Agenda of Franklin Local Board

Franklin Local Board

05 June 2018

Report to publicly notify an application from the owners of 1 Cherrie Road for a Reserves Act 1977 concession (licence) for a seawall at Sunkist Bay Reserve, Beachlands

File No.: CP2018/08331

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To seek a resolution from the Franklin Local Board to publicly notify an application from the owners of 1 Cherrie Road for a Reserves Act concession (licence) for a seawall at Sunkist Bay Reserve, Beachlands.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. The applicant, GA King and AL King as Trustees of Silent Lucidity Trust, is seeking a Reserves Act concession (licence) to build a rock masonry seawall within Sunkist Bay Reserve to protect the toe of the cliff from erosion. The wall will replace a temporary seawall placed after a slip that occurred in 2017.

3. The applicant has received resource consent for the seawall and reclamation of 65m of the coastal marine area for a term of 35 years.

4. Sunkist Bay Reserve is held by the crown but administered by council under a Reserves Act appointment to control and manage. Any permit, licence, lease or easement granted by council needs to be by a concession under Part 3B of the Conservation Act 1987.

5. The term of the concession is likely to be longer than ten years so will require public notification. A term of ten years or less is not renewable so would require the seawall to be removed on expiry. A publicly notified concession can be given a maximum term of 30 years unless special dispensation is given.

6. Iwi consultation is required under the Reserves Act.

7. An encumbrance will be registered on the Certificate of Title of the private property in order to ensure that future owners are held to ongoing ownership and maintenance requirements in perpetuity.

8. Feedback from the public notification and iwi consultation will need to be collated and a decision on whether a commissioner should be appointed.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board:

a) resolve to publicly notify an application from the owners of 1 Cherrie Road for a Reserves Act concession (licence) for a seawall at Sunkist Bay Reserve, Beachlands.

b) appoint a panel consisting of an Independent Hearings Commissioner as Chair and the full local board to consider any submissions received and to make the decision on the granting of the concession (licence).

Horopaki / Context

9. The applicant, GA King and AL King as Trustees of Silent Lucidity Trust, is seeking a Reserves Act concession (licence) to build a rock masonry seawall within Sunkist Bay Reserve to protect the toe of the cliff that their property sits at the top of.

10. A large slip from the applicant’s property at 1 Cherrie Road occurred in 2017 which deposited a significant volume of debris and vegetation onto the foreshore of Sunkist Bay. Following the slip the applicant built a temporary wall around the slip debris. The proposed application will replace this temporary wall with a permanent rock masonry wall.

11. The applicant has been granted resource consent to build the 60m sea wall and for reclamation of 65m of the coastal marine area (a copy of the resource consent is attached as Attachment A).

12. A large portion of the proposed seawall sits within Sunkist Bay Reserve which forms part of the Manukau City Domain. The Manukau City Domain comprised nine separately named domains all held by the Crown and all lying within the boundaries of the former Manukau City Council.

13. In 2010 Auckland Council inherited the powers under the Reserves Act to control and manage the Manukau City Domain.
Section 59A (1) of the Reserves Act requires any permit, licence, lease or easement proposed to be granted by any council over any Crown owned reserve to be by way of a concession under Part 3B of the 1987 Conservation Act.

14. The Minister of Conservation’s power to grant a concession was delegated to council in the 2013 delegations to local authorities amendment. A copy of the delegation to Council is attached in Attachment D.

15. Under section 17SC (1)(b) of the Conservation Act a licence for a term (including renewals) of more than ten years is required to be publicly notified. The applicant has applied for a term on the concession (licence) of ten years which would not require public notification.

16. Council do not consider a concession of ten years to be appropriate for this application. Under section 17Z of the Conservation Act a permit may be granted for a term not exceeding 10 years but shall not be renewable. The structure that is proposed to be built is of a permanent nature and is unlikely to be removed after a ten year interval.

17. If a 10 year term was granted for the seawall, the applicant would be required to remove the wall at the expiry of the term or the seawall would become the property of the landowner if not removed after a period of time. The council does not want the ownership and maintenance requirements of a seawall on the reserve.

18. Under Section 17Z of the Conservation Act, the maximum term for a concession is 30 years unless special dispensation is given by the minister for exceptional circumstances. There is little guidance on what constitutes ‘exceptional circumstances’. It is in the best interests of the applicant and future owners of 1 Cherrie Road if the maximum term is sought as this will minimise the amount of times the concession has to be renewed.

19. Sunkist Bay Reserve is an unclassified reserve under the Reserves Act. There is no scope to grant a licence on an unclassified reserve under the Reserves Act but as the concession (licence) will be granted under the Conservation Act, council will be able to grant the concession without going through the classification process.

20. As part of the discussion on whether to publicly notify or not, the Franklin Local Board should consider whether a commissioner should be appointed to review feedback and make a final decision on whether the proposal should be approved. The application is potentially precedent setting and could influence whether future applications for seawalls should be granted or not.

Figure 1: GIS screenshot of 1 Cherrie Road, Beachlands showing the extent of slip.

Figure 2: Photo of slip with the applicants house in the background

Figure 3: Approved resource consent plans of proposed seawall.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

21. There are many criteria to consider when assessing whether a coastal structure should be permitted on a reserve. It is hoped that the public notification will identify other areas of concern.

22. Free and unencumbered access for the public to and along the coastline should be maintained or enhanced. Public access to Sunkist Reserve is not considered to be greatly affected by the proposal. There will be reduced access along the foreshore area proposal as access to the foreshore is only possible at low tide by climbing over a rocky shore platform from Sunkist Bay (and via a walkway from the end of Cherrie Road) or via private access stairs from the subject site or similar access on other nearby sites. Note also that the applicant has not sought an exclusive interest in the reserve land.

23. Coastal structures should not adversely affect the amenity of the reserve, such as neighbour’s views, or affect the natural character of the coastal environment, or the intrinsic values of Sunkist Reserve.

24. The most dominant feature of the western end of Sunkist Bay Reserve is the presence of Pohutukawa trees. It has been identified in the resource consent findings that a mitigating factor for this application is that the proposed seawall will protect a fallen Pohutukawa tree.

25. The resource consent also came to the conclusion that the adjoining coastline around the proposed wall is already highly modified with the presence of a number of existing seawalls.

26. Coastal structures on reserves should show there are clear public benefits or opportunities to be gained, such as landscape enhancements, improved public access and safety, structures providing additional recreational opportunities or more useable public space.

27. The proposal is predominantly for private benefit as the seawall is planned to slow the rate of cliff regression from the subject’s site and protect the physical integrity of their property. There is a health and safety benefit to users of the reserve as the seawall may protect users if another slip occurred.

28. The applicant commissioned a geotechnical cliff assessment of the cliff at 1 Cherrie Road (Attachment A). In the report it suggested that shore protection (seawalls) should be considered to reduce long term regression at the toe of the cliff.

