Agenda of Puketāpapa Local Board

Puketāpapa Local Board

17 May 2018

Auckland Transport's Monthly Update

File No.: CP2018/07371

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To provide a progress update to the Puketāpapa Local Board (the Board) on its current transport capital fund projects.

2. It also provides information on other transport related activities in the Board area, including decisions of Auckland Transport’s (AT) traffic control committee, consultations sent to the Board for comment and AT’s Quarterly report to the Board is appended as an attachment.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

3. Included in the report is a short update on the progress of the Mt Roskill Safer Communities project.

4. This report provides an update on the Board’s transport capital fund projects to date, together with financial information.

5. Any reporting on consultations sent to the Board for feedback is noted along with relevant decisions of AT’s Traffic Control Committee.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) receive Auckland Transport’s monthly update for May 2018

Horopaki / ContextLocal Board Transport Capital Fund

6. The Puketāpapa Local Board’s projects are summarised in the table below:

Project	Description	Status	Projected Cost
Fearon Park Pathway	A shared path to be constructed through Fearon Park.	This is being managed by Auckland Council Community Facilities. First stage of the greenway path is complete and the second section of the pathway by the playground will be completed by June 2018.	$190,000
Richardson Road carpark realignment and Lighting project	A project to shift parking in the carpark to facilitate the construction of a shared path past the kindergarten. This will complete the missing link in the Mt Roskill safe route scheme.	This project is being delivered by Auckland Council Community Facilities who advise that a consent application is in progress.	$220,000
Keith Hay Park Lighting – Southern Section	Continuing the lighting project from the northern section to the southern end of the park past Noton Road carpark to Richardson Road.	This project is being delivered by Auckland Council Community Facilities who advise that they are in discussions with the affected stakeholders as to their preferred delivery timing. Delivery of this project is likely later in this calendar year.	$350,000
Smart Studs	Installation of flashing studs at the pedestrian zebra on Mt Albert Rd, vicinity of Three Kings Plaza.	Financial resourcing for this project was agreed in February 2018. Project is in design.	$60,000
Greenway Cycling Project – Route D (modified)	This route includes shared paths on Frost Road and then a combination of traffic calming measures, signs, markings along Britton and Dornwell Roads, shared paths through the laneways and then traffic calming on Hayr Road and Haughey Avenue through to, but not across Hillsborough Rd. It avoids the Hayr/Dornwell/Mt Albert Rds intersection.	Financial resourcing for this project was agreed in March 2018.	$600,000
Tetra Trap Installation	Working to improve water quality in the Oakley Creek catchment area.	Advice from Healthy Waters included installation of 25 tetra traps in catchpits in the Gifford Avenue area. This project is on hold until Board funding becomes available.	$30,000

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

Regional Land Transport Plan (RLTP)

7. The Regional Land Transport Plan (RLTP) is a plan of how transport delivery agencies intend to respond to growth and other challenges facing Auckland over the next 10 years.

8. It is informed by the new version of the Auckland Transport Alignment Project (ATAP) which was announced on 26 April 2018; the Governments’ draft Policy statement on transport and the Auckland Plan. Aligning the documents has led to a delay in delivery of the RLTP 2018–28. Statutory requirements dictate that the RLTP must be adopted by 30 June 2018, so only a short period is available for public consultation.

9. Local Boards have an opportunity to present verbally to the Regional Land Transport Committee in May as well as to make written submissions to the new document which reflects central governments priority for transport delivery in Auckland. Aucklanders are also encouraged to put their views forward on a regional fuel tax.

Mt Roskill Safer Communities Project

10. Earlier this year, AT’s Road Safety Team carried out an external engagement with the Mt Roskill Community to identify locations where locals are expressing concerns about safety, especially when crossing roads and walking and cycling.

The focus areas identified from the engagement and AT’s observations are:

· Carr Road,

· Mt Albert Rd (Three Kings Plaza),

· Intersection of Carr Road/Frost Road,

· Intersection of Carr Road/Hayr Road and

· Intersection of Mt Albert Rd/Dornwell Rd/Hayr Road.

11. AT is developing some concepts for improvements at these locations and discussed these with the Board in April. It is our intention to go back to the community with these ideas in May to invite comment.

Traffic Control Committee (TCC) report

12. There were four decisions of the Traffic Control Committee that affected the Puketapapa Local Board area in April 2018.

Street/Area	Description	Work	Decision
Mount Albert Road, Mt Roskill	Permanent Traffic and Parking changes combined	Lane Arrow Markings, No Stopping At All Times, Bus Stop, Bus Shelter, Flush Median, Edge Lines	Carried
Mount Albert Road, Peet Avenue, Royal Oak	Permanent Traffic and Parking changes combined	Lane Arrow Markings, No Stopping At All Times, Clearway, Bus Stop, Stop Control, No Passing, Flush Median	Carried
Mount Albert Road, May Road, Mt Roskill	Permanent Traffic and Parking changes combined	Lane Arrow Markings, No Stopping At All Times, Bus Stop, Bus Shelter, Traffic Island, Stop Control, Flush Median, Edge Lines	Carried
Richardson Road, Rogan Street, Staveley Avenue, Whitmore Road	Permanent Traffic and Parking changes combined	No Stopping At All Times, Bus Stop, Bus Shelter, Rescinded, Stop Control, Edge Lines	Carried

Consultation Items

13. Auckland Transport provides the Board with the opportunity to comment on transport projects being delivered in its Local Board Area.

14. In this reporting period, one consultation was sent to the Board.

Commodore Drive, Lynfield

AT is proposing the extension of existing broken yellow lines (no stopping at all times parking restrictions) on the eastern side of Commodore Drive near the intersection with Hillsborough Road. These changes are proposed as vehicles parked at this location are causing traffic turning left onto Commodore Drive from Hillsborough Road to track too close to, and sometimes over a recently constructed pedestrian refuge island. This proposal includes the removal of approximately three parking spaces.

Dominion Road Extn

AT Metro is currently investigating a design for a new bus layover on Dominion Road Extension.

This layover will serve the 27H route. This bus stop is on the eastern side of Dominion Rd just before the intersection with Hillsborough Rd. Buses on route 25L will use the stop on the way to Lynfield. Buses running outbound on route 27W will terminate at the stop, lay-up, then run inbound on service 27H.

Quarterly Reporting January to March 2018

15. The following quarterly report material is attached to this monthly report:

· Attachment A – report from Auckland Transport departments on their activities in the Puketapapa Local Board area and regionally over the last quarter (January to March 2018).

· Attachment B – report on Travelwise Schools activities in the Puketapapa Local Board area over the last quarter.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

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

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

17. The Puketapapa Local Board has discretionary funding available for transport related capital projects in its Board area of just over two million dollars.

Financial Summary

Puketapapa Local Board Transport Capital Fund Financial Summary
Total Funds Available in current political term	2,064,658
Amount committed to date on projects approved for design and/or construction	2,025,339
Remaining Budget left	$39,319

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

18. No risks were identified during the preparation of this report.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Auckland Transport’s Quarterly report	31
b ⇩	January-March 2018 Travelwise Schools report	41

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Lorna Stewart, Elected Member Relationship Manager

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon, Manager Elected Member Relationship Unit

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

17 May 2018

New community lease to Mt Roskill Tennis Club Incorporated, Arthur Faulkner Reserve, 34 Foch Avenue, Mt Roskill

File No.: CP2018/07169

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To grant a new community lease to Mt Roskill Tennis Club Incorporated, located on part of Arthur Faulkner Reserve, 34 Foch Avenue, Mt Roskill.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. Mt Roskill Tennis Club Incorporated has a community lease with the former Mount Roskill Borough Council commencing 1 February 1985 to 31 January 2006. The lease contains one 10 year right of renewal to 31 January 2016. The lease has fully expired and is currently rolling over on a month by month basis. The club owns the building and improvements.

3. Mt Roskill Tennis Club Incorporated has indicated to the council that it wishes to continue its use of the reserve.

4. As specified in the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012, groups that own their own building have an automatic right to re-apply at the end of their occupancy term without the need for public notification.

5. Mt Roskill Tennis Club Incorporated have agreed to surrender its current deed of lease dated 10 April 1986 and enter into a new lease agreement for the footprint of its building.

6. This report recommends the Puketapāpa Local Board grant a new community lease to Mt Roskill Tennis Club Incorporated to allow the club time to implement new initiatives and strategies to increase membership and make better use of the facility.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) approves the surrender of the current deed of lease dated 10 April 1986 to Mt Roskill Tennis Club Incorporated effective upon the date of entering into a new community lease.

b) grant a new community lease to Mt Roskill Tennis Club Incorporated on part of Arthur Faulkner Reserve (Attachment A) subject to the following terms and conditions:

i) term – two years commencing 17 May 2018 with one two-year right of renewal;

ii) rent - $1.00 plus GST per annum if requested;

iii) approve the Mt Roskill Tennis Club Incorporated Community Outcomes Plan be attached to the lease document (Attachment B);

iv) delegate to the Chair to approve any amendment to the Community Outcomes Plan if required when the courts are activated.

v) all other terms and conditions in accordance with the Reserves Act 1977 and the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines July 2012.

