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

 

Date:

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

 

Thursday, 24 May 2018

6.00pm

Waitākere Ranges Local Board Office
39 Glenmall Place
Glen Eden

 

Waitākere Ranges Local Board

 

OPEN AGENDA

 

 

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Chairperson

Greg Presland

 

Deputy Chairperson

Saffron Toms

 

Members

Sandra Coney, QSO

 

 

Neil Henderson

 

 

Steve Tollestrup

 

 

(Quorum 3 members)

 

 

 

Brenda  Railey

Democracy Advisor

 

18 May 2018

 

Contact Telephone: +64 21 820 781

Email: brenda.railey@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

 

 


 

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 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

9          Public Forum                                                                                                                  5

10        Extraordinary Business                                                                                                5

11        Notices of Motion                                                                                                          6

12        240A Bethells Road Te Henga - Marae and Kainga Whakahirahira                        7

13        New community lease to Swanson Railway Station Trust, approval to enter into a sublease and reclassification of part of 760 Swanson Road, Swanson               15

14        New road name in the Solution Street Limited subdivision at 44 Ambler Avenue, Glen Eden.                                                                                                                             35

15        Auckland Transport's May 2018 report for the Waitākere Ranges Local Board 41

16        Change and Development in Glen Eden Report: 2017                                            59

17        Auckland Council’s Quarterly Performance Report: Waitākere Ranges Local Board for quarter three, 1 January - 31 March 2018                                                                 91

18        Reallocation of LDI Opex, FY 2017 / 2018: Wāitakere Ranges Local Board       141

19        Proposed Establishment of Auckland Food Alliance                                           143

20        Review of Auckland Council’s representation arrangements for the 2019 elections 157

21        Panuku Development Auckland Local Board six-monthly update 1 October 2017 - 31 March 2018                                                                                                                 189

22        Local Board feedback on the Local Government (Community Well-being) Amendment Bill                                                                                                                                     197

23        Draft 2018-2028 Regional Land Transport Plan and draft Regional Fuel Tax proposal submissions                                                                                                               201

24        Governance Forward Work Programme Calendar                                                209

25        Confirmation of Workshop Records                                                                       213

26        Chair’s report - May 2018                                                                                          225  

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 Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

a)         confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Thursday, 10 May 2018, including the confidential section, as a true and correct record.

 

5          Leave of Absence

 

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

 

6          Acknowledgements

 

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

 

7          Petitions

 

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

 

8          Deputations

 

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

 

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

 

9          Public Forum

 

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

 

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.

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 

240A Bethells Road Te Henga - Marae and Kainga Whakahirahira

 

File No.: CP2018/07910

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To seek the Local Board’s views on the revocation of the reserve status of 240A Bethells Road, Te Henga, and the transfer of this land to enable Te Kawerau ā Maki to develop a marae and papakāinga.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       To enable the Local Board’s views to inform decision-making on possible options to facilitate the development of a marae and papakāinga by Te Kawerau ā Maki at Te Henga.

3.       Staff recommend that the Waitākere Ranges Local Board support the revocation of the classification of 240A Bethells Road, Te Henga under the Reserves Act 1977. Staff also recommend that the Local Board support the transfer this site to Te Kawerau ā Maki for the purpose of constructing a marae and papakāinga. Disposal of the land aligns with the wider strategic objectives of Auckland Council and there is ample provision of open space within this area.

4.       These steps would enable the development of a marae and papakāinga. Without them it is likely that Te Kawerau ā Maki will continue to be the only mana whenua group without an iwi-based marae.

5.       The main risk to manage is public expectations about ongoing access. Te Kawerau ā Maki have previously expressed a willingness to make the marae facilities available to community when not in use by the iwi.

6.       The Local Board’s views will be incorporated into reports to the Environment and Community Committee on the possible revocation of the reserve status and the Finance and Performance Committee on the disposal of the land.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

a)      support the revocation of the classification of 240A Bethells Road, Te Henga, identified as Section 1 SO 427404 comprising 2.6836 hectares and contained in CFR538253, as a Local Purpose (marae papakāinga) Reserve under the Reserves Act 1977.

b)      support the transfer of the 240A Bethells Road, Te Henga, identified as Section 1 SO 427404 comprising 2.6836 hectares and contained in CFR538253, to Te Kawerau ā Maki as general freehold land in Fee Simple for the purpose of constructing a marae and papakāinga.

Horopaki / Context

7.       Waitākere City Council and Te Kawerau ā Maki were in discussions over the development of a marae within the traditional heartland of the iwi and in the vicinity of their ancestral village at Waiti since the mid-1990s.

8.       The following is a summary of key developments.

·     Waitākere City Council and Te Kawerau ā Maki investigated three possible sites in 1994 and 1995, before Te Henga was identified as the preferred site for a marae.

·     Waitākere City Council allocated $30,000 in the 1995/96 Annual Plan to assist Te Kawerau ā Maki to purchase 240A Bethells Road.[1] This site was also zoned as ‘Marae Special Area’ in the District Plan.

·     In 1998, Waitākere City Council and Te Kawerau ā Maki entered into a memorandum of partnership, which includes an objective to establish a marae.

·     Staff investigated the potential to acquire 240a Bethells Road under the Public Works Act 1981 and re-commence negotiations with the landowner. Budget for the acquisition is allocated in 2008/09. There is also a proposal to vest the land with Te Kawerau ā Maki under the Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993.

·     In 2009, Waitākere City Council purchased the 2.6836 hectares site at 240A Bethells Road, Te Henga for ‘community development purposes.’

·     Waitākere City Council proposed to classify the land as a Local Purpose (marae papakāinga) Reserve under the Reserves Act 1977.

·     The consultation process on the proposed classification generated 104 public submissions and two Ministerial representations.

·     In 2010, the classification was approved by an independent commissioner on condition that ‘the council provide in the proposed Deed of Lease, or any agreement entered into with Te Kawerau ā Maki for the use of the reserve, provision for the community to have the opportunity for effective input into the type and scale of the facilities to be built on site.’

·     On 27 January 2011, approval was granted by the Minister of Conservation for permanent personal accommodation on the reserve (Case No. 2010/11 51) to provide for papakāinga housing.

9.       The Waitākere Ranges Local Board has sought to enable the development of a marae and papakāinga at Te Henga.

10.     In May 2013, the Local Board recommended that staff enter into formal discussions with Te Kawerau ā Maki Iwi Authority to develop a ground lease over the land at Bethells Beach [WTK/2013/93 refers].

11.     In October 2014, the Local Board recommended a four step process by which the land at 240A Bethells Road, Te Henga, is able to be transferred to Te Kawerau ā Maki for the purposes of a marae and papakāinga [WTK/2014/161 refers]. The recommended four steps were:

(i)    an agreement to Lease’ would be signed with Te Kawerau ā Maki Iwi Authority followed by an ‘Agreement to Occupy’

(ii)   completion of Public Works Act 1981 processes, including a section 40 report

(iii)  revocation of the Local Purpose (marae papakāinga) Reserve classification under the Reserve Act 1977

(iv)  transfer of the land to Te Kawerau ā Maki.

12.     To-date, no lease or other agreement has been entered into in relation to the land.

13.     Te Kawerau ā Maki raised concerns about a lease under the Reserves Act 1977. In particular, the iwi has compliance costs associated with the requirement to develop and consult on a reserve management plan as well as limits on land use.

14.     Security of tenure is another issue. Te Kawerau ā Maki have indicated a desire to own the land on which they would build their marae.

15.     A leasehold interest over the land may also restrict the availability of commercial funding for marae and papakāinga development.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

16.     Auckland Council is considering at a range of options to enable Te Kawerau ā Maki to develop a marae and papakāinga at Te Henga. These options include:

·     Option 1: To negotiate a long-term ground lease with Te Kawerau ā Maki in accordance with the classification of the land as a Local Purpose (marae and papakāinga) Reserve.

·     Option 2: To revoke the reserve status on the land and transfer the land to Te Kawerau ā Maki as general freehold land in Fee Simple.

·     Option 3: To revoke the reserve status on the land and to dispose of the land by way of sale to Te Kawerau ā Maki.

17.     Option 1 represents the status quo.

18.     Option 2 appears to accord with the 2014 resolution of the Local Board [WTK/2014/161 refers] and this report seeks confirmation that this remains the Local Board’s preferred option.

19.     Option 3 has largely been discarded because it does not align with the decisions of the former Waitākere City Council.

There are several factors for the Local Board to consider, including strategic alignment and open space provision

20.     Auckland Plan directives to ‘support marae development to achieve social, economic and cultural development’ (Directive 2.4) and ‘investigate and implement a suite of options to support papakāinga development on both traditional Māori land and general land’ (Directive 2.1). 

21.     Provision of land for a marae for Te Kawerau ā Maki appears to be aligned with the Waitākere Ranges Heritage Area Act (2008). Section 29(1) of the Act acknowledges Te Kawerau ā Maki (alongside Ngāti Whātua) as tangata whenua of the heritage area, with a particular historical, traditional, cultural, or spiritual relationship with any land in the heritage area. Further, any deed of acknowledgement developed under this section “must identify any specific opportunities for contribution by the tangata whenua to whom the deed relates to the management of the land by the Crown or the Council” [section 29(5)(d) refers].

22.     There is clear evidence of the longstanding intent of the Waitākere City Council to support, and then acquire land, to enable the development of the marae.

23.     The objectives, policies and rules of the Unitary Plan: Special Purpose Zone – Māori Purpose enable marae and papakāinga activities on the site.

24.     Potential disposals of open space, such as a transfer, are assessed against the criteria in the Parks and Open Space Acquisition Policy and the Open Space Provision Policy.

25.     A summary of the disposal assessment is provided in Table 1 below.

26.     A range of other factors need to be considered prior to disposal, including the possible future development of the area and the potential for increased demand for parks and open space.

27.     Given that Te Henga is situated within the Waitākere Ranges Heritage Area there is limited growth and potential for future development.

28.     There is ample provision of open space provision within this area. Local residents and the wider community have access to Te Henga Park, Te Henga Recreation Reserve and Lake Wainamu Scenic Reserve within a 400 metre radius of 240A Bethells Road.

29.     The parcel of land has a very narrow access (approximately 5.8 metres wide and 395 metres long), which limits the utility of the open space and poor crime prevention through environmental design outcomes.

30.     Community views and preferences are another consideration, which the Local Board may be able to provide based on their networks and community engagement.

Table 1: Assessment of proposed disposal of land in Bethells

Park type: Open space

Number of lots: 125 (within one km catchment)

Density: Low

Number of residents[2]: 375

Unitary plan zone: Special Purpose Zone – Māori Purpose

Proposed size of disposal: 26,836m²

General valuation: $650,000 – 2017

Settlement: To be determined

Potential future use:

Cultural

 

Nature / Ecological

Disposal Criteria

Comment

Overall Rating

Meeting community needs, now and in the future

Not a priority:

·      the land does not contribute to the provision targets in the Open Space Provision Policy.

High priority
ü





High priority
ü





High priority
ü





High priority
ü





Disposal recommended

Connecting parks and open spaces

Not a priority:

·      the land does not connect to any existing open space.

Protecting and restoring Auckland’s unique features and meanings

Not a priority:

·      the land does have identified landscape values, its value as public open space is negligible.

Improving the parks and open spaces we already have

Not a priority:

·      the land does not improve the functionality of existing open space.

Assessment conclusion

31.     Staff recommend that the Local Board support the revocation of the reserve status and the transfer of the land to Te Kawerau ā Maki. It aligns with the wider strategic objectives of Auckland Council and there is ample provision of open space within this area.