29. The report suggested that other geotechnical stabilisation measures such as in-ground palisade walls or a mesh and anchor system should also be considered to protect the cliff from long term regression. At this stage the applicant has not proposed how they plan to halt regression of the central and upper cliff face.

30. The proposal has also been reviewed by coastal and geotechnical specialists in Infrastructure & Environmental Services who have said that this application only addresses some of the issues with cliff stability so there needs to be clear distinction of who is responsible for ongoing maintenance and repair of the wall if further slips occurred.

31. Council’s parks and places specialist and maintenance delivery co-ordinator have been consulted and have not raised any concerns with the proposal.

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

32. The Franklin Local Board has questioned why public notification is needed. Public notification is a legislative requirement and the Local Board does not have the option of refusing to publicly notify the concession where the term is for more than 10 years.

33. A term of 10 years (or less) would require the seawall to be removed following the 10 year period as the concession would not be renewable.

34. Franklin Local Board plan outcome 1 “A well-cared for natural environment” is met, in part, by providing some protection to a cliff that is subject to erosion.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

35. If the application proceeded towards approval it is council’s practice to consult with all iwi with an interest in land within a local board area.

36. Section 4 of the Conservation Act 1987 is the driver for Iwi consultation and reads; “This Act shall so be interpreted and administered as to give effect to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi”. Auckland Council is expected to fulfil the obligations of section 4 on behalf of the Crown as treaty partner when dealing with either council owned or council managed reserves.

37. The applicant has not engaged with iwi for this proposal at this stage.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

38. The applicant will be required to pay an application fee and to cover the costs of the public notification. They will also be required to pay an annual concession fee for ongoing monitoring of the concession.

39. If an encumbrance is registered on the Certificate of Title there will not be any financial implications to the Council.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

40. For this proposal it is important that the structure remains in private ownership and is not vested in public ownership, to avoid any future risk or liability to council.

41. An encumbrance will be registered on the certificate of title of the private property to ensure that future owners are held to these requirements in perpetuity. A notation will also be recorded on councils property file of the applicant and on the property LIM report.

42. It should be noted that if a concession for the seawall at 1 Cherrie Road is granted that it may create a precedent for adjoining coastal properties or similar locations. There are a number of similar cliffs within the Franklin Local Board area that are subject to similar erosion processes so it is likely that similar applications will be received.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

43. A resolution to publicly notify the concession will require Land Advisory Services to undertake the public notification process.

44. Consultation will be undertaken with iwi who have interests in the Franklin Local Board Area.

45. The appointment of a commissioner should be considered to review feedback and make the final decision on if the proposal should be granted.

46. If the application for a concession is approved, Land Advisory Services will provide the applicant concession with the concession including relevant conditions. All other standard land owner approval conditions (e.g., health and safety plan, reinstatement of site, liability insurance, etc.) will also be included.

47. An encumbrance will be registered against the Certificate of Title and noted on the property LIM report.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Geotechincal Cliff Assessment	15
b ⇩	Resource Consent Decision	47
c ⇩	Approved RC Plans	57
d ⇩	Instrument of Delegation	69

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Glenn Riddell - Stakeholder & Land Advisory

Authorisers

Rod Sheridan - General Manager Community Facilities

Nina Siers - Relationship Manager

Franklin Local Board

05 June 2018

Auckland Transport update to the Franklin Local Board - May 2018

File No.: CP2018/08721

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To provide an update to the Franklin Local Board on transport related matters in their area, including the Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF) and projects

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. The Franklin Local Board currently has five LBTCF proposals underway:

· Construction began on the Beachlands gardens upgrade on 21 May

· Construction is substantially complete on the upgrade of Waiuku pavers (stage 2). The remaining 100m² will be completed after the arrival of further pavers from China, expected before the end of May

· Construction of new kerb and channel on First View Avenue is completed, though road pavement reshaping work remains that is expected to start before the end of May

· Construction is underway on the new kerb and channel project on Second View Avenue

· Auckland Transport does not support the installation of Flagtrax on its streetlight poles, and a second meeting to discuss other options has been scheduled at the end of May.

3. There remains $4,178 in the LBTCF, from the 2019/20 financial year. There is no requirement to allocate this amount prior to the next election.

4. In response to the Franklin Local Board’s April resolutions regarding the Pukekohe station building, Auckland Transport is commissioning GHD to undertake the requested building investigation/structural assessment and provide cost estimates for relocation, and has also provided a 2014 Scheme Assessment Report it commissioned on the station to the Board.

5. Auckland Transport’s Quarterly Report for the January-March 2018 is attached to this report and details its activities and projects both in the Franklin area and regionally.

6. The Minister of Transport and Mayor of Auckland will formally open the new Pukekohe bus station and park-and-ride on 6 June. The opening of the new over bridge at the station is delayed and is now expected later in July.

7. New ‘high crash area’ warning signage and temporary speed limits are expected to be implemented on Whitford Road before the end of May.

8. Train timetable improvements coming in August will see Pukekohe shuttle services increased to two trains per hour during inter-peak periods and at weekends.

9. Auckland Transport consulted the Franklin Local Board on three proposals in the area, including a shared path in a new Beachlands subdivision, traffic controls related to a new Whitford subdivision, and proposed pedestrian and cycle safety improvements at the main Beachlands roundabout. Feedback received did not support the alignment of the proposed shared path in the new subdivision, but fully supported the proposed improvements at the Beachlands roundabout.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board:

a) receives the report entitled ‘Auckland Transport update to the Franklin Local Board – May 2018’.

Horopaki / Context

10. 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) and LBTCF projects.

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

12. The LBTCF is a capital budget provided to all local boards by Auckland Council and delivered by Auckland Transport. Local boards can use this fund to deliver transport infrastructure projects that they believe are important but are not part of Auckland Transport’s work programme.

13. Any LBTCF projects selected must be safe, must not impede network efficiency, and must be located in the road corridor or on land controlled by Auckland Transport (though projects running through parks can be considered if there is a transport outcome).

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

Local Board Transport Capital Fund

14. The Franklin Local Board’s transport capital fund to date is summarised below.

Franklin Local Board transport capital fund financial summary:

Funds available in current political term (includes 2019/20 FY)	$1,654,863
Amount committed to date on projects approved for design and/or construction	$1,650,685
Remaining budget (from 2019/20 FY so not required to be allocated by the end of the current political term)	$4,178

15. The Board’s current or recently completed LBTCF projects are included in the table below (NB: ROC = rough order of costs, and FEC = firm estimate of cost):

ID#

Project Description

Progress/Current Status

443

Upgrade of Beachlands town centre gardens

· FEC estimate of $279,396 (for hardwood)

· Spend to date = $37,606

· On 6-Jun-17, the Board approved construction, using hardwood.

Latest update:

· The contract was awarded to Broadspectrum. A pre-commencement meeting was held on 20-May and construction commenced on 21-May.

516

Waiuku pavers upgrade, Stage 2

· ROC estimate of $505,000

· Spend to date = $459,657

· On 6-Jun-17, the Board approved the project for construction based on the estimate of $505,000.

