I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Upper Harbour Local Board will be held on:

 

Date:

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

 

Thursday, 17 May 2018

9.30AM

Upper Harbour Local Board Office
30 Kell Drive
Albany

 

Upper Harbour Local Board

 

OPEN AGENDA

 

 

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Chairperson

Lisa Whyte

 

Deputy Chairperson

Margaret Miles, QSM, JP

 

Members

Uzra Casuri  Balouch, JP

 

 

Nicholas Mayne

 

 

John McLean

 

 

Brian Neeson, JP

 

 

(Quorum 3 members)

 

 

 

Cindy Lynch

Democracy Advisor

 

11 May 2018

 

Contact Telephone: (09) 4142684

Email: Cindy.Lynch@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

 

 


 

 


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

ITEM   TABLE OF CONTENTS                                                                                         PAGE

1          Welcome                                                                                                                         5

2          Apologies                                                                                                                        5

3          Declaration of Interest                                                                                                   5

4          Confirmation of Minutes                                                                                               5

5          Leave of Absence                                                                                                          5

6          Acknowledgements                                                                                                       5

7          Petitions                                                                                                                          5

8          Deputations                                                                                                                    5

8.1     Girlboss - Future CEO Summit                                                                           5

8.2     Empire Capital - Hobsonville Marina redevelopment                                      6

9          Public Forum                                                                                                                  6

10        Extraordinary Business                                                                                                6

11        Notices of Motion                                                                                                           7

12        Minutes of the Upper Harbour Local Board meeting held Thursday, 19 April 2018     9

13        Fernhill Escarpment walkway development plan                                                    21

14        New community lease to Greenhithe Tennis Club Incorporated                           43

15        New community leases to the North Shore Playcentre Association Incorporated and East Coast Bays Association Football Club Incorporated                                     51

16        Notice to revoke previous resolutions on funding allocation and proposed right of way easement over Kell Park, Albany                                                                       65

17        Auckland Transport monthly report - May 2018                                                      69

18        Business Improvement District (BID) Programme Compliance Report to Upper Harbour Local Board for FY 2016-2017                                                                     91

19        Draft 2018-2028 Regional Land Transport Plan, draft Regional Fuel Tax proposal and draft Contributions Policy                                                                                 101

20        Review of Auckland Council’s representation arrangements for the 2019 elections                                                                                                                                      249

21        New road names for subdivision at 144 Albany Highway, Albany                      281

22        New road names for subdivision at 40A and 42 Kewa Road, Albany                 287

23        Governance forward work calendar - June 2018 to May 2019                             293

24        Record of the Upper Harbour Local Board workshops held on Thursday 5, 12, 19 and 26 April 2018                                                                                                       299

25        Board Members' reports - May 2018                                                                        309

26        Chairperson's report - Lisa Whyte                                                                           311  

27        Consideration of Extraordinary Items 

 

 


1          Welcome

 

2          Apologies

 

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

 

3          Declaration of Interest

 

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

 

4          Confirmation of Minutes

 

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a)         confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Thursday, 19 April 2018, as a true and correct record.

 

 

5          Leave of Absence

 

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

 

6          Acknowledgements

 

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

 

7          Petitions

 

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

 

8          Deputations

 

Standing Order 3.20 provides for deputations. Those applying for deputations are required to give seven working days notice of subject matter and applications are approved by the Chairperson of the Upper Harbour Local Board. This means that details relating to deputations can be included in the published agenda. Total speaking time per deputation is ten minutes or as resolved by the meeting.

 

8.1       Girlboss - Future CEO Summit

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To provide an update to the board on the outcomes and successes of the Future CEO Summit delivered by Girlboss in April 2018.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       Alexia Hibertidou, CEO of Girlboss NZ, will be in attendance to present to the local board the outcomes of the recent Future CEO Summit, held at the Albany Community Hub on 27 April 2018, and sponsored by the Upper Harbour Local Board.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a)      thank Alexia Hibertidou of Girlboss NZ for her attendance and presentation.

 

 

 

8.2       Empire Capital - Hobsonville Marina redevelopment

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To socialise the master plan for the redevelopment of the Hobsonville Marina.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       David Boersen, Development Manager of Empire Capital, will be in attendance to discuss redevelopment plans for the Hobsonville Marina with local board members.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a)      thank David Boersen, of Empire Capital, for his attendance and presentation.

 

Attachments

a          Hobsonville Marina masterplan - artist's impression................................... 319

 

 

9          Public Forum

 

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

 

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

 

10        Extraordinary Business

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

11        Notices of Motion

 

There were no notices of motion.

 


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

Minutes of the Upper Harbour Local Board meeting held Thursday, 19 April 2018

 

File No.: CP2018/05757

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       The open unconfirmed minutes of the Upper Harbour Local Board ordinary meeting held on Thursday, 19 April 2018, are attached at item 12 of the agenda for the information of the board only.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a)      note that the open unconfirmed minutes of the Upper Harbour Local Board meeting held on Thursday, 19 April 2018, are attached at item 12 of the agenda for the information of the board only and will be confirmed under item 4 of the agenda.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Upper Harbour Local Board open unconfirmed minutes - 19 April 2018

11

      

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Cindy Lynch - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

Fernhill Escarpment walkway development plan

 

File No.: CP2018/06030

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report1. To approve the Fernhill Escarpment walkway development plan, as presented in Attachment A.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       The existing walking tracks within Fernhill Escarpment are in poor condition and are scheduled for renewal as part of the Upper Harbour Local Board Community Facilities work programme (resolution number UH/2017/84).

3.       The Fernhill Escarpment walkway development plan (refer to Attachment A) has been developed to plan renewal works and identify areas for improved connections.

4.       The development plan identifies several recommendations, including:

·      renewing the existing main track through Fernhill Escarpment

·      one to three short additional tracks to provide short walking loops

·      two new bridge crossings:

one between Fernhill Escarpment and Villenova Place

the other is to upgrade the existing concrete bridge between Massey University and Fernhill Escarpment

·      two new sections of walkway:

one through Brookfield Park to create a loop track

the other over grassland from Northwood Reserve to Bush Road

·      decommission three tracks:

the current track that enters/exits Fernhill Escarpment from Bush Road

the track on the southern side of the stream at the Bush Road end

the track on the southern side of the Oteha Creek (alongside the university campus).

5.       Implementing the walkway development plan requires approximately $550,000. The recommended works will be funded from the Community Facilities renewals budget, except for the connections listed below which will require locally driven initiative (LDI) capital funding:

·      the new bridge between Fernhill Escarpment and Villenova Place

·      the new pathway through Brookfield Park.

6.       Once the Upper Harbour Local Board approves the walkway development plan, the concept design stage can begin for the recommended works.

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a)      approve the Fernhill Escarpment walkway development plan, as presented in Attachment A to the agenda report.

b)      allocate $580,000 for the project ‘Fernhill Escarpment - renew walkways’ as part of the 2018/2019 Upper Harbour Local Board Community Facilities work programme.

 

 

Horopaki / Context

7.       The existing walking tracks within Fernhill Escarpment have been identified as being in poor condition and in need of renewal.

8.       The Fernhill Escarpment walkways were approved for renewal in the Upper Harbour Local Board Community Facilities work programme (resolution number UH/2017/84) as part of the project ‘Upper Harbour - FY19 renew walkways and paths’.

9.       To best plan for and prioritise the track renewal works, a walkway development plan was required. The overall objectives for this plan were to:

·        review the existing track network

·        renew/upgrade tracks (where necessary) to ensure they comply with the New Zealand Tracks and Outdoor Visitor Structures Standards, and Auckland Council design guidelines

·        rationalise/decommission tracks where appropriate

·        ensure the track network meets the demand, experiences and safety standard that are expected by the current and future visitor profile

·        achieving a plan that is financially sustainable in terms of initial capital and long‑term maintenance

·        to increase the enjoyment, ease of use and accessibility for the public.

10.     Greenscene NZ was engaged to undertake the walkway development plan. Input and guidance was also provided by Auckland Council’s Parks and Places Specialist to understand the service level provision, history of the reserve, and current and future users of the reserve.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

11.     The Fernhill Escarpment walkway development plan makes several recommendations. These are summarised in the following paragraphs.

12.     The access into the reserve from the Albany Highway is recommended for retention but, where required, redeveloped and realigned to ensure it is fit for purpose and meets New Zealand Tracks and Outdoor Visitor Structures Standards.

13.     One to three short additional tracks were recommended to provide short walking loops. Several access points were identified for these smaller loop tracks and have formed the basis behind the recommended development locations.

14.     Two options to cross the Oteha Stream were investigated (listed below). If both stream crossings can be achieved, a new 1.2m section of footpath through Brookfield Park will be created. This would enable a recreational walking loop that incorporates Fernhill Escarpment, Northwood Reserve and Brookfield Park, as part of a continuous recreational network:

·        the first is between Fernhill Escarpment and Villenova Place and would connect the track network with the residential area

·                the second is an upgrade of the existing concrete bridge between Massey University and Fernhill Escarpment, formalising existing informal accessways into the park and between both campuses.