Horopaki / Context

Arthur Faulkner Reserve

7. Part of Arthur Faulkner Reserve described as part Lot 254 DP 15470. Lot 254 is held by the Crown through the Department of Conservation as a classified recreation reserve and vested in the Auckland Council, in trust, for recreation purposes.

8. The Arthur Faulkner Reserve Management Plan (1983) contemplates occupation by the tennis club with the following clause:

· council will grant new leases within the provisions of the Reserves Act 1977 to the Mt Roskill Tennis Club Incorporated on expiry of present leases.

Mt Roskill Tennis Club Incorporated

9. Under the provisions of the current deed of lease dated 10 April 1986, the club lease and maintain five tennis courts, a clubhouse, 10 carparks and the surrounding grassed area.

10. Whilst the clubhouse is fit for its intended use, the five tennis courts have deteriorated over time and are currently not fit for purpose. Three of the courts on the southern side of the reserve are dilapidated and unsafe to play on and the two central courts do not have nets.

11. To ensure the best use of the reserve and to align with other projects occurring on the reserve, the Puketapāpa Local Board have requested council staff to develop a concept plan for the reserve. The draft concept plan has been supported in principle by the Puketapāpa Local Board and will be formalised at the same time as the granting of the lease.

12. The draft concept plan identified that the three courts on the southern side of the reserve will be removed and the land reinstated. The two central courts will be retained by council for public use and used as a multisport zone with hoops and movable tennis nets to enable other activities to take place outside of tennis club hours.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

13. The club has been an incorporated society since 19 October 1931 and its objectives are to:

· encourage and promote in the district of Mt Roskill and elsewhere the sport of tennis and other such games, sports, past-times, or activities as may be conveniently or advantageously carried on in conjunction therewith.

14. The club currently has a membership of 20. The Auckland Regional Tennis Facility Strategy 2015 identifies:

· all courts in the Puketapāpa Local Board aea should be maintained to meet requirements for current and future growth

· to ensure financial and social sustainability of the club a minimum of 45 members is considered appropriate.

15. The club’s low membership combined with the requirements of its lease agreement to maintain the tennis courts has put the club under significant financial pressure.

16. With the current condition of the courts restricting the ability of the club to attract further members, the club decided to surrender its current lease agreement and enter a new community lease with council for the footprint of the building only.

17. Maintenance of the building will remain the responsibility of the club with the two remaining courts to be renewed and maintained by council. This will allow the club time and resources to implement new initiatives and strategies to increase its membership and become a viable tennis club.

18. A community outcomes plan has been negotiated with the club and will be attached as a schedule to the lease document.

19. The community outcomes plan will be amended to include further initiatives and strategies to increase membership once the courts are renewed and become available to the club.

20. The club currently shares its facility with a dance group and yoga group.

21. As the new lease agreement excludes the courts area, the club will need to book the courts for exclusive use during specific times to enable their tennis activities.

22. Auckland Council will manage the bookings for the tennis courts and the club will need to apply for use of the courts. The club will be recorded as a user in the parks booking process and will have first right of application over the courts. The hours of use will align with the clubs activity hours specified within the new lease agreement. At other times the courts will be available for public use.

23. A new community lease for a term of two years with one two-year right of renewal is recommended to the Puketapāpa Local Board to allow the club time to implement new initiatives and strategies to increase membership and make better use of the facility.

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

24. The proposed new community lease was workshopped on 12 April 2018 with the local board. The local board gave informal support for a new community lease to the club for a term of two years with one two-year right of renewal.

25. The recommendations within this report support the Puketapāpa Local Board Plan 2017 outcome of “Connected communities with a sense of belonging”.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

26. Auckland Council is committed to meeting its responsibilities under Te Tiriti o Waitangi and its broader legal obligations to Māori. The council recognises these responsibilities are distinct from the Crown’s Treaty obligations and fall within a local government Tāmaki Makaurau context. These commitments are articulated in the council’s key strategic planning documents, the Auckland Plan, the Long-term Plan 2012-2022, the Unitary Plan and Local Board Plans.

27. There are no changes in use or operational activities being conducted on the land.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

28. Staff have assessed the consequential cost of council accepting responsibility for the maintenance of the 2 courts that are being retained which is assessed at between $2,000 - $2,400 per annum. Additional turf maintenance of the area being returned to grass is assessed at $570-$800 per annum. This additional expenditure would need to be met from council budgets.

29. There are no further financial implications associated with the granting of a new community lease.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

30. If the club is unable to increase membership and the club ceases to operate there is risk club building ownership would revert to council and there is no budget allocated if this occurs.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

31. Subject to the grant of a new community lease, staff will work with the club to finalise the deed of community lease.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	SIte Map for Mt Roskill Tennis Club Incorporated	49
b ⇩	Community Outcomes Plan for Mt Roskill Tennis Club Incorporated	51

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Michelle Knudsen - Community Lease Advisor

Authorisers

Rod Sheridan - General Manager Community Facilities

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

17 May 2018

Puketāpapa community space stocktake and needs analysis

File No.: CP2018/03515

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To present the Puketāpapa Community Space Stocktake and Needs Analysis Report November 2017 prepared by Point Research.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. The Puketāpapa Local Board commissioned a community facilities stocktake and needs assessment (Attachment A). This was to build on work of a community needs assessment undertaken in 2015.

3. This research aims to help the local board understand what facilities are in the area, community needs relating to facilities, and usage and availability of these spaces.

4. Council-owned and managed facilities, community leases and private and/or community hubs were in scope.

5. Key findings of the stocktake included:

· some unmet need for long-term space and a lack of community understanding as to how the leasing arrangements work and what space is available

· considerable interest among organisations and clubs in Puketāpapa to work with the local board to increase short-term/one-off use of their facilities by the general public.

6. This report enables the local board to receive the Point Research report and note that the next steps have been identified in the Arts, Community and Events (ACE) 2018/2019 work programme following workshops with the board on 22 and 29 March 2018.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) receive the Puketāpapa Community Space Stocktake and Needs Analysis Report November 2017 prepared by Point Research (Attachment A of the agenda report.).

b) note that next steps have been identified in the Arts, Community and Events 2018/2019 work programme following workshops with the board on 22 and 29 March 2018.

Horopaki / Context

7. The local board commissioned Point Research to undertake a community facilities stocktake and needs assessment throughout the Puketāpapa area. This work was undertaken to help the local board understand the number and range of facilities available for community use, their utilisation rates and to consider if there are unmet community facility needs.

8. The research also sought to build on the work of the community needs assessment undertaken in 2015 and provide robust evidence to inform any future conversations and decisions on service provision and spatial requirements of council-owned community facilities within the local board area.

9. The scope for this piece of work included:

· council-owned and managed community facilities

· community leases

· private and/or community hubs including churches, NGO’s, and clubs and societies, based in Puketāpapa

· consideration of the work already completed in the community needs assessment from 2015

· an analysis of current and future community need and to identify if there is a gap between provision and need for community space.

10. The needs assessment and stocktake found there is:

· both positive and negative perceptions of the council-owned facilities available for short-term use and how they are managed

· some unmet need for long-term space and a lack of community understanding as to how the leasing arrangements work and what space is available

· considerable interest among organisations and clubs in Puketāpapa to work with the local board to increase short-term/one-off use of their facilities by the general public

· plenty of both council and non-council facilities available for short-term hire.

11. Several community groups in Puketāpapa are currently funded to deliver on the local board’s work programme, with some experiencing barriers to accessing space that is available and/or affordable. There are also local community providers whose current private lease arrangements are no longer feasible financially or are up for lease renewal. The community stocktake helps to identify other available spaces that could be accessed by the community that are affordable/low cost.

The Fickling Centre

12. The local board is due to vacate its current space within the Fickling Centre and move back into the ground floor of the Mt Roskill Borough Building in 2018. This space will return as venue for hire unless a need is identified and a case made for the use of the space to change. There is then an opportunity to consider how this space can be used and managed to meet the needs and aspirations of the local community.

Mt Roskill Borough Building

13. The local board has previously explored the use of the first floor of the Mt Roskill Borough Building for community use. At a local board workshop held on 7 December 2017 about council’s Workplace Strategy, it was confirmed that the Mt Roskill Borough Building is to be retained under the Corporate Property portfolio and to be utilised as a ‘spoke’ under the Corporate Building Strategy. It will therefore not be available for community use.

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

14. The Puketāpapa Local Board Plan 2017 provides direction to staff to “provide more space for communities to meet and work, including encouraging shared use of buildings, e.g. leased spaces.”