· Construction is complete apart from 100m² in Kitchener Road. Further pavers have been ordered from China, for which sufficient budget remains.

Latest update:

· A walkover has taken place with the town centre manager, contractor and AT staff and defects have been identified.

· Further pavers are expected to arrive from China on 22-May, after which the remaining work can be completed.

518

First View Avenue, Beachlands – installation of new kerb and channel between Sunkist Bay and Wakelin Roads (both sides)

· FEC estimate of $347,097

· Spend to date = $168,682

· On 28-Nov-17, the Board approved the project for construction based on the estimate of $347,097.

· Works are in progress.

Latest update:

· The contractor has completed all kerb and channel on both sides of First View Ave.

· The contractors will return in the last week of May to repair some patches and complete the pavement formation of the whole road and seal. AT has agreed to pay for the pavement repairs and the difference for the pavement formation and seal that is beyond the scope of the agreed project with the contractor (i.e. the whole road section will be reshaped to match the new kerbing and sealed for the full length.

519

Second View Avenue, Beachlands – installation of new kerb and channel between Puriri and Cherrie Roads (north side)

· FEC estimate of $340,000

· Spend to date = $38,341

· On 28-Nov-17, the Board approved the project for construction based on the estimate of $340,000.

· Same contractor appointed as for First View Ave works above.

Latest update:

· The contractors is approximately halfway through this project and hopes to pour the first section of new kerb and channel in the last week of May (subject to weather and availability of the kerbing sub-contractor).

520

Pukekohe Flagtrax – proposed installation on existing streetlights in Pukekohe

· ROC estimate of $147,000 (based on an estimated 150 units)

· Spend to date = $6,770

· On 6-Jun-17, the Board approved the project for detailed design and costings, based on the estimate of $147,000 for 150 FlagTrax units.

· An inventory of poles has been compiled. This this for the loop road around the Pukekohe CBD that has 154 poles.

Latest update:

· AT’s Streetlighting team has given further consideration to the proposal and does not support the installation of Flagtrax on AT assets.

· A meeting was held in early May with a Board representative to discuss other options. A further meeting is scheduled at the end of May.

Response to resolutions

16. At its April business meeting, the Franklin Local Board passed the resolutions below in respect of the Pukekohe station building:

1. Resolution number FR/2018/48

2. That the Franklin Local Board:

b) request Auckland Transport to commission a full building investigation/structural report on the old station building and, if the building is deemed possible to relocate, also estimated costs for both relocating the building and reinstating it on a new site with upgrades as necessary to comply with building code standards.

c) request Auckland Transport to provide any previous assessment reports on track placement behind bus location, to allow station to remain in current position.

17. Auckland Transport is commissioning GHD to undertake the requested building investigation/structural assessment and provide cost estimates, and has been in discussions confirming the inspection scope. As no relocation site has been identified, the assumption will be to relocate the building to a level site with all the services available and linked in (water, plumbing, electricity, sewage).

18. With regard to any previous assessments, Auckland Transport has provided the 2014 Scheme Assessment Report commissioned on Pukekohe station to the Board.

Quarterly Report for January-March 2018

19. Auckland Transport has also committed to providing more detailed information to local boards on its activities in both the local area and regionally every quarter, comprising:

· Attachment A – report from Auckland Transport departments on their activities in the Franklin Local Board area and regionally over the last quarter

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

Local projects and activities

Pukekohe Station project update

20. The scope of works for Stage 2 of the project is a new bus station catering for six bus bays, an 87-space park-and-ride, a new over-bridge with lifts linking the rail and bus stations, customer toilets and bus shelters, bicycle parking, new ticket machines on the bus side, and improved rail platforms with the removal of timber decks and replacement with concrete and asphalt.

21. Construction continues on Stage 2 of the project as follows:

a. Bridge works are continuing with finishing works to the lifts and main span, and the balustrade for the ramp is being completed.

b. Following a design and conformance issue with the canopies over the bridge, the main legs for the canopy are being re-fabricated. This has caused a delay for the overall completion and opening of the bridge, which is now targeted for late July. The old ramp is planned to be removed following the opening of the new bridge and during a rail Block of Line in late July.

c. Station Road works continue with most of the kerbing installed and footpath poured. New lighting is also in place for the area. A section of footpath has been left open to allow a plinth to be installed that will hold a carving being produced by Iwi.

d. Finishing works in the bus station area are being completed ready for the formal opening ceremony. Bus operations will commence afterwards with AT Metro to confirm the exact date. Following the commencement of bus services, Downers will undertake some minor works on Custom Street to re-open the car park for the Council service centre and remove the original bus shelters

22. The Minister of Transport and Mayor of Auckland will formally open the new Pukekohe bus station and park-and-ride on 6 June. A dawn Karakia will be held ahead of the formal ceremony.

23. For more information on the project, visit at.govt.nz/pukekohestation.

Update on Whitford Road

24. As previously reported in April, Auckland Transport engaged consultants to analyse the SCRIM (‘Sideway-force Coefficient Routine Investigation Machine’, which measures skid resistance) test data undertaken along Whitford and Whitford-Maraetai Roads.

25. All of the data has now been analysed and plotted onto plans, along with where loss of control crashes are being experienced. Auckland Transport is now developing targeted solutions that will be fast tracked through the design process.

26. More immediate measures being considered included temporary speed limits until the planned road resurfacing of three sections of Whitford Road could be undertaken at the beginning of next season, and ‘high crash area’ and ‘slippery when wet’ warning signs.

27. ‘High crash area’ signs are programmed to be installed in two locations on Whitford and Whitford-Maraetai Road on 24 and 25 May.

28. Temporary speed limits on Whitford Road between Somerville Road roundabout and Whitford village, and north of Whitford village on Whitford-Maraetai Road until after the Clifton Road intersection, are programmed to be implemented over the weekend of 26 and 27 May.

29. Auckland Transport also considered the installation of ‘slippery when wet’ signs but concluded that, given the imminent high crash area signs and additional signage for the temporary speed limit reduction, the effectiveness of these further signs would not be particularly effective.

Train timetable improvements

30. The 2018 Auckland train timetable has been approved and will be introduced on Sunday 12 August. Across the region, the timetable will introduce

· Improved journey times across the Southern, Eastern & Western Lines, including further reduced dwell times

· An increase to three trains per hour, across the Southern, Eastern and Western Lines until 7:00pm, at weekends and on public holidays, up from two trains per hour

· Afternoon peak services will now transition from the 10-minute frequency to a 20-minute frequency from 7:00pm to 8:00pm, and to a 30-minute frequency thereafter

· Services to Parnell Station will increase, and include all Western Line services, throughout the day (currently, Western Line services only operate to Parnell after 7.00pm, and at weekends)

31. Specifically for Franklin, Pukekohe shuttle services will continue to operate three trains per hour during the morning and afternoon peaks, but will increase to two trains per hour during inter-peak periods and at weekends (doubled from the current one train per hour at those times).