15.     A new shared cycle and pedestrian pathway (minimum 2m wide) over the grassland from Northwood Reserve and Bush Road is also recommended, to enable a potential shared pathway connection between Bush Road and Albany Highway.

16.     This proposed connection appears to cross private land at 66 Bush Road. However, after further investigation, it has been determined that the land is held by the Crown. The Crown, through the Department of Conservation (DOC), administers the land as a marginal strip, pursuant to the provisions of Part IVA of the Conservation Act 1987. When the Crown sells land adjoining a river with banks that are 3m or wider, a 20m-wide strip is established on disposal and becomes subject to the conservation act. To establish a walkway here, Auckland Council would need to apply to DOC seeking appointment to manage this marginal strip.

17.     On-site investigations identified that the current entrance/exit of the track network onto Bush Road is unsafe. It opens out onto a busy road where there are no safe pedestrian crossing options, there are traffic barriers, and no footpath to the north or south on Bush Road. An underpass between Fernhill Escarpment and Burnside Reserve is not considered feasible due to the cost and safety aspects and would not provide a justified return on investment. Therefore, this track is recommended for removal.

18.     The track on the southern side of the stream at the Bush Road end of the reserve, is also recommended for decommissioning. There is no significant bush in this location and the track runs along a narrow and steep stream bank, so would be costly to renew with several structures required. It would also present a safety risk for track users.

19.     The existing track on the southern side of the Oteha Creek (alongside the Ōtehā Rohe Massey University campus off Albany Highway) was constructed within the last year and was not commissioned by Auckland Council. Therefore, this track is not a registered council asset. In addition, there is no significant bush in this location and there is an existing track on the other side of the stream. Therefore, this track is recommended to be decommissioned.

20.     To enhance access to the Fernhill Escarpment, an easement could be discussed with Massey University which would allow users to access and exit the reserve from the north and east via an already developed track on the East Precinct of the university. Alternately, it may only require an agreement with Massey University that the path can end at the university boundary and they can connect to it if they choose.

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

21.     A workshop was held with the Upper Harbour Local board on 22 February 2018 to discuss the Fernhill Escarpment walkway development plan.

22.     The board was supportive of the recommendations identified in the plan and highlighted the connection from Northwood Reserve to Bush Road as a priority.

23.     This connection aligns with Outcome 2 in the Upper Harbour Local Board Plan 2017 ‘efficient and effective transport links’, specifically the objective to have a quality walking and cycling network.

24.     The overall development plan also aligns with Outcome 3 in the local board plan, ‘healthy and active communities by providing a safer and easier to access recreational walking network in the Albany area’.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

25.     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 2015-2025 Long-term Plan, the Unitary Plan and local board plans.

26.     No specific impacts to Māori were identified for the Fernhill Escarpment that differ from the general community. Therefore, iwi were not directly engaged regarding the walkway development plan.

27.     Engagement with iwi identified as having an interest in the Upper Harbour Local Board geographical area will be undertaken as part of any project to implement the walkway development plan.

28.     Any design work of the tracks will need to consider the Te Aranga design principles, as outlined in the Auckland Design Manual.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

29.     The walkway development plan identifies a rough order of cost of $565,000 to undertake all recommended works.

30.     Most of these works are able be to funded using the Community Facilities renewals budget, except for the following connections which would need to be funded using the locally driven initiative (LDI) capital fund:

·                the new bridge between Fernhill Escarpment and Villenova Place

·                the new pathway through Brookfield Park.

31.     The new pathways between Northwood Reserve and Bush Road can be achieved with renewal funding, as this will require relocation and amalgamation of the two tracks within the bush connecting Fernhill Escarpment to Bush Road.

32.     Further investigations, in tandem with Auckland Transport, will be required to progress the connection from Northwood Reserve / Brookfield Park to Albany Highway.

33.     As the path between Brookfield Park and Albany Highway is not a registered council asset, it does not qualify for renewal funding. Therefore, the same approach cannot be taken for funding of the new track through Brookfield Park, and it must be funded from the LDI budget.

34.     The investigation and design work required for the Fernhill Escarpment walkways was approved as part of ‘Upper Harbour - FY19 renew walkways and paths’ project in the 2017/2018 Upper Harbour Local Board Community Facilities Work Programme (resolution number UH/2017/84).

35.     The Fernhill Escarpment component of this project has been unbundled to be presented in the 2018/2019 Upper Harbour Local Board Community Facilities Work Programme as ‘Fernhill Escarpment - renew walkways’. A preliminary renewal budget of $580,000 has been allocated to this project.

36.     As these recommendations progress through the design phases, the cost estimates will become more refined and this figure may need to be adjusted.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

37.     The current cost estimate for the works is still at a very high level. The actual cost for the works may be higher. This can be further refined as the concept and developed designs progress.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

38.     Once the Upper Harbour Local Board approves the walkway development plan, the renewals project can progress to the concept design stage.

39.     The concept design work will include those areas identified as LDI capex, and the funding for these works will be requested from the board when these costs are understood.

40.     The concept design work will also include a prioritised work plan for staging of the works.

 


 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Fernhill Escarpment walkway development plan

27

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Kaitlyn White – Senior Renewals Coordinator

Authorisers

Rod Sheridan - General Manager Community Facilities

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator



Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

New community lease to Greenhithe Tennis Club Incorporated

 

File No.: CP2018/04954

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To grant a new community lease to Greenhithe Tennis Club Incorporated, for part of Greenhithe War Memorial Park, 10-24 Roland Road, Greenhithe.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       Greenhithe Tennis Club Incorporated holds a community ground lease with the former North Shore City Council for its clubrooms and four tennis courts at Greenhithe War Memorial Park (refer Attachment A). The club’s lease, totalling 20 years, expired on 28 February 2018 and is holding over on a month-to-month basis. The club owns its building and other improvements.

3.       As specified in the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012, groups that own their own buildings have an automatic right to apply for a new lease at the end of their occupancy term. There is no requirement to undertake an expression of interest process.  The Greenhithe Tennis Club Incorporated requested a new community lease to continue its activities.

4.       The operative reserve management plan for Greenhithe War Memorial Park (Management Plan for Reserves in the Albany Ward, October 1984) contemplates a lease to the club for a pavilion and courts for the purposes of playing tennis. There are no changes to the leased area. This means public notification and/or iwi engagement prior to any new lease being granted is not required, in accordance with section 54 (2A) of the Reserves Act 1977.

5.       This report recommends that the Upper Harbour Local Board grant a new community lease to Greenhithe Tennis Club Incorporated for 10 years, commencing 1 March 2018, with one 10-year right of renewal, as specified in the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a)      grant a new community lease to Greenhithe Tennis Club Incorporated for Part Lots 56 and 57 DP13702, War Memorial Park, 10-24 Roland Road, Greenhithe, subject to the following terms and conditions:

i.        term: 10 years, commencing 1 March 2018, with one 10-year right of renewal

ii.       rent - $1.00 plus GST per annum if requested

iii.      the Greenhithe Tennis Club Incorporated Community Outcomes Plan as approved, is attached to the community lease document

iv.      that all other terms and conditions are met, in accordance with the Reserves Act 1977 and the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines July 2012.

 

 

Horopaki / Context

6.       Greenhithe Tennis Club Incorporated occupies a site on Greenhithe War Memorial Park, comprising its own clubrooms and four tennis courts. A ground lease was granted by the former North Shore City Council for Part Lots 56 and 57 DP13702. The lease was for a term of 10 years, commencing 1 March 1998. The lease contained one right of renewal for a further 10 years, expiring on 28 February 2018, and is now holding over on a month-by-month basis. The club submitted a formal application requesting a new lease to continue its activities.

7.       Greenhithe War Memorial Park is described as Lots 56, 57 58 and 59 DP 13702 - 2.1249 ha - NA497/284 and NA899/260 held in fee simple by Auckland Council as a classified recreation reserve. The operative reserve management plan for Greenhithe War Memorial Park (Management Plan for Reserves in the Albany Ward, October 1984) contemplates a lease to the club for the pavilion and courts, and the continued use of the site for the purposes of playing tennis. There are no changes to the leased area. This means public notification and/or iwi engagement prior to any new lease being granted is not required, in accordance with section 54 (2A) of the Reserves Act 1977.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

8.       Greenhithe Tennis Club has been an incorporated society since 4 September 1984. 

9.       The objectives of the club are to foster an inclusive atmosphere of genuine community through sport, welcoming anyone who loves to watch or play tennis. The club prides itself on being a community-based tennis club that provides fun, friendship and excitement for players of all ages and abilities.

10.     The club is part of the Tennis Northern Region and is considered an exemplar to other affiliated clubs through its coaching programmes and interclub activities, its support for casual participation in tennis, and its well-maintained facilities. The club received the accolade of ‘Club of the Year Tennis Northern Region’ for the 2016-2017 season and won the ‘Tennis New Zealand Club of the Year’ for 2017.