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

32.     The local community may be concerned about the perceived loss of open space. However, open space provision within this area exceeds the Open Space Provision Policy.

33.     The Waitākere Ranges Local Board has sought to enable the development of a marae and papakāinga at Te Henga.

34.     In addition to the decisions outlined above, the Local Board, at its meeting of 14 December 2017, passed a Notice of Motion recommending the transfer and revocation of the reserve status [WTK/2017/171 refers].

That the Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

a)    request that Auckland Council undertakes the process to transfer the land at 240a Bethells Road, Te Henga, to Te Kawerau ā Maki Tribal Trust to enable the iwi to establish a marae and papakāinga

b)    that processes in a) include consideration of lifting the Reserve Act status on the land to enable transfer.

 

35.     The views of the Local Board are again sought through this report.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

36.     Te Kawerau ā Maki have clearly stated their aspirations to establish a marae within their traditional heartland and in the vicinity of their ancestral village at Waiti. They have also noted that they are the only mana whenua group without an iwi-based marae.

37.     Te Kawerau ā Maki have previously been offered a ground lease over the land at Te Henga. This option was actively considered, however, to-date the iwi have declined to enter into a leasing arrangement with council.

38.     They have indicated a preference for the land to be general freehold land in Fee Simple before they develop their marae and papakāinga. In the view of the iwi this would recognise their mana and align with what they hold to be the undertakings given by the former Waitākere City Council.

39.     On 10 May 2018, the Chairpersons of the Environment and Community Committee, Councillor Penny Hulse, and the Finance and Performance Committee, Councillors Ross Clow, wrote to Te Kawerau ā Maki. The purpose of this letter was to outline the steps that council proposes to undertake to enable the development of the marae and papakāinga at Te Henga.

40.     A formal response from Te Kawerau ā Maki may be provided at the meeting of the Local Board to inform decision-making.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

41.     240A Bethells Road was acquired for $935,000 (inclusive of GST) in 2009.

42.     An indicative valuation, based on council’s geographic information system data, records a rateable value of $650,000. This valuation reflects the zoning of the land as Māori Purpose Zone and Outstanding Natural Features and Landscape Overlays as well as the Waitākere Ranges Heritage Area Overlay.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

43.     The main risk is to manage is public expectations about future access. Te Kawerau ā Maki have previously expressed a willingness to make the marae facilities available to community when not in use by the iwi.

44.     Council will also consider a term of transfer that the land is to be used as a marae and papakāinga.

45.     The independent commissioner hearing submissions to the reserve classification process set a condition that the local community should have an input to the type and scale of the facilities to be built on the marae site. This condition has been met as part of the consultation process to develop the Unitary Plan. The policies and rules of the Special Purpose Zone – Māori Purpose control the type and scale of buildings and activities that can be undertaken on the site.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

46.     Staff will prepare a report to the 12 June 2018 meeting of the Environment and Community Committee to consider revocation of the Reserves Act 1977 status of the land and seeking a decision from the Minister of Conservation.

47.     Staff will prepare a report to the 19 June 2018 Finance and Performance Committee to consider disposal of the land to Te Kawerau ā Maki, subject to completion of required statutory processes and a term of transfer that the land is to be used as a marae and papakāinga.

48.     Implementation will be subject to the completion of required statutory processes and a decision by the Minister of Conservation. Council is not able to guarantee these outcomes.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Site Location

13

      

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Paul Marriott-Lloyd - Senior Policy Manager

Authorisers

Kataraina Maki - GM - Community & Social Policy

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 

Attachment A: Site Location


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 

New community lease to Swanson Railway Station Trust, approval to enter into a sublease and reclassification of part of 760 Swanson Road, Swanson

 

File No.: CP2018/06075

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To grant a new community lease to Swanson Railway Station Trust located on Swanson Station Park, 760 Swanson Road, Swanson.

2.       Approval for Swanson Railway Station Trust to enter into a sublease with an Auckland Council approved operator to run a café/restaurant on the premises.

3.       To approve the reclassification of part of Swanson Station Park, 760 Swanson Road, Swanson from local purpose (community purposes) reserve to historic reserve under section 24(1) of the Reserves Act 1977.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

4.       Swanson Railway Station Trust’s lease totalling 15 years for part of Lot 1 Deposited Plan 188043 of Swanson Station Park, 760 Swanson Road, Swanson reached final expiry on 30 November 2015. The lease has been continuing on a month by month basis.  The trust has applied for a new community lease and approval to enter into a sublease.  The Category B heritage status Swanson Railway Station building remains in the ownership of the trust so long as the landlord and tenant relationship between the council and the trust (which commenced with the now expired lease) continues.  If the relationship ceases, ownership of the building passes to council.

5.       A Deed of Arrangement dated 22 November 1995 between the former Waitākere City Council and the Trustees of the Balefill Trust records the financial contribution made by the Trust to the Waitākere City Council to purchase Swanson Station Park.  The agreement also outlines the purpose and use of the park.  With the Deed of Arrangement still operative, special conditions are contained in the recommendations to record this.

6.       The Swanson Railway Station building formerly the Avondale Railway Station building was relocated to the park for the purposes of preserving the building and operating it as a restaurant/café for the Swanson community.  This activity was a permitted use under the now expired lease.  Approval for the trust to enter into a new sublease arrangement to allow this activity to continue is required.

7.       Swanson Station Park is classified as a local purpose (community purposes) reserve under the Reserves Act 1977.  Reclassification of Lot 1 DP188043 to historic reserve will enable the restaurant/café operation to continue as the current classification does not allow for this activity.  The reclassification to historic reserve will complement the Category B heritage status of the Swanson Railway Station building.

8.       This report recommends the reclassification of Lot 1 Deposited Plan 188043 of Swanson Station Park as a historic reserve under the Reserves Act together with the grant of a new community lease to Swanson Railway Station Trust and approval to enter into a sublease arrangement with a restaurant/café operator. 

 

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

a)      approve the reclassification of Lot 1 Deposited Plan 188043 of Swanson Station Park from local purpose (community purposes) reserve to historic reserve under section 24(1) of the Reserves Act 1977 (Attachment A);

b)      grant a new community lease to Swanson Railway Station Trust for part of Swanson Station Park, 760 Swanson Road, Swanson (Attachment B) on the following terms and conditions:

i)        term: 10 years commencing 10 May 2018 with one 10 year right of renewal

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

iii)      Auckland Council acknowledges that the Swanson Railway Station building, formerly the Avondale Railway Station building, is owned by the Swanson Railway Station Trust but the trust shall not be entitled to remove the building from its present position on the park

iv)      the station building shall remain in the ownership of the trust so long as the relationship (which commenced with the now expired lease previous lease) between the council and the trust continues

v)      if the lease is terminated and the landlord and tenant relationship between the council and the trust comes to an end, then the council shall forthwith honour the obligations assumed by it under Clause 3 of Deed of Arrangement dated 22 November 1995 relating to alternative uses, entered into between the council and the Trustees of the Balefill Trust

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

c)      grant approval for Swanson Railway Station Trust to enter into a sublease with a restaurant/cafe operator for part of the Swanson Railway Station building (Attachment C) on the following terms and conditions:

i)        the current restaurant/café operator being Abefore Ltd is approved;

ii)       The sublease shall be for a term not exceeding the term of the head lease less one day, with or without a right of renewal.

Horopaki / Context

Swanson Railway Station Trust

9.       Swanson Railway Station Trust holds a community lease with the former Waitākere City Council for a term of five years commencing 1 December 2000.  The lease contained two renewals of five years each, reaching final expiry on 30 November 2015.

10.     The trust owns the building now known as the Swanson Railway Station located on Swanson Station Park.  The trust relocated the former Avondale Railway Station building to the park for the purposes of operating it as a restaurant/café for the Swanson community.  The building has Category B heritage status.  Under the expired lease ownership of the building shall remain with the trust so long as the relationship between council and the trust continues.  If the relationship ceases, ownership of the building shall pass to council without any compensation being paid to the trust.

11.     The trust subleases the majority of the station building to a third party to operate the restaurant/café.  The remainder of the building comprises of toilet facilities for patrons and a small room to store the overflow of restaurant/café tables and chairs.  This small room is used occasionally by community groups to hold meetings for a maximum of eight people.

 

Swanson Station Park

12.     Swanson Station Park is held in fee simple by Auckland Council and described as Lot 1 and Lot 2 Deposited Plan 188043 comprising 8318 and 3518 square metres respectively.  Both Lots 1 & 2 are held as local purpose (community purposes) reserve and are subject to the Reserves Act 1977.

13.     A Deed of Arrangement dated 22 November 1995 was entered into between the former Waitākere City Council and the Trustees of the Balefill Trust.  The agreement records the financial contribution made by the Balefill Trust to the Waitākere City Council to purchase Swanson Station Park.  The purpose of the acquisition was for the Swanson Community Railway Station Society Incorporated, now known as Swanson Railway Station Trust to landscape, develop and operate the building known as the Avondale Railway Station as a community facility (Attachment D).

14.     Independent legal advice obtained by Auckland Council confirms that the Deed of Arrangement is still operative. 

15.     In 2003, three years after a lease was granted to the Swanson Railway Station Trust the former Waitākere City Council resolved to declare Swanson Station Park a local purpose (community purposes) reserve under the Reserves Act.  The park was formerly held under the Local Government Act 1974.  The 1974 Act has since been replaced by the Local Government Act 2002.

Reclassification of Swanson Station Park

16.     Located on Lot 1 of Swanson Station Park is the station building, picnic area, public gas barbeque, children’s playground including climbing tower and flying fox.  The classification of local purpose (community purposes) reserve does not allow for the restaurant/café activity.  Reclassification of Lot 1 to a historic reserve under section 24 (1) of the Reserves Act will legitimise the restaurant/café activity in terms of the Reserves Act 1977 and complement the Category B heritage status of the building.  The other public enjoyment activities are permitted under this classification.

17.     Located on Lot 2 are public toilets, skate park, baseball courts, gardens and pathways.  These current amenities and activities align with the classification of local purpose (community purposes) reserve.

18.     A public notice of the council’s intention to reclassify Lot 1 of Swanson Station Park, grant a new community lease and approval for a sublease arrangement has taken place.  An advertisement was placed in the New Zealand Herald and on council’s website on 19 February 2018 and in the Western Leader on 20 February 2018.  The notice period for sending objections to the council concluded at close of business on 6 April 2018.  No objections or submissions were received.

19.     As Swanson Station Park borders a car park and railway station platform owned and managed by Auckland Transport, consultation was undertaken in February 2018.  Auckland Transport advises that it does not see the existing arrangement changing nor create any significance to it operational use of the station.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

20.     The trust has submitted a comprehensive application in support of a new community lease and approval to sublease.  The building is being maintained and the restaurant/café is well used by the local community.

21.     The current classification of local purpose (community buildings) reserve does not allow the activity of the restaurant/café.  With the station building having a Category B heritage status, it is recommended to reclassify Lot 1 as a historic reserve under section 24 (1) of the Reserves Act.

22.     A community outcomes plan is not required to be attached to the deed of community lease as the trust is not actively involved in the services provided by the restaurant/café on the park.

23.     With the Deed of Arrangement still operative special conditions b) iii), iv) and v) have been included in the recommendations to record this.

24.     The recommended term of lease for a group owned building is 10 years with one 10-year right of renewal in accordance with the Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012.

25.     Despite the commercial nature of the restaurant/café business, proceeds from the rent paid to the trust go towards maintaining the historic building for the enjoyment of the public.

26.     As the trust does not operate the restaurant/café business, approval for the trust to enter into sublease arrangement is required.  The trust must obtain approval from the council of the proposed operator.  The sublease shall be for a term not exceeding the term of the head lease less one day, with or without a right of renewal.

27.     Abefore Ltd currently operates the restaurant/café business.  An inspection by Auckland Council in April 2018 resulted in Abefore Ltd receiving a food safety grade of ‘A’, achieved after a 100 percent pass.

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

28.     Council staff sought input at a local board workshop on 2 November 2017 regarding reclassification of part of Swanson Station Park as a historic reserve, the proposed new community lease and approval to enter into a sublease.  No objections were raised.

29.     The Waitākere Ranges Local Board is the allocated authority to approve the reclassification of part of the park and approve the granting of a new community lease and sublease.

30.     The restaurant/café service aligns to the 2017 Waitākere Ranges Local Board outcome; Local communities feel good about where they live.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

31.     Engagement was undertaken in December 2017 and January 2018 with the eight iwi groups identified as having an interest in land in the Waitākere Ranges Local Board area about the intention to reclassify part of Swanson Station Park as a historic reserve under the Reserves Act and the granting of a new community lease and sublease.

32.     Engagement involved:

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

·    email contact containing detailed information on the park, the trust 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

33.     No objections were raised by the three iwi representatives who responded.

34.     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 Tamaki 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.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

35.     Public notification of the intention to reclassify Lot 1 of Swanson Station Park, grant a new community lease and approval to enter into a sublease was borne by Auckland Council’s Community Facilities unit.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

36.     If Lot 1 of Swanson Station Park is not reclassified as a historic reserve under the Reserves Act the restaurant/café activity will not comply with the Act.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

37.     Subject to the local board approval to reclassify Lot 1 of Swanson Station Park, granting a new community lease and approval to enter into a sublease arrangement, council staff will work with key representatives of the Swanson Railway Station Trust to finalise the deed of lease.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Site Plan of Lot 1 DP 188043 Swanson Station Park, 760 Swanson Road, Swanson to be reclassified

21

b

Site Plan for Swanson Railway Station Trust

23

c

Site Plan for sublease from Swanson Railway Station Trust

25

d

Deed of Arrangement between The Trustees of the Balefill Trust

27

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Donna Cooper – Community Lease Advisor

Authorisers

Rod Sheridan - General Manager Community Facilities

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 

New road name in the Solution Street Limited subdivision at 44 Ambler Avenue, Glen Eden.

 

File No.: CP2018/07975

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To seek approval from the Waitākere Ranges Local Board to name a new private road created by way of subdivision at 44 Ambler Avenue, Glen Eden.

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, Solution Street Limited, has submitted the following names:

·    Kaneke Place (preferred)

·    Kanorau Place

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

a)      approve a name for a new private road constructed within the subdivision being undertaken by Solution Street Limited at 44 Ambler Avenue, Glen Eden in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974.

Horopaki / Context

4.       Resource consent has been obtained for a 10 lot residential subdivision at 44 Ambler Avenue, Glen Eden, and the council reference is SUB60308292.

5.       This approved development contains a new private road, in the form of a jointly owned access lot, which requires a road name as it services more than 5 lots.

6.       A site plan of the road and development can be found in Attachment A.

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.

8.       The Applicant has proposed the road names listed in the table below, in order of preference.

Proposed New Road Name

Meaning

Road Naming Criteria

Kaneke Place (preferred)

Maori meaning to move, progress. This option was chosen as the homes that are being built in the development are modular and built off-site in a factory. This is to reduce costs and provide affordable housing to the Auckland market making it possible for more Kiwis to own their home. Developer has stated, they are one of the first developers to attempt this in New Zealand and believe this is a progression in the right direction. 

Meets criteria – unique and appropriate.

Kanorau Place

 

Maori meaning to be diverse, varied. This option was chosen due to the ethnic diversity of the Glen Eden area, along with the residents who have purchased homes within the development as they are all from different cultural backgrounds. Developer is encouraging the formation of this new community by holding social events for these purchasers to meet each other prior to moving in to their new homes.

 

 

Meets criteria – unique and appropriate.

9.       Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) has confirmed the proposed and alternative name is acceptable and no duplicates exist. LINZ rejected Hapori Place as this road name already exists in Flat Bush and therefore has not been included in this report as a proposed road name.

10.     All iwi in the Auckland area were written to and invited to comment.

Ngati Whatua o Kaipara deferred comment to Te Kawerau a Maki and noted Hapori has been submitted as a park name in Hobsonville. Waikato Tainui supported Hapori as a road name however as above, this is a duplicate name and not included in the report.

All other replies from iwi supported proposed road names.

11.     The proposed new names are deemed to meet the council’s road naming guidelines.

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

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

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

13.     The applicant has corresponded with local iwi who has given their support for proposed road names.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

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

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

15.     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

16.     Approved road names are notified to Land Information New Zealand 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

Road naming diagram for 44 Ambler Avenue Glen Eden

39

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Dale Rewa - Subdivision Advisor

Authorisers

Trevor Cullen - Team Leader Subdivision

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 

Auckland Transport's May 2018 report for the Waitākere Ranges Local Board

 

File No.: CP2018/07978

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       The purpose of this report is to respond to resolutions and requests on transport-related matters, provide an update on the current status of the Land Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF), request approval for new LBTCF projects, provide a summary of consultation material sent to the board and, provide transport related information on matters of specific application and interest to the Waitākere Ranges Local Board and its community.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       This report covers:

i.    Progress on the Regional Land Transport Plan 2018

ii.    Consultation on Proposed Safety Improvements

iii.   Quarterly report on AT activities over January to March 2018

iv.  Traffic Control Committee (TCC) report.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

a)      receive Auckland Transport’s May 2018 report.

Horopaki / Context

3.       This report addresses transport related matters in the local board area and includes information on the status of the Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF).

4.       Auckland Transport is responsible for all of Auckland’s transport services, excluding state highways. They report on a monthly basis to local boards, as set out in their Local Board Engagement Plan. This monthly reporting commitment acknowledges the important engagement role local boards play within and on behalf of their local communities..

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

i)        Attachment A – report from Auckland Transport departments on their activities in the Waitākere Ranges Local Board area and regionally over the last quarter.

ii)       Attachment B – report on Travelwise Schools activities in the Waitākere Ranges Local Board area over the last quarter.

Local Board Transport Fund (LBTCF) Update

 

6.       The Waitākere Ranges Local Board’s annual funding allocation under the LBTCF is currently $358,706 pa. Future budgets will have an adjustment for inflation added.  The following tables note previous decisions and progress since the last update, budgets and financial commitments.  The Local Board remaining budget left of $908,621 will hopefully be committed dependant of the Glen Eden Town Centre Development funding project being approved by Council in July 2018.

7.       The table immediately below is an update of progress on the Board’s current project:

Waitakere Ranges Local Board Transport Capital Fund Financial Summary

Total Funds Available in current political term

$1,900,714

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

$992,093

Remaining Budget left

$908,621

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

Piha and Scenic Drive Intersection - Road Safety Issues

8.       Auckland Transport has meet with the Local Board and key stakeholders to inform them on the temporary changes that will be put in place to minimise the road safety issues that are occurring at this intersection.

The description of the works that will be carried out are:

·    Install permanent flexi posts, 4 at the taper and 3 at the Stop control

·    Permanently remove the existing centre lines and install double yellow no passing lines (arrows are pointing beginning and end of centrelines). The existing white RRPMs are to be removed and not replaced as new flashing yellows are to be installed shortly.

·    Extensions of double yellow centre lines

·    Install 5x advance warning strips (check Figure 05)

·    Change speed signs from 70km/h to 50km/h with ‘Temporary’ supplementary plates on all approaches to the intersection

·    Trim vegetation

·    New Stop Control ( STOP road marking and stop line and signage) – at the intersection of Quinns Road with Scenic Drive

·    Install `PIHA` sign 1.5m x 1.5m

·    Install continuity lines along the intersection

·    Markings and signs to be in accordance to MOTSAM/ATCOP guidelines.

9.       The works have started with a due date of completion by the 28th May except for the flashing studs which will take a bit longer.

 

Consultation documents on proposed improvements

10.     Consultation documents for the following proposals have been provided to the Waitākere Ranges Local Board for its feedback, and are summarised here for information purposes only.

 

11.     Following consultation, Auckland Transport considers the feedback received and determines whether to proceed further with the proposal as consulted on, or proceed with an amended proposal if changes are considered necessary:

·    Proposal for Broken Yellow Lines in Atkinson Road, Titirangi.

·    Penihana Subdivision Stages 4-6, Swanson traffic and parking controls resolution.

·    Proposal to install broken yellow lines on Glengarry Road, Glen Eden.

·    Proposal to install broken yellow lines on Rangiwai Road in Titirangi.

·    87 Bethells Road-Motorcyclist Protection Shield/Guard pavement rehabilitation works

 

 

 

 

 

Auckland Transport’s Traffic Control Committee (TCC) report

12.     Decisions of the TCC during the month of April 2018 affecting the Waitakere Ranges Local Board area are listed below.

 

 

Date

 

Street (Suburb)

 

Type of Report

 

Nature of Restriction

 

Decision

 

 

1-April-18

Rosandich Drive, Seymour Road, Benita Place, Sunnyvale

Permanent Traffic and Parking changes Combined

No Stopping At All Times, Bus Stop, Lane Arrow Markings, Give-Way, Traffic Island 

CARRIED

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

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

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

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

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

15.     No significant risks have been identified.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

16.     Auckland Transport provides the Waitākere Ranges Local Board with the opportunity to comment on transport projects being delivered in the local board area.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Auckland Transport activities - January to March 2018

47

b

Travelwise - January to March 2018

57

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Owena Schuster – Elected Members Relationship Manager (Western Boards)

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon – Manager Elected Member Relationship Unit, Auckland Transport

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 


 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 

Change and Development in Glen Eden Report: 2017

 

File No.: CP2018/08059

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       The purpose of this report is for the Waitākere Ranges Local Board to receive the Change and Development in Glen Eden Report: 2017.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       The Social Practice Department at Unitech Institute of Technology was commissioned in 2016 to carry out a report on change and development issues facing Glen Eden.

3.       The report provided is called the Change and Development in Glen Eden Report: 2017. It is intended as a resource to inform future decision making by the local board.

4.       The local board is asked to receive the report.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

a)      receive the Change and Development in Glen Eden 2017 report.

Horopaki / Context

5.       The 2013 census highlights that some of the more urban parts of the Waitākere Ranges local board area have relatively high levels of deprivation. These include residential suburban parts of the greater Glen Eden area. The Change and Development in Glen Eden Report: 2017 was commissioned in 2016 in recognition that Glen Eden, like much of urban Auckland, is a community in transition, influenced by property markets as well as external policies, plans and programmes by local, regional and central government.

6.       Although commissioned under the 2014 local board plan, the production of the report is in alignment with the following priorities of the 2017 local board plan:

·    Outcome 3: Local Communities feel good about where they live

·    Outcome 5: Our urban centres are enjoyable places to be

·    Outcome 6: our easy to get to community spaces and recreation facilities meet local needs.

7.       The report is in two stages:

1)   A literature review of material specific to Glen Eden and broader information about development and growth; and

2)   Interviews with key stakeholders in Glen Eden.

8.       It makes a number of suggestions relating to re-development of the Glen Eden town centre, design and urban policies concerning future intensification of Glen Eden, collaborations with social housing  and community services providers,  and greater emphasis on strategies to deal with such matters as child and age-friendly development, safety, cycleways and pedestrian amenity.

9.       The report is attached as Appendix A.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

10.     This report is for information only.

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

11.     This report is for the Local Board to receive the Change and Development in Glen Eden Report: 2017

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

12.     The Change and Development in Glen Eden Report: 2017 does not impact specific outcomes or activities relating to Māori, other than as specific resident/contributors.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

13.     None.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

14.     There are no specific risks in relation to receipt of the Change and Development in Glen Eden Report: 2017.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

UNITEC Change and Development in Glen Eden 2017 Study

61

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Raewyn Curran - Snr Local Board Advisor - Waitakere Rnge

Authorisers

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 

Auckland Council’s Quarterly Performance Report: Waitākere Ranges Local Board for quarter three, 1 January - 31 March 2018

 

File No.: CP2018/08295

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

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

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       This report includes financial performance, progress against local board key performance indicators, progress against work programmes, key challenges the board should be aware of and any risks to delivery against the 2017/2018 work programme

3.       The snapshot in Attachment A indicates performance against the agreed 2017/2018 work programmes is tracking positively at this stage of the year.

4,       All operating departments with agreed work programmes have provided a quarterly update against their work programme delivery in quarter three. A full progress summary is contained in Attachment B.

5.       The majority of activities are reported with a status of green (on track) or amber (some risk or issues, which are being managed). Six activities are reported with a status of red (behind delivery, significant risk). However, a  these are all cancelled projects or projects on hold actual risk may be assessed as minimal.

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

·    Operating expenditure is $477k under budget. The majority of the under spend relates to the new full facility maintenance contract where fluctuations are expected until baselines at local board level are established after this first full year.  Operating revenue is $27k below budget in community facility hire due to lower usage of the Titirangi War Memorial Hall than planned. Overall capital spend is below budget by $1,078k mainly as a result of park asset renewals which are at differing stages of progress design, tender, contract negotiations etc. Physical works have now begun at Piha South Road Reserve and Piha Domain toilet blocks. Huia Domain Retaining Wall physical works progressing following earlier delays.

7.       The key performance indicators (KPI) for year-end outlook project that 53 per cent of measures will not achieve target.  Currently all performance measures are being reviewed as part of the development of the 2018-2028 Long Term Plan.

8.       Attachment D contains detailed KPI information.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

a)      receive the Quarterly Performance report for quarter 3, 1 January-31 March 2018.

Horopaki / Context

9.       The Waitākere Ranges Local Board has an approved 2017/2018 work programme for the following operating departments:

·           Arts, Community and Events: approved on 22 June 2017

·           Parks, Sport and Recreation: approved on 22 June 2017

·           Libraries and Information: approved on 22 June 2017

·           Community Facilities: approved on 22 June 2017

·           Community Leases: approved on 22 June 2017

·           Infrastructure and Environmental Services: approved on 22 June 2017, and

·           Local Economic Development: approved on 22 June 2017

10.     These work programmes are aligned to the 2014 Waitākere Ranges Local Board Plan.

11.     Attachment B contains a full progress summary of at all work programmes in quarter three.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

Key achievements for quarter three

12.     Key achievements to report from the quarter three period programme activities include:

·     ID 134: To establish and support community nurseries,and to provide advice to the community on how best to establish and maintain these – 5,600 native plants were germinated and potted, and 5,900 native plants made available for community planting projects in quarter four.

·     ID 138: The War on Weeds. This campaign was delivered throughout of March 2018, with weed bins continuously available at 11 sites in the local board area.

Key project updates from the 2017/2018 work programme

13.     Further to delivery of activities that can be defined as business as usual, progress during this quarter largely relates to planning and mid-stage delivery of projects. 

Key performance indicators

14.     The local board agreements include level of service statements and associated performance measures to guide and monitor the delivery of local services. This report provides information on the performance measure year-end outlook for Waitākere Ranges Board’s measures, showing how we are tracking after the third quarter of FY18.

15.     The year-end outlook is that 53 per cent of measures will not achieve target.

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

17.     Attachment D contains further detailed KPI information.

Financial performance

18.     Operating expenditure is $477k under budget. The majority of the under spend relates to the new full facility maintenance contract where fluctuations are expected until baselines at local board level are established after this first full year.

19.     Operating revenue is $27k below budget in community facility hire due to lower usage of the Titirangi War Memorial Hall than planned.

20.     Overall capital spend is below budget by $1,078k mainly as a result of park asset renewals which are at differing stages of progress design, tender, contract negotiations etc. Physical works have now begun at Piha South Road Reserve and Piha Domain toilet blocks. Huia Domain Retaining Wall physical works progressing following earlier delays.

 

21.     Attachment C contains further detailed financial information.

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

22.     This report informs the Waitākere Ranges Local Board of the performance for the quarter ending 31 March 2018.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

23.     The Community Capacity Building work programme delivered via the Community Waitakere partnership builds on the capacity building work initiated by Community Waitākere in 2015/16 with Hoani Waititi Marae and surrounding communities. It supports the capacity of Hoani Waititi Marae to implement community-based programmes and activities and connect to the wider community.

24.     The local board formally agreed on 28 September 2017 to pursue a relationship agreement with Te Kawerau a Maki in 2018, as a commitment to an open and positive relationship. 

25.     Under activity ID 552: increase diverse participation - community and iwi engagement and initiatives – fund and facilitate community and mana whenua engagement in local board initiatives work is progressing towards producing an action plan by and for Māori Communities to address priorities identified in the Toi Tu Wāitakere Report, and a Māori responsiveness plan for the western local boards

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

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

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

27.     Six work programme activities have been reported as red in Attachment B – significantly behind budget/time or achievement of outcomes. These are all cancelled projects or projects on hold. Their inclusion marks no effective change from the quarter 2 report and will not be highlighted in ongoing reports. The activities of ongoing significant interest are:

·     ID 279: Glen Eden Playhouse. Previous grant acquittal requirements have not been met. The funding agreement is on hold at the local board's discretion, and

28.     ID 3406 Titirangi – replace toilet block, which has been placed on hold while options for siting a replacements are considered.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

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

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Local Board work programme Snapshot 2017/2018

95

b

Work Programme update for Quarter 3, 2017/2018

97

c

Financial Performance Summary

125

d

Quarterly Performance Measure results

133

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Raewyn Curran - Snr Local Board Advisor - Waitakere Rnge

Authorisers

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 



Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 

Reallocation of LDI Opex, FY 2017 / 2018: Wāitakere Ranges Local Board

 

File No.: CP2018/08308

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.   For Wāitakere Ranges Local Board to reallocate $95,000 of 2017/2018 Locally Driven Initiative (LDI) opex currently located in the following budget lines, for use before the start of the 2018/2019 financial year:

·      Community response fund

·      On-site wastewater subsidy scheme

·      Coastal and marine environment.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.    The Local Board Funding Policy sets out how local boards are funded to meet the costs of providing local activities and administration support. Funding for local activities is split into three parts based on the nature of the service provided and the allocation of decision making between the Governing Body and local boards. The three classifications of activities are asset-based services, locally driven capital projects and locally driven initiatives (LDI opex).

3.    In 2017/2018 portions of the the following LDI opex budget lines remain unallocated or unspent:

·    Community response fund ($50,000)

·    On-site wastewater subsidy scheme ($20,000)

·    Coastal and marine environment ($25,000).

4.    Total LDI to be reallocated is $95,000, of which:

·   $10,000 is to be allocated for a boundary survey of 4-10 Sunnyvale Road, Swanson, Massey, known informally as Concordia Reserve, to support the parks information project.

·   $85,000 is to be allocated via the local grants process, or to progress discretionary initiatives that align with objectives in the local board plan.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

a)      reallocate a total of $95,000 unallocated or unspent LDI for the following uses:

i)        $10,000 for a boundary survey of 4-10 Sunnyvale Road, Swanson, Massey, known informally as Concordia Reserve, to support the parks information project.

ii)       $85,000 is to be allocated via the local grants process, or to progress discretionary initiatives that align with objectives in the local board plan.

Horopaki / Context

6.       In FY 2017/18 a total of $50,000 was apportioned to the on-site waste water subsidy scheme. This activity was subsequently discontinued and of the original $50,000 budget proposed for a septic tank subsidy scheme, $30,000 was allocated to Community Weed Bins (resolution number WTK/2017/123) to top up the budget made available through the Waitākere Ranges Heritage Area work programme. Opportunities for reallocating the funds within this budget line were not available.

7.       In FY 2017 / 18 a total of $50,000 was also apportioned to the Coastal and Marine Environment Programme, $25,000 of which was not subsequently required to deliver the work programme. Opportunities for reallocating the funds within this budget line were not available.

8.       The ‘Community Response Fund to provide a resource so that initiatives or requests for funding from the community that occurred outside of the work planning process could be responded to after consideration.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.    

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Raewyn Curran - Snr Local Board Advisor - Waitakere Rnge

Authorisers

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 

Proposed Establishment of Auckland Food Alliance

 

File No.: CP2018/06587

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To seek endorsement for the development and implementation of a pilot Auckland Food Alliance with an initial focus on five local board areas including Waitākere Ranges Local Board.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       Our existing food system is based on mass production and mass consumption, making it hard to access healthy, affordable and locally produced food. This often comes with unsustainable social, economic and environmental side effects including poor farming practices, small local enterprises unable to compete with large multinationals, high rates of non-communicable diseases such as diabetes and obesity, food waste, and high levels of greenhouse gas emissions (19-29% of total emissions globally[3]).

3.       Meanwhile our ability to meet future demand is subject to a range of pressures including rapid population growth, a changing climate, and loss of productive soils to land development.   

4.       There is currently no holistic strategic direction for Auckland’s food system, however, its cross-cutting nature means that it is partially addressed in several council plans (Attachment A). The Chief Sustainability Office and The Southern Initiative have reviewed local, national and international best practice and feedback from internal and external stakeholders to identify options that address policy gaps and improve coordination, across these plans and the wider food system.

5.       Based on this analysis, staff propose to develop a pilot Food Policy for council called the Auckland Food Alliance. The Alliance would bring together 10-15 influential stakeholder organisations from across the food system (production, distribution, processing, consumption and waste) to address regional systemic issues and remove the road blocks that can sometimes impede the success and ‘scaling up’ of local initiatives.

6.       The Auckland Food Alliance will provide expert strategic advice to council and other stakeholders on inter-related regional food policy development and advocate on national food policy issues.

7.       It is proposed that the pilot focus in five local board areas; Waitakere Ranges, Henderson-Massey, Whau, Mangere-Otahuhu and Manurewa. These areas have been chosen to build on existing momentum of communities who are actively engaged in food initiatives, and because they are within the Healthy Families operational boundaries and therefore have a predetermined need.

8.       Workshops held in the pilot local board areas in March 2018 have provided valuable feedback that has informed the recommendations proposed and have established further context, needs and barriers for consideration by the Alliance.

9.       This top down policy approach will complement the grass-roots movement of local communities by considering systemic issues that are often difficult to address at a local level such as complex regulation, unsustainable business practices and loss of productive land. Local boards in the pilot area would further benefit from the highlighting of local issues.

 

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

a)      endorse establishment of a pilot Auckland Food Alliance for a period of two years from August 2018,

b)      endorse the approach for Auckland Food Alliance, once established, to focus on Waitākere Ranges Local Board during the pilot phase,

c)      request a minimum of six-monthly updates from the Alliance on progress. 

Horopaki / Context

Problem definition

10.     Research and consultation with local boards had identified significant issues with the food system that cut across economic, environment and social wellbeing.

11.     For example, in Auckland we have:

·        Poor access to affordable fresh and nutritious foods.  Research in New Zealand has found that those who are food insecure (i.e., a lack of access to safe, nutritious and affordable food) report higher levels of psychological distress, as well as wider impacts on nutrition and physical health.

·        Loss of productive soils to urbanisation – only one per cent of the Auckland Region’s soils are considered Class 1 (elite) and suitable for vegetable production. Approximately 86 per cent of this is in the Pukekohe area, a renowned powerhouse of outdoor vegetable production for New Zealand.[4] This is also an area under pressure from urban development where 14 per cent of Class 1 soils have been or will be encroached upon by 2040.

·        High volumes of food waste (45 per cent of household kerbside collection)[5] representing missed opportunity to feed people, animals and plants, and producing greenhouse gas emissions.

·        Health inequality - high rates of obesity (Auckland = 28 per cent; Asian = 13.4 per cent; European/other = 24.6 per cent; Maori = 44 per cent; Pasifika = 68 per cent)[6], non-communicable diseases such as diabetes (Auckland = 7.5 per cent; Mangere = 17.3 per cent)[7] and malnutrition.

·        Environmental degradation due to non-sustainable production methods, particularly water quality, with elevated levels of nitrates in surface and ground water[8], and nearly a third of Auckland’s rivers classified as poor on the swimmability scale[9].

12.     There are already a large number of successful, local activities being undertaken across Auckland by council, community groups, non-profit organisations and government agencies with the support of local boards. These activities are predominantly focused around urban production/community gardens, food waste and health education.

13.     However, engagement across stakeholders, including the Sustainable Business Network, EcoMatters, Kai Auckland, Auckland Regional Public Health Service, Healthy Families, Gardens4Health and C40’s global cities network, has highlighted a gap at the regional policy level, with missed opportunities to address regional systemic issues and further support local programmes.

14.     Additionally, there are significant and complex underlying issues (such as unsustainable business practices, complex regulation, lack of understanding of resilience across the system) that will require collaboration across stakeholders to address.

Food Policy Councils

15.     Internationally there is a growing number of successful food governance structures tackling these issues such as the Los Angeles Food Policy Council, Toronto Food Policy Council, Puget Sound Regional Council’s Regional Food Policy Council (Seattle), and Melbourne’s Food City. 

16.     These Food Policy Councils and others like them have been established to bring together stakeholders to examine how a local food system is functioning and develop opportunities to improve it.  The councils review and look at the system as a whole, influencing decision makers and remove the road blocks that can sometimes impede the success and ‘scaling up’ of local initiatives to deliver healthy, equitable and resilient outcomes.

17.     Based on this analysis, it is proposed that a Food Policy Council be created for Auckland called the Auckland Food Alliance.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

Auckland Food Alliance proposal

18.     The Alliance proposal is for an independent advisory group that provides expert, strategic advice to Auckland Council and other stakeholders, and advocates on national policy.

19.     It would operate on the following principles:

·        Foster collaboration and innovation among diverse stakeholders.

·        Operate on a strategic level, ensuring a holistic overview of regional issues.

·        Advise on interrelated policy-making to council and other stakeholders and advocate on national policy issues.

20.     Membership would comprise 10-15 member organisations representing a cross-section of Auckland’s food system across public, voluntary and private sectors. Member organisations would appoint a suitable senior representative to participate in Alliance activities.

21.     The Alliance would be supported by a smaller working group and secretariat services will be provided by Auckland Council through the Chief Sustainability Office and The Southern Initiative.

22.     Staff will initially support the Alliance to develop terms of reference, a food charter clearly stating its purpose and objectives to guide its work (in line with international best practice), and a preliminary action plan identifying a small number of discrete actions to focus Alliance efforts.

Pilot areas

23.     It is proposed that the initial focus of the Alliance be in five local board areas: Waitakere Ranges; Henderson-Massey; Whau; Mangere-Otahuhu; and Manurewa. These areas were chosen as they are all within the Healthy Families operational boundaries and therefore a predetermined need exists, and because these communities and local boards are actively engaged in local food initiatives.

24.     Healthy Families Waitakere is engaged in a programme of community food projects being rolled out across the western local boards including the My Backyard Garden Project, Fresh Choice (recipes and ingredient lists to feed a family of six for under $50), a Food Banks Network and are in the process of forming a Local Food Network group. In addition to these, there are a number of location specific projects led by various community stakeholders, for example:

·          Waitakere Ranges – Glen Eden Transition Towns Veggie Swap Meet and composting workshops; Hoani Waititi Marae Maara Kai (edible garden and workshops with a focus on Maramataka, the Maori lunar calendar)

·          Henderson-Massey – Vision West’s Social enterprise café, food bank and proposed food store; The Kitchen Project in Henderson; Triangle Park and Woodside Road Community Gardens.

·          Whau - Ecomatters community garden and educational workshops; Avondale Community Fridge; Generation Ignite Food Bank including cooking and nutrition training.

25.     The Southern Initiative in partnership with Healthy Families South are also involved in a programme of food projects across southern local boards including development of Food and Beverage Guidelines for public facilities, The Kitchen Project, a social supermarket and Fresh Choice South (recipes and ingredient lists to feed a family of six for under $50). There are also location specific projects being undertaken by various community stakeholders including: 

·          Mangere-Otahuhu – Old School Reserve Teaching Gardens; Cook Island Development Agency New Zealand community garden and community food enterprise support; Fale Kofi social enterprise café at Otahuhu Station

·          Manurewa – Manurewa Marae Para Kore and community garden; Manurewa Community Teaching Gardens; Clendon Pride Project Community House teaching gardens and Clendon Shopping Centre community fruit orchard.

26.     A targeted focus in the first instance will enable clear direction and an opportunity to deliver regional actions of importance to priority local board areas. However, the Alliance will be established with a clear remit for delivery on wider regional issues in the longer term.

27.     A short list of priority policy actions will be identified with the assistance of local stakeholders, ensuring a complementary top down approach that could assist the implementation or upscaling of local initiatives.

28.     If agreed, it is proposed that the Alliance will report to the Environment and Community Committee and that the committee is represented on the Alliance to maintain a strong link to decision makers.

Proposed method of communication with local boards

29.     Based on feedback from local board workshops, 6-monthly updates to local board business meetings are the proposed method of communication between local boards and the Alliance.

Options analysis

30.     From analysis of international and local food policy councils, a key learning has been that form and function vary widely but the most defining success factor is the relationship to a local government entity. That is, how structural ties or the level of support provided, bear on the perceived level of independence from decision makers, the ability to influence decision makers, and the sustainability of a food policy council.

31.     As many successful food policy councils have some link to a government entity, two of the options explored (2 & 3) have strong links to council with differing levels of independence. Table 1 provides a summary of options considered.

 

Table 1: Options Analysis Summary

Option

Description

Options 1: Do nothing

No costs or staff time required, but regional systemic issues are not addressed leading to reduced resilience, environmental, economic and social outcomes.

Option 2: Establish Auckland Food Alliance following the One Voice: Sports and Recreation model (recommended option)

Attachment B contains the One Voice terms of reference

This is an independent, voluntary group endorsed by council. The Alliance is accountable to the Environment and Community Committee (ECC) and has ECC representation on the group. It is based on an existing model with demonstrated successes.

Independence allows greater flexibility in its work programme and potential to apply for external funding in future.

 

Option 3: Establish Auckland Food Alliance as an Auckland Council Advisory Panel

This group is embedded within councils existing structure of advisory panels. As such it has a strong mandate from council and visibility of council work programme. The panel has elected member representation and funding is secured through the LTP from the next LTP review cycle.

The work programme is more directed, largely based on council’s work programme.

 

32.     Options were assessed against a set of criteria including the flexibility of the work programme, their accountability and reporting requirements, likely funding and administration support, flexibility of operational structure, attractiveness to prospective members and opportunity for community engagement.

33.     Option 2, the Auckland Food Alliance based on the One Voice model is recommended because it is independent of council’s structure, enabling more freedom in work plan development (e.g. to advise on regional policy gaps, advocate on national issues and partner with other stakeholders) and is likely to invoke a greater level of trust from the community. This option also includes the key benefits of Option 3 with strong links to decisions makers and support from council staff.

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

34.     At the time of writing this report, workshops had been held with Waitakere Ranges, Henderson-Massey, Whau, Mangere-Otahuhu and Manurewa.

35.     The purpose of the workshops was to introduce the concept of food systems thinking, introduce the Auckland Food Alliance proposal and obtain feedback on local issues, potential regional of national policy solutions, local stakeholders and preferred method of communication with the Auckland Food Alliance.

36.     Feedback has informed this report and learning will also be integrated into the work programme of the Alliance.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

37.     At the time of writing this report, no official consultation with Māori had been undertaken, however, consultation is planned. 

38.     Initial review of available literature indicates that Māori and Pasifika groups are disproportionately impacted by an ill performing Auckland food system and that food is of significant cultural value.

39.     In response, the Auckland Food Alliance concept will be piloted in local board areas representative of high Māori and Pasifika occupancy and adverse food system impacts.

40.     Council is committed to working through any impacts of the proposal with Maori and involving Māori in development of the Auckland Food Alliance and in the membership.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

41.     The estimated cost to council will be met within existing budgets and primarily involve staff time and provision of secretariat support through the Chief Sustainability Office and The Southern Initiative.

42.     Ongoing operational costs and staff time will be approximately $1500 per annum and eight hours per month.

43.     Additional funds and staff time will be required during the implementation phase of the Alliance (first six months). Estimated costs are $3000 for two facilitated workshops and four days staff time per month.

44.     In terms of direct financial implications for local boards, no funding is requested. Broader local board funding decisions with food-related outcomes may benefit from being joined up and aligned with Alliance initiatives to better amplify local impact.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

45.     The proposed Alliance is a low risk initiative overall due to the small financial commitment required from council and measures incorporated in the design to support long-term sustainability.

46.     The key risk associated with the recommended Option 2 relates to the long-term sustainability of the Alliance due to its independent and largely voluntary structure. It is proposed that this risk be mitigated by adopting best practice and lessons learned from One Voice: Sports and Recreation model (that has been operating for more than 6 years) and analysis of international food policy councils, provision of staff support, and regular ‘fit for purpose’ reviews.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

47.     If endorsed, a proposal will be submitted to the Environment and Community Committee in June 2018 and pending approval, implementation will begin in August 2018.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Auckland Council Food Related Plans and Strategies

149

b

One Voice terms of reference

153

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Lauren Simpson - Principal Sustainability & Resilience Advisor

Authorisers

Jacques Victor – GM Auckland Plan Strategy and Research

Louise Mason – GM Local Board Services

 

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 


 


 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 


 


 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 

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

 

File No.: CP2018/07972

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To provide the Waitākere Ranges 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 Waitākere Ranges 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

169

b

Rodney ward boundary options

171

c

Manurewa-Papakura ward boundary options

173

d

Local board subdivisions and the 10 per cent rule

175

e

Botany subdivision boundary options

177

f

Rodney Local Board subdivision options

181

g

Waitemata Local Board subdivision option

185

h

Upper Harbour Local Board subdivision option

187

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Warwick McNaughton - Principal Advisor - Democracy Services

Authorisers

Marguerite Delbet – General Manager Democracy Services

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 

Panuku Development Auckland Local Board six-monthly update 1 October 2017 - 31 March 2018

 

File No.: CP2018/07149

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To update the Waitākere Ranges Local Board on Panuku Development Auckland (Panuku) activities within the local board area for the six months from 1 October 2017 to 31 March 2018.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       Panuku was established in September 2015 due to the merger of two council controlled organisations, Waterfront Auckland and Auckland Council Property Limited.

3.       Panuku helps to rejuvenate parts of Auckland, from small projects that refresh a site or building, to major transformations of town centres or neighbourhoods.

4.       Panuku manages around $2 billion of council’s property portfolio, which is continuously reviewed to find smart ways to generate income for the region, grow the portfolio, or release land or property that can be better used by others.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

a)      receive the Panuku Development Auckland Local Board update for 1 October 2017 to 31 March 2018.

Horopaki / Context

Local Activities

Portfolio management

5.       Panuku manages ‘non-service’ properties owned by council and Auckland Transport (AT). Non-service properties are those that are not currently needed for service or infrastructure purposes. These properties were generally being held for planned future projects that are no longer required, such as road construction, park expansion or development of future town centres.

6.       As at 31 March 2018, the property portfolio comprises 1437 properties, containing 1119 leases. The current portfolio includes vacant land, industrial buildings, warehouses, retail shops, cafes, offices, medical centres, and a large portfolio of residential rental homes.

7.       The return on the property portfolio for the period ending 31 December 2017 was above budget, with a net surplus to council and AT shareholders of $1.1 million ahead of budget.

8.       The average monthly tenantable occupancy rate, for the six-month period is more than 98 per cent, which is above the Statement of Intent target of 95 per cent.

Properties managed in the Waitākere Ranges Local Board Area

9.       Panuku currently manages 19 commercial and 13 residential interests within the Waitākere Ranges Local Board area.

 

 

Business interests

10.    Panuku also optimises the commercial return from business interests it manages on council’s behalf. This includes two forestry enterprises, two landfills and four quarries. 

11.     There are currently no managed business interests in the Waitākere Ranges Local Board area.

Portfolio strategy

Optimisation

12.     The 2015-2025 Long-Term Plan reflects a desire of council to materially reduce or slow down expenditure and unlock value from assets no longer required or which are sub-optimal for service purposes.  In response to this, prior to the establishment of Panuku, Auckland Council property Limited (ACPL) developed a new method of dealing with service property, called optimisation. 

13.     Asset optimisation deals with “service property”. It is self-funding, it maximises efficiencies from service assets, and maintains levels of service whilst releasing property for sale or development.  A key element of optimisation is that the sale proceeds are locally reinvested to advance approved projects and activities on a cost neutral basis.  It does not include the Auckland Transport portfolio. Panuku continues to advance this programme of work. This includes the development of a cross-council project to coordinate and execute asset sales and optimisation. 

Portfolio review and rationalisation

Overview

14.     Panuku is required to undertake ongoing rationalisation of council’s non-service assets. This includes identifying properties from within council’s portfolio that may be suitable for potential sale and development if appropriate. Panuku has a focus on achieving housing and urban regeneration outcomes. Identifying potential sale properties contributes to the Auckland Plan focus of accommodating the significant growth projected for the region over the coming decades, by providing council with an efficient use of capital and prioritisation of funds to achieve its activities and projects.

Performance

15.     Panuku works closely with council and Auckland Transport to identify potential surplus properties to help achieve disposal targets.

16.     Target for July 2017 to June 2018:

Unit

Target

Achieved

Portfolio review

$60 million disposal recommendations

$88 million as at 30 April 2018

Process

17.     Once identified as a potential sale candidate, a property is taken through a multi-stage ‘rationalisation’ process. The agreed process includes engagement with council, council-controlled organisations (CCOs), the local board and mana whenua. This is followed by Panuku Board approval, engagement with local ward councillors and the Independent Māori Statutory Board, and finally, a Governing Body decision.

Under review

18.     Properties currently under review in the Waitākere Ranges Local Board area are listed below. This list includes any properties that may have recently been approved for sale, or development and sale by the Governing Body.

 

Property

Details

9 Matama Road, Glen Eden

A narrow strip of vacant land that is an access way reserve subject to the Reserves Act 1977.  The access way became redundant when a road was formed to access the adjacent developed land in 2003.

No alternative service uses were identified through the rationalisation process.

The board endorsed the proposed reserve revocation and disposal of the subject site in October 2017.

Council’s Finance and Performance Committee approved the reserve revocation and disposal of the subject site in December 2017.

Panuku are currently undertaking due diligence in accordance with statutory requirements of the Reserves Act 1977 and Local Government Act 2002 in order to progress a disposal.

300 West Coast Road, Glen Eden (Part)

Approximately 2500m2-3000m2 of the former Glen Eden Borough Council works depot is being retained as open space. The remainder of the site is subject to a Panuku led rationalisation process.

The internal consultation commenced in December 2015. No alternative service uses were identified.

The board has identified a priority route through the subject area in the Waitākere Ranges Greenways Plan.

Panuku will undertake formal consultation with the board regarding the subject area in July/August 2018.

Acquisitions and Disposals

19.     Panuku manages the acquisition and disposal of property on behalf of Auckland Council. Panuku purchases property for development, roads, infrastructure projects and other service. These properties may be sold with or without contractual requirements for development.

Acquisitions

20.     Panuku does not decide which properties to buy in a local board area. Instead, it is asked to negotiate the terms and conditions of a purchase on behalf of council.

21.     Panuku purchased eight properties for open space across Auckland in this financial year (ending 30 June 2018) at a cost of $19.7 million, and also bought six properties for storm water use at a value of $4.2 million.

22.     No properties were purchased in the Waitākere Ranges Local Board area during the reporting period.

 

 

 

Disposals

23.     The disposal team sold eight properties for a total of $10.7 million this financial year. The team’s 2017/2018 target is $8.0 million for the year. The target is agreed with the council and is reviewed on an annual basis.

24.     No properties were sold in the Waitākere Ranges Local Board area.

Housing for Older People

25.     The council owns 1412 units located in 62 villages across Auckland, which provides rental housing to low income older people in Auckland.

26.     The Housing for Older People (HfOP) project involved the council partnering with a third-party organisation, The Selwyn Foundation, to deliver social rental housing services for older people across Auckland.

27.     The joint venture business, named Haumaru Housing, took over the tenancy, facilities and asset management of the portfolio, under a long-term lease arrangement from 1 July 2017.

28.     Haumaru Housing was granted community housing provider (CHP) status in April 2017. Having CHP registration enables Haumaru to access the government’s Income Related Rent Subsidy (IRRS) scheme.

29.     Auckland Council has delegated Panuku to lead a new multi-year residential development programme.

30.     The first new development project is a 40-unit apartment building on the former Wilsher Village site at 33 Henderson Valley Road, Henderson. Once completed in mid-2019, this development will increase the council’s portfolio to 1452 units.

31.     The following HfOP villages are located within the Waitākere Ranges Local Board area:

Village

Address

Number of units

Kaurilands Court

18 Kaurilands Road, Titirangi

22

Westview Village

100 West Coast Road, Glen Eden

42

Regional Activities

Highlights

32.     Over the year, Panuku achieved key project milestones and performance results in our priority development locations. Panuku categorises three types of priority locations:

33.     Transform locations – Panuku ‘transforms’ locations by creating change through urban regeneration. Panuku leads the transformation of select parts of the Auckland region; working alongside others and using the custodianship of land and planning expertise. The catalytic work Waterfront Auckland led at Wynyard Quarter is a great example of the transformation of urban locations.

34.     Unlock locations – Panuku also ‘unlocks’ development potential for others. By acting as a facilitator; using relationships to break down barriers and influence others, including the council family, to create development opportunities.

35.     Support locations – Panuku plays a ‘support’ role to ensure council is making the most of what it already has. Intensification is a key driver in the Auckland Plan. Panuku will support housing demands by enabling development of council-owned land.

Transform locations

36.     The Wynyard Quarter is undergoing rapid change both commercially and residentially, with thousands of Aucklanders using this space every week:

·        The first three phases of structural steel have been installed at the Park Hyatt Hotel. All up, approximately 2000 tonnes of primary structural steel will be used to construct the luxury five-star hotel, which will span a total area of 37,000sqm.

·        In April 2017, Mayor Phil Goff officially opened the Mason Bros. building, a former industrial warehouse that has been redeveloped into a three-level office space, bringing together a community of entrepreneurs and businesses. It is the centrepiece of Wynyard Quarter’s innovation precinct.

·        The innovation precinct in Wynyard Quarter has expanded with the newly opened five-floor building at 12 Madden Street. The purpose-built home for entrepreneurs offers the latest in flexible co-working spaces. This milestone marks two years since the GridAKL initiative was launched by Auckland Tourism, Events, and Economic Development (ATEED), partnering with Panuku and Precinct Properties to develop the commercial space to house ambitious companies and connecting technologists, designers, digital content makers, product designers and start-ups.

·        Developer Willis Bond is constructing 500-600 apartments of various types and sizes that are set to house around 1100 people. There are two developments currently under construction; Wynyard Central and 132 Halsey. The first residents moved in during September 2017.

37.     ‘Transform Manukau’ was the first location to have a Framework Plan completed, outlining the five key moves for the project and the vision for Manukau in 2040. Over the past six months, the emphasis has been on confirming the delivery of an affordable housing development on 5ha of land at 20 Barrowcliffe Place. This project will be Panuku’s largest development of affordable housing and involves the first partnership arrangement with mana whenua in a property development role. Earthworks on the development of over 200 homes will commence soon. Work is also about to commence on the street-scape upgrade of Putney Way, in conjunction with the bus station process led by AT.

38.     The high-level plan to ‘Transform Onehunga’, on a similar scale to Wynyard Quarter and Manukau, was approved in March 2017. The plan was completed involving significant consultation with the community. Panuku is leading the redevelopment of strategic council-owned land, and works in partnership with government and others, to deliver positive outcomes for the local community. The East-West link, which affects the wharf and southern parts of the area, is currently being reassessed by the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA). The final board of inquiry decision approving the East-West link was given in January 2018. Panuku is however, expecting amended plans later this year. Working with the local board and key stakeholders, Panuku has advanced plans on the town centre and the Onehunga wharf precinct where possible. The Framework Plan that will guide the transformation is due for completion in April 2018.

Unlock locations

39.     In Takapuna, Auckland Council owns nearly four hectares of land focused around the Anzac Street carpark and the Gasometer site, and consultation on redevelopment of these sites has started.

40.     In Northcote, a masterplan and design guide for the new Awataha Greenway project has been completed, and work is well advanced on the masterplanning and reference design for the town centre regeneration. Works are also progressing well on the redevelopment of the Housing New Zealand stock by Homes Land Community (HLC).

41.     Hobsonville 20ha Airfields site - stage one of construction of 102 standalone and terrace homes is underway. Avanda Group have been announced as the developers that will deliver more than 500 homes in stage two, of which a minimum of 10 per cent will be affordable housing.

42.     The opportunity to revitalise Avondale has been given the green light in November 2017 with the approval of the over-arching plan for its regeneration by the Planning Committee. The vision for Avondale will be enabled through a number of key moves. Panuku will work closely with the local board and community to implement a retail strategy that attracts new businesses, increasing diversity of products and services. The train station, upgraded bus network and new cycleways offer great transport options and we will continue to strengthen connections between these activity hubs and the town. A focus for the regeneration of Avondale is working with developers to build quality residential neighbourhoods that offer a mix of housing types, including terraces and apartments. A number of significant developments are already underway in the area.

43.     Council’s Planning Committee approved the over-arching plans to redevelop Old Papatoetoe in June 2017. Panuku is leading the redevelopment of the mall, a 2.5ha block of land, which will see the area opened up with a new plaza space, reconfigured shops, upgraded carpark and a revamped New World supermarket. In addition to the upgrade of the mall, which is expected to be completed early next year, approximately 110 new homes are planned to be developed in the surrounding area.

44.     With the overall plan for Henderson being approved in May 2017, the vision is for it to grow into an urban eco-centre. This vision will guide planning and development with an outcome towards ‘liveable growth’ by creating a safe, attractive and vibrant mixed-use environment with a uniquely west Auckland identity.

45.     A development agreement was signed with Todd Property for the delivery of more than 350 homes in Flat Bush, Ormiston. In December 2016, Panuku sold a site at 187 Flat Bush School Road for a 30-lot subdivision.

Support locations

46.     The Mariner Rise subdivision at 20 Link Crescent, Whangaparaoa, has been completed by Panuku’s development partner, McConnell Property, along with the delivery of a 2700sqm park and playground. Sixty new homes will be built on this new subdivision.

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

47.     This report is for the Waitākere Ranges Local Board’s information.

48.     Panuku requests that all feedback and/or queries relating to a property in the local board area be directed in the first instance to localboard@developmentauckland.co.nz

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

49.     Tāmaki Makaurau has the highest Māori population in the world with one in four Māori in Aotearoa living here. 

50.     Māori make up 12% of the region’s total population who mainly live in Manurewa, Henderson-Massey, Papakura, Ōtara-Papatoetoe, Māngere-Ōtahuhu and Franklin. Māori have a youthful demographic with 50% of Māori in Tāmaki Makaurau under the age of 25 years. 5% of the Māori population in the region are currently 65 years and over.      

51.     There are 19 Mana Whenua in the region, with 10 having indicated an interest in Panuku lead activities within the local board area. 

52.     Māori make up 11 percent of the local board population, and there is one marae located within the local board area.   

53.     Panuku work collaboratively with Mana Whenua on a range projects including potential property disposals, development sites in the area and commercial opportunities. Engagement can be on specific individual properties and projects at an operational level with kaitiaki representatives, or with the Panuku Mana Whenua Governance Forum who have a broader mandate.

54.     Panuku will continue to partner with Māori on opportunities which enhance Māori social and economic wellbeing.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.    

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Sven Mol - Corporate Affairs Advisor, Panuku Development Auckland

Authorisers

Marieke Numan - Senior Engagement Advisor

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 

Local Board feedback on the Local Government (Community Well-being) Amendment Bill

 

File No.: CP2018/08070

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To provide an opportunity for local boards to formally provide feedback on the government’s Local Government (Community Well-being) Amendment Bill.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       The Government introduced the Local Government (Community Well-being) Amendment Bill (the Bill) into Parliament on 5 April 2018. The Bill has been referred to Select Committee and submissions are now open.

3.       On 1 May 2018, the Planning Committee approved that staff would develop a submission on the Local Government (Community Well-being) Amendment Bill and established a political working group to approve the final submission.

4.       The political working group consists of the chair and deputy chair of the Planning Committee, chair and deputy chair of the Environment and Community Committee, chair and deputy chair of the Community Development and Safety Committee, a member of the Independent Māori Statutory Board and two local board chairs.

5.       The Bill seeks to address two main areas:

·    to reinstate the purpose of local government to promote the social, economic, environmental and cultural well-being of communities

·    to restore the power to collect development contributions for a wider group of infrastructure projects.

6.       Both of these areas can have significant impact on council’s way of working, as they define local government’s purpose and its ability to collect funds.

7.       In both 2012 and 2014 changes were made to the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act) regarding these two main themes.  Auckland Council made submissions opposing those changes.  The submission to this new Bill will be founded on the evidence from those previous submissions.

8.       Broadly the submission intends to support the amendments.  However, staff require time to ensure a robust analysis of any potential impact, particularly of the development contribution changes. 

9.       To develop a submission, staff will work across the council family, including CCOs, and with the Independent Māori Statutory Board.

10.     An opportunity is provided for local boards to formally provide feedback on the government’s Local Government (Community Well-being) Amendment Bill.

11.     Submissions on the Bill close on 25 May 2018.  Due to the tight timeframes, local boards needed to provide their feedback for consideration by 16 May.  Any formal feedback received after 16 May and before 21 May 2018 will be attached to the final submission.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

a)      endorse the following as its feedback to the Auckland Council submission on the Local Government (Community Well-being) Amendment Bill. 

 

Horopaki / Context

12.     The Local Government (Community Well-being) Amendment Bill (the Bill) has two main themes:

·    to reinstate the purpose of local government to promote the social, economic, environmental and cultural well-being of communities

·    to restore the power to collect development contributions for a wider group of infrastructure projects.

13.     Specifically, the Bill seeks to

·    restore the purpose of local government to promote the social, economic, environmental, and cultural well-being of communities, taking a sustainable development approach

·    restore territorial authorities' power to collect development contributions for any public amenities needed as a consequence of development

·    make a minor technical modification to the development contributions power to allow territorial authorities to collect development contributions for projects financed through financial advances from the New Zealand Transport Authority.

14.     The Governance and Administration Select Committee deadline for submissions on the Bill is 25 May 2018. 

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

15.     The Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Act 2012 made significant changes to the purpose of local government through an amendment to section 10. This removed the focus on social, economic, environmental and cultural well-being of communities and reoriented the purpose towards the provision of cost-effective infrastructure and core services. 

16.     In 2014, there was another amendment to the Act which made an array of changes including to the development contributions regime. This limited territorial authorities’ ability to collect development contributions for community amenities (e.g. sports grounds, swimming pools and libraries).

17.     In both 2012 and 2014, Auckland Council made submissions opposing these changes to the Act.

18.     The development of this submission will be based on the evidence of the council’s previous submissions on the Act. 

19.     Broadly the submission intends to support the amendments.  However, staff require the remaining time to gain input from subject matter experts across the council family and ensure a robust analysis of the impact, particularly of the development contribution changes.

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

20.     An opportunity is provided for all local boards to provide formal feedback.  Local Board Services sent out an email on 13 April to all local board members outlining the objectives of the Bill and that staff would be requesting local board involvement. 

21.     Submissions on the Bill close on 25 May 2018.  Due to the tight timeframes, local boards needed to provide their feedback for consideration by 16 May.  Any formal feedback received after 16 May and before 21 May 2018 will be attached to the final submission.

22.     Additionally, two local board chairs have been invited to participate on the political working group that endorses the final council submission.

23.     The proposed restoration of the purpose of local government to include social, economic, environmental and cultural well-being aligns well with local boards planning for and delivering on issues of local importance, as defined in the Local Board Plans.

24.     The restoration of local government’s power to collect development contributions will allow for better access to funding of key local facilities that are of significant interest to local boards such as swimming pools and sports grounds.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

25.     The Bill’s proposed changes align well with the Independent Māori Statutory Board’s Māori Plan for Tāmaki Makaurau that describes the implementation of their key directions through the lens of the four pou of social, cultural, economic and environmental wellbeing areas. 

26.     Māori experience disproportionately high negative social, economic and health outcomes.  The reinstating of a more holistic purpose of local government could have a positive impact on Māori by refocusing local government decisions to require consideration of broader outcomes.

27.     Council staff will seek to engage and receive input from mana whenua by email.  Staff will also seek input from the Independent Māori Statutory Board.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

28.     There are no anticipated negative financial implications from supporting the Bill, however, staff will work with the finance team to identify and analyse any impact.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

29.     If the local board does not contribute to the submission, then there is a risk that Auckland Council family’s position on this Bill will not include their insights.  

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.    

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Bonnie-May Shantz - Principal Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Louise Mason – GM Local Board Services

Jacques Victor – GM Auckland Plan Strategy and Research

 

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 

Draft 2018-2028 Regional Land Transport Plan and draft Regional Fuel Tax proposal submissions

 

File No.: CP2018/08322

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To confirm the Waitakere Ranges Local Board’s (the Board) feedback on the draft 2018/2028 Regional Land Transport Plan and the draft Regional fuel Tax proposal.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       The Board received a report ‘Draft 2018-2028 Regional Land Transport Plan, draft Regional Fuel Tax proposal and draft Contributions Policy’ at its 10 May 2018 which provides the background to the Regional Land Transport Plan (RLTP) and fuel tax proposal.

3.       At its 10 May meeting by resolution (WTK/2018/43) it was agreed to ‘delegate the provision of the feedback to the Chair, Greg Presland, in consultation with the local board’.

4.       The Board’s subsequent submissions are attached and referred to as Attachment A and Attachment B.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

a)      confirm the feedback provided under delegation on the Auckland Regional Land Transport Plan, and the Regional fuel Tax Proposal, outlined in Attachment A and Attachment B.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Auckland Regional Land Transport Plan submission dated 14 May 2018

203

b

Regional Fuel Tax Proposal submission 14 May 2018

207

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Brenda  Railey - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 


 


 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 

Governance Forward Work Programme Calendar

 

File No.: CP2018/08206

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To present the Puketāpapa Local Board with its updated governance forward work programme calendar (the calendar).

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       The calendar for the Puketāpapa Local Board is in Attachment A. The calendar is updated monthly, reported to business meetings and distributed to council staff.

3.       The calendar was 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 Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

a)      receive the governance forward work programme calendar for May 2018.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Governance forward work programme calendar, May 2018

211

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Brenda  Railey - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 


 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 

Confirmation of Workshop Records

 

File No.: CP2018/08207

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To present records of workshops held by the Waitākere Ranges Local Board on 22 February 2018, 15 and 22 March 2018 and 12, 19 and 26 April 2018.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       Briefings provided at the Workshop held on 22 February 2018 are as follows:

Administration

Engagement on the Sports Facility Investment Plan

Healthy Food and Beverage

3.       Briefings provided at the following Workshops held in March are as follows:

a)    15 March 2018

- UNITEC’s study of Change and Development in Glen Eden

- Walkways information project

- Administration

b)    22 March 2018

- Waitākere Ranges Local Board Agreement Planning process (Workshop 5)

4.       Briefings provided at the following workshops held in April are as follows:

a)    12 April 2018

- Maurice Shadbolt House update

- Henderson Civic Centre sale

- Administration

- Fees and charges and performance measures

- Community Weed Bins 2018 – 2019

- Waitakere Ranges Programme; 2018 -2019 allocation

b)      19 April 2018

- Outcomes of the consultation on neighbourhood/small park development in Glen Eden

- Huia Water Treatment Plant replacement

- Open Studio

- Leasing matters

- Grants, Round 3

c)      26 April 2018

Workshop 6 - Local Board Agreement Planning process

Further discuss capex programme for FY19

Draft 30 year Ferry Strategy for Auckland

Glen Eden Town Centre Improvement Project / West Coast Road safety improvements - concept design and consultation approach

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

a)      receive the workshop records for 22 February 2018, 15 and 22 March 2018 and 12, 19 and 26 April 2018.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Workshop Record for 22 February 2018

215

b

Workshop Records for 15 and 22 March 2018

217

c

Workshop Records for 12, 19 and 26 April 2018

219

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Brenda  Railey - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 


 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 


 


 


 


 


Waitākere Ranges Local Board

24 May 2018

 

 

Chair’s report - May 2018

 

File No.: CP2018/08339

 

  

 

1.      Civil Defence and Piha

Recent events at Piha have provided a good opportunity for Council to review its preparedness for emergencies.  A major storm caused power outages for extended periods of time and then localised heavy rainfall caused flooding in Glenesk Road.  Flooding had also occurred there in January after another localised downpour.  A more recent heavy rain event caused already nervous residents to fear a repeat although thankfully a third flood did not eventuate.

With the effects of climate change becoming more pronounced I regret to say that these sorts of events are going to become more regular.

During these emergencies some things worked well. The community response was magnificent. Local fire brigades did what they could to make sure that locals had somewhere to go to for basics such as a wash or a toilet stop. The surf club rescued stranded residents using their boats.  Local community groups and individuals volunteered the use of the resources that they had. Council officers volunteered their time to go door to door in some areas to check that each household was ok.

The local community Facebook pages performed a good job in disseminating information. Bethells Te Henga’s Bukino Faso quality communications infrastructure needs a rethink because in times of crisis reliable communications channels are vital.  Overall there was an outstanding community response and many examples of kindness and dedication.

Social media assumed an importance I have not seen before. During the near flood event at Piha I was able to receive messages and comments via facebook about the height of the Glenesk River as it rose and then send this onto Civil Defence while attending a meeting concerning Weeds and Pests.

Other aspects did not go so well.  I have real concerns about the stability and resilience of the power supply to the west particularly to the coastal area.  Although the storm was not in the most severe of categories (it was a category two storm with four being the maximum strength) widespread disruption to the west’s power supply occurred.  And, the interaction between Civil Defence, the emergency services and the community also needs to be checked to make sure that it is optimal.

Now that things are settling down it is time to review what happened and what needs to be done to lessen the disruption that will be caused by the next significant storm event.  So what do we do so that we are better prepared next time?

There has to be a big question as to the resilience of the power network. In my home suburb of Titirangi houses were without power for days on end. I appreciate that the coastal villages posed extra difficulty but Titirangi should not have been that difficult to fix.

Undergrounding of power supply has to be a priority. But there does not appear to be the resources to do this.  And there appears to be large gaps in Vector’s ability to pinpoint power outages.

For the coastal villages such as Piha localised power should be given serious consideration. With enough solar panels and a wind turbine or two combined with an intelligent localised network it could become self-sufficient in power and show the rest of the country how it is done. Aotea Great Barrier Island relies on solar power and generators. Maybe Piha should think about doing the same.

To kick off the discussion the local board invited some Piha and Karekare locals who were heavily involved in the response to a gathering where we asked three simple questions, what worked well, what was the greatest challenge and what can be improved on.  These included the Fire Service, the Surf Club, local social media coordinators, the RSA and many others.

The meeting was an opportunity for us to listen to and talk with locals.  I suspect that the event was cathartic for many and allowed them to process what was a very traumatic event for them, particularly those living in the Glenesk area.  It is clear that there are some early practical things that can be achieved.  Ensuring that the Piha Surf Club has an emergency power supply is one of them.

The community has asked that we collate their responses, incorporate these into the draft emergency response plan that is in existence and then put this out for consultation.  This work is under way.

I intend to report on progress in relation to this soon.

2.    Waitakere Ranges Heritage Area 5 yearly Monitoring Report

Last week, Council formally adopted the 2018 Waitākere Ranges monitoring report.  This is the second monitoring report and was dedicated to Denise Yates who had a great deal to do with the formation of the Waitākere Ranges Heritage Area Act as well as the preparation of the first report when she was chair of the Board.  The Act was an attempt to provide for meaningful protection of the Ranges and to protect against the cumulative degradation and subdivision of the Ranges through conventional RMA processes.

At the time it was controversial and caused considerable debate in the community but 10 years on things have settled down and erstwhile opponents are now at peace with the heritage area concept.  And people are proud to live in a statutorily recognised heritage area.

The report is important.  It is meant to assess how well the Act is performing, how well Council is going in its statutory obligation to protect and enhance the area, and what threats the area is facing.  The document itself is a complex and impressive collation of lots of information.

The original focus, subdivision, is working out in my view as intended.  Existing subdivision rights are being exercised but growth predictions suggest that once these rights have been exercised there should be no more.

Kauri dieback features heavily and thank Council for taking the strong action required to protect this taonga.

Te Kawarau ā Maki have provided critical commentary which is included in the report.  The Act anticipates that Council will enter into a deed of acknowledgement with Ngāti Whātua and Te Kawarau ā Maki.  Work on this should be a priority and could address Te Kawarau ā Maki’s concerns.

The report is not meant to be a PR exercise.  It is to show is what is going right and what needs to be done to make sure that this precious area remains protected.

3.    Greenways plan

Consultation on this important document is nearing an end.  It is our draft list of possible future projects to create walking and cycling tracks throughout the local board area.  It is, in part, a collection of maps showing existing paths and plans that may have existed for many years.  They have been collected together in graphical form so that we can have a look at them from a bird’s eye view.  This helps us work out where the gaps are and also what the priorities should be.

Walkways and cycleways are important because they improve communities, help with health and traffic congestion and they make villages and urban areas better places to be.

There are a couple of caveats in relation to the plan.  Not all of the supported projects will be built in the near future.  There are about 60 different projects in the document.  Nine are identified as possible priorities but this will need to be worked through.

To give you an idea of what is possible the local board has, in the past 6 years, built four substantial walkways, the Landing Road stairs, the Rimutaka Walkway, the Henderson Valley walkway and the cycleway from Oratia to Parrs Park.  The total cost of these four projects is in the vicinity of $2 to $3 million.  And, to put this into perspective, we currently receive $.5 million per year for capital projects in the road corridor although there is hope that this will be nearly doubled in the near future.

The new government has indicated that because of safety and health considerations it will place much greater emphasis on walking and cycling projects and we are hopeful that there will be a lot more central funding so that more of these projects can be built.

The second caveat is kauri dieback and the closure of the forest.  These plans were completed in August last year and were formally passed in December.  We were happy to release these for consultation but certainly tracks through bush areas were going to be much more carefully scrutinised and this is especially so after the forest was closed.

The public response has been really good.  I was invited to a meeting in Oratia and was slightly bemused not to mention worried that there were a hundred people wanting to talk about the draft.  An old walkway through pristine bush that I was happy to rule out was one of the causes.  There was also a preference that any infrastructure in the area is sympathetic to the local area.  One problem with the Oratia cycleway is that it is white concrete and I agree that better design and more sympathetic infrastructure should be a priority.

Carolynne Stone came up with the great idea of getting the community to design new walkways starting with Parker Road.  The theory is that they do not need a concrete path along the full strength of the road, rather there are sections that need work and other areas, for instance flat grassed areas which function perfectly well as a walkway.

I look forward to receiving their feedback and proposals.  This sort of approach could mean walkways that are not only practical and more respectful of the local area but also cheaper.

 

 

4. Auckland Council's Long-term 10 year plan consultation

The consultation has now concluded and Auckland Council is to shortly make decisions on its budget for the next ten years.  The Board's One Local Initiative is a plan to enhance Glen Eden township. 

The plan has a number of aspects to it but the primary advocacy area is the development of a town square using predominately local board resources and the creation of a laneway to join the town square to West Coast Road.  This will be augmented by Auckland Transport work to slow down traffic through the village and improve street amenity.  The need is because the area is facing fundamental change.  Glen Eden is forecast to grow dramatically.  Already the train station is a significant driver of activity.

The use of Glen Eden Train Station has increased by 40 percent over the past three years, with around 650,000 trips annually.  The station is right within the town centre and we want to work with AT to improve the amenity around the train station.  The local board has strong support for Central Rail Link delivery in 2024.  This is a transformative project.  People will be able to get from Glen Eden to the middle of town in about 25 minutes by rail.  There is already significant growth because of the existing system and in anticipation of what will happen in the future.

The Ted Manson Foundation is currently building two ten-story apartment houses within 100 metres of the train station.  Housing Corp has a five story apartment house being planned and there are plans for a further apartment house within Glen Eden although I understand plans have stalled.  Change is clearly coming.

Glen Eden is going to transform from a sleepy pleasant area to a significant transport node with medium and high density housing being common place.  This is why the local board believes that our One Local Initiative is so important, so that we can get Glen Eden ready for the future.  Glen Eden has been tagged for future development many times and there have been a number of plans prepared in the past.  The local board has done what we can with limited resources to try and advance development.

For instance, we put money from the Transport Capital Fund into design work for Auckland Transport’s park and ride opened a couple of years ago.  The park and ride was important and is very popular.  Already there are complaints that it is full.

We have also spent $160,000 on design work in anticipation that the Town Square project will proceed.  We have tagged the sum of $2.5 million from our own funds to aspects of this project.

The response from the consultation suggests that locals are supportive of this project.  81% of respondents fully or partially supported the proposal being a priority and only 18% did not think it was a priority.

The board’s feedback to Council on the other matters consulted on is as follows:

·      We support the proposed regional fuel tax with the caveat that we are concerned about effect on low socio economic groups.  Locally 59% of respondents supported the tax with 34% opposing it.  The Regional figures were 46% for and 48% opposed.

·      We support the proposed water quality targeted rate.  Locally 77% of respondents supported the tax with 18% opposing it.  The Regional figures were 61% for and 33% opposed.

·      We support "option B plus" plus in relation to the environmental special rate.  This would result in a $66 per annual rate increase for the average ratepayer.  We supported the enhanced rate so that the regional pest management strategy can be fully funded.  The Regional figures were no support for an increased rate 25%, option A ($21 pa) 26%, option B ($47 pa) 29% and other (generally option B plus) 20%.  The local equivalent figures were were no support for an increased rate 18%, option A ($21 pa) 18%, option B ($47 pa) 37% and other (generally option B plus) 28%.

·      In relation to the proposed Rates increase, we are concerned that 2.5% may not be enough, particularly given our position regarding the proper funding of the weed and pest strategy.

 

 

Our other advocacy items are:

·      Continuing advocacy to seek a return to historic levels of funding to be made available for Waitākere Ranges Heritage Area programmes under the local board’s decision-making control.

·      Funding to deliver aspects of Waitākere Ranges ‘greenways’ plan’ which is intended in part to improve access to public transport.

·      Funding to progress the now closed Te Henga Quarry to become either a regional or local park.  Funding was collected for this purpose by Waitākere City but has disappeared in the amalgamation and we would like it returned.

5.    Laingholm Star Wars celebration and photography project

Steve, Saffron and I had the pleasure of attending Laingholm Primary School for its annual Star Wars day which was combined with a very special occasion.  Former Mayor Bob Harvey and World renowned photographer and philanthropist and philanthropist Ashok Kochhar used the occasion to launch Ashok’s project to give film cameras to some school kids to take photos of their world.

The intent is that the children have two months to photograph their world and then return the cameras to their teachers and then the best photographs are sent back to the school for an exhibition.  It’s a simple but stunning idea to get children involved in analysing the environment around them and recording it.

The work is to be collated and published. I look forward to seeing the result.

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

a)      receive the Chair, Greg Presland’s report for May 2018.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Brenda  Railey - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

     

    

 



[1] Negiciations between the landowner and Te Kawerau ā Maki were usucessful

 

[2] Based on the average household size of 3.0 in Auckland at Census 2013.

[3] The Annual Review of Environment and Resources - environ.annualreviews.org

[4] Auckland’s Prime and Elite Soils 2013:TP2013/050, Auckland Council

[5] Most recent draft inventory, Waste Solutions, Auckland Council

[6] http://www.healthyaucklandtogether.org.nz/assets/Summary-Reports/HAT-Monitoring-Report-2017.pdf

[7] https://www.nzma.org.nz/journal/read-the-journal/all-issues/2010-2019/2016/vol-129-no-1436-10-june-2016/6915

[8] Elevated Nitrate Concentrations in Franklin Surface and Groundwater: A Review: TP2016/015

[9] LAWA: http://www.mfe.govt.nz/fresh-water/about-freshwater/auckland