Other Auckland Transport news

Increased road safety investment planned

32. Auckland Transport is proposing to invest $700 million in road safety initiatives to reduce death and serious injury on Auckland’s roads.

33. In the past three years (2014-2017), road deaths and serious injuries in Auckland have increased at more than five times the rate of travel and more than three times the rate of the rest of New Zealand. On average, there is at least one death or serious injury on Auckland’s roads every day.

34. The funding was signalled in the draft Regional Land Transport Plan (RLTP), which was open for public consultation in May.

35. Auckland Transport is also proposing an ambitious safety infrastructure acceleration programme estimated to reduce deaths and serious injuries by up to 150 (15-20%) over three years. This includes reducing speed limits and installing traffic calming treatments on at least 10% of the roading network, better and safer pedestrian infrastructure (e.g. crossings), safety cameras, and high friction road surfacing which reduces the risk of skidding. In addition, Auckland Transport will increase the number of high-risk intersections that will receive safety improvements.

36. Feedback on the draft RLTP is now being analysed before final budgets are approved.

New Manukau bus station wins award

37. The new Manukau bus station, opened in April by the Mayor of Auckland, the Minister of Transport and the Otara-Papatoetoe Local Board, has won a prestigious architecture award.

38. The new station was the sole winner in the Public Architecture category at the Auckland Architecture Awards held on 9 May, which are part of a programme run by the New Zealand Institute of Architects to recognise the contribution of architects to towns and communities.

39. The project was designed by Beca Architects and Cox Davies.

40. Auckland Transport’s continued partnership with Mana Whenua was an important component in the design and construction of the station. In addition to the use of natural timber and prominent Iwi creative expressions, Te Aranga Māori Principles guided the design of the vital stormwater management system and the passive temperate controls methods.

Architecture award winner

Other transport news

State highway changes

41. The NZ Transport Agency (NZTA) has announced that variable speed limits around the Waterview Tunnel will be introduced from July 2018. The proposed changes on State Highways 20 and 16 will allow maximum speeds of 100 km/h in certain driving conditions.

42. Variable speed limits mean that the maximum legal speed limit can change between 30 km/h and 100 km/h and be adjusted for the road and driving conditions. Speed limits are likely to be reduced during peak periods when there are typically high traffic volumes and in the event of incidents, crashes, maintenance work or extreme weather conditions.

43. The changes to increase the variable speed limit from 30–80 km/h to 30-100 km/h will be introduced in two phases.

44. For more information, please visit www.nzta.govt.nz/waterview-speed-limits

45. In other NZTA news, the Landing Drive roundabout on SH20A to Auckland Airport was transformed into an intersection controlled by traffic lights on the night of 18 May. The intersection is now an 8-lane intersection for north and southbound traffic, with traffic lights controlling all movements through the intersection.

46. Changes to the intersection were necessary because the heavy traffic flows to and from the airport meant the roundabout did not function efficiently.

47. Work will continue to build traffic islands, median strips and lay the final road surface around the intersection. This work is planned to be finished by August 2018.

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

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

49. The local board’s views on any proposed schemes are taken into account during consultation on those proposals.

Auckland Transport consultations

50. Consultation documents for the following proposals have been provided to the Franklin Local Board for its feedback. The proposals are summarised below, as is any feedback received, and any responses to that feedback, if available at the time of writing.

51. 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.

52. Proposed shared path, new residential subdivision, Beachlands – the Board was previously consulted on new roads in Beachlands for a residential subdivision south of Ninth View Avenue and Artists Avenue. A shared path along the southern side of the subdivision is now part of the proposal.

53. Board feedback did not support the proposal due to its alignment not being in accordance with the walkway shown in the 2002 Structure Plan for the area. The Structure Plan concept was for the walkway to follow natural contours rather than running along urban footpaths, which the new proposal does in part.

54. Consultants for the developer advise that the walkway shown in the 2002 Structure Plan was indicative only, and although the road layout for the site has changed from the Structure Plan, the walkway was generally in accordance with the indicative alignment shown on the Plan.

55. During the design process, consideration was given to provision of appropriate gradients for pedestrian accessibility and avoiding flood plains, alongside earthworks to the existing land contours. Due to those constraints, a short section of path ~200m in length is now proposed to run adjacent to a road. The walkway design has engineering approval from Auckland Council.

56. Proposed controls for new residential development, Whitford Park Road, Whitford – as part of a proposed residential development at 40 Whitford Park Road, a right turn bay and associated ‘No Stopping At All Times’ (NSAAT) parking restrictions are proposed on Whitford Park Road to provide access to the development. A footpath extension, pram crossings and associated NSAATs are also proposed on Whitford-Maraetai Road to connect a walkway to the new development.

57. Proposed pedestrian and cycle improvements, main Beachlands roundabout, Beachlands – Auckland Transport is proposing to construct a shared bicycle and pedestrian path along the northern and eastern sides of the roundabout at the intersection of Beachlands Road and Whitford-Maraetai Road, in Beachlands. The new facilities will mirror existing facilities on the western and southern sides of the roundabout and will improve safety and connectivity for vulnerable road users. Board feedback was in support of the proposal.

Traffic Control Committee (TCC) resolutions

58. Resolutions passed by the TCC during the month of April 2018 that will affect the Franklin Local Board area are shown below.

Street (Suburb)	Type of Report	Nature Of Restriction	Decision
Beachlands Road, Whitford-Maraetai Road, Mahutonga Avenue, Constellation Avenue, Kouka Road, Karo Road (Beachlands)	Permanent Traffic and Parking changes Combined	Cycle Lane, No Stopping At All Times, Angle Parking, Loading Zone, Parking Place, P15, Bus Stop, Bus Shelter, Mobility Parking, Traffic Islands, Road Hump, Pedestrian Crossing, Give-Way, Roundabout, Flush Median, Lanes	Carried
Ninth View Avenue, Jack Lachlan Drive (Beachlands)	Permanent Traffic and Parking changes Combined	No Stopping At All Times, Give-Way, Lanes	Carried
Princes Street West, Jutland Road, Unnamed Road (Pukekohe)	Permanent Traffic and Parking changes Combined	Shared Cycle Path, No Stopping At All Times, Road Hump, Give-Way, Lanes	Approved in principle
Unnamed Roads, Clarks Beach Road (Clarks Beach)	Permanent Traffic and Parking changes Combined	No Stopping At All Times, Cycle Lane, Cycle Path, Shared Path, Flush Median, Traffic Island, Shoulder Marking, Give-Way	Approved in principle
Queen Street, Kitchener Road (Waiuku)	Temporary Traffic and Parking changes (Event)	Temporary Traffic and Parking restrictions (Waiuku Steel & Wheels)	Carried

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

59. The proposed decision of receiving the report has no impacts or opportunities for Māori. Any engagement with Māori, or consideration of impacts and opportunities, will be carried out on an individual project basis.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

60. The proposed decision of receiving the report has no financial implications.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

61. The proposed decision of receiving the report has no risks.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

62. Auckland Transport will provide another update report to the local board next month.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Franklin 1805 Attachment A	89
b ⇩	Franklin 1805 Attachment B	103

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Jenni Wild, Elected Member Relationship Manager Auckland Transport

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon, Auckland Transport

Nina Siers - Relationship Manager

Franklin Local Board

05 June 2018

Adoption of the Franklin Local Board Agreement 2018/2019

File No.: CP2018/08528

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To adopt a Local Board Agreement 2018/2019, a message from the chair, local board advocacy, and a local fees and charges schedule for 2018/2019.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. Each financial year, Auckland Council must have a local board agreement between the Governing Body and the local board, for each local board area.