11.     The club has a growing membership of 163 playing members, of which approximately 52 are under 21 years of age.

12.     The club runs after-school programmes catering for children of all ages and abilities. The club also liaises with local groups to enhance community spirit, such as providing the clubrooms as a venue for ANZAC Day commemorations and the Greenhithe Santa Parade.

13.     The financial accounts provided indicate that the funds of the Greenhithe Tennis Club Incorporated are sufficient to meet its liabilities and are being managed appropriately.

14.     The Greenhithe Tennis Club Incorporated has all necessary insurance cover in place, including public liability insurance.

The premises

15.     The clubrooms on Greenhithe War Memorial Park is a single storey building, providing a lounge, kitchen, and administration space. Public toilets and changing facilities are a short walk from the clubroom, are outside the leased area and are maintained by Auckland Council. A site visit to the club on 31 January 2018 ascertained the building is well used, managed and maintained, with the leased area in a neat and tidy condition. 

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

16.     At its business meeting of15 June 2017, the Upper Harbour Local Board resolved to approve the 2017/2018 Community Facilities work programme (resolution number UH/2017/84). The proposed new lease to the Greenhithe Tennis Club Incorporated is listed on the Community Leasing work programme for 2017/2018.

17.     The proposal to grant a new lease was workshopped on 22 February 2018 with the Upper Harbour Local Board. The board were informed that public notification and iwi consultation is not a requirement in the granting of a new lease to the club.

18.     The recommendations contained in this report do not trigger Auckland Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

19.     Community groups seeking a new lease are required to include a community outcomes plan as a schedule to the lease document (refer Attachment B). This plan aligned with the 2017 Upper Harbour Local Board Plan, has been negotiated and agreed with the club and submitted for approval as part of this report.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

20.     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.

21.     The operative reserve management plan for Greenhithe War Memorial Park sanctions the club and its activities. There are no changes to the leased area, use, or operational activities being conducted on the land. Iwi engagement prior to any new lease being granted is not required in accordance with section 54 (2A) of the Reserves Act 1977.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

22.     There are no financial implications associated with granting a new lease to the club. 

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

23.     There are no known risks associated with the granting of a new lease. 

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

24.     Subject to the granting of a new community lease, council staff will work with key representatives of the club to finalise the deed of lease.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Site plan for Greenhithe Tennis Club

47

b

Community outcomes plan

49

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Wendy Zapart – Community Lease Advisor

Authorisers

Rod Sheridan - General Manager Community Facilities

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

New community leases to the North Shore Playcentre Association Incorporated and East Coast Bays Association Football Club Incorporated

 

File No.: CP2018/05428

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To grant new community leases to:

·        the North Shore Playcentre Association Incorporated, for part of Collins Park, 15A Greenhithe Road, Greenhithe 

·        East Coast Bays Association Football Club Incorporated, for part of Bay City Park, 50 Andersons Road, Browns Bay.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       The North Shore Playcentre Association Incorporated owns a building occupying a site on Collins Park, Greenhithe, from where the Greenhithe Playcentre operates. The lease granted by the former North Shore City Council totalling 20 years, expired on 30 September 2015. Since that date, the lease has been holding over on a month-by-month basis. The association has requested a new community lease to continue its activities.

3.       Collins Park is held in fee simple by Auckland Council under the Local Government Act 2002. In accordance with sections 81 and 138 of the Act, public notification and engagement with iwi is required prior to any lease being granted.

4.       East Coast Bays Association Football Club Incorporated owns clubrooms that occupy part of Bay City Park, Browns Bay. The lease granted by the former North Shore City Council expired on 31 August 2016. Since that date, the lease has been holding over on a month-by-month basis. The club has requested a new community lease to continue its activities.

5.       Bay City Park is held in fee simple by Auckland Council, is subject to the requirements of the Reserves Act 1977 and is classified as recreation reserve. As there is no operative reserve management plan for the park, the proposed lease requires public notification in accordance with the terms of the Reserves Act 1977, and iwi engagement in accordance with the Conservation Act 1987.

6.       As specified in the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012, groups owning their own buildings have an automatic right to apply for a new lease at the end of their occupancy term. There is no requirement to undertake an expression of interest process for either community lease.

7.       The council has satisfactorily completed the required statutory processes of iwi engagement and public notification about its intention to approve new community leases to both groups.

8.       This report recommends that the Upper Harbour Local Board grant new community leases for 10 years commencing 17 May 2018, with one 10-year right of renewal as specified in the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012 to:

·        North Shore Playcentre Association for the site it occupies on Collins Park, Greenhithe

·        East Coast Bays Association Football Club Incorporated, for the site on which it has its clubrooms on Bay City Park, Browns Bay.

 

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a)      grant a new community lease to the North Shore Playcentre Association Incorporated for a part of Collins Park, 15A Greenhithe Road, Greenhithe, legally described as Part Lot 5 DP 7132 (refer to Attachment A to the agenda report), subject to the following terms and conditions:

i.    term:10 years commencing 17 May 2018 with one 10-year right of renewal

ii.    rent: $1.00 plus GST per annum if requested

iii.   the North Shore Playcentre Association Incorporated Community Outcomes Plan as approved, be attached to the community lease document (refer to Attachment B to the agenda report)

iv.  all other terms and conditions in accordance with the Local Government Act 2002 and the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines July 2012.

b)      grant a new community lease to the East Coast Bays Association Football Club Incorporated for a part of Bay City Park, 50 Andersons Road, Browns Bay, legally described as Part Allotment 313 Parish of Paremoremo (refer to Attachment C to the agenda report), subject to the following terms and conditions:

i.        term: 10 years commencing 17 May 2018 with one 10-year right of renewal

ii.       rent: $1.00 plus GST per annum if requested

iii.      the East Coast Bays Association Football Club Incorporated Community Outcomes Plan as approved, be attached to the community lease document (refer to Attachment D to the agenda report)

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

 

 

Horopaki / Context

The North Shore Playcentre Association Incorporated - Greenhithe Playcentre

9.       The North Shore Playcentre Association Incorporated occupies a 1610m² (more or less) site on Collins Park, Greenhithe, under the terms of a community lease on which it owns a new purpose-built building. The Greenhithe Playcentre operates from this site. The association has formally requested a new community lease.

10.     The lease was granted by the former North Shore City Council for a term of 10 years commencing from 1 October 1995. The lease contained one right of renewal for a further 10 years, expiring on 30 September 2015, and has continued to hold over on a month-by-month basis on its existing terms and conditions.

11.     Collins Park is held in fee simple by Auckland Council under the Local Government Act 2002. In accordance with sections 81 and 138 of the Act, public notification and engagement with iwi is required prior to any lease being granted.

East Coast Bays Association Football Club Incorporated

12.     East Coast Bays Association Football Club Incorporated occupies a site on Bay City Park, Browns Bay, under the terms of a community lease on which it owns its clubrooms.

13.     The lease was granted by the former North Shore City Council for a term of 10 years commencing from 1 September 1996. The lease contained one right of renewal for a further 10 years, expiring on 31 August 2016, and has continued to hold over on a month-by-month basis on its existing terms and conditions. The club has formally requested a new community lease.

14.     Bay City Park is held in fee simple by Auckland Council, is subject to the requirements of the Reserves Act 1977, and is classified as a recreation reserve. As there is no operative reserve management plan for the park, the proposed lease required public notification in accordance with the terms of the Reserves Act 1977, and iwi engagement in accordance with the Conservation Act 1987.

15.     A notice was published in the North Shore Times covering both lease proposals on 2 November 2017. Submitters were allowed one calendar month to make submissions or objections to the proposal to grant new community leases to the two groups. During this period, no submissions or objections were received. No objections were received from iwi engagement.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

The North Shore Playcentre Association Incorporated

16.     The North Shore Playcentre Association was registered as an incorporated society in November 1973 (number 224136). Its objectives are to:

·        work with ngā whanau/families to provide quality learning experiences for young children

·        assist ngā matua/parents to provide, maintain, equip and supervise a playcentre

·        advise, assist, encourage and coordinate the activities of existing playcentres

·        develop public awareness of the playcentre movement and to develop public conscience concerning the welfare of young children and foster better matua /parent /child relationships. 

17.     The association ensures that every playcentre adult is offered free education that will give them the skills and confidence for parenting and working with children. The Playcentre Diploma is a New Zealand Quality Assurance qualification that consists of six courses. The playcentre provides teaching space for these courses when not being used by the children.

Greenhithe Playcentre

18.     For the past five years, the playcentre has operated from a new single-storey facility that replaced the former playcentre building. The playcentre, which operates under the lease held by the association, caters for children from birth up to six years of age and currently has 25 families who regularly attend. Sessions are held each week-day morning, with one supervised extension session for older children in the afternoon. The playcentre is also used two afternoons each week by a local children’s drama group, and on a casual basis for family gatherings, information events and celebrations.