15. This report enables the local board to receive the stocktake and needs assessment that it commissioned. Staff will use the information contained in the research report to progress a three-year programme that will enable shared space in the Puketāpapa area. This programme has been identified in the ACE 2018/2019 work programme that was workshopped with the board on 22 and 29 March 2018.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

16. Māori make up six per cent of the local board population and despite nine iwi having an interest in Puketāpapa, there are no significant Māori facilities in the local board area. In responding to the recommendations of the Point Research report there is an opportunity to engage with these iwi to ensure the needs of Māori in the area are considered.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

17. The local board is considering an allocation from its LDI budget of $10,000, for a three-year programme within the ACE work programme, to progress greater shared space use in the area.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

18. There is no risk to the local board in receiving the research report.

19. Any potential project risks that may occur when activity commences will be mitigated through staff engagement with groups where required.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

20. A three-year programme will be developed by staff that will progress greater shared space use in line with the findings of the research report.

21. Year one of the proposed three year programme as part of the 2018/2019 ACE work programme, to commence in July 2018, will:

· evaluate and programme activity based on findings from the stocktake commissioned by the local board in 2018/2019

· contract a provider to work closely with five identified community lease groups to support them to effectively and efficiently share use of their space

· establish/evaluate need for a collaborative community hub.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Puketāpapa Local Board Community Facilities Stocktake dated 24 Nov 17	57

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Peter Loud - Team Leader Community Facilities

Authorisers

Graham Bodman - General Manager Arts, Community and Events

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

17 May 2018

Auckland Council’s Quarterly Performance Report: Puketāpapa Local Board for Quarter three, 1 January-31 March 2018

File No.: CP2018/07385

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To provide the Puketāpapa Local Board with an integrated quarterly performance report for quarter three, 1 January - 31 March 2018.

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, the board:

· Met with representatives of Ngāti Tamaoho to progress a relationship agreement

· Selected members for the inauguaral Puketāpapa Youth Board

· Received 28 written submissions in Chinese during 10-year Budget 2018/2028 consultation

· Hosted a hui with mana whenua and other stakeholders to discuss the restoration and recognition of Te Auaunga.

4. Performance against the agreed 2017/2018 work programmes is tracking positively as summerised in Attachment A.

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) or amber (some risk or issues, which are being managed). The following activities are reported with a status of red (behind delivery, significant risk):

i) Community Facilities: Investigate and Design

· Pah Homestead – reseal four carparks.

· Monte Cecilia Park – restore historic Whare.

· Freeland Reserve – install paths.

· Keith Hay Park – install lighting.

· Richardson Road car park – develop shared path.

ii) Community Facilities: Project Delivery

· Pah Homestead – install HVAC system.

· Belfast Reserve – renew structure and furniture.

· Waikowhai – install coastal boardwalk – stage 2.

iii) Infrastructure and Environmental Services

· Mount Roskil and Dominion Road streetscape improvements.

6. The financial performance report compared to the 2017/2018 budget is attached. There are some points for the local board to note.

· Capital investment for the period was $1.6m and net operational cost of service was $5.8m.

· Operating expenditure is on budget due to underspends in community services and planning being offset by higher parks, sports and recreation services for contract maintenance.

· Operating revenue is 9% above budget as a result of increased community facility hire.

· Capital expenditure is 52% under budget. The main drivers were delays for streetscape improvements at (Mt Roskill/Dominion Road), sportsfield improvements, locally driven initiatives (LDI) capital projects and parks asset renewals.

7. The key performance indicators show a trend of delivery that is meeting the indicators, with the exceptions being in the areas of community services and environmental management. These are explained further in the report.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) receive the performance report for the financial quarter ending 31 March 2018.

Horopaki / Context

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

· Arts, Community and Events; approved on 15 June 2017

· Parks, Sport and Recreation; approved on 18 May 2017

· Libraries and Information; approved on 8 June 2017

· Community Facilities: Build Maintain Renew; approved on 8 June 2017

· Community Leases; approved on 8 June 2017

· Infrastructure and Environmental Services; approved on 18 May 2017

· Local Economic Development; approved on 8 June 2017

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

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

Key achievements for quarter three

10. The Puketāpapa Local Board has a number of key achievements to report from the quarter three period, these include:

· Meeting with Ngāti Tamaoho to progress a relationship agreement

· Selecting applicants to join the Puketāpapa Youth Panel

· Receiving 28 written submissions in chinese during the 10-year Budget 2018/2028 consultation period.

Key project updates from the 2017/2018 work programme

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

· The board hosted a hui focused on implementing the tohu of Te Auaunga. Mana whenua, the Albert-Eden Local Board and Friends of Oakley Creek attended

· The Taste of Puketāpapa programme has been adjusted from previous years and now includes the development of a ‘food map’ highlighting the diversity of cuisine within Puketāpapa

· Work relating to the Keith Hay carpark (ID 3035) is expected to commence May 2018 on the Noton Road entrance way carpark through to the Richardson Road entranceway carpark.

· Stage 2 of the physical works at Fearon/Harold Long Reserve have started.

Key performance indicators

12. 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 Puketāpapa Local Board’s measures, showing how we are tracking after the third quarter of this financial year.

13. The year-end outlook is that 44 per cent of measures will not achieve target.

14. The key performance measures which have not been achieved are:

· Percentage of funding/grant applicants satisfied with information, assistance and advice provided

· Percentage of Aucklanders that feel connected to their neighbourhood and local community

· Percentage of attendees satisfied with council delivered and funded local events

· Percentage of Aucklanders that feel their local town centre is safe (night)

· Facility Utilisation - utilisation at peak times and off-peak times for council managed community centres and venues for hire (off peak)

· Percentage of community facilities bookings used for health and wellbeing related activity

· Number of visitors to community centres and venues for hire

· Percentage of Aucklanders that feel their local town centre is safe (day)

· Proportion of local programmes that deliver intended environmental actions and/or outcomes

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

16. Attachment D contains further detailed performance measures.

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

17. This report informs the Puketāpapa Local Board of the performance for the quarter ending 31 March 2018.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

18. The board is working with Ngāti Tamaoho to progress a relationship agreement. Six points of common interest have been identified: maunga, water (awa), harbour (and coastal margins), toi Maori, engagement, and housing

19. As part of the development of the Puketāpapa Open Space Network Plan the board hosted a workshop with mana whenua in February to discuss the key moves for the project. A representative from Ngāti Whātua attended

20. The board hosted a hui on 22 Febuary to discuss the next steps for the implementation of a tohu along Te Auaunga (ID 2497). Representatives from Ngāti Whātua, Te Akitai Waiohua and Ngāti Tamaoho attended

21. The Walmsley and Underwood Reserves Community-led Te Auaunga placemaking project (ID 707) provides an understanding of Nga-aro takaro (Maori play) and introduces young people to the historic social norms of Maori society. It includes the creation of hupara, Maori artefacts, created from natural material that will be integrated into the reserves redevelopment and provide play opportunities for children

22. The board is in on-going converstations with staff regarding the Maori naming of reserves programme (ID 1186). The input and direction from mana whenua is a core element of this work

23. The 10-year Budget 2018/2028 consultation included two submissions relating to Puketāpapa from mana whenua. They came form the Ngāti Tamaoho Settlement Trust and Ngāti Paoa Iwi Trust. A submission was also made by the Auckland district Maori Kiwitea Maori council committee, noting tautoko support to Kawerau a Maki iwi.

Financial performance

24. Operating expenditure is $16,000 below budget. This is due to lower administrative costs at Wesley Community Centre/Roskill Youth Zone and an under-spend in planning and development relating to the Mt Roskill village revitalisation project due to the Dominion Road streetscape upgrade project being on hold. This has been offset by higher full facility maintenance contract costs, where fluctuations are expected until baselines are established at the local board level after this year.

25. Operating revenue is $35,000 over budget in community facility hire due to greater utilisation of Wesley Community Centre and Fickling Convention Centre and timing of payment received on Pah Homestead café.

26. Overall capital spend is below budget by $1.7m mainly as a result of streetscape improvements at (Mt Roskill/Dominion Road), car parking improvements at Harold Long and Fearon Reserve and Keith Hay Park - Noton Road, and sportsfield improvements at Three Kings Reserve, Mt Roskill War Memorial and Keith Hay Park.

27. Attachment C contains further detailed financial information.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

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

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

29. The following risks have been identified by operating departments where the progress and performance indicator has been reported as red – significantly behind budget/time or achievement of outcomes:

i) Community Facilities: Investigate and Design

· Pah Homestead – reseal four carparks (ID 2503). This project has been deferred. The renewal will now be considered when other roading projects occur within park. At this stage, no budget or timeframe is allocated for this work.

