plan is likely to be staged as follows:

· commission cultural values assessment ($5,000-$10,000)

· commission archaeological report (and heritage plan if necessary - $5,000-$10,000)

· determine which actions are to be progressed/funded over a five-year period

· commission detailed design for actions to be progressed ($2,000-$20,000)

· apply for resource consent for works ($5,000)

· fund implementation projects over following years ($2,000-$140,000 depending on scope).

15. A three-stage approach to implementation of the works in the reserve is recommend:

Stage 1 – Establish access and planting for privacy (approx. $10,000)

· Planting in grassed area and on boundary, signage, make well safe and clear fallen pines from beach

Stage 2 – Improve visitor experience (approx. $30,000)

· Install steps to grave site, interpretive signage, directional signage

Stage 3 – Restoration (up to $100,000)

· Remove pines, replace with native trees and construct all-tide track.

16. Due to the requirement for a cultural values assessment, archaeological survey, heritage management plan and resource consent, it is anticipated that the design and consenting stage will cost around $25,000 to enable any work on the reserve.

17. The owners of 88 Vintage Lane have indicated that they will be seeking to ensure that concept plan implementation follows due process noting that they have had to follow such processes to obtain consent for their development.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Wharetana Bay concept plan	155

Signatories

Author

Gary Wilton - Parks and Places Specialist

Authorisers

Mace Ward - General Manager Parks, Sports and Recreation

Helgard Wagener - Relationship Manager Great Barrier and Waiheke Local Boards

Waiheke Local Board

22 February 2018

Auckland Council’s Quarterly Performance Report: Waiheke Local Board for quarter two, 1 October - 31 December 2017

File No.: CP2018/01117

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To provide the Waiheke Local Board with an integrated quarterly performance report for quarter two, 1 October - 31 December 2017.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / 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. Of significance this quarter:

· finalisation and printing of the 2017 Waiheke Local Board Plan

· the Waiheke Christmas celebration on Sunday, 9 December 2017

· swimming pool investigations

· progress on the Matiatia planning project.

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

5. All operating departments with agreed work programmes have provided a quarterly update against their work programme delivery. The majority of activities are reported with a status of green (on track). The following activities are reported with a status of red (significantly behind budget/time or achievement of outcomes).

· Red - Te Ara Hura – Pearl Bay to Orapiu Road (ID3217): This project has been placed on hold due to legal issues with the proposed easement remaining unsolved.

· Red - 530 Orapiu Road track installation (ID3420): On ‘red’ status due to encroachment issues that are being negotiated.

· Red - Little Oneroa Playground renewal (ID2110): Project on hold pending decisions on the final master plan for Little Oneroa Reserve.

· Red – Renew eastern trials (ID2116): Project record has been merged with Waiheke renew path, structures and eastern trials (ID2113). Note: this is not a cancellation of project works and there is no loss of budget as a result of the merge.

Further details on these activities are included within this report.

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

· Overall, the net operational financial performance of the board is tracking at 109 per cent of revised budget for the year to date. Revenue is tracking right on year to date budget and should be on budget at year end. Delivery of the capital expenditure programme is currently at 76 per cent against the year to date revised budget and projects underway include the Artworks building roof replacement, Artworks HVAC renewal, signage on walkways and various walkway and track renewals across the island.

7. The key performance indicators show a trend of delivery that is failing to meet the indicators, particularly in the areas of venue utilisation, provision of sports fields, parks and reserves, and the grant/funding processes. This is explained in further detail in attachment D.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation

That the Waiheke Local Board:

a) receive the performance report for the financial quarter ending 31 December 2017.

Horopaki / Context

8. The Waiheke Local Board has an approved 2017/2018 work programme for the following operating departments:

· Arts, Community and Events; approved on 25 May 2017

· Parks, Sport and Recreation; approved on 25 May 2017

· Libraries and Information; approved on 1 June 2017

· Community Facilities and Leases: approved on 1 June 2017

· Infrastructure and Environmental Services; approved on 1 June 2017.

9. The work programmes are aligned to the 2014 Waiheke Local Board Plan.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

10. The Waiheke Local Board has a number of key achievements to report from the quarter two period.

· Finalisation and printing of the 2017 Waiheke Local Board Plan.