19.     The most recent Education Review Office report was prepared in March 2014 and is due again in 2018. It concludes that the Greenhithe Playcentre is very well placed to promote positive learning outcomes for children:

·        the learning environment is richly resourced and provides a wide range of indoor and outdoor experiences for children to enjoy. The complexity of equipment and the layout of the learning environment allows members to offer programmes that challenge infants, toddlers and older children’s learning

·        biculturalism is also evident in the programmes and is reflected in display resources and activities that value Māori culture. The management team has a strong commitment to Te Tiriti o Waitangi, and to building adults and children’s familiarity with te reo and tikanga Māori

·        there has been a successful focus on retaining four-year old children’s attendance at the playcentre. ‘Big Kids’ sessions, designed to extend children’s development, give older children opportunities to interact with their own age group and prepare them for their transition to school. Members have established meaningful relationships with the local school and some neighbouring schools. Graduation traditions provide children with a sense of anticipation and celebration around progressing to the next stage of learning as they prepare to go to school. A feature of the centre is the strong sense of community. Effective parent leadership and association support contributes to the success of this centre.

20.     The financial accounts provided indicate that the association’s funds are sufficient to meet its liabilities and are being managed appropriately. The association has all necessary insurance cover, including public liability insurance in place.

Playcentre’s improvements

21.     North Shore Playcentre Association made a significant investment approximately five years ago to replace its main building. Its outdoor play area was remodelled and centre resources upgraded. Its standards align with Ministry of Education requirements.

East Coast Bays Association Football Club Incorporated

22.     The East Coast Bays Association Football Club Incorporated was formed in 1959 and was registered as an incorporated society in December 1968 (number 222021). Its objectives are:

·        to continue to improve emphasis on youth development within the community

·        to continue development of the home grounds and clubrooms into an all year-round community complex.

23.     The club has been operating from the site on Bay City Park for over 50 years. Membership has grown over this time and the club has been part of many key initiatives primarily focused on growth at junior levels. The club has approximately 1228 playing members; over 900 of these are under 21 years of age and there are 128 female members.

24.     The club liaises with local schools and provides coaches, training courses, resources and a venue for school teams.

25.     The club accommodates summer football from November until March in the off-season, and the facility is also used by the East Coast Bays Cricket Club from September until the end of March.

26.     The club has experienced great success, with many players named in the New Zealand U12, U20, and U23 teams, as well as progressing into the New Zealand Ferns Training Squad and the New Zealand All Whites. The club is affiliated to The Northern Football Federation and New Zealand Football.

27.     The financial accounts provided indicate that the club’s funds are sufficient to meet its liabilities and are being managed appropriately.

28.     The club has all necessary insurance cover, including public liability insurance in place.

The building

29.     The clubrooms on Bay City Park comprise a two-storey structure. The upper level provides a lounge, kitchen, bar area, toilets and administration space. The lower level has public toilets and changing facilities. The building is well used, managed and maintained.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe /

Local impacts and local board views

30.     At its business meeting on 15 June 2017, the Upper Harbour Local Board resolved to approve the 2017/2018 Community Facilities work programme (resolution number UH/2017/84). The proposed new leases to The North Shore Playcentre Association Incorporated and the East Coast Bays Association Football Club Incorporated are listed on the Community Lease work programme 2017/2018.

31.     The local board was advised of the requirement for public notification of both leases at its workshop on 24 August 2017. At its business meeting on 21 September 2017, the Upper Harbour Local Board approved public notification of Auckland Council’s intention to grant new community leases to both groups (resolution number UH/2017/147). Public notification seeking submissions, appeared in the North Shore Times on 2 November 2017. No objections were received in respect of either proposal.

32.     Community outcome plans have been negotiated and agreed with both groups that align with the 2017 Upper Harbour Local Board Plan.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

33.     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.

34.     Engagement with iwi identified as having an interest in the Upper Harbour Local Board area was required regarding the proposal to grant these new community leases.

Greenhithe Playcentre

35.     Engagement on the proposal for a new community lease to the North Shore Playcentre Association with the 12 mana whenua groups who have an interest in Collins Park was undertaken in September 2016. Engagement involved:

·    email contact containing detailed information and inviting iwi representatives to hui and/or for a kaitiaki site visit to comment on any spiritual, cultural or environmental impact with respect to the proposal.

36.     Three responses were received with no objections raised.

East Coast Bays Association Football Club Incorporated

37.     Engagement on the proposal for a new community lease to the football club with the 12 mana whenua groups who have an interest in Bay City Park was undertaken in September and November 2017. Engagement involved:

·    a presentation at the North-West Mana Whenua Forum held at Orewa on 6 September 2017

·    email contact containing detailed information and inviting iwi representatives to hui and/or for a kaitiaki site visit to comment on any spiritual, cultural or environmental impact with respect to the proposal.

38.     Mana Whenua Forums are the result of a collaboration initiative between Auckland Council and mana whenua which commenced in November 2016.

39.     Three responses were received with no objections raised.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

40.     The financial implications of public notification were met by Auckland Council Community Facilities. There are no known further financial implications associated with the approval of new community leases to either group.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

41.     Should the Upper Harbour Local Board resolve not to grant the North Shore Playcentre Association and the East Coast Bays Association Football Club new community leases, this decision may materially affect the ability of each group to undertake core activities. Since the existing leases were put in place, the playcentre and the club have each invested significant funds in their respective assets to make improvements.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

42.     Subject to the local board’s approval of new community leases, council staff will work with key representatives of these groups to finalise the deeds of lease.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Site plan - North Shore Playcentre, Collins Park, 15A Greenhithe Road, Greenhithe

57

b

North Shore Playcentre (Greenhithe Playcentre) Community Outcomes Plan

59

c

Site plan - East Coast Bays Association Football Club Inc, Bay City Park, Andersons Road, Browns Bay

61

d

East Coast Bays Association Football Club Community Outcomes Plan

63

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Wendy Zapart – Community Lease Advisor

Authorisers

Rod Sheridan - General Manager Community Facilities

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

Notice to revoke previous resolutions on funding allocation and proposed right of way easement over Kell Park, Albany

 

File No.: CP2018/05304

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To revoke existing resolutions which provided funding, landowner consent and support for the creation of right of way easements, to improve public car parking in Kell Park, Albany Village.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       The Upper Harbour Local Board has identified the need to provide additional car parking within the Albany Village area. Kell Park is the preferred location.

3.       The local board approved proposals in April and July 2015 to work with the developer of an adjacent property to provide the additional car parking required. A resolution was carried granting landowner funding, consent and support for the creation of easements within Kell Park, to enable the proposal to progress.

4.       In 2017, the developer sold the property prior to the car park works progressing. The current property owner has indicated they are not planning to develop the site in the near future.

5.       A workshop with the local board was held in October 2017. The local board advised staff to progress with investigating the design and construction of an extension to the existing car park within Kell Park.

6.       The previous resolutions are required to be revoked as the easements are no longer necessary, the land is under new ownership and Auckland Council will manage the design and construction of the additional parking space.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a)      agree, pursuant to standing order 1.10.1, to revoke the following resolution of the Upper Harbour Local Board, adopted at its ordinary meeting held on 28 April 2015:

Resolution number UH/2015/44:

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a)      support the release of the reserve Albany parking funds to Mr Nicholas Lowes to construct additional parking spaces for the benefit of the Albany Village business and library patrons.

b)      advocate to the Budget Committee for the $354,374 of parking reserve funds to be released for use towards alleviating the parking congestion in the Albany Village.  This meets the requirement for which the funds were collected originally.

c)      request the financial department to write a report to the 12 August 2015 Budget Committee meeting, to seek approval for the release of the parking reserve funds to Mr Nicholas Lowes, in order to construct additional parking spaces in the Albany Village.

CARRIED

b)      agree, pursuant to standing order 1.10.1, to revoke the following resolution of the Upper Harbour Local Board, adopted at its ordinary meeting held on 14 July 2015:

Resolution number UH/2015/104:

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a)   provide landowner consent and support the creation of the proposed easement ‘A’ over part of Kell Park in favour of the properties at 243, 245 and 247 Dairy Flat Highway, being Lot 1 DP38729, Lot 1 DP148906 and Lot 1 DP66714, and the simultaneous extinguishing of the existing easement in favour of the property at 245 Dairy Flat Highway, Lot 1 DP148906, as shown on DP91102.

b)   provide landowner consent and support the creation of easements ‘B’ and ‘C’ in favour of council’s reserve land as shown on the plan of proposed easements (61172-GE-004 Sheet 2) for the purpose of improving public car parking, and anticipates that the payment of a proportional share of on-going maintenance costs will be provided for in the easement document.

CARRIED

 

 

Horopaki / Context

The issue

7.       The Albany Village area has a shortage of parking and the local community and businesses have expressed concern regarding this to the local board.

8.       The local board has implemented parking restrictions and signage within the current car park areas through Auckland Transport. However, there is still a demand for additional car park spaces.