· Monte Cecilia Park – restore historic Whare (ID 2507). A business case was completed in February. It recommended that the grant be provided to the James Wallace Art Trust subject to funding and lease agreements being implemented with the trust. The trust is reviewing their overall approach to the park and their service offering.

· Freeland Reserve – install paths (ID 2987). Project has been cancelled due to current development around the reserve by Housing New Zealand. The budget has been reallocated to the construction of a toilet at Walmsley Park.

· Keith Hay Park – install lighting (ID 3423) and Richardson Road car park – develop shared path (3424). These projects have been combined with the Keith Hay Park renew Noton Road car park project. They are now captured under ID 3035.

ii) Community Facilities: Project Delivery

· Pah Homestead – install HVAC system (ID 2504). The challenges of providing high quality air conditioning, the operation of the facility and heritage considerations are being considered. An air-conditioning engineer has started detailed investigations. The results of the investigation will be used to complete a detailed design for the new air-conditioning system.

· Belfast Reserve – renew structure and furniture (ID 2515). Track renewal scope exceeds budget allocated. This is primarily due to significant estimated labour costs as a result of limited access and the length and narrowness of the track.

· Waikowhai coastal boardwalk – stage 2 (ID 3240). The resource consent application has had an extension of time limit applied for processing. Options are being investigated to address accesss to the neighbouring property which is affected by the boardwalk.

iii) Infrastructure and Environmental Services

· Mount Roskill and Dominion Road streetscape improvements (ID 873). Auckland Transport's Dominion Road streetscape upgrade project is on hold due to the new government's emerging transport policy (and funding priorities). A decision from Auckland Transport about the delivery of this project is expected in the next quarter.

30. 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:

i) Arts, Culture and Events: Arts & Culture

· JWAT Joint Liaison Board Relationship Agreement (ID 1998). The relationship agreement is dependent on the new lease agreement between Auckland Council and the James Wallace Arts Trust.

ii) Arts, Culture and Events: Community Empowerment

· Build capacity: Community partnerships (ID 689). The contractor has reported some issues with arranging face-to-face meetings with groups. Staff will work closely with Mad Ave to ensure this project remains on track. This will include utilising an array of communication channels to reach groups and seek engagement and feedback.

iii) Community Facilities: Community Leases

· Mt Roskill Tennis Club Inc (ID 1619). The lease application has been received and is being progressed. A community outcomes plan will developed and presented to the board in quarter four.

iv) Community Facilities: Investigate and Design

· Arthur Faulkner – renew tennis courts (ID 2918). Project is on hold pending the approval of a concept design and the agreement of next steps.

· Keith Hay Park – renew car park – Noton Road (ID 3035). A site meeting has been held with stakeholders to confirm the design and the commencement of construction work on the Noton Road entrance way carpark. The detailed design and tender package is being prepared for completion in April. It is expected the works will commence May 2018 with the Noton Road entrance way carpark working through Keith Hay Park to the Richardson Road entranceway carpark.

v) Infrastructure and Environmental Services: Development Programme Office

· Mount Roskill village revitalisation (ID 1929). Auckland Transport's streetscape upgrade project remains on hold. Options for improving amenity such as street furniture, a "parklet", and connections to the adjoining car park are to be explored. A concept is to be taken back to the board for its consideration, from which a design can be prepared.

vi) Infrastructure and Environmental Services: Environmental Services

· Bus subsidies for participation in education for sustainability (ID 73). Uptake by schools has been lower than expected to date. The bus subsidy was re-advertised to all schools in the Puketāpapa local board area. Four schools are booked in quarter four. Promotion of the subsidy to Puketāpapa schools is ongoing.

· Health Rentals – Puketāpapa (ID 78). The project is targeting 26 households. Uptake has been slow, however it is expected to increase as the temperature begins to cool.

vii) Infrastructure and Environmental Services: Healthy Waters

· Manukau Harbour Forum (ID 54). Staff are yet to confirm the details of the communications programme. This may impact on the ability to fully expend the budget by the end of the financial year. Staff are meeting with the forum in April 2018 to finalise the communications programme.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

31. The Local Board will receive the next performance update following the end of quarter four, August 2018.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Puketāpapa Q3 Snapshot	97
b ⇩	Puketāpapa Q3 Work Programme update	99
c ⇩	Puketāpapa Quarterly Financial Performace report	125
d ⇩	Puketāpapa Performance Measure Results	133

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors	Mary Hay - Local Board Advisor - Puketapapa
Authorisers	Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

17 May 2018

Freeland Reserve Concept Plan Adoption

File No.: CP2018/07458

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To seek adoption of the final concept plan for Freeland Reserve in Mt Roskill South.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. Freeland Reserve is an existing local park situated in the suburb of Roskill South, in the Puketāpapa Local Board area. A combined concept plan for both Freeland Reserve and Turner Reserve was developed during FY14/15.

3. In 2017, a significant housing development programme was announced in Roskill South, with up to 1000 new homes proposed to be constructed by Homes Land Community (HLC) and Housing New Zealand (HNZ) over a ten year period.

4. To enable this development, Healthy Waters (HW) must improve stormwater storage capacity within the reserve to mitigate the increase in hardstand in the storm water catchment, and prevent flooding during storm events.

5. Parks Services staff undertook a reassessment of the existing concept plan, to determine how increased stormwater requirements would impact future park activities within the reserve. Both Mana Whenua and the local community provided input to this process.

6. The refined concept plan will improve park outcomes through provision of walkway connections, opportunities for informal recreation and community gathering, in addition to significant planting which will improve connection with nature.

7. Following adoption of the refined concept plan, Healthy Waters will progress developed design and implementation during FY18/19.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) adopt the Freeland Reserve concept plan as presented in Attachment A to this report.

Horopaki / Context

8. Freeland Reserve is an undeveloped 1.4ha local park which currently functions as a drainage reserve, situated in the suburb of Roskill South in the Puketāpapa Local Board area. A smaller but flatter open space (Turner Reserve) is accessed directly across Freeland Avenue from Freeland Reserve.

9. The watercourse running through the reserve is an offshoot of Te Auaunga (Oakley Creek) which has created a valley shaped contour through the reserve. Sections of this waterbody have been channelised and in places piped through the reserve.

10. In 2014, a joint concept plan was prepared for Freeland and Turner Reserves. This plan outlined improvements including play and active recreation outcomes within Turner Reserve, and active transport and environmental improvements within Freeland Reserve.

11. Funding was allocated by the Puketāpapa Local Board to upgrade Turner Reserve, resulting in new play facilities and a learn to ride bike track in 2014. Additional funding was allocated to delivery of the Freeland Reserve plan in 2016. However, this was put on hold due to the announcement of housing development in the area.

12. The Roskill South area will be redeveloped to provide 800-1000 new homes (mix state / affordable / market) over the next 10 years.This is one of three of such large scale HLC and HNZ developments across Auckland (Onehunga, Northcote, Mt Roskill).

13. To enable this development, Healthy Waters (HW) must improve stormwater storage capacity within the reserve to mitigate the increase in hardstand on housing lots, and prevent flooding of neighbouring properties during storm events.

14. To ensure that the increased storm water storage requirements within the reserve were compatible with the park services identified in the original plan, Parks Services re-assessed the outcomes speficied in the original plan.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

15. Parks Services worked in collaboration with the Community Facilities Investigation and Design team, Auckland Transport, Healthy Waters, HLC, Mana Whenua and the Puketāpapa Local Board to develop a refined concept plan for Freeland Reserve.

16. Healthy Waters in collaboration with HLC undertook a catchment analysis of the Roskill South area to determine future storm water requirements. Following this, HW were able to provide details around the minimum requirements for storm water storage within Freeland Reserve in order to enable housing growth in the area.

17. The local community were consulted to confirm that the service principles identified in the original concept plan were still relevant and appropriate. Themes that were considered particularly important to the community at this stage included provision for passive recreation (walking and jogging) and community spaces (picnics and socialisation). Native planting and environmental story-telling were considered the next most important to the community.

18. Council’s internal Landscape Design team produced an altered concept plan to combine these service principles and stormwater requirements.

19. The final refined concept plan for Freeland Reserve (Attachment A) enables the stormwater storage required to support housing development in the area, and also provides the following benefits to the community:

-Provides walkway connections between Freeland Avenue, Balfron Avenue and Kallu Crescent. This improves community connection to recreation and socialisation opportunities at Turner Reserve, the Maunga (Puketāpapa) and the primary school. In addition, this enables passive recreation through walking and cycling.

-Provides enhanced flat open spaces in three locations within the park to enable community use, including use for picnics, community gatherings or passive recreation.

-Provides significant native planting within the reserve, as well as boardwalk access through a wetland environment. This improves both the amenity of the reserve and the ability to provide a connection to nature.

-Mitigates flooding risk, particularly for those properties located at the downstream end of the park which are currently prone to flooding during storm events.