· Adoption of the Waiheke Local Board Annual Budget consultation material.

· Progress on the Matiatia planning project including release of survey results, relocation of transport operators and negotiation of lease arrangements.

· Confirmation of Waiheke RSA taking over bookings of the Ostend War Memorial Hall to improve accessibility for the community.

· The Waiheke Christmas celebration took place on Sunday, 9 December 2017. This included creation of a new night market at the Artworks courtyard, performances from youth music groups, a record number of float entries and sponsorship and business donations, and an improved Santa parade route.

· Progressing swimming pool investigations.

· Re-establishment of the Rangihoua and Tawaipareira Management Committee, a kaitiaki co-governance committee between the council and Ngāti Paoa for Tawaipareira Reserve and the Te Rangihoua manga.

· A wildlife contractor with a trained dog located an additional 25 penguin burrows during the October Coastal Bird Survey.

· Working with the Healthy Waters team on a number of initiatives due to community water supply concerns. This included water conservation flyers, promotion of council facilities supplying potable water, delivery logistics, consenting and aquafer monitoring. The board will continue to work with the team to ensure there is greater resilience in the supply and distribution of potable water on the island.

· Liaising with the Healthy Waters team and Auckland Transport to resolve flooding in the Moa Avenue area of Blackpool beach by upgrading the current stormwater network service. (Note this is a regional stormwater project).

Key project updates from the 2017/2018 work programme

11. The following are progress updates against key projects identified in the Waiheke Local Board Plan and/or Local Board Agreement (refer to attachment B for further details):

Community Services - Arts, Community and Events

12. There are some points to note for this period.

13. The Waiheke Youth Voice (ID595) collaborated with the Waiheke Library and Piritahi Ora Hau to raise awareness around mental health and promote the dangers of drug use. They also promoted and sought volunteers for the Santa Parade and supported youth involvement in the Waiheke Adult Learning driving programme.

14. An initiative to improve accessibility of community halls has resulted in the Waiheke RSA taking over the bookings for the Ostend War Memorial Hall.

15. The successful Waiheke Christmas celebration (ID331) took place on Sunday, 9 December 2017 (see further information above).

16. The board allocated $3,000 to Piritahi Marae from the Local Maori Responsiveness budget (ID744) to support the Waitangi Day celebration on 6 February.

17. Findings and recommendations from the rest home level care facility study were presented to the board. The research concluded that there is a high level of demand on Waiheke, for both rest home and semi-independent living facilities, and provides evidence of need for future providers.

18. The Artworks needs assessment project continues including interviews, online surveys and two community hui at the Waiheke Library and Piritahi Marae. A workshop to present the draft report to the board will be held in quarter three.

19. During this quarter the Artworks Theatre attracted 4,220 visitors from 28 performances and the Waiheke Community Art Gallery attracted 15,945 visitors and hosted 11 exhibitions featuring works by 200 artists.

20. The board endorsed a proposal to establish the International Network of Sustainable Tourism Observatories (INSTO) initiative and approved $9,000 to support the project.

Community Facilities

21. Renew path and structures (ID2113) – Kuakarau Bay, Musson, Tin Boat Reserve and Wharf Road tracks have resource consents lodged and tenders for physical works will begin once finalised. The Matiatia-Owhanake track work is in investigation stage. (Note: Project line has been merged with “Renew eastern trials (ID2116)).

22. Funding was approved to install Te Rerenga Wai o Takapa Mo a Chris Bailey sculpture gifted from Headland Sculpture on the Gulf, to be located at McKenzie Reserve.

23. The board approved $64,000 towards a community delivered project to build a rock revetment sea wall at Picnic Bay. The board were advised following this decision that the total sought by the community group was $65,000. The board have agreed in principle to fund the additional $1,000 and a resolution under this report would be appropriate.

24. $50,000 for drainage infrastructure improvements to address stability and slumping issues at Picnic Bay reserve.

25. Te Ara Hura – interpretation signage (ID3238): Feedback is due from Ngati Paoa by the end of December and the final design will be presented to the board in February.