9.       The need for additional car park facilities within Albany was recognised by the former North Shore City Council (NSCC). Development contributions of $354,374 were collected by NSCC and held in a reserve fund for the provision of off-street parking in Albany. Auckland Council inherited this reserve fund at the time of amalgamation. The reserve fund is required to be used in accordance with the purpose for which the money was collected.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

10.     As part of item 14 of the local board business meeting on 28 April 2015, the Upper Harbour Local Board resolved to approve allocation of the Albany Off-Street Parking Fund to the developer, Nicholas Lowes, to provide additional parking for the Albany Village, as part of the development at 243 Dairy Flat Highway.

Resolution number UH/2015/44:

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a)    support the release of the reserve Albany parking funds to Mr Nicholas Lowes to construct additional parking spaces for the benefit of the Albany Village business and library patrons.

b)    advocate to the Budget Committee for the $354,374 of parking reserve funds to be released for use towards alleviating the parking congestion in the Albany Village.  This meets the requirement for which the funds were collected originally.

c)    request the financial department to write a report to the 12 August 2015 Budget Committee meeting, to seek approval for the release of the parking reserve funds to Mr Nicholas Lowes, in order to construct additional parking spaces in the Albany Village.

CARRIED

11.     In August 2015, the Finance and Performance Committee agreed to release the $354,374 Albany Off-Street Parking Fund to the Upper Harbour Local Board to provide additional car parking space in the Albany Village, which is consistent with the purpose of the reserve fund.

12.     The Upper Harbour Local Board, in association with council, identified options for alleviating the car parking shortage. The preferred option in 2015 was to work with the developer of a property adjacent to the current Kell Park car park to incorporate 17 additional car park spaces as part of the planned development. This option proposed the creation of easements between council and the developer. The local board resolved on 14 July 2015 to support this option.

Resolution number UH/2015/104:

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a)    provide landowner consent and support the creation of the proposed easement ‘A’ over part of Kell Park in favour of the properties at 243, 245 and 247 Dairy Flat Highway, being Lot 1 DP38729, Lot 1 DP148906 and Lot 1 DP66714, and the simultaneous extinguishing of the existing easement in favour of the property at 245 Dairy Flat Highway, Lot 1 DP148906, as shown on DP91102.

b)    provide landowner consent and support the creation of easements ‘B’ and ‘C’ in favour of council’s reserve land as shown on the plan of proposed easements (61172-GE-004 Sheet 2) for the purpose of improving public car parking, and anticipates that the payment of a proportional share of on-going maintenance costs will be provided for in the easement document.

CARRIED

13.     Resource consent was granted to the developer based on this proposal.

14.     In 2017, the developer sold the property prior to the car park works progressing. The new land owner has indicated they are not planning to develop the property in the near future.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe /

Local impacts and local board views

15.     In October 2017, options were discussed with the Upper Harbour Local Board at a workshop. A decision was made to progress with extending the car park within the Kell Park Reserve boundary, and to use the Albany Off-Street Parking Fund to enable these works.

16.     To progress with this option, resolution numbers UH/2015/44 and UH/2015/104 must be revoked.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

17.     Engagement with mana whenua will take place as the project progresses.

18.     The developers of the adjacent property at 247 Dairy Flat Highway (and developer-led car park proposal) consulted with iwi as part of their resource consent application (prior to July 2015). Earthworks on or within 50m of a site or place of value to mana whenua was a restricted discretionary activity under the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan. Relevant iwi were notified of the application to determine whether there was a requirement for a cultural impact assessment (CIA) to be undertaken. The following responses were received:

·        Ngati Whatua o Kaipara replied stating that their korero is given provided three conditions are incorporated into the application:

Ngati Whatua o Kaipara will be notified prior to commencement of works in order that tikanga may be observed

provision shall be made for further input from Ngati Whatua o Kaipara concerning the trees and vegetation to be included in the design

the use of te reo Māori where appropriate.

·        Te Runanga o Ngati Whatua o Kaipara stated that they will defer their interests in the proposal to Ngati Whatua o Kaipara to minimise any duplication of effort.

19.     It is therefore proposed to engage directly with Ngati Whatua o Kaipara on this project.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

20.     Funding is available through the Albany Off-Street Parking Fund. A decision to revoke the previous resolution will enable the project to progress using this fund.

21.     The budget available has increased since it was approved for release to the local board from $354,374 in 2015 to $426,000 in the 2018 financial year. The reserve fund will continue to attract interest until it is utilised.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

22.     The following risk has been identified:

Risk

Proposed mitigation

Risk to Auckland Council’s reputation if additional car parking is not provided for, given a fund was established for this specific purpose

Revoke the previous local board resolution and allocate funding from the Albany Off-Street Parking Fund to complete construction of the car park extension within Kell Park

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

23.     If the recommendation is supported by the local board, the Albany Off-Street Parking Fund will be transferred to Community Facilities to enable the design, consent and construction of the car park to progress in the financial years 2018 and 2019.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.    

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Angela Levet – Senior Growth Development Specialist

Authorisers

Rod Sheridan - General Manager Community Facilities

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

Auckland Transport monthly report - May 2018

 

File No.: CP2018/06989

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To:

·     respond to resolutions and requests on transport-related matters

·     provide an update on the status of the Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF)

·     request approval for new LBTCF projects

·     provide a summary of consultation material sent to the local board

·     provide transport-related information on matters of specific application and interest to the Upper Harbour Local Board and its community.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       This report covers:

·     Auckland Transport’s (AT) quarterly report for January to March 2018

·     status of the Local Board Transport Capital Fund projects

·     consultation on proposed safety improvements

·     Traffic Control Committee (TCC) report.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a)      receive the Auckland Transport update for April 2018.

 

Horopaki / Context

Projects and activities of interest

Quarterly report for January to March 2018

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

·     Attachment A – report from AT on their activities in the Upper Harbour Local Board area and regionally over the last quarter

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


 

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

4.       The following table provides an update of the board’s current projects:

Project

Description

Status

Gills Road

footpath and pedestrian bridge

To construct a footpath along Gills Road between the Living Stream intersection and the one-way bridge

Footbridge: construction is complete and the bridge is available for public use.

Footpath and boardwalks: construction contract was awarded on 6 April 2018, which includes the concrete footpath and boardwalk. This is progressing to plan and expected to meet timeframes below:

Description

Date for completion

Time

Tender publish date

23 February 2018

In for a period of two weeks

Deadline for tenders

10am 16 March 2018

Three weeks open tender

Tenderer review

30 March 2018

Two-week tender review period

Award of contract

6 April 2018

One week for paperwork

Establish onsite

Mid to late April 2018

Two weeks mobilisation

Contract period

Two plus months

Two plus months

Revised scheme extents: the project scheme extents have been revised.

The new Gills Road Link project connecting the housing developments in the Gills Road area towards Albany town centre (Oteha Valley Road) is being developed and scheduled to start construction in October 2018. For the Gills Road Link project to successfully tie in to the existing Gills Road network, vertical realignment is required approximately 170m down the existing section of Gills Road towards the one-way bridge, and approximately 200m up the existing section of Gills Road towards Living Stream Road.

To protect AT’s reputation (by avoiding re-work in a couple of months) a mutually acceptable ‘extent of works’ for both projects has been defined and agreed. The initial footpath project extended 652m in length, between the one-way bridge and Living Stream Road. The footpath project scheme extents have been revised to halve the initial proposed length as the overlap between the two projects is significant.

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

Consultation documents on proposed improvements

5.       Consultation documents for the following proposals have been provided to the Upper Harbour Local Board for its feedback and are summarised here for information purposes only.

 

6.       Following consultation, AT considers the feedback received and determines whether to proceed further with the proposal as consulted on or to proceed with an amended proposal if changes are considered necessary. Following is a list of proposed improvements in the Upper Harbour Local Board area:

·     Whenuapai 1 stage 4 – proposed on-street changes

·     258-268 Hobsonville Point Road, Hobsonville – proposed roads within a new subdivision

·     Constellation Drive park and ride – three time-restricted spaces (XP5) will be converted to motorcycle parking (MC1). These three spaces will be relocated to the existing P240 time-restricted parking. Consequently, the P240 angle parking area will be reduced by three parking spaces

·     install broken yellow lines (no stopping at all times – NSAAT) on both sides of the eastern end of Kell Drive, including the removal of approximately six parking spaces

·     install NSAAT around the bends of and opposite the intersection of Horizon Way and Reflection Drive, West Harbour

·     install parking restrictions on Samuels Lane, including NSAAT, along one side of the bend on Samuels Lane and around the intersection with Red Shed Lane, Albany

·     install NSAAT on Apollo Drive, Rosedale, to the west of number 43, including parking removal of approximately two spaces

·     install NSAAT near the driveway of 1 Sunnydale Place, Oteha

·     install NSAAT on Tait Place, Rosedale

·     implement a new weekday evening clearway along the southern side of Constellation Drive

·     install NSAAT around several bus stops on Constellation Drive, Rosedale

·     install NSAAT on Schopolo Place, Schnapper Rock.