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

20. The Puketāpapa Local Board allocated $50,000 OPEX towards the Parks Sport and Recreation FY17/18 Work Programme line item #799 “Parks Sport and Recreation Services planning”. A portion of this budget was used to enable the Freeland Reserve concept refresh.

21. Scheduled investment into Freeland Reserve by Healthy Waters to deliver the updated concept plan provides numerous benefits to the local community.

22. This also helps to meet several objectives identified within the Puketāpapa Local Board Plan 2017, including “connected communities with a sence of belonging”, “improved wellbeing and safety”, “transport choices meet our varied travel needs” and “vibrant and popular parks and facilities”.

23. Naturalisation and improvements to the awa running through the reserve help to meet objectives from the Te Auaunga Vision and Restoration Plan for the Upper Catchment document (produced and adopted by the Puketāpapa Local Board). This includes reduction in sedimentation and contamination, improved vegetation cover, and improved community connection and awareness of the awa.

24. Workshops were held with the local board to discuss this project on 7 September 2017 and 12 October 2017, in addition to presentations at the Green Cluster meeting on 22 November 2017 and 28 February 2018. Key feedback through this process was the desire to ensure the local community was able to contribute to the plan.

25. As part of the HLC engagement process, a forum was held with the public currently living in this community to gather their feedback. Key themes identified in this consultation and incorporated in the concept plan included provision for passive recreation, community spaces, and environmental improvements.

26. The final draft was workshopped with the local board on 26 April 2018. The Puketāpapa Local Board were supportive of the final concept plan.

27. The local board will continue to be engaged on this project by Healthy Waters as it moves into detailed design and implementation in FY18/19.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

28. Te Auaunga is of cultural significance to Māori. Its waters weave together a cultural landscape of diverse cultural sites including mahinga kai, pā taua, papakāinga, wāhi nohoanga and wāhi tapu.

29. Mana Whenua were engaged throughout the development of the concept plan via both the Parks, Sport and Recreation (PSR) Mana Whenua Forum and the Infrastructure & Environmental Services (I&ES) Quarterly Mana Whenua Forum.

30. In addition, Mana Whenua were invited to a site walkover on 12 Februrary 2018. Representatives from Ngati Tamaoho and Te Akitai Waiohua attended to offer feedback on relevant cultural considerations which helped to shape the finer details of the plan.

31. The final concept plan was presented at the PSR Mana Whenua Forum on 28 February. Mana Whenua feedback was positive, with the improvements to water quality, significant native planting and opportunities for culture design commended.

32. Potential future engagement on the delivery of the plan include input into design features within the park, such as the panels on the sides of the bridges and finishing of the walkways, as well as implementation of the Te Auauanga tohu. Mana Whenua will be engaged to provide input during the detailed design phase of this project in FY18/19.

33. The concept plan references the importance of Mana Whenua as kaitiaki (guardians) of both the awa (river) and whenua (land), and reflects Auckland Council’s desire to deliver the vision of a world class city, including a Māori identity that is Auckland’s point of difference in the world.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

34. Detailed design and delivery of the concept plan is proposed to be funded predominantly by Healthy Waters to enable growth within the area, with contribution HLC as part of an Infrastructure Funding Agreement.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

35. Delivery of the concept plan relies on contribution from the developer through an Infrastructure Funding Agreement. This will be signed in 2018, which will provide certainty to the project moving forward.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

36. Once formally adopted, Healthy Waters will work with Community Facilities to develop a detailed design plan for Freeland Reserve. This will provide more detail to the concept plan and enable implementation during FY18/19 or FY19/20.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Freeland Reserve Final Concept Plan	145

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Thomas Dixon - Parks & Places Specialist

Authorisers

Mace Ward - General Manager Parks, Sports and Recreation

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

17 May 2018

Arthur Faulkner Concept Plan Adoption

File No.: CP2018/07461

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To seek adoption of the final concept plan for Arthur Faulkner Reserve in Three Kings.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. Arthur Faulkner Reserve is an existing neighbourhood park situated in the suburb of Three Kings, within the Puketāpapa Local Board area. The park provides opportunities for both active and passive recreation, including provision of tennis courts / hardstand, grassed open space and a playground.

3. Several stakeholders currently hold community leases over the park, including the Mt Roskill Tennis Club. The tennis club’s lease will be renewed in May 2018.

4. In Financial Year (FY) 2016/17, the Puketāpapa Local Board allocated $40,000 LDI CAPEX to the repair and upgrade of the tennis courts at Arthur Faulkner Reserve. To ensure a holistic approach to the renewal., Parks Services developed a concept plan for the park.

5. The concept plan has been amended over the past two years in response to feedback from the public, mana whenua, and on-site stakeholders. Amendments have also been made to the plan due to significant drainage challenges within the park.

6. Development of the concept plan occurred simultaneously to the renewal of the community lease for the Mt Roskill Tennis Club, to ensure the outcomes of the lease agreement was reflected in the final plan.

7. Key changes to the park outlined in the final draft concept plan (Attachment A) are:

· Removal of the southern courts and reinstatement to grassed open space.

· Development of the central courts as a multicourt space

· Improve walking connections through the park

· Enable the tennis club to continue operations on the park

8. The parks outcomes identified in the plan will benefit the local community through provision of more open space for passive recreation, and flexibility of court use to allow for multiple recreation activities.

9. Significant consultation with Mana Whenua groups, the local community, the Puketāpapa Local Board, council departments, regional sporting bodies, and on site stakeholders has been undertaken. All those engaged in this process are supportive of the final draft attached.

10. Several actions outlined on the concept plan will be delivered with budgets already allocated, including renewal of the central courts and northern carpark. LDI funding will be sought in future years as it becomes available to complete other actions, including removal of the southern courts, and planting/amenity improvements within the park.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) adopt the Arthur Faulkner Concept Plan as presented in Attachment A to this report.

Horopaki / Context

11. Arthur Faulkner Reserve is a local park situated on Foch Avenue in the suburb of Three Kings, within the Puketāpapa Local Board area. At 0.8ha in size, the park functions as a neighbourhood park, providing opportunities for both active recreation in the form of hardstand for sports and a playground, as well as grassed open space for passive recreation and informal sporting activity.

12. Vested by the Crown as a park in 1922, this has been an important space for the local community for nearly a century. A lease was granted to the Mt Roskill Tennis Club (an incorporated body of local residents) in 1931, and the club have been located in the park ever since. A local scout group moved onto the northern end of the park in 1957, occupying the site until 2015 when their building was removed. The VHF Club have held a lease over the building immediately north of the central courts since 1972, and remain on site today.

13. The existing five tennis courts were re-sealed partly through council grants in 1971 and 1974, however they have fallen into disrepair in the forty years since then due to a lack of membership and thus inability for the club to maintain and renew these assets. Today, three of the five existing tennis courts are unsafe to play on, and the remaining two are unmarked, instead often used by the community for other informal activities such as bike learn to ride and ball sports.

14. In FY16/17, the Puketāpapa Local Board allocated $40,000 of LDI CAPEX to the repair and upgrade of the Mt Roskill Tennis Club courts at Arthur Faulkner Reserve. To ensure a holistic approach to the renewal, council staff were tasked with the production of a concept plan for the park prior to granting a new lease to the Mt Roskill Tennis Club and start of any works within the park.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

15. Parks Services staff worked to produce a concept plan for Arthur Faulkner Reserve over FY16/17 and FY17/18. This involved significant consultation with a range of stakeholders. Several iterations of the plan were developed in response to on-site challenges which were identified as the project progressed.

16. The original concept for this park included renewal of all five courts. Three were to be retained as tennis courts and two altered to provide multisport and learn to ride facilities. In addition to this, the plan included construction of a new small carpark at the northern end, and a walkway through the park to connect both park entrances.

17. This version of the plan went through early consultation with the public, Mana Whenua and on-site stakeholders, and was met with general support.

18. As investigation into the court renewal began, issues related to drainage were identified. Significant impermeable surfaces, combined with poor natural drainage and a lack of engineered drainage solutions has resulted in occasional flooding problems of neighbouring properties at the southern edge of the park.

19. The Healthy Waters department carried out an assessment of drainage within the park, and outlined options for possible solutions. This resulted in the development of three options:

· Option A – retention of all five courts as detailed in the initial concept plan. This would involve significant construction of a water-storage tank and reticulation network through the park. Significant budget would be required and the construction would result in disruption to park users.

· Option B – removal of the three southern courts and reinstatement to grass to mitigate drainage concerns. This includes retention of the two central courts and development of walkways and northern carpark. A relatively small amount of funding would be required to implement these changes, and the disruption to park users would be minimal.

· Option C – no action, resulting in continued non-use of the existing hard courts and continued flooding issues for neighbouring properties. The courts would continue to degrade and occupy valuable open space, while the Mt Roskill Tennis Club would be unable to function. There are no cost implications for this option.