3. From 28 February to 28 March 2018, council consulted on the 10-year Budget 2018-2028. Local boards considered this feedback and then held discussions with the Finance and Performance Committee on 16 and 17 May 2018 on regional issues, community feedback and key local board initiatives and advocacy areas.

4. Local boards are now considering local content for the 10-year Budget 2018-2028 which includes a local board agreement, a message from the chair, local board advocacy, and a local fees and charges schedule for 2018/2019.

5. On 28 June 2018, the Governing Body will meet to adopt Auckland Council’s 10-year Budget 2018-2028, including 21 local board agreements.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board:

a) adopts local content for the 10-year Budget 2018-2028 (Attachment A), including:

i. a Local Board Agreement 2018/2019

ii. a message from the Chair

iii. local board advocacy.

b) adopts local fees and charges schedules for 2018/2019 (Attachment B).

c) delegates authority to the Chair to make any final minor changes to the local content for the 10-year Budget 2018-2028, including the Local Board Agreement 2018/2019.

d) notes:

i. that Local Board Agreement 2018/2019 local activity budgets will be updated to reflect final budget decisions made by the Governing Body on 31 May 2018

ii. that if there are outstanding (not yet agreed) matters in the Local Board Agreement 2018/2019, the local board should include an explanation of these matters in the Chair’s message at the front of the agreement

iii. that the resolutions of this meeting will be reported back to the Governing Body when it meets to adopt the 10-year Budget 2018-2028 on 28 June 2018.

Horopaki / Context

6. Local board plans are strategic documents that are developed every three years to set a direction for local boards. Local board plans influence and inform the 10-year Budget 2018-2028 (and associated local board agreements) which outlines priorities, budgets and intended levels of service over a 10-year period and for each financial year, Auckland Council must have a local board agreement between the Governing Body and the local board, for each local board area.

7. Local board nominees have had the opportunity to attend Finance and Performance Committee workshops on key topics and provide local board views on the 10-year Budget 2018-2028.

8. From 28 February to 28 March 2018, Council consulted with the public on the 10-year Budget 2018-2028. Nine locally held events were held in the Franklin Local Board area to engage with the community and seek feedback on both regional and local proposals.

9. A report analysing the feedback on local board priorities, as well as feedback from those living in the local board area related to the regional issues, was included as an attachment on the 8 May business meeting agenda.

10. Local boards considered this feedback, and then held discussions with the Finance and Performance Committee on 16 and 17 May 2018 on regional issues, community feedback and key local board initiatives and advocacy areas.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

11. Both staff and the local board have reviewed the feedback received on 10-year Budget 2018-2028 and local boards have received a report analysing the feedback. It is now recommended that local boards adopt local content for the 10-year Budget 2018-2028 (Attachment A), including the Local Board Agreement 2018/2019, and a local fees and charges schedule for 2018/2019 (Attachment B).

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

12. This report seeks local board adoption of its content for the 10-year Budget 2018-2028 and other associated material, including the Local Board Agreement 2018/2019.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

13. Many local board decisions are of importance to and impact on Māori. Local board agreements and the 10-year Budget are important tools that enable and can demonstrate council’s responsiveness to Māori.

14. Local board plans, which were developed in 2017 through engagement with the community including Māori, form the basis of local priorities. There is a need to continue to build relationships between local boards and iwi, and where relevant the wider Māori community.

15. Of those who submitted to the 10-year Budget 2018-2028 from the Franklin Local Board area 47 identified as Māori. Three iwi entities from the Franklin Local Board rohe also made a submission to the 10-year Budget 2018-2028. These submissions were provided to the local board for consideration when finalising their local board agreement.

16. Ongoing conversations will assist local boards and Māori to understand each other’s priorities and issues. This in turn can influence and encourage Māori participation in council’s decision-making processes.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

17. The local board agreement includes the allocation of locally driven initiatives (LDI) funding and asset based services (ABS) funding to projects and services for the 2018/2019 financial year.

18. Funding for locally driven initiatives (LDI) is discretionary funding local boards can spend on local priorities that are important to their communities.

19. Funding for asset based services (ABS) is required to run and maintain our local assets including parks, pools and recreation facilities, community facilities, and libraries.

20. A local fees and charges schedule for 2018/2019 is adopted alongside of the Local Board Agreement 2018/2019.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

21. Decisions on the local content of the 10-year Budget 2018-2028, including the Local Board Agreement 2018/2019 and a local fees and charges schedule for 2018/2019, are required by 7 June 2018 to ensure the Governing Body can adopt the 10-year Budget 2018-2028 at its 28 June 2018 meeting.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

22. The resolutions of this meeting will be reported to the Governing Body on 28 June 2018 when it meets to adopt the 10-year Budget 2018-2028, including 21 local board agreements.

23. It is possible that minor changes may need to be made to the attachments before the 10-year Budget 2018-2028 is adopted, such as correction of any errors identified and minor wording changes. Staff therefore recommend that the local board delegates authority to the Chair to make final changes if necessary.

24. Local board agreements set the priorities and budget envelopes for each financial year. Work programmes then detail the activities that will be delivered within those budget envelopes. Work programmes will be agreed between local boards and operational departments at business meetings in June 2018.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Local Board Agreement - Attachment A	115
b ⇩	Franklin Fees and Charges 2018/19	129

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Christie McFadyen, Strategic Project Advisor

Authorisers

Louise Mason, GM Local Board Services

Nina Siers - Relationship Manager

Franklin Local Board

05 June 2018

Franklin Local Board 2018/2019 Local Economic Development Work Programme

File No.: CP2018/08731

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To adopt the Franklin Local Economic Development Action Plan (2018) and approve the Franklin local economic development programme for the 2018/19 financial year.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. This report introduces the revised Franklin Local Economic Development Action Plan (Attachment A) and associated work programme for 2018/19.

3. The proposed 2018/19 financial year Local Economic Development (LED) Work Programme for the Franklin Local Board as set out in attachment B.

4. The proposed work programme comprises, support for the tourism sector, completion of the Hunua Trail establishment work, coordination of the Franklin Skills Network and support for the Young Enterprise Scheme.

5. A Hunua, Clevedon and Pohutukawa Coast Tourism Leverage project which is not funded with 2018/19 funds will be reported on as part of the 2018/19 programme.

6. The total value of the Local Economic Development programme is $67,000

7. The board is being asked to adopt the Franklin Local Economic Development Action Plan (2018) and approve the 2018/19 local economic development programme.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board:

a) adopt the Franklin Local Economic Development Action Plan (Attachment A)

b) approve the 2017/18 local economic development programme (Attachment B) as follows.

i) Hunua, Clevedon and Pohutukawa Coast Tourism Leverage (no 2018/19 funding required)

ii) Supporting the Franklin Tourism Sector ($30,000)

iii) Hunua Trail ($10,000)

iv) Franklin Skills Network Coordination ($25,000)

v) Young Enterprise Scheme ($2,000)

Horopaki / Context

8. In 2017/18 the Franklin Local Board commissioned a review and refresh of its Local Economic Development Action Plan. The purpose of this refresh was to provide a more focused plan that was reflective of the Local Board’s current priorities identified in the Local Board Plan and that more clearly identified actions the board would like to support over the next three years.

9. The content of the action plan was agreed at a local board workshop on 8 May 2018.

10. This report also provides the Local Board with the proposed local economic development work programme for the coming financial year.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

11. The 2017/2018 local economic development programme has been developed having regard to the Local Board’s priorities for local economic development set out in the draft Local Board Plan (2017) and the refreshed Franklin Local Economic Development Action Plan (2018).

12. The proposed LED programme comprises the following activities.

Hunua, Clevedon and Pohutukawa Coast Tourism Leverage (no 2018/19 funding required)

13. Work to identify the economic development opportunities that will arise from the development of the Hunua Trail. Will not use 2019/19 funding, however reporting to the local board on this work will take place in the 2018/19 financial year.

Supporting the Franklin Tourism Sector ($30,000)

14.     There are several potential projects that could be delivered over a two to three year period, building on the recommendations of the Motor Caravanning research undertaken in 2016/17.

-             Supporting development of an overarching framework to guide investment and activity    in      developing tourism across the Franklin Local Board area
- Understanding Franklin visitor information needs
- Supporting the Franklin Tourism group to develop and promote the Franklin tourism          offer.

This project proposes to roll out delivery of those recommendations within the context of the new ATEED strategy for tourism ‘Destination AKL 2025’.

Hunua Trail ($10,000)

14. Establishment of the Hunua Trail provides a significant opportunity for economic development in the Franklin District. Work is currently underway to establish a body to oversee the development of the trail, articulate a vision and identify economic development opportunities. Experiences in neighbouring districts have shown that in the early stages of development and implementation there needs to be oversight of the management of the trail. This project provides for the local board to provide continued support until the trail is fully established. In early 2018/19 it is likely two tasks will need completing. One is to prepare the aspirational plan for the trail and the other is to prepare the funding and delivery strategy.

Franklin Skills Network Coordination ($25,000)

15. Provide support to the Franklin Skills Network to develop a deliverable work programme and ensure that agreed activities are delivered. A suitably skilled contractor will be appointed on a part-time fixed term contract to work with the Franklin Skills Network to develop a focused and deliverable set of actions and to coordinate and drive delivery.

Young Enterprise Scheme ($2,000)

16. Auckland Business Chamber, on behalf of the Young Enterprise Trust, delivers the Young Enterprise Scheme (YES) in Auckland. YES is a practical, year-long programme for year 12 and 13 students. Through the programme, students develop creative ideas into actual businesses, complete with real products and services and experience real profit and loss.

17. Fostering youth entrepreneurship is a key requirement for developing an innovative economy and creating employment pathways for our young people. Through the programme, students develop creative ideas into actual businesses, complete with real products and services and real profit and loss. Students learn key work skills and business knowledge including: business fundamentals, planning, interpersonal relations, financial, decision making, reporting, risk management and team work. YES helps create a culture of innovation and entrepreneurship amongst Auckland’s young people.

18. The funding from the local board will support the delivery of the YES Kick Start days in February 2019. The Kick start days are held in sub-regions (North, South, East, Central/West) and are the first day students get to meet the Young Enterprise team, and find out about their 2019 year, what YES is about, and what is in store for them. All schools in the local board area that have shown an interest in YES are invited. In addition, the invite is extended to those schools who have not shown an interest to enable them to decide as to whether to participate.

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

19. The two main focuses of the refreshed Franklin Economic development Action plan the local board have indicated they wish to support are helping the tourism sector fulfil its potential and provide continued support to help young people progress through education and training and in to employment.

20. Support for the tourism sector in the work programme is a continuation of previous pieces of work to support the Franklin Tourism Group and to look at the needs of motor caravan tourists visiting the area. The work programme for 2018/19 will take a more holistic and longer-term approach to the development needs of the sector building on the previous work of the tourism group as well as opportunities that will arise with the development of the Hunua trail.

21. By supporting a coordinator for the Franklin Skills Network, the local board will enable the network to make further progress in helping young people in to employment by providing a focused resource with the primary purpose of driving forward delivery of the work programme of the network. Supporting the Young Enterprise Scheme in the district will also provide support to enable this initiative to be successful and grow in Franklin schools.

22. The proposed LED programme was presented to the Local Board at the 22 May 2018 workshop and has been amended to reflect the comments received at that workshop.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

23. Iwi have been engaged throughout the discussions on the potential for development of a Hunua trail. In supporting implementation of the Hunua trail and development of the tourism sector more broadly there will be opportunities to work together with local Iwi to identify economic development opportunities. Similarly, through the work of the Franklin Skills Network, education, training and employment initiatives that directly support rangatahi economic success will be developed in partnership with relevant organisations.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

24. The Local Economic Development work programme progress will be reported directly to the Local Board as part of the quarterly local board work programme report produced by Local Board Services.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

25. Support for the tourism sector is dependent in part on agreement with the Franklin Tourism Group on a programme of initiatives to pursue and agreement of roles and responsibilities between the tourism group and any external capacity contracted to provide assistance. Early stage discussion between the tourism group, local board and local board representatives will facilitate this.

26. Bringing the Hunua trail in to being from concept stage remains dependent on several factors including continued agreement of key stakeholders on the vision for the trail, the outcome of any public consultation and the maintenance of current Auckland Council position that Kauri Dieback will not affect the trail as it is envisioned.

27. The success of supporting a coordinator for the Franklin Skills Network is dependent on finding a person with the skills capabilities to assist the group develop achievable projects and initiatives and see them through to delivery.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

28. Following approval by the local board the Local Economic Development team at ATEED will begin to implement the programme as approved by the local board. Where there is a need further scoping of activities will be undertaken and presented back to the local Board as required

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Local Economic Development Action Plan	135
b ⇩	Franklin ATEED Work Programme 2018/2019	145

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Jonathan Sudworth - Local Economic Development Advisor , ATEED

Authorisers

John Norman - Strategic Planner Local Economic Development, ATEED

Nina Siers - Relationship Manager

Franklin Local Board

05 June 2018

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

File No.: CP2018/06699

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To update the Franklin 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 (CCOs), Waterfront Auckland and Auckland Council Property Limited (ACPL).

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 Franklin 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 Franklin Local Board Area

9. Panuku currently manages 43 commercial and 17 residential interests within the Franklin 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 Franklin 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, 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. 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 (AT) 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 Franklin 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 Hall Street, Pukekohe	An off-street car park released by AT as not required for its future service needs and having no strategic purpose to retain. No alternative service uses were identified through the rationalisation process. The board opposed the proposed disposal of the subject site at its April 2017 meeting on the basis of anticipated future demand from population growth and requested that Pukekohe town centre car parking data from AT inform the proposed disposal of the property. AT are due to complete a comprehensive car parking management plan and parking survey of Pukekohe in June 2018. Panuku will further engage with the board regarding the subject site in late 2018.
28 Lockwood Avenue, Hunua	A residential property and garage no longer required for open space purposes or as a regional park asset. No alternative service uses were identified through the rationalisation process. The board endorsed the proposed disposal of the subject property at its April 2017 meeting. Panuku will recommend the disposal of the property to council’s Finance and Performance Committee’s June 2018 meeting.
42 Seddon Street, Pukekohe	Residual land acquired by the former Pukekohe Borough Council in 1977 to construct a new ring road around the Pukekohe township. The board provided informal feedback that it was opposed to the proposed disposal in October 2015. Watercare are currently undertaking investigations to ascertain if the site is required for infrastructure purposes.
15R First View Avenue, Beachlands	A narrow strip of land remaining from an unformed access way vested with the former Manukau City Council in 1963. An information memorandum regarding the proposed disposal was provided to the board in January 2018. Panuku and council’s Stakeholder and Land Advisory team are seeking to resolve encroachments associated with the site.

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 Franklin 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. One of the properties sold is in the Franklin Local Board area - 270 Flanagan Road, Drury.

Development

25. Panuku is contributing commercial input into approximately 50 region-wide council-driven renewal and housing supply initiatives.

26. Panuku works with partners and stakeholders over the course of a project. It also champions best practice project delivery, to achieve best value outcomes within defined cost, time and quality parameters.

27. Below is a high-level update on development activities in the Franklin Local Board area:

28. 17-21 Massey Avenue & 33 Edinburgh Street, Pukekohe – The Massey / Edinburgh properties represent a long term strategic development opportunity, which has been identified for town centre regeneration over the long term. Some preliminary discussions were held on site in March 2018 with an interested party and the Deputy Mayor and Andrew Baker. Future development is dependent on the outcome of AT’s car park review which affects 3 sites in the block.

Housing for Older People

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

30. 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.

31. 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.

32. 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.

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

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

35. The following HfOP villages are located within the Franklin Local Board area:

Village	Address	Number of units
Albert Place Village	1 Albert Place, Pukekohe	30
Henry Curd Village	4-8 Henry Curd Terrace, Pukekohe	10
Kent Street Village	14 Kent Street, Waiuku	8
Lawrie Avenue Village	111 Queen Street, Pukekohe	7
Norfolk Rise Village	2 Norfolk Rise, Waiuku	16
Parkway Village	16 Princes Street, Pukekohe	28

Regional Activities

Highlights

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

37. 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.

38. 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.

39. 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

40. 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.

41. ‘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.

42. 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

43. 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.

44. 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).

45. 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.

46. 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.

47. 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.

48. 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.

49. 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.

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

50. This report is for the Franklin Local Board’s information.

51. 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

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

53. 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.

54. There are 19 Mana Whenua in the region, with 13 having indicated an interest in Panuku lead activities within the local board area.

55. Māori make up 13 percent of the local board population, and there are 14 marae located within the local board area.

56. 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.

57. 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

Helga Sonier - Senior Engagement Advisor, Panuku Development Auckland

Nina Siers - Relationship Manager

Franklin Local Board

05 June 2018

New Road Name Approval for the residential subdivision by Knight Investments Limited at 137 Clarks Beach Road, Clarks Beach

File No.: CP2018/08806

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. The purpose of this report is to seek approval from the Franklin Local Board, for new road names for the new roads created by way of subdivision at 137 Clarks Beach Road, Clarks Beach.

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 for the Auckland Council.

3. Following assessment against the road naming criteria, the road names “Kaitiaki Drive” (Road 1), “Koiora Road” (Road 2), “Poutawa Lane” (Road 3), “Mutetai Road” (Road 4) (applicant’s preferred road name), “Gertrude Cole Drive” (Road 1). “Ritetai Road” (Road 2), “Uatoto Lane” (Road 3) and “Matarau Road” (Road 4), and “Whata Drive” (Road 1), “Ungatetaka Road” (Road 2), “Korowhiti Lane” (Road 3) and “Paratehoe Road” (Road 4) were determined to meet the road naming policy criteria.

4. Local Iwi groups were consulted and Waikato - Tainui deferred to other Iwi to comment. Ngati Te Ata Waiohua suggested the names “Kaitiaki Drive” and “Poutawa Lane” and Ngati Tamaoho suggested the names “Koiora Road”, “Mutetai Road”, “Ritetai Road”, “Uatoto Lane”, “Matarau Road”, “Whata Drive”, “Ungatetaka Road”, “Korowhiti Lane” and “Paratehoe Road”. No responses were received from the other Iwi groups.

5. The name ”Kaitiaki Drive”(Road 1), “Koiora Road” (Road 2), “Poutawa Lane” (Road 3) and “Mutetai Road” (Road 4) proposed by the applicant and the names “Gertrude Cole Drive” (Road 1), “Ritetai Road” (Road 2), “Uatoto Lane” (Road 3) and “Matarau Road” (Road 4), and “Whata Drive” (Road 1), “Ungatetaka Road” (Road 2), “Korowhiti Lane” (Road 3) and “Paratehoe Road” (Road 4) are recommended for approval to the Local Board.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board:

a) pursuant to section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974, considers for the approval, the road names ”Kaitiaki Drive”(Road 1), “Koiora Road” (Road 2), “Poutawa Lane” (Road 3) and “Mutetai Road” (Road 4) proposed by the applicant, for the new roads created by way of subdivision at 137 Clarks Beach, Clarks Beach while noting that “Gertrude Cole Drive” (Road 1), “Ritetai Road” (Road 2), “Uatoto Lane” (Road 3) and “Matarau Road” (Road 4), and “Whata Drive” (Road 1), “Ungatetaka Road” (Road 2), “Korowhiti Lane” (Road 3) and “Paratehoe Road” (Road 4) also meet the road naming criteria.

Horopaki / Context

6. The Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines allowed that where a new road needs to be named as a result of a subdivision or development, the subdivider/developer shall be given the opportunity of suggesting their preferred new road name for Council’s approval.

7. The first stage of the subdivision development of the Clarks Beach Precinct, consisting of 32 vacant residential free hold lots and two residential superlots and one balance lot occurring at 137 Clarks Beach Road, Clarks Beach, contains four new roads to be named. Road 1 is a short stub road that connects to Clarks Beach Road to the west and will be extended to the east when the balance lot, Lot 1000, is developed. Road 2 is a long road that will connect Roads 1 and 4. Road 3 is a short road that will connect to Clarks Beach Road to the west and Road 2 to the east. Road 4 is long L-shaped road that will connect to Clarks Beach Road to the southwest and Road 1 to the east.

Consent for this subdivision was granted on 15 September 2016 under resource consent FC_R/JSL/2016/2485 (SUB60216263) and as amended under resource consent FC_/R/VCC/2016/2485/1 (LUC60107462-A) granted on 21 May 2017.

8. The applicant has proposed the following names for consideration for the roads created as part of the development of the subject site.

Preference	Proposed New Road Name	Meaning
Road 1
Preferred Name	Kaitiaki Drive	Maori word for “Guardians” and was suggested by Ngati Te Ata to acknowledge the work of Dame Nganeko Minhinnick.
First Alternative	Gertrude Cole Drive	The name of one of the early settlers in the Clarks Beach area.
Second Alternative	Whata Drive	Maori word for “place to store food, elevated platform, storage area”
Road 2
Preferred Name	Koiora Road	Maori word for ‘life’ and was suggested by Ngati Tamaoho to acknowledge the life supporting nature of the Manukau Harbour.
First Alternative	Ritetai Road	Maori word ri short for pari meaning “high” and tai meaning “tide” to acknowledge the flow of the Manukau Harbour
Second Alternative	Ungatekaka Drive	Maori word unga short for urunga meaning “pillow” and taka meaning “to drop”, to acknowledge the loved ones who have passed on or laying our loved ones to rest.
Road 3
Preferred Name	Poutawa Lane	To acknowledge the sandbank in the Manukau Harbour and historic tree species.
First Alternative	Uatoto Lane	Maori word for “veins” and to acknowledge the freshwater tributaries large and small whose journey began at the head waters and finally reached their destination of Manukau Harbour
Second Alternative	Korowhiti Lane	Maori word for ‘hoop like net” used for fishing
Road 4
Preferred Name	Mutetai Road	Maori word mu short for timu meaning “low” and tai meaning “tide”, to acknowledge the ebb of Manukau Harbour
First Alternative	Matarau Road	The name of the spear that is used to catch flounders, stingrays, eels, etc.
Second Alternative	Paratehoe Road	A metaphonic acknowledgment to olden times, the hoe being a waka paddle and Para meaning “not being used”, “standing for a long time”, “gathering of dust” and “all the elements of time”.

Figure 1: Locality Plan

Figure Two: Location and Layout of new Roads

9. The Auckland Council, by way of the Auckland Council Long Term Plan (2012 - 2022), allocated the responsibility for the naming of new roads, pursuant to section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974, to Local Boards.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

10. The applicant’s proposed road names have been assessed against the criteria set out in the Auckland Council road naming guidelines.

11. All names proposed by the applicant meet the road naming guidelines.

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

- a historical or ancestral linkage to an area;

- a particular landscape, environmental or biodiversity theme or feature; or

- an existing (or introduced) thematic identify in the are.

13. The applicant has proposed a suffix of “Drive” for Road 1. Road 1 meets the definition of suffix “Drive” which also meets the definition of the suffixes “Road” and “Avenue” as the road is wide roadway. The applicant’s preference for Road 1 was “Drive”.

For Road 2, the applicant has proposed a suffix of “Road”. Road 2 meets the definition of suffix “Road” which also meets the definition of the suffix “Street”. The applicant’s preference for Road 2 was “Road”.

For Road 3, the applicant has proposed a suffix of “Lane”. Road 3 meets the definition of suffix “Lane” which also meets the definition of the suffix “Street”. The applicant’s preference for Road 3 was “Lane”.

For Road 4, the applicant has proposed a suffix of “Road”. Road 4 meets the definition of suffix “Road” which also meets the definition of the suffix “Street”. The applicant’s preference for Road 4 was “Road”.

14. As the applicant’s preferred names “Kaitiaki Drive” (Road 1), “Koiora Road” (Road 2), “Poutawa Lane” (Road 3) and “Mutetai Road” meet the criteria, they are recommended for consideration for approval while noting that the names “Gertrude Cole Drive” (Road 1), “Ritetai Road” (Road 2), “Uatoto Lane” (Road 3) and “Matarau Road” (Road 4), and “Whata Drive” (Road 1), “Ungatekaka Road” (Road 2), “Korowhiti Lane” and “Paratehoe Road” are also appropriate as they comply with all the criteria of the road naming guidelines.

15. The applicant has consulted with the Land Information New Zealand who indicated that the proposed road names are acceptable and no duplicates exist.

16. Local Iwi groups were contacted by email to seek feedback on the proposed names. The feedback received was as follows:

· Ngati Te Ata Waiohua suggested the names “Kaitiaki Drive” and “Poutawa Lane” which the applicant adopted for Roads 1 and 3;

· Ngati Tamaoho suggested the names “Whata”, “Ritetai”, “Mutetai”, “Koiora”, “Uatoto”. “Korowhiti”, “Matarau”, “Paratehoe” and “Ungatetaka” which the applicant adopted.

· Waikato – Tainui supported the suggested names provided by Ngati Te Ata Waiohua and Ngati Tamaoho

· No responses were received from the other Iwi Groups

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

17. The decision sought from the Franklin Local Board 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

18. The decision sought from the Franklin Local Board on this report is linked to the Auckland Plan Outcome, “A Maori identity that is Auckland’s point of difference in the world”. The use of Maori names for roads, buildings and other public places is an opportunity to publicly demonstrate Maori identity.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

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

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

20. 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

21. 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

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Romel Layco – Senior Planner

Authorisers

Nina Siers - Relationship Manager

Trevor Cullen - Team Leader Subdivision

Franklin Local Board

05 June 2018

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

File No.: CP2018/07389

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To provide the Franklin 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 Franklin 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	185
b ⇩	Rodney ward boundary options	187
c ⇩	Manurewa-Papakura ward boundary options	189
d ⇩	Local board subdivisions and the 10 per cent rule	191
e ⇩	Botany subdivision boundary options	193
f ⇩	Rodney Local Board subdivision options	197
g ⇩	Waitemata Local Board subdivision option	201
h ⇩	Upper Harbour Local Board subdivision option	203

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Warwick McNaughton - Principal Advisor - Democracy Services

Authorisers

Marguerite Delbet - General Manager Democracy Services

Nina Siers - Relationship Manager

Chairperson	Angela Fulljames
Deputy Chairperson	Andrew Baker
Members	Malcolm Bell
	Alan Cole
	Brendon Crompton
	Sharlene Druyven
	Amanda Hopkins
	Murray Kay
	Niko Kloeten

Preference	Proposed New Road Name	Meaning
Preferred Name	Taitaia Lane	Named for the stream that runs through all the properties on the ROW.
First Alternative	Brindle Lane	Named for the original owner of the land the ROW passes through.
Second Alternative	Sunnybrook Lane	Named for the farm at the end of the ROW.

Authors	Denise Gunn - Democracy Advisor - Franklin
Authorisers	Nina Siers - Relationship Manager