26. Alison Park water bore reinstatement (ID3239): Funding has been approved to progress stage one design and consent. A follow-up report is due to the board early 2018.

27. Onetangi Domain – develop lighting (ID2112): This project is no longer on hold following meeting with the board and the Football Club. Concept plans and upgrade options for field two or field three are being developed.

28. Funding of up to $20,000 has been approved to progress design and consent for the Artworks Theatre new fire escape doors and stairs.

Libraries and Information

29. There are some points to note:

· Library visits have decreased compared to the same quarter last year. Library staff have noted that the general use of the library is now settling into a regular pattern following increased use due to the “newness” of the building. They’ve also noted they will be focusing on improving the standard of the collection this financial year.

· Borrowing of physical items has decreased seven percent compared to the same quarter last year.

· The use of e-books has increased and regionally is now over 12 per cent of issues. E-book usage statistics for individual libraries are not readily available; however we can assume that Waiheke’s e-book percentage has grown along with the regional trend.

· 25 Wriggle and Rhyme (ID1333) and two school holiday events were delivered during this period.

· Kia Māia te Whai / Dare to Explore (ID1335) reading programme has 200 children enrolled at the end of December.

Infrastructure and Environmental Services

30. Coastal Bird Survey for Local Dog Access Review (ID2038): A wildlife contractor with a trained dog located another 25 penguin burrows during the October survey. This brings the total of penguin burrows located to 95. Further details will be reported to the board in quarter three.

31. The ecological survey of proposed marine reserves on Waiheke was finalised and presented to the board in October. The results of the survey will be available for future marine reserve research purposes.

32. Little Oneroa Project (ID720): Advisory meetings hosted by the Waiheke Resources Trust included a workshop on the voluntary targeted rate septic scheme.

Parks, Sports and Recreation

33. Matiatia planning project (ID789): The board have been liaising with Auckland Transport and Panuku Development Auckland to relocate transport operators (including the Explorer buses) from the keyhole to the Matiatia carpark. Negotiation has occurred with a carpark lease holder to ensure there is no reduction of public carparks as a result of the relocation. The board has also confirmed Matiatia as being their priority advocacy area to the Governing Body. A status report will be presented to the board’s February meeting.

34. Ecological restoration community partnership programme (ID791): Waiheke Resources Trust have commenced weed control and plant releasing across four sites (Rangihoua, Te Whau, Matiatia and Te Matuku) and are providing monthly reports to the council’s project team on work hours and tasks completed.

35. Walking and cycling promotion (ID792): A programme for a cycling festival has been developed and staff have approached a local cycling group seeking a partnership to deliver a series of events.

36. Ecological volunteers and environmental programme: Volunteer projects underway during this period included a joint working group for Alison Park, the Ratbusters programme at Tin Boat Reserve, ecological restoration at McKenzie Reserve, and mountain-bike club works at the Onetangi Sports Park.

37. Swimming pool (ID1947): Staff have been liaising with local board members and the Ministry of Education to discuss a potential location between the primary and secondary schools. During this quarter funding was approved engage architects to undertake a bulk and location assessment and provide high level location options for the pool.

Key performance indicators

38. 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 Waiheke Local Board’s measures, showing how we are tracking after the second quarter of FY18.

39. The year-end outlook is that 47 per cent of measures will not achieve target.

40. Currently all performance measures are being reviewed as part of the development of the 2018-2028 Long-term Plan.

41. For the first and second quarter we will be providing the year-end outlook based on the results of 2016/17 or for any changes to the outlook based on results available. In the third quarter we will be in a better position to accurately project the year-end outlook for all measures. This is because the frequency of most measures is annual as data is collected through surveys.

42. Attachment D contains further detailed key performance indicator information.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe /
Local impacts and local board views

43. This report informs the Waiheke Local Board of the performance for the quarter ending 31 December 2017.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

44. The Matiatia planning project (ID789) is progressing in partnership with Ngāti Paoa representatives. The project aims to prepare a strategic plan for Matiatia which reflects the aspirations of the Waiheke community and also respects the interests and rights of mana whenua for the future use of that land. The Cultural Values Assessment for Matiatia (prepared by Ngāti Paoa Iwi Trust for the council) is a key document in this process.