20. The local board requested that staff explore option B. The concept plan was amended to reflect the boards preffered option. A long term vision for the park was also outlined including future renewal of the play space at the southern end of the park.

21. A second round of public consultation during January 2018 involving local residents, Mana Whenua and on-site stakeholders, who indicated support for option B, and the removal of the southern courts. There was also significant support from the public for formalization of the northern carpark, and the retention of the central courts with multisport markings which are available for activities other than tennis outside of tennis club hours.

22. The final concept plan provides benefits to the local community including:

· creates a largely contiguous grassed open space from North to South through removal of the southern courts to enable enhanced recreation and community use of the park.

· provides two tennis courts for exclusive use during club hours to enable the Mt Roskill Tennis Club to continue to provide tennis opportunities for the local (and wider) community.

· provides two hardcourts for public use outside of tennis club exclusive use hours, including allowance for multisport marking and diverse recreational activities.

· helps to mitigate drainage issues within the reserve, reducing the risk of flooding for properties bordering the park.

· improves parking and park access, including for users of the leased facilities on site.

· improves pedestrian connection through the park from North to South.

· improves amenity through plantings which also help to screen neighbouring properties.

· Improves the safety and security of the reserve through installation of park entry chains to be included in the Community Facilities locking and security contract.

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

23. Investment into Arthur Faulkner Reserve as per the updated concept plan provides numerous benefits to the local community.

24. This also helps to meet several objectives identified within the Puketāpapa Local Board Plan 2017, including “connected communities with a sense of belonging”, “improved wellbeing and safety”, and “vibrant and popular parks and facilities”.

25. Workshops were held with the whole local board to discuss this project on 14 December 2016, 2 May 2017, 22 November 2017 and 28 February 2018, in addition to presentations at the Green Cluster meeting in August 2017, October 2017 and February 2018.

26. Feedback from the local board throughout this process emphasised a desire to find a compromise to enable benefits to both the Mt Roskill Tennis Club and other park users.

27. Public feedback was sought at two on-site consultation forums in 2016 and 2017, as well as through email and written feedback over the month of October 2017. Feedback for the final concept plan was positive, with support for removal of the southern courts and retention of multisport markings as well as tennis courts.

28. The final draft was workshopped with the local board on 28 February 2018. The Puketāpapa Local Board were supportive of the final concept plan, provided a lease terms could be agreed with the Mt Roskill Tennis Club.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

29. Mana Whenua were engaged throughout the development of the concept plan at several Park, Sports and Recreation Kaitiaki Forums. The final draft of the plan was endorsed by all representatives present at the forum on 28 February 2018.

30. Mana Whenua were also invited to a site walkover in November 2016. Representatives from Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki and Te Akitai Waiohua offered feedback during the walkover around relevant cultural considerations, which helped to shape the finer details of the concept plan.

31. Potential future projects to come from this plan include the renewal and construction of assets, as well as amenity improvements. Mana Whenua will be engaged to provide input when relevant projects are initiated.

32. The action plan references the importance of Mana Whenua as kaitiaki (guardians) of the whenua (land), and reflects Auckland Council’s desire to deliver the vision of a world class city, including a Māori identity that is Auckland’s point of difference in the world.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

33. $40,000 of LDI CAPEX funding from the local board has been allocated to renewal of the courts.

34. Renewals funding has been allocated to delivery of the formalised northern carpark and walkway connection through the reserve.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

35. This concept plan may require amendment in the future should changes occur on the park. For example, if an existing lease holder was to disband, a reassessment would be required of buildings and associated facilities.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

36. Projects which have already been allocated funding will be progressed through detailed design and delivery. Updates will be brought back to the Local Board for approval.

37. In future years, unfunded cantidate projects from the concept plan for potential LDI Opex or LDI Capex allocation will be identified by staff.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Arthur Faulkner Reserve Final Concept Plan	167

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Thomas Dixon - Parks & Places Specialist

Authorisers

Mace Ward - General Manager Parks, Sports and Recreation

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

17 May 2018

Review of Auckland Council’s representation arrangements for the 2019 elections

File No.: CP2018/07382

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To provide the Upper Harbour Local Board an opportunity to give formal feedback on the review of Auckland Council’s representation arrangements for the 2019 elections.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. Auckland Council’s representation arrangements have to be reviewed this year. The outcome will apply at the 2019 elections.

3. The Governing Body finalised the process for conducting the review in December 2017, following consultation with local boards.

4. The Joint Governance Working Party established by the mayor will develop a proposal for reporting to the Governing Body in July 2018.

5. The local board is now invited to provide its formal feedback on the review, for consideration by the Joint Governance Working Party.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) endorse the general approach to the review of Auckland Council’s representation arrangements for the 2019 elections, which is to make changes on an issue-by-issue basis and to not seek significant change.

b) endorse the Joint Governance Working Party’s position on the following matters with respect to the review of Auckland Council’s representation arrangements for the 2019 elections:

i) that all Governing Body members are to continue to be elected by ward as decided by the Governing Body

ii) that the current number of members in each ward is retained

iii) that the Waitematā and Gulf ward non-complying variance (population per member) should be addressed by reducing the size of the isthmus part of the ward on both the east and the west of the ward as in ‘Option 1’, with the resulting changes for neighbouring wards as set out in that option

iv) that the Rodney ward non-complying variance (population per member) should be retained on the basis that compliance would result in splitting communities of interest or joining disparate communities of interest

v) that the area alongside the Kaipara Harbour does not have a community of interest with Warkworth, and that the Rodney Local Board is invited to provide feedback on the alternative options for subdivision arrangements.

c) endorse the following recommendations with respect to the review of Auckland Council’s representation arrangements for the 2019 elections, noting that they have yet to be considered by the Joint Governance Working Party:

i) that the Botany subdivision non-complying variance (population per member) should be addressed by moving the southern boundary of the Howick ward southwards and that the Howick Local Board is invited to provide feedback on the two alternative options

ii) that the Manurewa-Papakura ward non-complying variance (population per member) should be retained on the basis that compliance would result in splitting communities of interest or joining disparate communities of interest

iii) that the Waitematā Local Board consider whether subdivisions within the board area are appropriate

iv) that the Upper Harbour Local Board consider whether subdivisions within the Board area are appropriate.

d) provide any other feedback on the review of Auckland Council’s representation arrangements for the 2019 elections.

e) delegate authority to the Chairperson to represent the board’s views on the review of Auckland Council’s representation arrangements for the 2019 elections should the Joint Governance Working Party seek further engagement with and/or feedback from the board prior to reporting to the Governing Body with a proposal in July 2018, or during the consideration of submissions following public notification.

Horopaki / Context

There are statutory deadlines

6. All councils must, under the Local Electoral Act 2001, review their representation arrangements at least every six years. Auckland Council, under the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009, must conduct a review of its representation arrangements no earlier than the 2013 elections and no later than September 2018.

7. The Governing Body considered conducting a review for the 2016 elections but resolved to defer this.

8. The Local Electoral Act 2001 requires the following timeline and process:

· public notice of the council’s proposals by 8 September 2018

· consideration of submissions

· public notice of the council’s final proposals within six weeks of the closing date for submissions.

· if there are no objections or appeals, the council’s proposals stand and are implemented

· if there are objections or appeals, they are forwarded to the Local Government Commission for a decision.

9. Staff are planning to report the Joint Governance Working Party’s proposals to the Governing Body meeting on 26 July 2018.

Role of the Joint Governance Working Party and the process for developing the Auckland Council proposal

10. In 2017, the Governing Body endorsed a process for the review of Auckland Council’s representation arrangements for the 2019 elections that was then recommended to local boards. Local board feedback, which was generally supportive of the proposed process, was reported back to the Governing Body in December 2017.

11. The Governing Body, after considering local board feedback, made the following decision:

That the Governing Body:

a) receive the feedback from local boards.

b) note the mayor’s appointments to the Joint Governance Working Party as follows:

Cr Cathy Casey (Central), Cr Linda Cooper (West), Cr Daniel Newman (South), Cr Wayne Walker (North), Angela Dalton (South), Phelan Pirrie (Rural North), Richard Northey (Central) and Shane Henderson (West).

c) approve the draft terms of reference for the Joint Governance Working Party for inclusion in the Auckland Council Committee Terms of Reference.

d) approve the following process for conducting the review of representation arrangements:

i) the Joint Governance Working Party will develop Auckland Council’s initial review of representation arrangements and present it to local boards and the Governing Body for comments before the Governing Body makes the statutory resolution for public notification for submissions.

ii) the Joint Governance Working Party will conduct the hearing of submissions and report its findings to local boards and the Governing Body before the Governing Body makes the final statutory resolution on any representation changes, which will then be publicly notified for objections and appeals.

iii) the Governing Body will review the process for hearing submissions under (ii) at the time the initial proposals for change are known.

12. The rationale for (d)(iii) in the decision was to respond to some local board feedback regarding the hearing of submissions. The legislation requires a final proposal to be publicly notified within six weeks of the submission closing date. This may require a centralised process. However, this will be reviewed once the nature of changes being proposed is known.

Representation arrangements that may be reviewed

13. For the Governing Body, it is possible to review for members other than the mayor:

· whether members are elected by ward or at-large or by a mixture

· if by ward, the number of wards, names, boundaries and number of members for each ward.

14. For each local board it is possible to review:

· whether members are elected by subdivision or at-large or by a mixture

· if by subdivision, the number of subdivisions, names, boundaries and number of members for each subdivision

· the number of members for the local board

· the name of the local board.

Matters that are required to be taken into account

15. The Local Electoral Act 2001 (Act) requires the council to take into account:

· the effective representation of communities of interest

· fairness of representation.

16. Other requirements in the Act include:

· ward boundaries should align with local board boundaries as far as is practicable

· boundaries must align with mesh-block boundaries

· when the council gives public notice of its proposal, it needs to give reasons for any changes from the 2016 elections.

17. The concept of effective representation of communities of interest can be explained by considering a single electorate which has two quite different communities and two elected representatives. The outcome of each election might mean that both representatives are elected by one of the communities with the result that the other community will not be represented. This might be solved by splitting the total electorate into smaller electoral areas, each having one representative. In the case of territorial local authorities, those smaller electoral areas are known as ‘wards’ and in the case of local boards, those smaller areas are known as ‘subdivisions’.

18. The concept of fairness means that the ratio of population to elected member for wards, in the case of the Governing Body, and subdivisions, in the case of local boards, should not vary across the region or local board area respectively. The legislation allows for a variance of up to 10 per cent. It further allows the council to not comply if compliance would result in splitting communities of interest or joining disparate communities of interest. The final decision on a proposal to not comply is made by the Local Government Commission.

19. A practical consideration is the distribution of voting documents. Each voter receives a pack of voting documents which is relevant to that voter (the pack contains voting papers for the Governing Body positions and local board positions relevant to that voter). Misalignment of boundaries can create additional combinations of Governing Body and local board positions. This leads to additional cost in terms of voting documents. This reinforces the legal requirement for ward and local board boundaries to align as far as is practicable.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

The general approach is to not make significant change

20. The Local Government Commission determined the current arrangements in 2010, following 736 submissions on its first proposal. There was a lot of public interest and the process was robust. There are no significant issues with the current arrangements.

21. There have been discussions at local board cluster meetings and by the Joint Governance Working Party. Significant change has been considered (such as some Governing Body members being elected at large) but the outcome of these discussions to date is to basically retain the status quo except where changes are required.

22. One significant issue though, which has been considered by the Governing Body, is the number of Governing Body members. The Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 sets this at 20 members, in addition to the mayor. All other councils are able to review the number of councillors.

23. The Governing Body, when it considered conducting a review of representation arrangements for the 2016 elections, decided instead to seek legislative change to allow it to review the number of Governing Body members. It also sought provision for re-aligning local board boundaries with ward boundaries, should ward boundaries need to change, and if there was support from local boards to keep boundaries aligned.

24. This submission was not successful. The Governing Body is not able to review the number of Governing Body members. Local board boundaries are not able to be changed other than through the separate process of applying for a local government reorganisation.

25. The council is continuing to advocate change, however any legislative change in the short term is unlikely to be effective for the 2019 elections.

Wards

Wards that do not comply with the 10 per cent rule

26. Based on statistics provided by the Local Government Commission (being a 2017 estimate) population ratios are as follows:

Ward	Population	Members	Population per member	Difference from quota	% Difference from quota
Rodney Ward	64,300	1	64,300	-18,560	-22.40
Albany Ward	169,800	2	84,900	2,040	2.46
North Shore Ward	156,800	2	78,400	-4,460	-5.38
Waitākere Ward	176,500	2	88,250	5,390	6.50
Waitematā and Gulf Ward	119,100	1	119,100	36,240	43.74
Whau Ward	84,700	1	84,700	1,840	2.22
Albert-Eden-Roskill Ward	172,200	2	86,100	3,240	3.91
Ōrākei Ward	91,500	1	91,500	8,640	10.43
Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Ward	79,700	1	79,700	-3,160	-3.81
Howick Ward	150,200	2	75,100	-7,760	-9.37
Manukau Ward	168,900	2	84,450	1,590	1.92
Manurewa-Papakura Ward	148,900	2	74,450	-8,410	-10.15
Franklin Ward	74,600	1	74,600	-8,260	-9.97
Total	1,657,200	20	82,860

27. Final statistics will eventually be based on data provided by Statistics New Zealand at mesh-block level. Staff expect that final statistics will be very close to those that have been used in the review to date.

28. As stated above, one of the matters that must be taken into account in the review is fairness of representation. The legislation requires that the ratio of population to member should not vary by more than 10 per cent unless there are reasons for not complying with this requirement (on the basis of splitting communities of interest or uniting disparate communities of interest).

29. There are four wards that do not comply:

· Waitematā and Gulf ward

· Rodney ward

· Ōrākei ward

· Manurewa-Papakura ward.

Review of the Waitematā and Gulf ward and neighbouring wards

30. The Waitematā and Gulf ward has a population approximately 28,000 above the 10 per cent quota. The Joint Governance Working Party has considered three options to address this (maps are in Attachment A):

· Option 1: boundaries on both the east and west of Waitematā are moved

· Option 2: the eastern boundary with the Ōrākei ward is not changed and there is substantial change on the western boundary with the Albert-Eden-Roskill ward

· Option 3: the western boundary with the Albert-Eden-Roskill ward is not changed and there is substantial change on the eastern boundary with the Ōrākei ward.

31. Each option has different flow-on effects to neighbouring wards.

32. The Joint Governance Working Party recommends Option 1. The other options disrupt communities of interest to a greater extent.

33. For example, Option 2 takes areas around Ponsonby and Grey Lynn away from the central city into the Albert-Eden-Roskill ward.

34. Option 3 places large areas of Ōrākei into Maungakiekie-Tāmaki. In the Local Government Commission’s first proposal for wards, Ōrākei and Maungakiekie-Tāmaki were combined. Following submissions, the Local Government Commission determined that Ōrākei and Maungakiekie-Tāmaki were distinct communities of interest and created separate wards. The commission took into account socio-economic differences and voting patterns.

35. The effect of Option 1 on the 10 per cent rule is as follows:

Ward	% Difference from quota
Whau	9.5%
Waitematā and Gulf	9.5%
Albert-Eden-Roskill	9.8%
Ōrākei	11.0%
Maungakiekie-Tāmaki	10.6%
Waitākere	6.5%

Review of the Rodney ward

36. The Rodney ward needs to gain about 10,000 population to be only 10 per cent under the quota. The Joint Governance Working Party has considered three options (maps are in Attachment B):

· Option1: the area north of the Whangaparaoa peninsula which is currently in the Albany ward is moved into Rodney (Orewa, Hatfields, Waiwera)

· Option 2: the southern boundary of Rodney ward is moved southwards

· Option 3: the council proposes the status quo, which is not complying, on the basis that any options to increase the population in the Rodney ward split communities of interest.

37. The Joint Governance Working Party recommends Option 3. Both Option 1 and Option 2 split communities of interest.

38. In Option 1, the area from Orewa to Waiwera shares a community of interest with the Hibiscus Coast.

39. Option 2 is difficult to achieve without splitting a community of interest. Option 2 as shown, moves the Rodney ward boundary south to include Whenuapai and Paremoremo and it borders Ranui and Westgate. The Whenuapai area is assumed to be south-looking rather than north-looking; for example, residents in Whenuapai would tend to go south for key activities like retail shopping or business, rather than north. Another option for a boundary is along the Upper Harbour motorway. However, this splits the Hobsonville community.

40. Further reasons for keeping the status quo include:

· ward and local board boundaries remain aligned (the Local Electoral Act requires alignment as far as is practicable)

· the current boundaries are the boundaries originally set by the Local Government Commission as representing communities of interest

· population is increasing and will continue to increase over time.

Review of the Manurewa-Papakura ward

41. The Joint Governance Working Party has not yet considered options for changing the Manurewa-Papakura ward boundaries.

42. In order to be only 10 per cent different to the average population to member ratio, the ward needs to gain a population of about 250. The Franklin ward cannot lose population, or it will become non-complying. Any change to the ward boundary will need to be at the northern end.

43. Staff have provided two options for local board comment back to the Joint Governance Working Party, in Attachment C:

· Option 1: move the northern boundary of the ward on the western side of SH1 motorway up to Cavendish Drive

· Option 2: move the northern boundary of the ward on eastern side of SH1 motorway northwards, just over the Redoubt Road ridge

· Option 3: the status quo, which would need to be promoted to the Local Government Commission on the basis that it is not possible to achieve compliance without splitting communities of interest or uniting disparate communities of interest.

44. Staff recommend Option 3, given it is the least disruptive option, and that the degree of non-compliance is minimal. It also means that the ward and local board boundaries remain aligned (the Local Electoral Act requires alignment as far as is practicable).

Review of the number of members in wards

45. Wards are currently either single-member or double-member wards.

46. The Joint Governance Working Party has considered larger wards; for example, a southern ward based on the current Manukau, Howick and Manurewa-Papakura wards and having six members. Implications include:

· the cost of a by-election across such a large ward if a vacancy occurs

· voter turnout – those elected will tend to be elected by areas with higher turnout, meaning there will not be as much a spread of representation as there is now

· the cap on campaign expenditure is increased

· each of the six members will have the same large electorate to service.

47. The Joint Governance Working Party also considered splitting current double-member wards into single-member wards. If this was done using local board boundaries as defining communities of interest, only the Manukau ward, if split into two, would continue to comply. The Joint Governance Working Party is recommending no change to current ward arrangements.

Local boards

Local board population

48. The following table provides the population for each local board and the number of board members:

Board	Population	Members	Population per member
Rodney	64,300	9	7,144
Hibiscus and Bays	104,500	8	13,063
Upper Harbour	65,300	6	10,883
Kaipātiki	94,000	8	11,750
Devonport-Takapuna	62,800	6	10,467
Henderson-Massey	122,300	8	15,288
Waitākere Ranges	54,200	6	9,033
Great Barrier	1,000	5	200
Waiheke	9,630	5	1,926
Waitematā	108,500	7	15,500
Whau	84,700	7	12,100
Albert-Eden	109,200	8	13,650
Puketāpapa	63,000	6	10,500
Ōrākei	91,500	7	13,071
Maungakiekie-Tāmaki	79,700	7	11,386
Howick	150,200	9	16,689
Māngere-Ōtāhuhu	81,100	7	11,586
Ōtara-Papatoetoe	87,800	7	12,543
Manurewa	94,500	8	11,813
Papakura	54,500	6	9,083
Franklin	74,600	9	8,289
Total	1,657,330

49. This table is provided for information. There is no legal requirement that the number of members should reflect the size of population. The 10 per cent rule only applies between internal boundaries of subdivisions. Staff are not aware of any reasons for changing the existing number of board members.

Local board subdivisions that do not comply with the 10 per cent rule

50. A table showing local board subdivisions in relation to the 10 per cent rule is in Attachment D.

51. There are two subdivisions that do not comply:

· Botany subdivision of the Howick Local Board (at 16.84 per cent, which needs to reduce its population)

· Wellsford subdivision of the Rodney Local Board (at -10.69 per cent, which will be addressed in response to a suggestion to change the Warkworth subdivision).

Review of the Botany subdivision in the Howick Local Board area

52. Maps showing the current subdivision boundaries and two alternative options are contained in Attachment E.

53. It is clear that the only way for the Botany subdivision to lose population is through the Howick subdivision extending southwards. There are two options proposed for consideration by local boards.

54. One option expands the Howick subdivision southwards on the eastern side of Botany Road only, while the second option expands the Howick subdivision southwards on both sides of Botany Road. Each option results in subdivisions that comply with the 10 per cent rule.

55. The Howick Local Board is invited to indicate its preferred option. This would be the option which has the least disruptive effect on existing communities of interest.

Review of the subdivisions in the Rodney Local Board area

56. A submission has been received from a resident, Mr Grant Kirby, living near the Kaipara Harbour, pointing out that the Warkworth subdivision extends from coast to coast. Mr Kirby was a former chair of the Local Government Commission. The submission states that the area alongside the Kaipara Harbour does not share a community of interest with Warkworth and suggests extending the Kumeu subdivision boundary northwards, to follow the Helensville electoral boundary.

57. Maps showing current subdivisions, the option of extending the Kumeu subdivision northwards and an option of extending the Wellsford subdivision southwards, are contained in Attachment F. Both options result in subdivisions that comply with the 10 per cent rule.

58. The Joint Governance Working Party agrees that those near the Kaipara Harbour do not share a community of interest with Warkworth and invites the Rodney Local Board to recommend its preferred option in view of its knowledge of current communities of interest.

Waitematā Local Board subdivisions

59. A suggestion has been received that the Waitematā Local Board should have a central subdivision. A map is contained in Attachment G showing what this might look like.

60. The Waitematā Local Board is invited to recommend whether subdivisions should be created in order to promote more effective representation of communities of interest and, if so, whether it supports the proposed option.

Upper Harbour Local Board subdivisions

61. A suggestion has been received that the Upper Harbour Local Board should have subdivisions to ensure there was representation from the western end of the local board area. A map is contained in Attachment H showing an arrangement of three subdivisions that complies with the 10 per cent rule.

62. The Upper Harbour Local Board is invited to recommend whether subdivisions should be created to improve effective representation of communities of interest and if so, whether it supports the proposed option.

Review of local board names

63. Staff noted comments at local board cluster meetings and other meetings that some current names may not be appropriate. These include:

(i) Howick Local Board and Ward: ‘Howick’ is only part of the local board area

(ii) Waitematā Local Board and Ward: Some people associate ‘Waitematā’ with a different area (for example the area of the Waitematā District Health Board)

(iii) Ōrākei Local Board and Ward: ‘Ōrākei’ is only part of the local board area

(iv) Albany Ward: ‘Albany’ is only part of the ward area.

64. The Great Barrier Local Board has recommended adding ‘Aotea’ to its name. This acknowledges a recent Treaty of Waitangi settlement with Ngati Rehua - Ngatiwai ki Aotea.

65. Apart from the Great Barrier Local Board proposal, staff are not aware of any other specific proposals and are not researching alternative names. Local boards should note that a name change has the potential to confuse the electorate and there are budgetary implications with changing associated stationery and signage.

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

66. The Auckland Council’s review of representation arrangements for the 2019 elections has implications for local boards. These are discussed in the body of the report. The report also provides comments on changes that affect the Governing Body, for local board information and feedback.

67. Local boards have supported a process where a Joint Governance Working Party develops the Auckland Council proposal for presentation to the Governing Body. The Joint Governance Working Party has joint local board and Governing Body representation. The Governing Body will make the resolution required by the legislation which will be notified for public submissions.

68. Following the closing date for submissions, the Governing Body must make the final statutory resolution within six weeks. The Joint Governance Working Party will consider submissions. So that the working party may liaise effectively with local boards, the local board is invited to delegate authority to the Chairperson or another member to represent the board’s views on the review. This is in the event that the Joint Governance Working Party seek further engagement with and/or feedback from the board prior to reporting to the Governing Body with a proposal in July 2018, or during consideration of submissions following public notification.

69. There will be an opportunity for the Governing Body, when it makes its first resolution, to further consider a process for local board involvement in commenting on submissions.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

70. The Local Electoral Act 2001 provides for councils to establish Māori wards for electing Governing Body members. There is no similar provision for local board elections. The process for electing local board members is no different for Māori as for others.

71. The Auckland Council Governing Body has considered the possibility of creating a Māori ward. A resolution to do so was required by 23 November 2017. The Governing Body supported the creation of a Māori ward in principle but decided not to proceed further until the number of Governing Body members was able to be increased.

72. When considering subdivisions and communities of interest within its area, it may be relevant to take into account tribal rohe boundaries.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

73. The review process is supported in-house. There will be costs associated with public notices and a payment to the Local Government Commission for preparing plans of boundaries and having them certified by the Surveyor-General. These costs are budgeted city-wide.

74. There are no financial implications for local boards. There will be down-stream council costs if the total number of local board members is increased (salary and support costs) or if there are changes to local board names resulting in costs associated with changing signage and stationery.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

75. The legislation requires deadline dates for certain decisions and public notification. Auckland Council has the greatest number of governance entities in the country (one Governing Body and 21 local boards) and there is a risk of not meeting these deadlines due to the need to involve all entities in the review.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

76. The Joint Governance Working Party will consider local board feedback in June 2018 and develop proposals for consideration by the Governing Body at its July meeting, when it will make its statutory resolution for public notification. This report provides the opportunity for local boards to have input.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Waitemata ward boundary options	181
b ⇩	Rodney ward boundary options	183
c ⇩	Manurewa-Papakura ward boundary options	185
d ⇩	Local board subdivisions and the 10 per cent rule	187
e ⇩	Botany subdivision boundary options	189
f ⇩	Rodney Local Board subdivision options	193
g ⇩	Waitemata Local Board subdivision option	197
h ⇩	Upper Harbour Local Board subdivision option	199