Auckland Transport’s Traffic Control Committee (TCC) report

7.       Decisions of the TCC during the month of March 2018 affecting the Upper Harbour Local Board area are listed below:

 

Date

Street (suburb)

Type of report

Nature of restriction

Decision

1 March 2018

Vega Place, Atlas Place, Ascension Place, Whetu Place, Rosedale

Permanent traffic and parking changes combined

NSAAT, P720, give-way

Carried

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

8.       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

9.       The following table outlines the current balance available to the board in its Local Board Transport Capital Fund. The option selected for the upgrade of Rame Road will impact the board’s remaining budget:


 

 

Upper Harbour Local Board Transport Capital Fund financial summary

Total funds available in current political term

$1,835,080

Amount committed to date on projects approved for design and/or construction

$1,938,222

Remaining budget

-$103,142

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

10.     No significant risks have been identified.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Quarterly report - January to March 2018

73

b

Travelwise schools activities - January to March 2018

89

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Owena Schuster – Elected Member Relationship Manager, Auckland Transport

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon – Elected Member Relationship Team Manager, Auckland Transport

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

Business Improvement District (BID) Programme Compliance Report to Upper Harbour Local Board for FY 2016-2017

 

File No.: CP2018/05817

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To provide information on compliance with Auckland Council’s Business Improvement District (BID) Policy 2016 (Hōtaka ā-Rohe Whakapiki Pakihi) by Business North Harbour Incorporated for the financial year ending June 2017.  

2.       To provide information on which the local board will recommend to the Governing Body to strike the targeted rate for this BID programme.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

3.       Auckland Council’s Business Improvement District (BID) programme supports business associations by collecting a targeted rate from commercial properties within a defined geographic area. The funds from the targeted rate are then provided by way of a grant to the relevant business association (BID).

4.       The BIDs are incorporated societies that are independent of council. For council to be confident that the funds provided to the BIDs are being used appropriately, council requires the BIDs to comply with the BID Policy (2016) (Hōtaka ā-Rohe Whakapiki Pakihi), known as the BID Policy. 

5.       The BID Policy was developed to encourage improved governance of BID committees and staff to improve financial management, programme delivery and transparency to their members. 

6.       This report indicates that Business North Harbour Incorporated is in compliance with the BID Policy. Information presented in this report is based on documents submitted by this business association to council’s BID programme team to date. 

7.       Staff therefore recommend that as the BID has met the requirements of the BID Policy, that the Upper Harbour Local Board should recommend to the Governing Body to strike the targeted rate sought by the BID.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a)      recommend that the Governing Body strike the targeted rate of $690,621 for inclusion in the Annual Budget 2018-2019, for the Business North Harbour Incorporated Business Improvement District (BID) programme.

 

Horopaki / Context

1.       The council adopted the Business Improvement District BID Policy in 2016. This policy outlines the principles behind the council BID program. It creates the process for establishing, expanding, and disestablishing BIDs and prescribes operating standards and guidelines. The policy also sets accountability requirements. Please see Attachment A for a review of key elements of the BID programme.

2.       BID targeted rates are applied to all commercially-rated properties within a designated area around a town centre or commercial precinct. Those funds are transferred to the business association operating the BID programme.

3.       There are currently 48 BID programmes throughout Auckland which represent more than 25,000 businesses and a combined $17.5 million in targeted rates investment. Please see Attachment B for current and proposed targeted rates budgets for all BIDs.

4.       Under the Auckland Council shared governance arrangements, local boards are allocated several decision-making responsibilities. One of these is to annually recommend BID targeted rates to the Governing Body. The Local Board should recommend the striking of the targeted rate if it is satisfied that the BID is substantially complying with the BID Policy.

5.       Recommendations of this report are put into effect with the Governing Body’s approval of the Annual Budget 2018-2019 and striking of the targeted rate.

6.       This report is a requirement of the BID Policy (2016).

Compliance with the BID Policy

7.   The BID Policy is the means for the council to ensure accountability for BID targeted rate funding and encourage good governance. This is achieved by requiring regular reporting by BID-operating business associations, specifically by providing to council the following documents, and contacting their local board(s) at least once a year:

·        current strategic plan – evidence of achievable medium to long-term opportunities

·        audited accounts – assurance that the BID-operating business association is managing its members’ BID targeted rates funds responsibly

·        annual report on the year just completed – evidence that programmes are addressing priority issues that benefit BID targeted ratepayers

·        business plan for the coming year – detailed one-year programme, based on the strategic plan, to be achieved and resourced

·        indicative budget for the following year – Auckland Council’s annual budget requires targeted rates to be identified a year in advance to inform the annual budget process which sets all rates

·        board charter – establishes guidelines for effective board governance and positive relationships between the association and its members

·        annual accountability agreement – certification that these requirements have been met

·        programme agreement – a good faith agreement between each BID-operating business association and council that sets basic parameters of the council/business association relationship.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

8.       The council BID programme team monitors compliance with the BID Policy on an ongoing basis, and provides governance advice to BID-operating business associations as needed or requested.

9.       As BID programmes are operated by private independent societies, their programmes and services are provided according to their members’ stated priorities. In recognition of their independent corporate status, the policy does not prescribe standards for programme effectiveness. Officers, therefore, cannot base recommendations on these factors, but only on the policy’s express requirements.

10.     Business North Harbour Incorporated has complied with the BID Policy. Information presented in this report is based on documents submitted to date by this business association to council’s BID programme team. 

11.     Staff therefore recommend that as the BID has met the requirements of the BID Policy, the Upper Harbour Local Board recommend to the Governing Body to strike the targeted rate sought by the BID.

12.     The recommendation of this report is supported by evidence of full compliance with the council’s BID policy by Business North Harbour Incorporated, which operates in the Upper Harbour Local Board area. Please see Attachment C for details.

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

13.     Should the Upper Harbour Local Board recommend that the Governing Body strike the targeted rate for Business North Harbour Incorporated, this will ensure the BID programme continues to be funded from targeted rates on commercial properties in its district. This will also ensure continued provision of services in accordance with the business association’s strategic plan for its members.

14.     By continuing these services and programmes, Business North Harbour Incorporated should better serve the commercial precinct and its members, and support business growth.

15.     The Upper Harbour Local Board approved a similar recommendation for the Business North Harbour BID programme last year (resolution number UH/2017/44) as did the 17 other local boards that have BID programmes operating in their areas. 

16.     Any additional funding and associated accountability requirements provided by the local board to local business associations are separate to the requirements of the BID Policy and are not covered in this report.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

17.     This decision will have no adverse effects on, or particular benefits to, the Māori population.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

18.     There are no financial implications for the local board. Targeted rates for BID-operating business associations are raised directly from commercial ratepayers in the district and used by the business association for improvements within that district. The council’s financial role is only to collect the BID targeted rates and pass them directly to the association on a quarterly basis.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

19.     There are reputational risks to council if ratepayer funds are misused, but this is rare. Otherwise, there are no direct financial risks to the local board or the council that could result from the recommendation to approve the BID targeted rates.

20.     The requirements of the BID Policy are intended to help minimise the potential for BIDs to misuse funds, by requiring each BID to plan for the intended use of funds, report on its activities to its members, and to have its accounts audited. 

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

21.     If the Upper Harbour Local Board accepts the recommendation of this report, it will recommend to the Governing Body that the BID targeted rate be struck, as stated in the above recommendation, as part of its approval of the Annual Budget 2018-2019.


 

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Business Improvement District key elements 2018

95

b

Business Improvement District budgets

97

c

Business North Harbour annual compliance report

99

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Paul  Thompson - BID Programme Specialist

Authorisers

Alastair Cameron - Manager - CCO Governance & External Partnerships

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

Draft 2018-2028 Regional Land Transport Plan, draft Regional Fuel Tax proposal and draft Contributions Policy

 

File No.: CP2018/06677

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To seek formal local board feedback on the draft 2018-2028 Regional Land Transport Plan, the draft Regional Fuel Tax proposal and the draft Contributions Policy 2018.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       The Regional Land Transport Plan (RLTP) sets out a 10-year capital and operating programme for transport in Auckland. It covers transport activities delivered by Auckland Transport, the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA), Auckland Council and KiwiRail.

3.       The draft RLTP has been developed in collaboration with the NZTA. Legislation requires that the RLTP is revised every six years and reviewed after three years. It has been agreed that the level of change associated with Auckland’s growth warrants a full revision of the RLTP.

4.       The RLTP will be consulted with the public between 1 and 14 May 2018.

5.       Alongside the RLTP, Auckland Council is consulting the public on a draft Regional Fuel Tax (RFT) proposal. The council consulted on a fuel tax to fund transport improvements as part of the 10-year Budget. The regional fuel tax, if introduced, would add 10 cents a litre (plus GST), and generate approximately $1.5 billion over 10 years for transport projects in Auckland. At the time, the Government Policy Statement on Land Transport (GPS) and the Auckland Transport Alignment Project (ATAP) were still under review, so the projects proposed to be funded by a regional fuel tax could not be identified. The draft RFT proposal sets out the programmes and projects that the regional fuel tax would fund.

6.       The draft RFT proposal is conditional on the enactment of the Land Transport Management (Regional Fuel Tax) Amendment Bill which is currently passing through the Parliamentary process.