45. Funding was allocated to Piritahi Marae to support the Waitangi Day celebration on 6 February 2018 (Local Maori Responsiveness ID744).

46. During this quarter the board re-established the Rangihoua and Tawaipareira Management Committee, a kaitiaki co-governance committee between the council and Ngāti Paoa overseeing control and management of Tawaipareira Reserve and the Te Rangihoua manga.

Financial performance

47. Operating expenditure year to date is slightly over budget overall, predominantly due to the implementation of the Project 17 full facilities contract and the spread of costs over the region. A full year of costings will be required to more accurately budget in this area.

48. The revenue relating to community venues is right on track with budget.

49. Capital spend of $589,000 is $188,000 less than anticipated by budget although a number of projects are underway or completed, including the Artworks building roof replacement, Artworks HVAC renewal, signage on walkways and various walkway and track renewals across the island.

50. Attachment C contains further detailed financial information.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

51. This report is for information only therefore has no financial implications.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

52. The following risks have been identified by operating departments where the progress and performance indicator has been reported as amber (some risk or issues, which are being managed) or red (significantly behind budget/time or achievement of outcomes).

· Ara Hura Pearl Bay to Orapiu Track (ID3217): Project is on ‘red’ status due to proposed easements that haven’t yet been resolved. Legal confirmation of the easement is awaited. Once the easement is confirmed, design and consent will commence.

· 530 Orapiu Road track installation (ID3420): Project on ‘red’ status due to encroachment issues. The project cannot proceed until these issues have been resolved. Negotiations with the resident are continuing.

· Little Oneroa Playground renewal (ID2110): Project on hold pending decisions on the final master plan for Little Oneroa Reserve. Board have requested the master plan be confirmed and construction ready to go by late summer / early winter.

· Renew eastern trials (ID2116): Project record has been merged with Waiheke renew path, structures and eastern trials (ID2113). Note: this is not a cancellation of project works and there is no loss of budget as a result of the merge.

· Catherine Mitchell Cultural Society – install drainage (ID3293): This project is on ‘amber’ status awaiting completion of curb and channel works by Auckland Transport which may resolve the issue.

· Pest management – community delivered projects (ID2015): This budget has been partially allocated to appoint a facilitator to assist the Waiheke Collective prepare a pest free strategic action plan ($15,000) and to support the giant kokopu protection project ($10,000). Project is on ‘amber’ status awaiting direction from the board for allocation of the remaining $15,000. A report is due to the February board meeting.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

53. The local board will receive the next performance update following the end of quarter three, March 2018.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Work programme snapshot	205
b ⇩	Work programme update	207
c ⇩	Financial performance	219
d ⇩	Key performance indicators	225

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author	Janine Geddes - Senior Local Board Advisor Waiheke
Authoriser	Helgard Wagener - Relationship Manager Great Barrier and Waiheke Local Boards

Chairperson	Paul Walden
Deputy Chairperson	Cath Handley
Members	Shirin Brown
	John Meeuwsen
	Bob Upchurch

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	20171207 Waiheke Local Board Workshop proceedings	245
b ⇩	20171214 Waiheke Local Board Workshop proceedings	247
c ⇩	20171221 Waiheke Local Board Workshop proceedings	249
d ⇩	20180208 Waiheke Local Board Workshop proceedings	251

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Resource consent applications received from 2 to 8 December 2017	261
b ⇩	Resource consent applications received from 9 to 15 December 2017	263
c ⇩	Resource consent applications received from 15 to 22 December 2017	265
d ⇩	Resource consent applications received from 5 to 12 January 2018	267
e ⇩	Resource consent applications received from 13 to 19 January 2018	269
f ⇩	Resource consent applications received from 20 to 26 January 2018	271
g ⇩	Resource consent applications received from 27 January to 2 February 2018	273
h ⇩	Resource consent applications received from 3 to 9 February 2018	275

Author	Mark Inglis - Local Board Advisor
Authoriser	Helgard Wagener - Relationship Manager Great Barrier and Waiheke Local Boards