7.       The council is also consulting on a draft Contributions Policy 2018. This policy proposes an increase in development contributions to reflect additional investment, including for parks.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board give formal written feedback on:

a)      the draft 2018-2028 Regional Land Transport Plan

b)      the draft Regional Fuel Tax proposal

c)      the draft Contributions Policy.

 

Horopaki / Context

Regional Land Transport Plan

8.       The Land Transport Management Act 2003 requires that the Regional Transport Committee (RTC) prepare an RLTP every six years, which sets out the region’s transport priorities for the next 10 years and must contribute to the purposes of the Land Transport Management Act and be consistent with the Government Policy Statement on Land Transport (GPS).

9.       At its meeting on 24 October 2017, the Auckland Transport Board agreed that the level of change associated with Auckland’s growth warrants a full review of the RLTP. Since the 2015 RLTP was prepared, Auckland’s population growth has increased at a much faster pace than was envisaged. By 2028, the population of Auckland is expected to be around two million people; four years earlier than projected in 2015. Significant investment in transport infrastructure and services will be required to meet the increasing needs of these additional people, both to service new housing required to match growth and to service many more customers.

10.     The draft RLTP (refer to Attachment A) has been developed in collaboration with the NZTA and on 1 February 2018, was considered by the Regional Transport Committee (a committee comprised of the Auckland Transport Board and a representative of the NZTA convened to adopt the RLTP). This was subsequently approved by the Chair and Deputy Chair under delegation.

11.     Preparation of the draft RLTP and consultation were delayed as the GPS and ATAP were still under review, leading to some uncertainty about project priorities. Both the GPS and ATAP have now been released and have informed the draft RLTP.

Regional Fuel Tax

12.     In preparing the 10-year Budget 2018-2028, the council considered a range of funding options for its activities. The consultation on the 10-year Budget signalled that, to achieve the level of investment that Auckland needs to address its transport issues, new funding mechanisms for transport were required. An RFT of 10 cents per litre plus GST was proposed, subject to central government providing a legislative basis for such a tax.

13.     While the RFT, as a funding mechanism, was the subject of consultation, there was no ability to identify the projects that might be funded from the RFT at that time, due to the review of the GPS and ATAP.

14.     The government has initiated the Land Transport Management (Regional Fuel Tax) Amendment Bill. If passed, this will enable Auckland to levy a regional fuel tax of up to 10 cents per litre, plus GST, from 1 July 2018.

15.     A draft Regional Fuel Tax proposal (refer to Attachment B) has been developed based on the requirements of the draft legislation. While the legislation is still to progress through the full Parliamentary process, the transitional provisions in the legislation mean that Auckland Council can develop a draft proposal, consult with the public and submit to the responsible ministers (the Minister of Finance and Minister of Transport) for consideration, once the legislation has been passed.

Contributions Policy

16.     Development contributions enable the council to charge developers for a portion of the cost of growth infrastructure needed because of development. The current Contributions Policy expires on 30 June 2018. The policy needs to be amended to reflect changes to capital expenditure in the 10-year Budget 2018-2028 and the RLTP.

17.     Over the next 10 years, the council needs to fund additional infrastructure to enable construction of 120,000 dwellings to house an expected 300,000 additional Aucklanders. The 10-year Budget also allowed for an increase in investment in parks.

18.     The proposed Contributions Policy 2018 (refer to Attachment C) proposes an increase in both urban and greenfield prices to reflect this additional investment.

19.     Central government has recently introduced the Local Government (Community Well-being) Amendment Bill which would restore the council’s ability to use development contributions to fund public swimming pools and libraries. It is not certain when this legislation will be passed so provision for the inclusion of public swimming pools and libraries has not been included in the draft Contributions Policy 2018. Once the legislation has been passed, the council can consider amending the policy to include the growth component of any qualifying expenditure, or to prioritise within the expenditure programme for community infrastructure.

20.     The timetable for this process is very compressed. Public consultation on the draft RLTP, draft Regional Fuel Tax proposal and draft Contributions Policy will run for two weeks between 1 May and 14 May 2018.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

21.     Consultation material for the following documents has been attached for consideration of the Upper Harbour Local Board. Formal feedback on these consultation documents is being sought from local boards through this report:

·        draft 2018-2028 Regional Land Transport Plan

·        Regional Fuel Tax proposal

·        draft Development Contributions Policy.

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

22.     The RLTP sets out a 10-year regional programme. Early engagement with local boards has taken place to ensure that projects of interest to local communities could be taken into account in the prioritisation process by which the programme was developed.

23.     This report provides the opportunity for local boards to give formal feedback on the capital and operating programmes and any other aspects of the RLTP, including projects of interest to local communities. In particular, feedback from local boards is sought on whether the RLTP places the appropriate emphasis on the priority areas.

24.     The draft RFT proposal reflects the priority projects in the RLTP, along with a few specific local board priorities.

25.     The draft proposal signals the council’s intent to exclude Great Barrier Island from the regional fuel tax, in line with council’s submission on the draft legislation and subject to the legislation being amended accordingly. The consultation will also signal council’s advocacy in support of rebates being enabled for fuel that is purchased for off-road use, an issue which has been raised by a few local boards.

26.     The draft Contributions Policy price varies by location, depending on the cost of infrastructure required to support development in an area. The capital expenditure programme to be funded by development contributions was included in the draft 10-year budget and local boards can provide feedback on the proposed programme through the long-term plan process.

27.     Local boards have been invited to attend a briefing on the draft RLTP on 30 April 2018, followed by a full day of informal hearings-style sessions on 7 May 2018 with representatives of the Auckland Transport Board giving verbal feedback. This report enables boards to provide formal feedback to inform further decision-making on the RLTP.

28.     The draft RFT proposal and draft Contributions Policy will also be covered in the briefing. Formal feedback from local boards will be considered by the Governing Body and/or the Finance and Performance Committee when making their decisions on the RFT and the 10-year budget.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

29.     Many components of the RLTP are of importance to and impact on Māori. The RLTP is one of the tools that can enable and can demonstrate responsiveness to Māori. Early engagement with mana whenua took place throughout the region during the development of the draft.

30.     The introduction of a RFT will negatively impact some lower socio-economic communities who do not have access to alternative transport options and rely on their private vehicles. Māori tend to represent a high proportion of these communities. However, many of the projects that will be funded by the RFT are targeted at improving transport access to jobs and education for these communities, as well as providing greater public transport alternatives. In the longer term, this should have a positive impact for these communities.

31.     The impact on Māori for the changes to development contributions will be similar to the impact on other residents and ratepayers. The council’s Māori Cultural Initiatives Fund provides grants to support marae and papakāinga development and can be used to fund development contributions. The Contributions Policy treats kaumatua housing the same as retirement villages, which generally place lower demands on council services.

32.     There is a need to continue to build relationships between the council, transport agencies, mana whenua, and where relevant, the wider Māori community. Ongoing engagement will assist the council and agencies in understanding priorities for Māori, and can encourage Māori participation in decision-making processes.

33.     Appropriate engagement on the RLTP, RFT proposal and Contributions Policy are planned for the consultation period.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

34.     The financial implications of the draft RLTP, RFT proposal and Contributions Policy are set out in those documents. There are no specific financial implications from seeking local board feedback.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

35.     This report seeks local board feedback on draft regional proposals, which is part of the local board role. There are no specific risks from this process.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

36.     Possible changes to the RLTP, RFT proposal, and Contributions Policy will be considered following public consultation.

37.     The RFT proposal will be considered by the Governing Body for adoption and submission to Government on 31 May 2018.

38.     Decisions on the Contributions Policy will also be made on 31 May 2018, with the final policy document planned to be adopted on 27 June 2018.

39.     The final RLTP document will be considered by the Auckland Transport Board for approval prior to 30 June 2018.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Draft 2018-2028 Regional Land Transport Plan for consultation

105

b

Draft Regional Fuel Tax proposal

183

c

Draft Contributions Proposal and Contributions Policy 2018

207

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Anna Bray - Policy and Planning Manager - Local Boards

Authorisers

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator



Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

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

 

File No.: CP2018/07307

 

  

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 Upper Harbour 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

261

b

Rodney ward boundary options

263

c

Manurewa-Papakura ward boundary options

265

d

Local board subdivisions and the 10 per cent rule

267

e

Botany subdivision boundary options

269

f

Rodney Local Board subdivision options

273

g

Waitemata Local Board subdivision option

277

h

Upper Harbour Local Board subdivision option

279

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Warwick McNaughton - Principal Advisor - Democracy Services

Authorisers

Marguerite Delbet - General Manager Democracy Services

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

New road names for subdivision at 144 Albany Highway, Albany

 

File No.: CP2018/06449

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To approve road names for the public and private roads being constructed for the subdivision being undertaken by the applicant, HLG Holding Limited, at 144 Albany Highway, Albany.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       Auckland Council has road naming guidelines that set out the requirements and criteria of the council for proposed road names. These requirements and criteria have been applied in this situation to ensure consistency of road naming across the Auckland region.

3.       The applicant has submitted the following names in order of preference:

·        Koura Close - private road

·        Taimana Place - public road

·        Haipara Close or Place - public or private road

·        Hiriwa Close or Place - public or private road.

4.       Koura Close is not considered suitable as it is already duplicated in the Auckland region.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a)      approve the new road name ‘Taimana Place’ for the new public road in the subdivision being undertaken by HLG Holding Limited, at 144 Albany Highway, Albany.

b)      approve ‘Haipara Close’ or ‘Hiriwa Close’ for the new private road in the subdivision being undertaken by HLG Holding Limited, at 144 Albany Highway, Albany.

 

Horopaki / Context

5.       The 24-residential lot subdivision at 144 Albany Highway (council reference BUN10686125) was approved on 24 May 2017 and is currently under construction.

6.       The council and Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) require that public roads be named and that private roads servicing six or more lots also be named.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

7.       Auckland Council’s road naming criteria typically require that road names reflect:

·        a historical or ancestral linkage to an area

·        a particular landscape, environment or biodiversity theme or feature, or

·        an existing (or introduced) thematic identity in the area

·        the use of Māori names is also encouraged.

8.       The applicant has chosen the names of minerals translated to Māori names as a naming theme in the subdivision.

9.       The English translation of the Māori names is:

·        Koura - gold

·        Taimana - diamond

·        Haipara - sapphire

·        Hiriwa – silver.

10.     Aside from the name Koura, LINZ has confirmed that the other names are acceptable and that no duplicates exist in the Auckland region.

11.     The applicant has consulted with all local iwi groups and received support for the names, as detailed later in the report.

12.     The names meet the council’s road naming guidelines in that they create a unique name theme within the subdivision.

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

13.     The decision sought for this report does not trigger any significant policy and is not considered to have any immediate impact on the community.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

14.     The applicant has consulted with all local iwi groups and received support for the name suggestions from Ngatati Whanaunga Incorporated Society and Manuhiri Kaitiaki Charitable Trust. All other consulted iwi groups deferred to other iwi groups who did not respond.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

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

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

16.     There are no significant risks to council as road naming is a routine part of the subdivision development process, with consultation being a key part of the process.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

17.     Approved road names are notified to affected parties, including LINZ, who record them on their New Zealand-wide land information database, which includes street addresses issued by councils.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

144 Albany Highway Road Map

285

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

John Benefield – Senior Subdivision Advisor

Authorisers

Trevor Cullen - Team Leader Subdivision

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 



Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 



Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

New road names for subdivision at 40A and 42 Kewa Road, Albany

 

File No.: CP2018/06458

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To approve three names for the following roads in the subdivision being undertaken by the applicant, CDL Land New Zealand Limited, at 40A and 42 Kewa Road, Albany:

·        an extension to Kewa Road

·        one new public road

·        one new private road.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       Auckland Council has road naming guidelines that set out the requirements and criteria of the council for proposed road names. These requirements and criteria have been applied in this situation to ensure consistency of road naming across the Auckland region.

3.       The applicant has submitted the following names in order of preference:

·        Kewa Road – extension to the existing main public road

·        Hakura Street - stub public road

·        Baleen Street - stub public road

·        Brydes Street - stub public road

·        Paikea Street – private road

·        Pilot Street – private road

·        Minke Street – private road.

4.       All names are considered suitable as they meet the road naming guidelines.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a)      approve the road name ‘Kewa Road’ for the extension to the main public road in the subdivision being undertaken by CDL Land New Zealand Limited, at 40A and 42 Kewa Road, Albany.

b)      approve either ‘Hakura Street’, ‘Baleen Street’ or ‘Brydes Street’ for the new stub public road in the subdivision being undertaken by CDL Land New Zealand Limited, at 40A and 42 Kewa Road, Albany.

c)      approve either ‘Paikea Street’, ‘Pilot Street’ or ‘Minke Street’ for the new private road in the subdivision being undertaken by CDL Land New Zealand Limited, at 40A and 42 Kewa Road, Albany.

 

Horopaki / Context

5.       The 92-residential lot subdivision at 40A and 42 Kewa Road, Albany, (council reference SUB60033069) was approved on 4 September 2017 and is currently under construction.

6.       The council and Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) require that public roads be named, and that private roads servicing six or more lots also be named.

7.       A condition of subdivision consent required the applicant to provide road names for the council’s consideration and approval.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

8.       Auckland Council’s road naming criteria typically require that road names reflect:

·        a historical or ancestral linkage to an area

·        a particular landscape, environment or biodiversity theme or feature, or

·        an existing (or introduced) thematic identity in the area

·        the use of Māori names is also encouraged.

9.       The applicant has chosen the names of whales commonly found in New Zealand waters as a theme for the subdivision, with some of these names translated to Māori.

10.     The theme reflects the existing name of Kewa Road, which is being extended throughout the subdivision. 

11.     The English whale names Baleen, Brydes, Pilot and Minke are self-explanatory, and the English translation of the Māori whale names is:

·        Kewa Road - Southern Right whale

·        Hakura Street - Gray’s Beaked or Scamperdown whale

·        Paikea Street - Humpback whale.

12.     LINZ has confirmed the other proposed names are all acceptable and that no duplicates exist in the Auckland region.

13.     The applicant has consulted with all local iwi groups and received support for the names, as detailed later in the report.

14.     The names meet the council’s road naming guidelines in that they create a unique road name theme for the subdivision.

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

15.     The decision sought for this report does not trigger any significant policy and is not considered to have any immediate impact on the community.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

16.     The applicant has consulted with all local iwi groups and received support for the name suggestions from Te Runanga o Ngāti Whatua, Ngāti Manuhiri, Ngāti Whatua o Kaipara, Te Kawerau a Maki, Ngai Kai Ki Tamaki, and Ngāti Tamatera. No responses were received from all other consulted iwi groups.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

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

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

18.     There are no significant risks to council as road naming is a routine part of the subdivision development process, with consultation being a key part of the process.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

19.     Approved road names are notified to LINZ, who records them on their New Zealand-wide land information database, which includes street addresses issued by councils.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

42 Kewa Road location map

291

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

John Benefield – Senior Subdivision Advisor

Authorisers

Trevor Cullen - Team Leader Subdivision

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 



Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator



Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

Governance forward work calendar - June 2018 to May 2019

 

File No.: CP2018/05759

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To present the updated governance forward work calendar.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       The governance forward work calendar for the Upper Harbour Local Board is in Attachment A. The calendar is updated monthly, reported to business meetings and distributed to council staff.

3.       The governance forward work calendars were introduced in 2016 as part of Auckland Council’s quality advice programme and aim to support local boards’ governance role by:

·     ensuring advice on meeting agendas is driven by local board priorities

·     clarifying what advice is expected and when

·     clarifying the rationale for reports.

4.       The calendar also aims to provide guidance for staff supporting local boards and greater transparency for the public.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a)      receive the Upper Harbour Local Board governance forward work calendar for the period June 2018 to May 2019, as set out in Attachment A to this agenda report.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Governance forward work calendar - June 2018 to May 2019

295

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Cindy Lynch - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

Record of the Upper Harbour Local Board workshops held on Thursday 5, 12, 19 and 26 April 2018

 

File No.: CP2018/05760

 

  

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

1.       The Upper Harbour Local Board workshops were held on Thursday 8 and 22 March 2018. Copies of the workshop records are attached (refer to Attachments A and B).

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a)      receive the record of the Upper Harbour Local Board workshops held on Thursday 5, 12, 19 and 26 April 2018 (refer to Attachments A, B, C and D to this agenda report).

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Upper Harbour Local Board workshop record - 5 April 2018

301

b

Upper Harbour Local Board workshop record - 12 April 2018

303

c

Upper Harbour Local Board workshop record - 19 April 2018

305

d

Upper Harbour Local Board workshop record - 26 April 2018

307

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Cindy Lynch - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

Board Members' reports - May 2018

 

File No.: CP2018/05764

 

  

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

1.       An opportunity is provided for members to update the Upper Harbour Local Board on projects and issues they have been involved with since the last meeting.

[Note: This is an information item and if the board wishes any action to be taken under this item, a written report must be provided for inclusion on the agenda.]

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a)      receive the verbal board members’ reports.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Cindy Lynch - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

Chairperson's report - Lisa Whyte

 

File No.: CP2018/07576

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To provide a final chairperson’s message from Lisa Whyte, prior to the change of the chairperson position on 1 June 2018.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a)      receive the final report from Chairperson Lisa Whyte.

b)      receive the attendance record of members as submitted by Chairperson Lisa Whyte in response to requests from residents via social media for more transparency on attendance.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Chairperson's report - Lisa Whyte

313

b

Board members' attendance for the 2016-2019 electoral term

315

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Karen Marais - Senior Local Board Advisor Upper Harbour

Authorisers

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator

    

  


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

 

Item 8.2      Attachment a    Hobsonville Marina masterplan - artist's impression Page 319



Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Upper Harbour Local Board

17 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator