Agenda of Upper Harbour Local Board

Upper Harbour Local Board

21 June 2018

ITEM TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE

1 Welcome 5

2 Apologies 5

3 Declaration of Interest 5

4 Confirmation of Minutes 5

5 Leave of Absence 5

6 Acknowledgements 6

6.1 Marian Burns - Queen's Birthday Honours 6

6.2 Elaine Utting - Queen's Birthday Honours 6

7 Petitions 7

8 Deputations 7

8.1 Graham Don - Coastal bird survey in Hobsonville Point 7

9 Public Forum 8

10 Extraordinary Business 8

11 Notices of Motion 8

12 Minutes of the Upper Harbour Local Board meeting held Thursday, 17 May 2018 9

13 Hobsonville Headquarters venue hire fees 2018/2019 23

14 Albany Community Hub and Hobsonville Headquarters transition to community-led management and expression of interest timelines 27

15 Auckland Transport monthly report - June 2018 31

16 2017/2018 Upper Harbour Quick Response Round Three grant applications 35

17 Purchase and planting of fruit trees at Albany Community Hub 97

18 Provision of assistance with water connection costs for Catalina Community Gardens 103

19 2018/2019 Upper Harbour Local Environment and Development work programme 117

20 2018/2019 Upper Harbour Local Board Community Services work programmes 125

21 2018/2019 Upper Harbour Local Board Local Economic Development work programme 147

22 Auckland Council's Quarterly Performance Report: Upper Harbour Local Board for Quarter Three, 1 January - 31 March 2018 153

23 Freedom camping bylaw development 193

24 Delegation for formal local board views on notified resource consents, plan changes and notices of requirement 215

25 New road name for subdivision at 102-130 Clark Road, Hobsonville Point 221

26 Governance forward work calendar - July 2018 to June 2019 229

27 Record of the Upper Harbour Local Board workshops held on Thursday 3, 10 and 24 May, and 7 June 2018 233

28 Board Members' reports - June 2018 243

29 Consideration of Extraordinary Items

1 Welcome

2 Apologies

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

3 Declaration of Interest

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

The Auckland Council Code of Conduct for Elected Members (the Code) requires elected members to fully acquaint themselves with, and strictly adhere to, the provisions of Auckland Council’s Conflicts of Interest Policy. The policy covers two classes of conflict of interest:

i) A financial conflict of interest, which is one where a decision or act of the local board could reasonably give rise to an expectation of financial gain or loss to an elected member; and

ii) A non-financial conflict interest, which does not have a direct personal financial component. It may arise, for example, from a personal relationship, or involvement with a non-profit organisation, or from conduct that indicates prejudice or predetermination.

The Office of the Auditor General has produced guidelines to help elected members understand the requirements of the Local Authority (Member’s Interest) Act 1968. The guidelines discuss both types of conflicts in more detail, and provide elected members with practical examples and advice around when they may (or may not) have a conflict of interest.

Copies of both the Auckland Council Code of Conduct for Elected Members and the Office of the Auditor General guidelines are available for inspection by members upon request.

Any questions relating to the Code or the guidelines may be directed to the Relationship Manager in the first instance.

4 Confirmation of Minutes

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Thursday, 17 May 2018, as a true and correct record.

5 Leave of Absence

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

6 Acknowledgements

6.1 Marian Burns - Queen's Birthday Honours

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To acknowledge Marian Burns on her Queen’s Birthday honour, Member of the New Zealand Order of Merit (MNZM), for services to music.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. Marian has worked as a teacher, musician, composer, and conductor for more than 25 years.

3. She has been in primary school teaching for 32 years and has been the Music Specialist at Marina View School, West Harbour since 1994. Marian has had a long involvement with the Auckland Primary Principals’ Association Music Festivals since 1989 as a conductor. She has produced numerous school events, supported various charitable causes, composed for the New Zealand film industry, has mentored numerous students, and on occasion purchased instruments when a child’s family could not afford them.

4. In the early 1980s, Marian worked with the North Shore Youth Orchestra, Auckland Secondary Schools Orchestra, the Bays Orchestra for Adults, and the Auckland Symphony Orchestra. She has performed on a range of television shows, has toured with Highway of Legends, the Topp Twins, and extensively both nationally and internationally with Operatunity.

5. She has received several awards throughout her career, including the Benny Award from the Variety Artists Club of New Zealand and a Lifetime Achievement Award from the Golden Fiddle Awards, Australasia. Marian composed the song ‘Beautiful Soldier’ in 2015, commemorating the role New Zealand soldiers played in World War One, which has since been featured in numerous ANZAC ceremonies throughout New Zealand.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) acknowledge the investiture of Marian Burns with the Member of the New Zealand Order of Merit, for services to music.

6.2 Elaine Utting - Queen's Birthday Honours

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To acknowledge Elaine Utting on her recent Queen’s Service Medal (QSM) for services to the community and netball.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. Elaine Utting has been involved with Netball North Harbour for 63 years as a player, coach, umpire, treasurer for 10 years, and president for four years.

3. Elaine was on the committee of the inaugural Golden Oldies Netball Tournament held at Orewa Domain in 2012 and was responsible for organising North Shore Primary School Netball competitions in the early 1970s.

4. She has been involved with the New Zealand 60s-Up Movement, having been secretary and entertainment officer of the Takapuna branch for 13 years, and treasurer for the national organisation covering 34 branches.

5. She has been involved with Red Cross Meals on Wheels for 50 years, as both a driver and roster coordinator. She has been involved with Hospice North Shore for 27 years, is treasurer of the Greenhithe Residents Association, and is a Neighbourhood Support Street Coordinator.

6. Elaine is a member of the Auckland Schools Community Education Association and has run evening business classes for the community for more than five years. She has also served as a Justice of the Peace since 2004.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) acknowledge the investiture of Elaine Utting with her Queen’s Service Medal in the 2018 Queen’s Birthday Honours.

7 Petitions

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

8 Deputations

Standing Order 7.7 provides for deputations. Those applying for deputations are required to give seven working days notice of subject matter and applications are approved by the Chairperson of the Upper Harbour Local Board. This means that details relating to deputations can be included in the published agenda. Total speaking time per deputation is ten minutes or as resolved by the meeting.

8.1 Graham Don - Coastal bird survey in Hobsonville Point

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To discuss a proposal to undertake coastal bird surveys in the area of habitat between Scott Point and Limeburners Bay.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. Graham Don, Senior Ecology Consultant, Bioresearches Group Ltd, will be in attendance to address the board about completing a comprehensive bird survey between Scott Point and Limeburners Bay, which would complete the resource database for the wider Hobsonville area.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) thank Graham Don, from Bioresearches Group Ltd, for his attendance and presentation.

Attachments

a Coastal bird survey proposal........................................................................ 247

9 Public Forum

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

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

10 Extraordinary Business

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

11 Notices of Motion

There were no notices of motion.

Upper Harbour Local Board

21 June 2018

Hobsonville Headquarters venue hire fees 2018/2019

File No.: CP2018/08321

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To approve venue hire fees and charges for the Headquarters, the new Hobsonville community house, for 2018/2019.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. Local boards are responsible for setting local fees, charges and subsidies for council-managed venues.

3. At a workshop in April 2018 the Upper Harbour Local Board suggested that the Headquarters be council-managed for a period of 12 months, until June 2019.

4. In 2014, the council adopted the Hire Fee Framework, an operational policy which guides the setting of fees, charges and subsidies across the network of council-managed community centres and venues for hire.

5. Staff have applied the Hire Fee Framework to determine the venue hire fees for the Headquarters. Staff recommend the local board approve hourly rates for the six bookable spaces.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) approve the following 2018/2019 fees schedule for the Headquarters (noting that the room names will be subject to change following a decision from the local board):

Headquarters		Hourly rate as of 1 July 2018
Rooms	Capacity	Peak standard	Off-peak standard
Room 1	50	$36 p/h	$28.80 p/h
Room 2	25	$28 p/h	$22.40 p/h
Room 3	10	$20 p/h	$16 p/h
Room 4	5	$15 p/h	$14.40 p/h
Room 5	5	$15 p/h	$12 p/h
Room 6	5	$15 p/h	$12 p/h

b) note that groups and activities contributing to community outcomes, such as those offered by not-for-profit and community groups, will receive a discount of 50 per cent from the Headquarters standard fees.

Horopaki / Context

6. The Headquarters is a newly refurbished community house, due to open to the public in July 2018. The local board has suggested that for the first 12 months, the Headquarters be operated directly under council management.

7. Local boards are responsible for setting local fees and charges and subsidies for council-managed venues.

8. In 2014, the council adopted the Hire Fee Framework. This operational policy guides the setting of fees and charges across the network of council-managed community centres and venues for hire. The framework also includes financial incentives aimed at enabling community outcomes.

9. Within the framework, fees are determined by three factors: the condition of the facility, level of amenity provided, and presence of staff on site.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

10. On 7 June 2018, staff attended a workshop to discuss the 2018/2019 venue hire fees for the Headquarters. Staff recommended that the local board apply the Hire Fee Framework for the fees, to ensure a consistent approach to how fees are applied at other council-managed venues.

11. The setting of fees is applied to six rooms at the Headquarters. As shown in the image below, rooms three, four, five and six are separated by a dividing folding wall, creating four separate spaces out of two rooms. Staff recommend setting fees for six rooms.

12. A breakdown of proposed fees for the Headquarters, along with a comparison of fees at the Albany Community Hub, are provided in the following tables:

Table 1: Recommended fees for six bookable spaces

Headquarters		Hourly rate as of 1 July 2018
Rooms	Capacity	Peak standard	Off-peak standard
Room 1	50	$36 p/h	$28.80 p/h
Room 2	25	$28 p/h	$22.40 p/h
Room 3	10	$20 p/h	$16 p/h
Room 4	5	$15 p/h	$14.40 p/h
Room 5	5	$15 p/h	$12 p/h
Room 6	5	$15 p/h	$12 p/h

Table 2: Headquarters fees in comparison to Albany Community Hub

Facility

Largest space

Medium space

Smaller space

Headquarters

$36 - $28.80 p/h

50 capacity

$28 - $22.40 p/h

25 capacity

$18 - $14.40 p/h

10 capacity

Albany Community Hub

$39 - $31.20 p/h

80 capacity

$24 - $19.20 p/h

20 capacity

$17 - $13.60 p/h

6 capacity

13. The comparison to the Albany Community Hub’s fees helped to inform setting the fees for the Headquarters. Three key factors were considered: the condition of the facility, level of amenity provided and presence of staff onsite. It is felt that by comparing the fees to Albany Community Hub, which is already fully operating, fees are being set fairly and appropriately.

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

14. At the workshop to discuss the 2018/2019 fees for the Headquarters, the local board were supportive of the recommendation to apply the Hire Fee Framework for the fees.

15. The Upper Harbour Local Board Plan 2017 states a commitment to empower, engage and connect Upper Harbour communities.

16. With the existing council-managed venues in Upper Harbour, the local board has determined that the priority is to support activities contributing to community outcomes, such as those offered by not-for-profit and community organisations.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

17. The fees and charges, including the subsidies for council-managed venues, are not specifically targeted at Māori populations. However, these aim to be clear and transparent to all users and enabling all Aucklanders, including Māori.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

18. No additional funding is required to approve the recommended fees for the Headquarters.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

19. If a decision is not reached before the house is due to open to the public, there is a risk that bookings will not be available to the public.

20. Until the Headquarters is opened, staff have limited insight on what drives customer demand. This presents a risk that fees may not be set at an appropriate and affordable rate, which may impact utilisation. By setting fees which are comparable to the Albany Community Hub, staff are mitigating this risk.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

21. On receiving confirmation of a decision by the local board, staff will implement the appropriate administration arrangement for the application of the fees for the Headquarters. This will ensure it is ready to be booked by the public.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Melody Sei – Manager Venues for Hire

Authorisers

Graham Bodman - General Manager Arts, Community and Events

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Upper Harbour Local Board

21 June 2018

Albany Community Hub and Hobsonville Headquarters transition to community-led management and expression of interest timelines

File No.: CP2018/10592

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To approve the revised timeline for the transition of the Albany Community Hub (the Hub), Hobsonville Point Headquarters (Headquarters) and the Sunderland Lounge to community-led management by 1 July 2019.

2. To note the expression of interest (EOI) timeline is subject to revision, and selection criteria and priorities are to be determined by the local board.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

3. On 16 February 2017, the local board resolved that the Hub be managed by council and governed by the local board, with a transition to a community-led model (resolution number UH/2017/4).

4. On 15 February 2018, the local board approved a six-month interim council management model at the Headquarters, and a future community-led operating model, subject to a successful EOI process (resolution number UH/2018/12).

5. The Headquarters will be open in July 2018. The Sunderland Lounge is pending refurbishment and is scheduled for completion by early 2019.

6. As agreed by the local board, the Headquarters and the Sunderland Lounge are to be considered as one precinct, to allow for a simultaneous transition to the community-led model (resolution number UH/2018/12).

7. The transition to community-led management for both the Hub and the Headquarters was scheduled for December 2018. Transition to community-led management for both places is subject to a future, and successful, EOI process.

8. At a local board workshop on 19 April 2018, staff presented the proposed EOI selection criteria, and sought feedback on priorities for both community places.

9. A workshop is scheduled for August 2018 to progress the EOI selection criteria and priorities. A report will follow in September 2018.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) approve a revised timeline, as laid out in option 2 of the report, to transition the Albany Community Hub to community-led management by 1 July 2019.

b) approve a revised timeline, as laid out in option 2 of the report, to transition the Headquarters building and the Sunderland Lounge to community-led management by 1 July 2019.

c) note that a future local board workshop has been scheduled in August 2018 to advance the EOI selection criteria and priorities for Albany Community Hub, the Headquarters and the Sunderland Lounge.

d) note that, subject to expression of interest (EOI) selection criteria and priorities being approved, the EOI process for Albany Community Hub, the Headquarters and the Sunderland Lounge will commence in October 2018.

Horopaki / Context

10. Community places enable Aucklanders to run locally responsive activities that promote community participation, inclusion and connection. The Hub, Headquarters and the Sunderland Lounge will collectively provide spaces for community activities and engagement, within an area experiencing rapid population growth.

Albany Community Hub

11. On 16 February 2017, the local board resolved that the Hub be managed by council and governed by the local board for an establishment period of 12 months, with transition to a community-led model within 18 months from opening.

12. The Hub opened in July 2017. It currently has one council staff member employed as a programme coordinator, working 30 hours per week.

Headquarters and Sunderland Lounge

13. On 15 February 2018, the local board:

· agreed that the Headquarters and the Sunderland Lounge be considered as one precinct, to allow for a simultaneous transition to the community-led model

· approved the interim council management model for the Headquarters for an initial establishment period of six months

· approved the future operating model for both facilities from council-managed to community-led management, subject to a successful EOI selection process.

14. The Headquarters will open in July 2018. The nearby Sunderland Lounge is scheduled for refurbishment works in 2018 and is anticipated to re-open by late 2018.

15. There are currently two council staff members assigned to Headquarters. As a venue for hire, the Sunderland Lounge does not require staff to be on site.

Transition to community-led and EOI selection criteria and priorities

16. At a workshop on 19 April 2018, staff presented the proposed EOI selection criteria and sought feedback on the local board’s priorities for the Hub and the Headquarters.

17. Prerequisites to commencing the EOI process are selection criteria and priorities. Subject to local board approval, staff would be given the mandate to commence the EOI process.

18. Transition to community-led management for the Hub and the Headquarters was originally scheduled for December 2018, with a synchronised EOI process for both facilities running in parallel, and subject to successful operators being identified.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

19. At a workshop with the local board on 7 June 2018, the following was proposed:

· an extended timeline for transition of the Hub, Headquarters and the Sunderland Lounge to community-led management by 1 July 2019

· additional time to enable due consideration and decision-making on the EOI selection criteria and priorities.

20. Table 1 outlines three options for the local board to consider:

Table 1

Option	Advantages	Disadvantages
Option 1: Status quo: maintain original EOI timeline of December 2018 to transition the Hub, the Headquarters and the Sunderland Lounge to community-led management	There may be existing groups willing to participate in an EOI process now.	Decision-making has yet to be resolved on EOI selection criteria. This is due to be discussed with the local board in August. Timeline to undertake an EOI process between October and December 2018 is already compromised. If the Headquarters is not fully operational, there is a risk of problems being inherited by an incoming community group.
Option 2: Extend the timeline to 1 July 2019 to transition the Hub, the Headquarters and the Sunderland Lounge to community-led management	Extending interim council management enables operational capacity, and deliverables to be embedded further at these facilities. Empowers the community to be decision-makers, plays to their strengths and builds capacity. Staff can further foster local community relationships and promote the EOI process.	There may already be some interested parties wishing to operate from the facilities.
Option 3: Facilities remain under council management.	Council has an established track record of operating community places successfully.	The opportunity to empower the community and provide community places run by the community, for the community, at a localised level is missed in Upper Harbour.

21. Table 2 shows the proposed timeline for the EOI process for the Hub and the Headquarters (Option 2):

Table 2

Community - Led Expression of Interest (EOI) Timeline - The Hub and Headquarters
Timeframe
August / September 2018	Oct / November 2018	January / February 2019	March 2019	18 April 2019	April – 1 July 2019
Stage
Criteria selection	Inform community	Run EOI / receive submissions	Review / workshop	Decision	Transition
Workshop and meeting with the LB to select and approve the criteria and agree the assessment panel for EOI	Notify the community of intent to undertake the EOI	Open/close EOI	Assessment of EOIs and subsequent workshop with the LB to present the outcome	LB business meeting to appoint successful group(s)	Work with preferred operators to support transition

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

22. The Upper Harbour Local Board Plan 2017 expresses a commitment to create ‘well developed neighbourhoods that are connected to education facilities, transport networks, business parks and quality community and sports amenities’. It sets out an aspiration to establish the Hub and the Headquarters as purposeful, multi-functional facilities which will ultimately operate under community-led management.

23. Transition to a community-led model aligns to the local board plan which aspires for ‘empowered, engaged and connected Upper Harbour communities, where people are able to influence what happens in their neighbourhood.’

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

24. The Upper Harbour area is rich in Māori history, reflected in the names of places and landmarks of cultural and historical significance.

25. The local board signed a relationship agreement with Ngāti Manuhiri on 13 December 2017. The local board also has a relationship with Te Kawerau a Maki, further signalling future intent and a partnership approach.

26. The on-boarding of the three community places into the community network, provides the opportunity to reflect on Māori identity and culture with presentation, activations and engagement, including consideration of dual language naming.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

27. For the 2018/2019 financial year, there is sufficient asset-based services (ABS) funding to operate and staff these community places.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

28. The ability to identify selection criteria and priorities is still outstanding, and is to be discussed at a workshop in August 2018.

29. If the recommendations in this report are not approved by the local board, there is a risk that the EOI process will be delayed and ultimately, hold up the transition to a community-led model.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

30. Upon resolution, staff will progress with the transition to a community-led model for the Hub, the Headquarters and the Sunderland Lounge, by July 2019 as outlined in Table 2.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Sharon McGinity - Project Manager Community Places

Authorisers

Graham Bodman - General Manager Arts, Community and Events

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Upper Harbour Local Board

21 June 2018

Auckland Transport monthly report - June 2018

File No.: CP2018/10089

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To provide an update on transport related matters in the Upper Harbour Local Board area, including the Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF).

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. This report covers:

· status of the Local Board Transport Capital Fund projects

· consultation on proposed safety improvements

· Traffic Control Committee (TCC) report.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) receive the Auckland Transport update for June 2018.

Horopaki / Context

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

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

· be safe

· not impede network efficiency

· be located in the road corridor (although projects running through parks can be considered if there is a transport outcome).

5. AT is responsible for all of Auckland’s transport services, excluding state highways, and 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.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

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

Project

Description

Current Status

Gills Road

footpath and pedestrian bridge

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

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

Footpath and boardwalks: the construction contract was awarded 6 April 2018, which includes the concrete footpath and boardwalk. This is progressing to plan and expected to meet timeframes set out in the following table. Construction is due to finish at the end of July 2018.

Description	Date for completion	Time
Publish date	23 Feb 2018	In two weeks
Deadline for tenders	10am, 16 March 2018	Three weeks open tender
Tenderer review	30 March 2018	Two-week tender review period
Award of contract	6 April 2018	One week for paper work
Establish onsite	Mid – late April	Two weeks mobilisation
Contract period	2+ months	2+ months

Revised Scheme Extents - the project scheme extents have been revised.

The new Gills Link Road project, connecting the housing developments in the Gills Road area towards Albany Town Centre (Oteha Valley Road), is being developed and is scheduled to start construction in May 2019. For the Gills Link Road project to successfully tie in to the existing Gills Road network, vertical realignment is required approximately 170m down the existing Gills Road towards the one-way bridge, and approximately 200m up the existing Gills Road, towards Living Stream Road.

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

Rame Road upgrade

The full upgrade of Rame Road

The scope of the project is to upgrade the full length of Rame Road. The width of the road, where there are existing kerbs on both sides, is 8m.

Footpaths will be installed where missing, and potentially the existing ones are likely to be under-width, and should be considered for full replacement

Lighting should be reviewed with the potential to add in-fill lighting on existing poles.

Concept design is being prepared and will be reported back to the local board on completion. The board is to note that input from residents around safety will also be taken into account.

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

Skybus using Albany and Constellation Stations

7. AT has investigated this request and has provided the following reasons as to why it would make it difficult for Skybus to use these stations:

· Congestion: particularly at peak times, these are both busy stations for bus traffic and passengers. The nature of the Skybus service means that many passengers will have luggage and loading is likely to take longer than on other services using these stations. Given that, under the new network, there will be significantly more transfers taking place at these stations than at present, there is the potential for this to be an issue.

· Park and Ride: these are at capacity at both stations and are AT facilities provided for users of AT bus services. If Skybus was to use these stations, there is the real possibility that their customers would fill a number of the parking spaces. It is also useful to note that Skybus is a completely commercial operation.

Consultation documents on proposed improvements

8. Consultation documents for the following proposals have been provided to the Upper Harbour Local Board for feedback, and are summarised here for information purposes only. Following each consultation, AT 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:

· New Network North bus stop changes

· a proposal to install no stopping at all times (NSAAT) lines on Sunnydale Place, Oteha

· a proposal to install NSAAT on Schopolo Place, Schnapper Rock

· a proposal to install NSAAT on Reflection Drive and Horizon Way, West Harbour

· a proposal to install NSAAT on Samuels Lane, Albany

· a proposal to install an island redesign on Albany Highway and Appleby Road

· a proposal to install a signalised pedestrian crossing on Mercari Way, Albany

· a proposal to install a new footpath on Spencer Road, Pinehill

· a proposal to install NSAAT on Tait Place, Rosedale

· a proposal to install NSAAT on Rame Road, Greenhithe

· a proposal to install NSAAT at the intersection of Laurel Oak Drive and Oakway Drive, as well as at the bend of Laurel Oak Drive.

Auckland Transport’s Traffic Control Committee (TCC) report

9. Decisions of the TCC during the month of May 2018 affecting the Upper Harbour Local Board area, are listed below:

Date	Street (suburb)	Type of report	Nature of restriction	Decision
1 May 2018	Corinthian Drive, Oracle Drive, Data Way, Albany	Permanent traffic and parking changes combined	NSAAT, traffic island, road hump, pedestrian crossing, roundabout, controlled give-way, flush median, edge line, lanes	Carried
1 May 2018	Ockleston Landing, Makete Crescent, Waipani Street, Clarks Lane, Sinton Road, Hobsonville	Permanent traffic and parking changes combined	NSAAT, edge lines, road humps, stop control, give-way, traffic island	Carried

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

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

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications https://acintranet.aklc.govt.nz/EN/workingatcouncil/techandtools/infocouncil/Pages/FinancialImplications.aspx

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

Upper Harbour Local Board Transport Capital Fund financial summary
Total funds available in current political term	$1,835,080
Amount committed to date on projects approved for design and/or construction	$1,938,222
Remaining budget	-$103,142

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

12. No significant risks have been identified.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Owena Schuster – Elected Member Relationship Manager Auckland Transport

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon – Elected Member Relationship Team Manager Auckland Transport

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Upper Harbour Local Board

21 June 2018

2017/2018 Upper Harbour Quick Response Round Three grant applications

File No.: CP2018/09571

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To fund, part-fund or decline the Upper Harbour Quick Response Round Three 2017/2018 grant applications.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. This report presents applications received in the Upper Harbour Quick Response, Round Three 2017/2018 (refer Attachment B).

3. The Upper Harbour Local Board adopted the Upper Harbour Local Grants Programme 2017/2018 on 20 April 2017 (refer Attachment A). The document sets out application guidelines for contestable community grants submitted to the local board.

4. The Upper Harbour Local Board has set a total community grants budget of $155,000 for the 2017/2018 financial year. The local board has allocated $94,107 in Local Grants Rounds One and Two 2017/2018. The local board also approved $600 to the Hobsonville Herb Group (resolution number UH/2017/127) from the community grants budget. This leaves a total of $60,293 to be allocated in Quick Response Round Three.

5. Thirteen applications were received in this round, with a total amount requested of $25,146.

6. Three further applications were received as multi-board applications, requesting a total of $9500.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) agree to fund, part-fund or decline each application in the Quick Response Round Three 2017/2018 applications as outlined in the following table:

Application ID	Applicant	Requesting funding for	Amount requested	Eligibility
QR1817-301	Graeme Dingle Foundation	Towards the costs of marketing and materials for the event ‘Collateral for The Great New Zealand Santa Run’	$1937	Eligible
QR1817-312	Epilepsy Association of New Zealand Incorporated	Towards the staff salary for the epilepsy field services programme from 1 July 2018 to 1 July 2019	$2000	Eligible
QR1817-313	Scout Association of New Zealand - Tauhinu Sea Scout Group	Towards the cost of purchasing six folding tables and 48 folding chairs for the Tauhinu Sea Scout Group	$2000	Eligible
QR1817-314	The Scout Association of New Zealand - Beach Haven Scout Group	Towards the cost of insurance for the Beach Haven Scout group	$3457	Eligible
QR1817-315	A T C 30 Squadron Support Committee	Towards the cost of two trophy cabinets for the ‘ATC 30 Squadron’ support committee	$1078	Eligible
QR1817-318	Girlboss (Alexia Hibertidou)	Towards fees for two facilitators, administration, travel, printing and merchandise costs to run two workshops	$1900	Eligible
QR1817-311	Kaipatiki Ecological Restoration Project	Towards costs to build a tunnel house	$2000	Eligible
QR1817-317	Philip and Sarah Elworthy	Towards the cost of pruning a notable pecan tree	$2000	Eligible
QR1817-302	Facebook Badminton Club	Towards the costs of shuttlecock purchases and hall hire for the Facebook Badminton Club Tournament	$1000	Eligible
QR1817-305	Windsor Park Community and Multisport Hub Incorporated trading as Windsor Park Board Incorporated	Towards project management fees for the multi-sport indoor facility at Windsor Park	$2000	Eligible
QR1817-306	North Harbour Synchronised Swimming Club under the umbrella of Synchronised Swimming New Zealand Incorporated	Towards the cost of purchasing 25 jackets for synchronised swimmers to wear at competitions	$2095	Eligible
QR1817-308	Special Olympics Greenhithe	Towards the purchase of banners, portable football goals, cakes and venue hire for the 10-year celebration of the Special Olympics	$1679	Eligible
QR1817-309	Rosedale Park Sports Charitable Trust	Towards maintenance costs for the toilets in the clubhouse.	$2000	Eligible
Total requested			$25,146

b) agree to fund, part-fund or decline the multi-board applications in the Quick Response Round Three 2017/2018 application, as outlined in the following table:

Application ID	Applicant	Requesting funding for	Amount requested	Eligibility
LG1808-318	Chinese New Settlers Services Trust	Towards the tutor fees, venues hire, and advertising costs to run arts and cultural sessions for children and young people at the Glenfield Community Centre	$2000	Eligible
LG1808-311	Neighbourhood Support North Shore	Towards materials, operational costs and wages of a trainer for neighbourhood support training	$5000	Eligible
LG1802-203	North Shore Centres of Mutual Aid Incorporated	Towards a proportion of operating costs for the six-month period from July 2018 to December 2018	$2500	Eligible
Total			$9,500

Horopaki / Context

7. The local board allocates grants to groups and organisations delivering projects, activities and services that benefit Aucklanders and contribute to the vision of being a world class city.

8. The local board grants programme sets out:

· local board priorities

· lower priorities for funding

· exclusions

· grant types, the number of grant rounds and when these will open and close

· any additional accountability requirements.

9. The Upper Harbour Local Board adopted the Upper Harbour Local Grants Programme 2017/2018 on 20 April 2017 (refer Attachment A).

10. The Upper Harbour Local Board will operate one local grant round, and three quick response rounds in this financial year. Upper Harbour Quick Response Round Three 2017/2018 closed on 18 May 2018.

11. The community grant programmes have been extensively advertised through the council grants webpage, local board webpages, local board e-newsletters, Facebook pages, council publications, radio, and community networks.

12. The Upper Harbour Local Board has set a total community grants budget of $155,000 for the 2017/2018 financial year.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

13. The aim of the local board grants programme is to deliver projects and activities which align with the outcomes identified in its local board plan. All applications have been assessed utilising the Community Grants Policy and the local board grant programme criteria. The eligibility of each application is identified in the report recommendations.

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

14. Local boards are responsible for the decision-making and allocation of local board community grants. The Upper Harbour Local Board is required to fund, part-fund or decline these grant applications against the local board priorities identified in the local board grants programme.

15. The local board is requested to note that Section 50 of the Community Grants Policy states:

‘We will also provide feedback to unsuccessful grant applicants about why they have been declined, so they will know what they can do to increase their chances of success next time.’

16. A summary of each application received through the Upper Harbour Quick Response Round Three 2017/2018 is provided (refer Attachments B and C).

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

17. The local board grants programme aims to respond to Auckland Council’s commitment to improving Māori wellbeing by providing grants to individuals and groups who deliver positive outcomes for Māori. Auckland Council’s Māori Responsiveness Unit has provided input and support towards the development of the community grant processes.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

18. The allocation of grants to community groups is within the adopted Long-term Plan 2018-2028 and local board agreements.

19. The Upper Harbour Local Board has set a total community grants budget of $155,000 for the 2017/2018 financial year. The local board allocated $49,252 in the Upper Harbour Local Grant Round One 2017/2018.

20. At the August 2017 meeting, the Upper Harbour Local Board approved $600 to the Hobsonville Herb Group (resolution number UH/2017/127):

‘Approve funding of $600 to the Hobsonville Herb Group from the local board discretionary community grants fund to enable the establishment of the herb garden, and note that as this project provides improvement to a reserve, and in order to take advantage of the planting season, the board is considering this now, rather than through the contestable grants process.’

21. A total of $15,404 was allocated in Quick Response Round One 2017/2018, and $29,451 in Quick Response Round Two 2017/2018, leaving a total of $60,293 to be allocated to Upper Harbour Quick Response Round Three 2017/2018.

22. Thirteen applications were received in this round, with a total amount requested of $25,146.

23. Three further applications were received as multi-board applications, requesting a total of $9500.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

24. The allocation of grants occurs within the guidelines and criteria of the Community Grants Policy and the local board grants programme. The assessment process has identified a low risk associated with funding the applications in this round.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

25. The allocation of grants to community groups is within the adopted Long-term Plan 2018-2028 and local board agreements.

26. Following the Upper Harbour Local Board allocating funding for round three quick response grants, commercial and finance staff will notify the applicants of the local board’s decision.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Upper Harbour Local Board Grants Programme 2017/2018	41
b ⇩	Upper Harbour Quick Response Round Three 2017/2018 grant applications	45
c ⇩	Upper Harbour Quick Response Round Three 2017/2018 multiboard applications	81

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Erin Shin - Community Grants Coordinator

Authorisers

Marion Davies - Community Grants Operations Manager

Shane King - Operations Support Manager

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Upper Harbour Local Board

21 June 2018

Purchase and planting of fruit trees at Albany Community Hub

File No.: CP2018/10156

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To approve the proposal and budget for the purchase and planting of up to eight fruit trees, and establish a small community orchard, as part of development plans for the grounds around the Albany Community Hub.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. During the final design phase for the construction of the Albany Community Hub, planting on the grounds around the completed facility was recommended as a means to provide a design aesthetic, while also incorporating an element of historical vegetation.

3. The overall plan for the development around the facility includes native planting, in keeping with the earlier recommendations, and recognises the heritage of the land, both pre-European and as a fruit growing region.

4. Local users of the facilities at Albany Community Hub have previously advocated for the establishment of a community food garden and the small orchard has been recommended as an alternative, and in recognition of the land’s heritage.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) approve allocation of up to $2500 from its locally driven initiatives discretionary grants budget, for the purchase and planting of up to eight fruit trees, to establish a small community orchard.

Horopaki / Context

5. The proposal to establish a small community orchard is being put before the local board to request consideration and approval for the project.

6. During the final design phase for the construction of the Albany Community Hub, planting on the grounds around the completed facility was recommended as a means to provide a design aesthetic, while also incorporating an element of historical indigenous vegetation, and in recognition of the land’s heritage.

7. Plans for the wider project, and tree planting in particular, have also been canvassed with relevant council officers, Parks and Community Empowerment Unit (CEU), along with community stakeholders, such as residents at the local Settlers Retirement Village.

8. It is proposed that on-going maintenance of the trees will be co-ordinated through the Albany Community Hub, using community volunteers, and providing opportunities for community workshops on pruning, pest control and weeding.

9. Eventual harvesting of the trees will provide further opportunities for community workshops in food preparation and preserving. These workshops could be presented utilising the commercial kitchen at the Albany Community Hub.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

10. There are various options available to the local board in relation to the proposed planting of trees at the Albany Community Hub.

· Option 1: the local board does not approve the proposal and the funding request, and instead retains the funds for use on another identified community project(s). However, it should be noted that there are no similar projects seeking funding from the discretionary grants, nor are any anticipated in the remainder of this current financial year.

· Option 2: the local board approves the proposal and the full amount requested, which evidences the local board’s support for locally driven initiatives and a commitment to reducing barriers and enabling community to complete projects in a timely manner.

· Option 3: the local board approves the proposal but opts to approve a lesser amount than requested. However, this action is likely to hinder the development of the proposed planting around the Albany Community Hub.

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

14. The Upper Harbour Local Board supports the principles of the Empowered Communities Approach: treaty partnership, social inclusion and equity, and collaboration.

15. Prior to construction, planting on the grounds around the Albany Community Hub was initially mooted as part of the design phase. The local board is now being requested to consider and approve the project proposal and associated financial contribution.

16. Community members have been consulted regarding planting of the fruit trees and feedback has been positive.

17. Parks staff have provided information and advice regarding establishing the small orchard and will be involved in the purchase and planting of the trees.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

18. The purchase and planting of trees for the small community orchard is being done as a community amenity, with access and use by local residents. As mana whenua for the rohe, Ngati Manuhiri are being consulted, and will be providing advice and direction for proposed future plantings of indigenous vegetation.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

19. The local board is requested to consider allocation of up to $2500 towards the purchase and planting of trees at the Albany Community Hub. A detailed cost breakdown will be made available at the local board meeting.

20. The interim anticipated costs for purchase of trees, preparation of ground and planting are set out below:

Item	Budget
Purchase of 8 x sapling trees @ $120 each	$960
Ground preparation	$300
Soil/compost	$200
Staking	$100
Future planting	$500
Contingency	$400
TOTAL	$2,460

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

21. Due to the nature of the activity, there are no risks associated with this request.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

22. If approval is received, the next steps will include the purchase of the trees and preparation of an appropriate site on which to plant the trees.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Proposed placement of trees	101

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors	Karen Marais - Senior Local Board Advisor Upper Harbour
Authorisers	Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Upper Harbour Local Board

21 June 2018

Provision of assistance with water connection costs for Catalina Community Gardens

File No.: CP2018/10160

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To request approval of funding to cover a portion of costs for a water connection between mains pipes and a tap at the Catalina Community Gardens, Hobsonville Point.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. The Catalina Community Gardens were removed from their original site on Buckley Avenue to make way for housing developments, at the very early stages of development at Hobsonville Point. These gardens were removed with the understanding that they would be re-established at an appropriate site in close proximity at a future date.

3. The selected new site, also on Buckley Avenue, is a storm water reserve and as such, has presented a number of considerations which have had to be addressed. This has unfortunately prolonged reinstatement of the community gardens.

4. Homes, Land and Community (HLC), previously known as Hobsonville Land Company, has been supporting the Catalina Community Gardens Volunteer Committee throughout this time and process. HLC has, as part of their responsibility, offered to assist with a water connection at the proposed site, and is willing to contribute towards the associated costs.

5. The amount quoted by Watercare, includes the requirement to pay an Infrastructure Growth Fee, and brings the anticipated final cost to $9,611.25.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) approve the use of funds from its locally driven initiatives discretionary grants budget to contribute to the costs for a water connection at the Catalina Community Gardens.

Horopaki / Context

6. The Catalina Community Gardens were removed from their original site on Buckley Avenue, to make way for housing developments, at the very early stages of development at Hobsonville Point. These gardens were removed with the understanding that they would be re-established at an appropriate site in close proximity at a future date.

7. The selected new site, also on Buckley Avenue, is a storm water reserve and as such, has presented a number of considerations which have had to be addressed. This has unfortunately prolonged reinstatement of the community gardens.

8. Homes, Land and Community (HLC), previously known as Hobsonville Land Company, has been supporting the Catalina Community Gardens Volunteer Committee throughout this time and process. HLC has, as part of their responsibility, offered to assist with a water connection at the proposed site and is willing to contribute towards the associated costs.

9. The costs for the water connection are considerably more than may have been expected, and far greater than what HLC is able to meet, as part of their contribution to the re‑establishment of the gardens.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

10. There are various options available to the local board in relation to the request for a funding contribution towards provision of water for the community gardens in Hobsonville Point.

· Option 1: the local board does not approve the funding request, and instead retains the funds for use on another identified community project(s). However, it should be noted that there are no similar projects seeking funding from the discretionary grants, nor are any anticipated in the remainder of this current financial year.

· Option 2: the local board approves the funding request, which evidences the local board’s support for locally driven initiatives, and a commitment to reducing barriers and enabling community to complete projects in a timely manner.

· Option 3: the local board approves a lesser amount. However, this action is likely to hinder the installation of a water connection for the gardens and may impact the future viability of this community initiative.

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

14. The Catalina Community Gardens Volunteer Committee have been endeavouring to re‑establish the gardens on the selected site for more than four years.

15. Council staff have been providing assistance to the volunteer committee over this time, primarily to meet regulatory requirements relating to siting on the reserve and lease implications.

16. There is a high probability the gardens’ viability and future will be at risk if the water connection is not installed.

17. The local board is asked to consider the request for a financial contribution towards the installation of a water connection to the community garden.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

18. Te Kawerau a Maki are mana whenua for the rohe and will be consulted should the need arise. All Māori within the Upper Harbour Local Board area are able to participate in and have access to all community-led projects.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

19. A detailed cost breakdown from Watercare for installation of the water connection for the Catalina Community Gardens is attached to this report as Attachment A.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

20. The local board is asked to consider a financial contribution towards the installation of a water connection for the Catalina Community Garden, in Hobsonville Point.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

21. Due to the nature of the activity, there are no risks associated with this request.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

22. If approval is received, the next steps will include installation of a water connection at the site of the Catalina Community Garden with the assistance of Watercare and Homes, Land and Community (HLC).

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Watercare quote for water connection	107
b ⇩	Draft Terms of Reference for the Catalina Community Garden	109

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors	Karen Marais - Senior Local Board Advisor Upper Harbour
Authorisers	Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Upper Harbour Local Board

21 June 2018

2018/2019 Upper Harbour Local Environment and Development work programme

File No.: CP2018/09169

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To approve the 2018/2019 local environment ($150,000) and development ($1,112,610) work programme, totalling $1,262,610, for the Upper Harbour Local Board.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

1. The Upper Harbour Local Board has identified an aspiration for ‘a valued, protected and enhanced environment’ in its 2017 Local Board Plan. The board wishes to preserve and protect native ecosystems and habitats and to support communities to care for their surrounding environment.

2. To give effect to these aspirations, staff developed several projects for the board to consider.

3. At workshops held on 22 March and 24 May 2018, the local board provided feedback to Infrastructure and Environmental Services staff on the locally driven initiative (LDI) projects it would like to fund. These projects include:

· $20,000 for an industry pollution prevention programme

· $20,000 for a small building sites ambassador project

· $30,000 for a sustainable schools project - our local streams

· $80,000 for the Upper Harbour North-West Wildlink assistance programme.

4. The board also has $1 million of asset-based services capital budget for the Plan Change 14 (PC14) Waiarohia Ponds, Hobsonville corridor project, and $112, 610 of asset-based services operational budget for the septic tank pump-out programme.

5. This report recommends that the board approves the Local Environment and Development work programme and associated budgets, for delivery within the 2018/2019 financial year (see Attachment A).

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) approve allocation of $150,000 for environmental projects to be delivered by the Infrastructure and Environmental Services directorate in 2018/2019, as detailed in the agenda report and summarised in the following table:

Project	Budget
Industry pollution prevention programme	$20,000
Small building sites ambassador project	$20,000
Sustainable schools project - our local streams	$30,000
Upper Harbour North-West Wildlink assistance programme	$80,000
Total	$ 150,000

b) note the allocation of $1 million asset-based services 2018/2019 capital expenditure budget for the Plan Change 14 (PC14) Waiarohia Ponds, Hobsonville corridor project.

c) note the allocation of $112,610 asset-based services operational 2018/2019 budget for the septic tank pump-out programme.

Horopaki / Context

2. At a workshop held on 23 November 2017, the board requested that projects be scoped around the continuation of the Upper Harbour North-West Wildlink assistance programme, and the improvement and protection of water quality in the local board area.

3. In response to the direction set by the board, Infrastructure and Environmental Services staff provided a draft Local Environment and Development work programme for the board’s feedback at a workshop on 22 March 2018. In principle, the board approved the projects outlined in the draft work programme.

4. Six projects are proposed to be delivered by the Infrastructure and Environmental Services directorate as part of the board’s 2018/2019 Local Environment and Development work programme. The draft work programme is included as Attachment A to this report.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

5. In response to local board direction, Infrastructure and Environmental Services staff developed four projects for the board to consider.

6. At workshops held on 22 March 2018 and 24 May 2018, the board approved in principle the projects outlined in the draft work programme. They also indicated that a budget of $150,000 would be available from its 2018/2019 LDI operational expenditure (opex) budget to support the delivery of the Local Environment and Development work programme.

7. A brief description of each of the projects in the work programme is provided below.

Industry pollution prevention programme ($20,000)

8. To achieve the local board plan aspiration to ‘improve the quality of our creeks, streams and harbour and to work to boost the ecological health of our waterways’, the local board has indicated that it would like to continue funding the industry pollution prevention project. The board provided $20,000 in the 2017/2018 financial year towards educating industry and business about waste disposal, and how to minimise the impacts their activities may be having on the environment.

9. It is recommended that the local board allocate $20,000 of its LDI opex budget in the 2018/2019 financial year, towards an industry pollution prevention programme focused on waterways.

10. This project will inform urban industry and businesses about the impacts their activities may have on local waterways. The programme includes a site inspection and discussion with the business owners about potential pollution issues, as well as spill training. If changes are recommended, a report is sent to the business. The programme involves a geographic information systems (GIS) mapping exercise to ensure businesses understand the stormwater network connections in relation to local waterways. Staff have suggested the local board target the Rosedale area, as this would benefit the Oteha and Alexandra Streams.

Small building sites ambassador project ($20,000)

11. To achieve the local board plan aspiration to ‘actively encourage developers to adopt environmental best practice by utilising sustainable methods in their planning and construction’, the local board has indicated that it would like to fund a new project. This project is focused on small building sites within the board area.

12. It is recommended that the board allocate $20,000 of its LDI opex budget in the 2018/2019 financial year, towards a small building sites ambassador project.

13. This project will entail engaging an ambassador to work with and support council’s compliance team in reducing the amount of sedimentation, run-off and litter produced from small building sites entering waterways. Targeted areas within the Upper Harbour Local Board are to be identified after consultation with the consents team and the local board. This area could include Te Wharau Creek catchment, which is of interest to the local board.

Sustainable schools project - our local streams ($30,000)

14. To achieve the local board plan aspiration to ‘improve the quality of our creeks, streams and harbour, and to work to boost the ecological health of our waterways’, the board has indicated that it would like continue to fund the sustainable schools project, ‘Our Local Streams’. The board provided $20,000 in the 2017/2018 financial year towards engaging schools to adopt local streams to test and monitor water quality and undertake restoration activity.

15. It is recommended that the local board allocate $30,000 of its LDI opex budget in the 2018/2019 financial year, towards the sustainable schools project, ‘Our Local Streams’.

16. This project will provide expertise and assistance for schools in the Upper Harbour Local Board area to take an interest in their local streams. Schools will test and monitor water quality, connect with community restoration groups working in the same catchment, and take action to improve the stream area. The project will also link to the Marine Metre Squared Programme, which offers free resource to leverage local board investment.

Upper Harbour North-West Wildlink assistance programme ($80,000)

17. To achieve the local board plan aspiration to ‘support projects like the North-West Wildlink, which is a sub-regional initiative that creates green corridors, safe routes and refuges for native plants and animals’, the local board has indicated it would like continue to fund the Upper Harbour North-West Wildlink assistance programme. The board provided $39,000 in the 2016/2017 financial year and $50,000 in the 2017/2018 financial year towards this programme.

18. It is recommended that the board allocate $80,000 of its LDI opex budget in the 2018/2019 financial year, towards the Upper Harbour North-West Wildlink assistance programme.

19. This project will assist and grow capability to deliver community-led initiatives for safe, healthy and connected habitats in priority areas across the North-West Wildlink. It will provide technical advice, practical support, and facilitation to private landowners and community groups, to undertake restoration actions that improve biodiversity and native habitat.

20. Feedback from the Upper Harbour Ecology Network and the local board will continue to be used to shape the approach for delivery of this assistance programme. The Lucas Creek Sedimentation report will also be used to select priority areas for riparian restoration.

Septic tank pump-out programme ($112,610 asset-based services opex)

21. This programme manages the triennial pump-out of septic tanks within the former Waitākere City Council area. Within the Upper Harbour Local Board area, households pay a targeted rate for maintenance of rural sewerage systems. These households are visited every three years to have their tanks pumped out and cleaned.

22. The pump-out programme is focused on improvements to the environment and public health and safety, by reducing emergency overflows from septic systems into the environment. The community and environment benefit from fewer failing septic tank systems, and reduced contamination of streams and beaches in the board’s area.

23. In the 2017/2018 financial year, $110,400 was received for this programme. In the 2018/2019 financial year, $112,610 will be received for this programme.

Plan Change 14 (PC14) Waiarohia Ponds Hobsonville corridor project ($1 million)

24. The North-West Transformation Area (Westgate, Hobsonville Corridor and Hobsonville Point) is a priority development area in the Auckland Plan. PC14 Waiarohia Ponds Hobsonville corridor project is part of the development of this area.

25. Rawiri Stream is a permanent stream in Hobsonville identified in PC14, and is assessed by the council as a high priority acquisition.

26. Restoration of the riparian margins of the stream will assist with stormwater treatment and provide amenity for the community, via the green corridor created by the project.

27. The related stormwater land acquisitions are complete, and $1 million has been identified in the 2018/2019 financial year to begin delivery of a high amenity, interconnected stormwater system and related open space in the Hobsonville area.

28. The 2018/2019 financial year will focus on detail design and tender, construction completion, maintenance work and operational handover.

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

Local impacts

29. Both the sustainable schools project and the North-West Wildlink assistance programme work closely with, and support, the Upper Harbour Ecology Network, community groups and schools within the local board area.

Local board views

30. The projects noted above align with the local board plan outcome ‘our environment is valued, protected and enhanced.’

31. The proposed Local Environment and Development work programme was discussed with the board at workshops on 22 March 2018 and 24 May 2018. The local board indicated its support of the proposed projects outlined in this report at its 24 May 2018 workshop.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

32. This report provides information for environmental and development projects. It is recognised that environmental management, water quality and land management have integral links with the mauri of the environment and concepts of kaitiakitanga.

33. Some of the identified activities are of interest to Māori and, where appropriate, provisions for mana whenua participation, contribution, and consultation will be incorporated. The following table outlines how each of the projects contributes towards Māori outcomes:

Project	Māori impact assessment
Industry pollution prevention programme	No specific consultation with Māori on this environment programme has been undertaken. However, it is acknowledged that sustainable living practices and water quality have integral links with concepts of kaitiakitanga and Te Ao Māori, where people are closely connected to the land and nature.
Small building sites ambassador project	No specific consultation with Māori on this environment programme has been undertaken. However, it is acknowledged that sustainable living practices and water quality have integral links with concepts of kaitiakitanga and Te Ao Māori, where people are closely connected to the land and nature.
Sustainable schools project - Our Local Streams	This project does not specifically target sustainable living for Māori. However, it is acknowledged that sustainable living practices have integral links with concepts of kaitiakitanga and the Māori world view, where people are closely connected to the land and nature.
Upper Harbour North-West Wildlink assistance programme	No specific consultation with Māori on this environment programme has been undertaken. However, it is acknowledged that sustainable living practices and water quality have integral links with concepts of kaitiakitanga and Te Ao Māori, where people are closely connected to the land and nature.
PC14 Waiarohia Ponds, Hobsonville corridor project	Stormwater management, and its impact on waterways, is of key significance to mana whenua in their role as kaitiaki. Consideration of form and planting of stormwater related open spaces correlates with enabling Māori outcomes. The council has consulted with representatives from Te Kawera a-Maki and Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara who have been included in design development. Consultation will be carried out with mana whenua throughout the design and resource consents process for the creation of remaining open space and stormwater assets.
Septic tank pump-out programme	Feedback from mana whenua as part of other council consultation is supportive of projects that aim to improve water quality.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

34. The proposed 2018/2019 Local Environment and Development work programme will see the allocation of $150,000 of the local board’s LDI operational budget, and $1,112,610 of regional asset-based capital and operational budget. These amounts can be accommodated within the board’s total draft budget for 2018/2019. As such, the board’s approval will not have significant financial implications, unless projects experience a significant overspend or underspend. Regular quarterly updates on projects will be provided to the local board, to track expenditure and identify any projects at risk of non-delivery, over or underspend.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

35. If the proposed Local Environment and Development work programme is not approved at the local board’s June 2018 business meeting, there is a risk that the proposed projects may not be able to be delivered within the 2018/2019 financial year.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

36. Subject to the local board’s approval, delivery of this work programme will commence in the new financial year, beginning 1 July 2018. Regular reporting on project delivery will be provided through the Infrastructure and Environmental Services’ contribution to the local board’s quarterly performance report.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Upper Harbour Infrastructure and Environmental Services work programme 2018/2019	123

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Theresa Pearce - Relationship Advisor

Authorisers

Barry Potter - Director Infrastructure and Environmental Services

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Upper Harbour Local Board

21 June 2018

2018/2019 Upper Harbour Local Board Community Services work programmes

File No.: CP2018/09933

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To approve the Community Services 2018/19 work programmes for the Upper Harbour Local Board including the following departments:

· Arts, Community and Events (ACE)

· Libraries and Information (Libraries)

· Parks, Sport and Recreation (PSR)

· Service Strategy and Integration (SSI).

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. The Community Services work programmes provide a defined work programme to be delivered for the local board in the 2018/2019 financial year. The work programmes cover the following departments:

· Arts, Community and Events (ACE)

· Libraries and Information (Libraries)

· Parks, Sport and Recreation (PSR)

· Service Strategy and Integration (SSI).

3. The Community Services work programmes are being presented together as an initial step towards an integrated programme for the Community Services directorate.

4. The work programmes align with the following local board plan outcomes:

· efficient and effective transport links

· empowered, engaged and connected Upper Harbour communities

· healthy and active communities

· our environment is valued, protected and enhanced.

5. The work programmes include funding from asset-based services operational expenditure (ABS opex) and locally driven initiatives operational expenditure (LDI opex).

6. Should unforeseen works arise, or work priorities change from those approved by the local board, approval from the local board will be sought for any changes to work programmes.

7. Progress and updates on work programmes will be reported to the local board for each quarter of the financial year.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) approve the 2018/2019 Arts, Community and Events work programme (Attachment A to the agenda report), noting that the release of funding for work programme items 688 and 692 are subject to the fund-holder fulfilling probity and accountability requirements.

b) approve the 2018/2019 Libraries and Information work programme (Attachment B to the agenda report).

c) approve the 2018/2019 Parks, Sport and Recreation work programme (Attachment C to the agenda report) and delegate approval of minor changes to Chairperson Margaret Miles, and Deputy Chairperson Lisa Whyte.

d) approve the 2018/2019 Service Strategy and Integration work programme (Attachment D to the agenda report).

Horopaki / Context

8. Work programmes are presented to local boards for approval each year. They outline the local activities to be delivered in each local board area for the next financial year.

9. The Community Services directorate consists of the ACE, Libraries, and PSR departments and this year, they are presenting work programmes in a combined report as an initial step towards an integrated programme for the Community Services directorate. The work programme for SSI has also been included alongside other Community Services work programmes for the first time.

10. Preparation for the development of draft work programmes was supported by a series of workshops with the local board. Initial workshops provided strategic direction and subsequent workshops identified priority activities to support that direction.

11. Some activities are funded through regional budgets but have been included as they will have an impact on future asset or service provision in the local board area and may also require local board decisions or input as they progress.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

12. The 2018/2019 Community Services work programmes for the Upper Harbour Local Board include the following areas of activity:

· ACE – provision of service for local arts projects and facilities, community empowerment initiatives, community centres and venues and local and regional events

· Libraries – provision of library services and programmes that support Aucklanders with reading and literacy, and opportunities to participate in community and civic life

· PSR – provision of services to actively engage Aucklanders to lead healthy lives, connect with nature and value our cultural identity

· SSI – provision of service and asset planning advice, and support more integrated delivery of community outcomes.

13. The work programmes include activities that:

· align with local board plans

· identify budget allocation

· outline estimated timeframes for delivery.

14. The work programmes for 2018/2019 align to the following Upper Harbour Local Board Plan outcomes:

Outcome	ACE	Libraries	PSR	SS&I
Efficient and effective transport links			ü
Empowered, engaged and connected Upper Harbour communities	ü	ü
Healthy and active communities	ü		ü	ü
Our environment is valued, protected and enhanced			ü

15. Some activities require multiple years for delivery. The programmes align to the following strategies and plans:

· ACE: Hire Fee Framework, Events Policy, Arts and Culture Strategic Action Plan (Toi Whītiki), Community Development Strategic Action Plan (‘Thriving Communities’), Ka Ora Ai Te Iwi – Māori Responsiveness Plan

· Libraries: Te Kauroa – Auckland Libraries Future Directions 2013-2023, Te Kauhanganui – Auckland Libraries Māori responsiveness plan

· PSR: Public Open Space Strategic Action Plan, Sport and Recreation Strategic Action Plan, Auckland growing greener framework, Māori responsiveness framework, Pest free 2050 (through volunteers).

· SSI: Delivery of integrated outcomes from the strategies and plans outlined above including the Community Facilities Network Plan, Parks and Open Space Strategic Action Plan and Auckland Plan.

16. The work programmes include new activities, as well as existing activities that have been continued from the previous financial year.

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

17. The local board provided feedback on the proposed Community Services work programmes for the 2018/2019 financial year through a series of workshops, in preparation for approving these final work programmes.

18. Feedback from these workshops is reflected in the work programmes included in Attachments A, B, C and D.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

19. Where any aspects of the work programme are anticipated to have a significant impact on Māori, appropriate engagement and consultation will follow.

20. Community Services are committed to being responsive to Māori. When developing and delivering work programmes, the department considers how it can contribute to Māori well-being, values, culture and traditions.

21. Activities in the work programmes that are specific to Māori outcomes include:

· celebrating Te Ao Māori and strengthening responsiveness to Māori. Whakatipu i te reo Māori

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

22. Activities are funded from one or multiple budget sources which include: asset-based services operational expenditure (ABS opex) and locally driven initiatives operational expenditure (LDI opex).

23. The local board’s LDI opex budget associated with CS activities for the 2018/2019 financial year is $832,425.

24. The Community Facilities department leads capital development and asset enhancing activities including renewals and will be submitting a separate work programme for approval.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

25. Delivery and completion of activities in the work programmes are dependent on the local board approving the work programmes.

26. To ensure completion or continuation, work programme activities that require multi-year funding are dependent on the approval of work programmes in future years.

27. Where a work programme activity cannot be completed on time due to unforeseen circumstances, this will be signalled to the local board at the earliest opportunity, along with options for the local board to consider.

28. If a change is required to a work programme, approval from the local board will be sought.

29. It is pertinent to highlight risks identified relating to the ACE work programme items numbered 688 and 692.

30. Thorough process and financial management requires an entity, either community or commercial, to adopt sound policies for the governance and management of the organisation, with particular focus on governance structures and practices, financial management and human resource management.

31. At the time of the agenda going to print, the current fund-holder was unable to provide proof of suitable probity and accountability requirements. It is therefore, recommended that the funds associated with ACE work programme activity items 688 and 692 be held until the fund-holder meets its probity and accountability requirements.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

32. Once approved, delivery of activities identified in the Community Services work programmes will begin from 1 July 2018.

33. The work programmes list further decisions and milestones for each activity, these will be brought to the local board when appropriate.

34. Progress and updates on work programmes will be reported to the local board for each quarter of the financial year.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Upper Harbour ACE work programme 2018/2019	131
b ⇩	Upper Harbour Libraries work programme 2018/2019	141
c ⇩	Upper Harbour PSR work programmes 2018/2019	143
d ⇩	Upper Harbour SSI work programme 2018/2019	145

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Graham Bodman - General Manager Arts, Community and Events

Mirla Edmundson - General Manager Libraries & Information

Mace Ward - General Manager Parks, Sports and Recreation

Lisa Tocker - Head of Service Strategy and Integration

Authorisers

Ian Maxwell - Director Community Services

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Upper Harbour Local Board

21 June 2018

2018/2019 Upper Harbour Local Board Local Economic Development work programme

File No.: CP2018/10448

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To approve the Upper Harbour Local Board Local Economic Development programme for the 2018/19 financial year.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. This report introduces the proposed 2018/2019 financial year Local Economic Development (LED) work programme for the Upper Harbour Local Board as set out in Attachment A.

3. The proposed work programme comprises of support for:

· an Upper Harbour Pop-up Business School initiative

· the Young Enterprise Scheme (YES).

4. The total value of the Local Economic Development work programme is $9500.

5. The board is being asked to approve the 2018/19 Local Economic Development work programme.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) approve the 2018/2019 Local Economic Development work programme (refer to Attachment A to the agenda report) as follows:

i. Pop-up Business School ($7500)

ii. Young Enterprise Scheme ($2000).

Horopaki / Context

6. This report provides the Upper Harbour Local Board with the proposed Local Economic Development work programme for the 2018/2019 financial year.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

7. The 2018/2019 Local Economic Development work programme has been developed with regard to the local board’s priorities for local economic development, as set out in the 2017 Upper Harbour Local Board Plan and the Upper Harbour Local Economic Development Action Plan.

8. The proposed LED programme comprises the following activities:

Pop-up Business School ($7500)

9. The Upper Harbour Local Board aspires that the area become a base for entrepreneurial growth, with more self-employed people able to work locally. The Pop-up Business School offers a free 10-day business school to provide education and support for local people interested in starting their own business.

10. Examples elsewhere have had positive results in terms of the numbers of businesses established. Supporting local residents by providing entrepreneurial training, leads to an increase in local businesses and local employment opportunities.

11. The Pop-up Business School, run by Pop-up Business School Aotearoa, typically has 40-60 attendees drawn from a range of socio-economic backgrounds. As such, it provides practical business development training for those who would not ordinarily have access to it.

12. This initiative could be co-funded with a neighbouring local board.

Young Enterprise Scheme ($2000)

13. 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 in real profit and loss.

14. Fostering youth entrepreneurship is a key requirement for developing an innovative economy and creating employment pathways for our young people. Students learn key work skills and business knowledge, including:

· business fundamentals

· planning

· interpersonal relations

· financial, decision-making

· reporting

· risk management

· team work.

15. The YES helps create a culture of innovation and entrepreneurship amongst Auckland’s young people.

16. Local board funding will support 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 opportunity for students to meet the Young Enterprise team. The ‘Kick Start’ days also give students an opportunity to find out about the 2019 year, what YES is about, and what is in store for them.

17. All schools in the local board area that have shown interest in YES are invited. In addition, the invitation is extended to schools who have not previously expressed an interest, to give them the opportunity to participate.

18. Supporting the Young Enterprise Scheme will enable this initiative to be successful and grow in Upper Harbour schools.

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

Local impacts and local board views guidance

19. Outcome 4 of the Upper Harbour Local Board Plan 2017 seeks to ‘attract businesses and investment, and create skilled jobs’ in the Upper Harbour Local Board area. The two initiatives in the work programme for 2018/2019 aim to support people in the area to develop their entrepreneurial skills, and support local people to generate successful local businesses.

20. The proposed LED work programme was presented to the Upper Harbour Local Board at the 24 May 2018 workshop.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

21. There are no direct impacts on Māori as a result of this report. However, in implementing the programme, consideration will be given to the need to consult with Māori and consider any impacts arising from the specific project being undertaken.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

22. The 2018/2019 Local Economic Development work programme progress will be reported directly to the Upper Harbour Local Board as part of the quarterly local board work programme report produced by Local Board Services.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

23. The Pop-up Business School requires $25,000 to run. Involvement of the Upper Harbour Local Board is dependent on neighbouring local boards, private sponsors and Auckland Tourism, Events and Economic Development (ATEED) making up the difference. This will become more difficult should one neighbouring local board fully fund its own Pop-Up Business School.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

24. Following approval by the Upper Harbour Local Board, the Local Economic Development team at ATEED will begin to implement the work programme. Where there is a need, further scoping of activities will be undertaken and presented back to the local board.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	2018/2019 Upper Harbour Local Board Local Economic Development work programme	151

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Jonathan Sudworth – Local Economic Development Advisor (ATEED)

Authorisers

John Norman – Strategic Planner Local Economic Growth (ATEED)

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Upper Harbour Local Board

21 June 2018

Auckland Council's Quarterly Performance Report: Upper Harbour Local Board for Quarter Three, 1 January - 31 March 2018

File No.: CP2018/10091

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

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

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

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

3. Of significance this quarter, is Gecko Trust bringing the Curious Tamariki programme to the community of Whenuapai. The programme provides a platform for further place making activities, with children and young people from local schools working with biodiversity scientists to explore key ecological areas.

4. During quarter three, 254 people from the local board area became New Zealand citizens.

5. Performance against the agreed 2017/2018 work programmes is tracking positively.

6. All operating departments with agreed work programmes have provided a quarterly update against their work programme delivery. The majority of activities are reported with a status of green (on track) or amber (some risk or issues, which are being managed). The following activities are reported with a status of red (behind delivery, significant risk):

· Albany Village Library – interior refurbish - project cancelled

· Community house development (Hobsonville Point) – this project merged with Hobsonville Headquarters

· RNZ Plunket Society, Albany – multi-purpose lease (project ID # 1804) - this is a duplicate entry

· Attwood and Rame Esplanade - remove coastal assets – this project has been cancelled

· Landing Reserve - renew boat ramp and seawall – this project has been cancelled

· Waimarie Beach - renew seawall – this project has been cancelled

7. The four coastal projects have been bundled into a larger Upper Harbour Renew Coastal Assets project.

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

· Overall, the net operational financial performance of the board is tracking at 109% of revised budget year to date. Revenue is behind the revised budget by $253k due a closure earlier in the year at Albany Stadium Pool. Delivery of the capital expenditure programme is currently at 71% against the year to date revised budget and includes works underway on various community facilities and park renewals.

9. The key performance indicators show a trend of delivery that is meeting the indicators.

10. This report also includes an update on locally driven initiatives capital expenditure (LDI Capex) projects. One such project is the installation of spectator seating at Bay City Park. Although $70,000 was allocated to the project in 2017, once works began onsite it became apparent that the following three variations were required:

· Unscheduled enabling works in order to be able to remove the excess fill from the site. This consisted of laying gravel over a geotextile cloth and then top spoiling at the conclusion of the project for approximately 50m at a cost of $15,000

· Additional work for a new storm water connection at a cost of $3,000

· Arborist work to entrance way to allow trucks to access site at a cost of $2,000

11. Staff request that the local board consider the allocation an additional $20,000 from the 2017/2018 LDI Capex funding in order to complete the project.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

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

b) allocate $20,000 from its locally driven initiatives capital expenditure budget towards the installation of spectator seating at Bay City Park.

Horopaki / Context

12. The Upper Harbour Local Board has an approved 2017/2018 work programme for the following operating departments:

· Arts, Community and Events; approved on 18 May 2017

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

· Libraries and Information; approved on 15 June 2017

· Community Facilities: Build Maintain Renew; approved on 15 June 2017

· Community Leases; approved on 17 June 2017

· Infrastructure and Environmental Services; approved on 18 May 2017

· Local Economic Development; approved on 15 June 2017

13. The work programmes are aligned to the 2014 Upper Harbour Local Board Plan.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

Key performance indicators

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

15. The year-end outlook is that 30 per cent of measures will not achieve target.

16. Currently all performance measures are being reviewed as part of the development of the 2018-2028 Long Term Plan. Attachment D contains further detailed KPI information.

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

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

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

18. All Māori within the Upper Harbour Local Board area are able to participate in and have access to all projects and initiatives covered in this report.

Financial performance

19. Operating expenditure for the year to date is under budget overall, predominantly due to the implementation of the Project 17 full facilities contract, and the spread of costs over the region. A full year of costings will be required to more accurately budget in this area. There are a number of locally driven initiative projects which will be monitored in the final quarter, to ensure delivery is achieved as per planned work programmes.

20. The revenue variance was caused by a closure of facilities at the Albany Stadium Pool in the first half of the year. This variance has held steady since the closure and the variance will likely be similar at year end.

21. Capital spend of $3.9m represents investments including Hobsonville Corridor Reserves, Community House development at Hobsonville Point, Albany Community Hub, facility renewals at Albany Village Hall and Sunderland Lounge, and surface renewal at Bay City Park.

22. The complete Upper Harbour Local Board Financial Performance report can be found in Attachment C.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

23. The Upper Harbour Local Board passed resolution UH/2017/100 in 2017 to install spectator seating at Bay City Park and allocated $70,000 of LDI Capex funding. The contract was awarded within the allocated budget, however, once works began onsite it became apparent that the following three variations were required:

· Additional work for a new storm water connection at a cost of $3,000

· Arborist work to entrance way to allow trucks to access site at a cost of $2,000

24. Staff request that the local board consider the allocation an additional $20,000 from the 2017/2018 LDI Capex funding in order to complete the project.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

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

· Albany Village Library – interior refurbish – project cancelled. Minor maintenance work was completed by the operations team, hence the renewal is no longer required

· Community house development (Hobsonville Point) – this project was merged with Hobsonville Headquarters redevelopment, exterior landscaping and car park construction (refer to SharePoint ID 3012 for an update / commentary)

· Attwood and Rame Esplanade – remove coastal assets – this project has been cancelled and is bundled into Christmas Beach, the Landing Reserve and Waimarie Beach seawall renewal

· Landing Reserve – renew boat ramp and seawall – this project has been cancelled and is bundled up into Christmas Beach, the Landing Reserve and Waimarie Beach seawall renewal

· Waimarie Beach – renew seawall – this project has been cancelled and is bundled up into Christmas Beach, the Landing Reserve and Waimarie Beach seawall renewal

· RNZ Plunket Society, Albany – multi-purpose lease (project ID # 1804) – this is a duplicate entry (refer to project ID # 1450)

· Rosedale Landfill: Activate the open space: Feasibility and options assessment - is on hold pending the results of ongoing investigations being carried out by the Closed Landfill and Contaminated Land team. The Closed Landfill and Contaminated Land team will not support further review of the draft assessment until the investigations are completed and risk assessments undertaken, which is likely to be no earlier than 2020-2021.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

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

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Snapshot	157
b ⇩	Work Programme	159
c ⇩	Financial Performance	181
d ⇩	Performance Measures	187

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors	Karen Marais - Senior Local Board Advisor Upper Harbour
Authorisers	Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Upper Harbour Local Board

21 June 2018

Freedom camping bylaw development

File No.: CP2018/09430

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To seek formal feedback from the Upper Harbour Local Board on sites to be managed by the draft freedom camping bylaw (the bylaw).

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. In August 2017, the Regulatory Committee decided to develop a bylaw under the Freedom Camping Act 2011 (the act).

3. The council can only restrict or prohibit the activity through a bylaw made under the act if it is satisfied that it is necessary to:

· protect the area, and/or

· protect the health and safety of people who may visit an area, and/or

· protect access to the area.

4. Staff have now carried out site assessments for the Upper Harbour Local Board area and have concluded there are:

· twenty sites with adequate evidence to be scheduled as prohibited

· two sites with adequate evidence to be scheduled as restricted

· one suitable site for non-self-contained camping.

5. Recommendations provided by the Upper Harbour Local Board will be incorporated into a report to the Regulatory Committee in August 2018.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) recommend to the Regulatory Committee that the 20 sites contained in Attachment A to the agenda report, be prohibited through a bylaw under the Freedom Camping Act 2011.

b) recommend to the Regulatory Committee that the following restrictions be applied to the two sites contained in Attachment B to the agenda report, through a bylaw under the Freedom Camping Act 2011:

i. certified self-contained vehicles only

ii. limited numbers of vehicles

iii. only in identified parking spaces.

c) recommend to the Regulatory Committee that the following restrictions be applied to the one site contained in Attachment C to the agenda report, through a bylaw under the Freedom Camping Act 2011:

i. limited numbers of vehicles

ii. only in identified parking spaces.

d) confirm their general views on the management of freedom camping expressed through the workshop on 26 April 2018 as follows:

i. freedom camping should be limited to certified self-contained vehicles

ii. rules about the times when campers could come into and must leave an area should be considered

iii. it is preferable to consider freedom camping when developing or redeveloping a park rather than retrofitting freedom camping into existing areas

iv. when publicising areas for freedom camping, the council should also highlight what other options there are for campers in the area, and the types of facilities those options have

v. the council should consider developing more low-cost campsites or purpose-built facilities.

Horopaki / Context

Background

6. In 2017, staff conducted a review of freedom camping in Auckland, and the options available to the council to manage this activity. The review provided detailed information on current camper patterns and the associated issues.

7. Staff reported the findings of the review to the Regulatory Committee in August 2017. The Regulatory Committee decided to manage freedom camping by developing a bylaw under the Freedom Camping Act 2011 (resolution number REG/2017/72).

8. A bylaw under the act will allow the council to manage harm more effectively, by enabling council officers to issue campers with $200 infringement fines.

Freedom Camping Act 2011

9. Under the act, freedom camping is permitted in any local authority area unless it is restricted or prohibited:

· in a bylaw made under the act, or

· under any other enactment.

10. Other enactments include the Reserves Act 1977 which prohibits freedom camping on reserves unless a reserve management plan allows the activity.

11. The council can only restrict or prohibit the activity through a bylaw made under the act if it is satisfied that it is necessary to:

· protect the area, and/or

· protect the health and safety of people who may visit an area, and/or

· protect access to the area.

12. The council cannot make a bylaw which effectively prohibits freedom camping everywhere in Auckland.

13. The council must be satisfied that a bylaw is the most appropriate and proportionate way of addressing the perceived problem in relation to the affected area. The bylaw must not be inconsistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

Bylaw development process

14. Staff sought initial local board views through the local board cluster workshops in November 2017. This included discussion on characteristics of areas that make it either suitable or unsuitable for freedom camping. Ways to minimise potential harm were also discussed.

15. Principles were subsequently developed to guide the bylaw development. These are:

· to ensure that freedom campers can ‘do the right thing’

· to ensure that users and visitors to an area, including freedom campers, can enjoy the area

· to encourage the activity in suitable areas that meet the needs of freedom campers

· to protect areas of regional significance.

16. Community workshops were also held in April 2018 to test these principles. Attendees at the workshops were individuals or groups who had previously expressed an interest in the issue.

17. Staff attended workshops with all local boards in April and May 2018. The purpose of these workshops was to provide an overview of the bylaw development, and to seek feedback to help inform the draft bylaw.

Approach to site assessments

18. Staff completed assessments of all council-managed land, to understand the areas that may need to be protected from freedom camping and scheduled in the bylaw. Assessments included the following considerations:

· the size and condition of parking area

· existing use, including any leases over the area

· issues around safety in the area, including anti-social behaviour and lighting

· existing facilities, including toilets, drinking water, rubbish bins and gates

· the environmental, historical or cultural significance of the area.

19. To decide on recommendations for each site, staff developed a site assessment matrix with two indicators:

· current or anticipated desirability of an area to campers

· level of protection required under the act.

Site Assessment Matrix

20. Medium and high desirability areas that require a higher level of protection are recommended to be prohibited.

21. Areas of medium and high desirability that require a medium level of protection, are recommended to be restricted. As these sites may be suitable for a limited number of certified self-contained vehicles, site specific restrictions may include a maximum number of vehicles and a specific location within the parking area to camp.

22. High desirability areas that require a lower level of protection are recommended to have more permissive rules. These rules could allow for a limited number of non-self-contained vehicles to camp at these locations.

Areas held under the Reserves Act 1977

23. Areas held under the Reserves Act 1977 were included in the assessment. This enables the local board to provide feedback on whether a prohibition through the bylaw was required.

24. The default position on land held under the Reserves Act 1977 is that freedom camping is not allowed. The Reserves Act 1977 does, however, not have infringement powers available.

25. In reserves that meet the Freedom Camping Act’s evidential requirements to be prohibited, areas can also be scheduled in the bylaw. This provides enforcement staff additional infringement powers.

Potential regional default rules

26. Staff also presented the following potential regional default rules at each local board workshop:

· camping is permitted only in certified self-contained vehicles

· camping is permitted for no more than two nights in any four-week consecutive period

· a time by which a camper must leave the area in the morning.

27. These rules would be applied to all areas that are not otherwise scheduled in the bylaw, to ensure health and safety and access to the area are protected.

Upper Harbour Local Board area site assessments

28. The outcome of the initial site assessments for the Upper Harbour Local Board area are included in Attachments A, B and C. Attachments B and C also note where the Reserves Act 1977 applies.

29. Attachment D includes sites initially recommended to be scheduled in the bylaw, which have been reassessed following the workshop with the local board. These sites are now recommended to be covered by the default rules. Freedom camping will not be permitted in areas held under the Reserves Act 1977. Enforcement powers will be limited to sites held under the Reserves Act 1977.

30. In the Upper Harbour Local Board area, initial site assessments revealed:

· thirteen sites where there was adequate evidence to suggest that prohibition was required to protect the area

· no sites were identified (including reserves held under the Reserves Act 1977) where there was adequate evidence to suggest site specific restrictions would be required to protect the area

· nine areas where there was adequate evidence to suggest more permissive restrictions should be in place to allow non-self-contained camping, were also identified.

31. Attachments A, B and C also provide a summary of the additional evidence received from the local board and subsequent staff recommendations.

32. A summary of the recommendations for the Upper Harbour Local Board area:

· twenty sites have adequate evidence to be scheduled as prohibited

· two sites have adequate evidence to be scheduled as restricted (limited access for certified self-contained only vehicles)

· one site has adequate evidence to be scheduled as restricted, however is suitable for non-self-contained vehicles:

o of the restricted sites, all three are held under the Reserves Act 1977. Staff are investigating if there are legal avenues available to provide for freedom camping with restrictions on these sites. If no legal avenues are available, these sites will not be scheduled in the bylaw. As the default position under the Reserves Act 1977 will apply, no freedom camping will be allowed on these sites. Enforcement powers will be limited to those sites under the Reserves Act 1977 (no infringement capability).

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

Local impacts and local board views

33. The Upper Harbour Local Board also provided general feedback on the development of the bylaw at the workshop on 26 April 2018. This feedback included:

· freedom camping should be limited to certified self-contained vehicles

· rules about the times when campers could come into and must leave an area should be considered

· it is preferable to consider freedom camping when developing or redeveloping a park rather than retrofitting freedom camping into existing areas

· when publicising areas for freedom camping, the council should also highlight what other options there are for campers in the area and the types of facilities those options have

· the council should consider developing more low-cost campsites or purpose-built facilities.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

34. A memo was provided to mana whenua in November 2017 to update them on the development of the bylaw. Staff also attended the Regional Parks and Recreation Mana Whenua Engagement Hui in March 2018 to discuss the bylaw development.

35. Staff will continue to work with mana whenua, through this forum, to identify areas that need to be protected through the bylaw.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

36. There are no financial implications for the Upper Harbour Local Board from the decision being sought.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

37. There is a risk that the bylaw could be applied to a person experiencing homelessness and living in a vehicle.

38. The graduated enforcement model used by Licensing and Regulatory Compliance, enables consideration of individual circumstances. Currently, when a complaint is made about someone who is experiencing homelessness, staff work with social service agencies to ensure they are connected with the right support.

39. The Affordable Housing Policy Unit are currently developing a cross-sectoral strategy on homelessness.

40. Staff will continue to work with colleagues across the council, including Legal Services, to understand options available to mitigate this risk.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

41. In August 2018, staff intend to report to the Regulatory Committee with the draft bylaw and statement of proposal. If adopted at this time, the draft bylaw will go out for full public consultation in September 2018.

42. If the Upper Harbour Local Board would like to provide further feedback once the draft bylaw is adopted, this will be facilitated through the consultation and hearings process in September 2018.

43. Based on current timelines, staff intend to have the new bylaw adopted in December 2018.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Sites to be recommended to the Regulatory Committee as prohibited	199
b ⇩	Sites to be recommended to the Regulatory Committee as restricted (certified self-contained only). Site specific restrictions to limit number and location	207
c ⇩	Sites to be recommended to the Regulatory Committee as restricted (non-self-contained permitted). Site specific restrictions to limit number and location	211
d ⇩	Sites reassessed following local board workshop. Recommend to Regulatory Committee to apply default rules	213

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Jillian Roe - Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Kataraina Maki - GM - Community & Social Policy

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Upper Harbour Local Board

21 June 2018

Delegation for formal local board views on notified resource consents, plan changes and notices of requirement

File No.: CP2018/04441

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To seek that the Upper Harbour Local Board delegate responsibility of providing formal views (feedback) on notified resource consents, plan changes and notices of requirement to a local board member.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. Local board feedback can be provided on notified resource consents, plan changes and notices of requirement. Written feedback needs to be provided prior to the submission closing date (usually 20 working days after public notification). This feedback is included in the planner’s report verbatim and local boards are also able to speak to their written feedback at the public hearing. Views should be received by the processing planner, or reporting consultant, by the submission closing date to ensure the content can be considered in planning reports.

3. This report explores options to enable local boards to provide their views in a timely way. Local boards normally provide their formal views at business meetings. Because local board reporting timeframes don’t usually align with statutory timeframes, in most instances formal reporting at a business meeting will not allow local feedback to be provided by submission closing dates.

4. Providing formal local board views by way of a delegation to a local board member is considered the most efficient way of providing formal local board views. This is because the delegate can provide views within the regulatory timeframes and because no additional reporting is required when new applications of interest are notified.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) delegate authority to Local Board Member XXXXX (the resource consent lead) and XXXXX, as an alternate, to prepare and provide local board views and speak to those local board views at any hearings on:

· notified resource consents

· notified plan changes

· notices of requirement.

b) agree to note and ratify any views provided, or expressed on the local board’s behalf, by its duly authorised delegate at its next business meeting.

Horopaki / ContextBackground

5. In 2011, the Governing Body confirmed a process whereby local boards could make their interests and preferences of the people within the local board area known by providing comments which could be taken into consideration for notification decisions for resource consents.

6. In May 2016, a political working party was set up to review the statutory context of that practice. As a result of that work, it was confirmed that local boards could provide feedback on notified applications and could also make an oral presentation as part of any hearing on notified applications. The opportunity to present at a hearing is in alignment with section 15(2) of the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 (LGACA).

7. In relation to resource consents, a standard practice was signalled and endorsed by the Hearings Committee (20 September 2016, resolution number CP2016/20479) to enable local boards to speak to their local views and preferences when a hearing occurs in relation to any of the relevant resource management applications.

8. In the current political term, and since the completion of the Auckland Unitary Plan, there is now an increased number of plan change applications (both council-initiated and privately-initiated) and notices of requirement. This has highlighted an issue with timeframes and the wider process of obtaining local board views and preferences. Relying on local board workshops to present these types of applications or monthly business meetings to obtain local board views and preferences is not ideal. On some occasions, local boards have not received notification of plan change applications in their area until timeframes are well underway. This has resulted in urgent decisions and limited opportunities for local boards to consider their views and preferences and provide them to the reporting planner.

9. Providing local board views and preferences (feedback) is different from making a submission. Local board feedback is the formal view of the local board, providing local context. In comparison, submissions (which cannot be made by local boards) are made by submitters on notified applications for resource consents, plan changes and notices of requirement. Those who have submitted have formal rights to speak at a subsequent hearing and have appeal rights to the Environment Court.

10. This report seeks a delegation from local boards to provide feedback (local views and preferences) to address the times when applications are not able to meet local board timeframes. This will also acknowledge those local board members who have knowledge and understanding of planning and to ensure local boards do not miss the opportunity to express views and preferences as provided for by LGACA.

Notified Resource Consents

11. Local boards are able to provide input into the determination of applications that may be notified. Local boards, via their appointed resource consents leads, input into a wide range of resource consents that are received by the council and that trigger the matters of particular interest to local boards.

12. Local views and preferences are also able to be provided, once a decision of notification is made, and local boards can then provide further feedback to any notified resource consent application within their local board area. This feedback is then included in the planner’s report verbatim for the hearing and for the consideration of the commissioners who determine the outcome of the resource consent application.

13. Local boards are also able to speak to their written feedback at any notified resource consent hearing. Local boards are using this opportunity more often and it is considered important to ensure any feedback is authorised by the local board and a delegation is in place for the resource consent lead to authorise them to speak on behalf of the local board at hearings.

Notified Plan Changes and Notices of Requirement

14. The Auckland Unitary Plan was made ‘Operative in Part’ in November 2016. As plan changes and notices of requirement can now be received and processed by council, there are opportunities for local boards to provide their views and give feedback on notified applications.

15. For council-initiated plan changes and notices of requirement, staff will seek local board views prior to notification for proposals where there are issues of local significance. For private plan changes and notices of requirement submitted by non-council requiring authorities, local boards may not have any prior knowledge of the application until notification.

16. Local boards can provide written feedback on notified applications. Written feedback needs to be provided prior to the submission closing date (usually 20 working days after public notification). Local boards can subsequently present their feedback to support their views at any hearing.

17. It is important that options are explored to enable local boards to provide their views in a timely way and a delegation to ensure timely feedback is desirable. At present, local board views must be confirmed formally and statutory timeframes are short and do not always align with local board reporting timeframes.

18. Local boards may want to add the responsibility for plan changes and notices of requirement feedback to the resource consent lead role. This will broaden the responsibilities of the role to enable feedback on notified plan changes and notices of requirement to be provided. Alternatively, local boards may want to develop a separate planning lead role and each local board has the flexibility to make appointments that best suit their needs.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

Options considered

19. Local boards normally provide their formal views at business meetings (option 2). Because local board reporting timeframes do not usually align with statutory timeframes, in most instances, formal reporting at a business meeting will not allow local feedback to be provided by submission closing date. Views must be received by the processing planner or reporting consultant by the submission closing date to ensure the content can be considered in planning reports.

20. Providing formal local board views by way of a delegation to one local board member (option 5) is considered the most efficient way of providing formal views. This is because no additional reporting is required when new applications of interest are notified.

21. Options available for local boards to provide their views into the hearings process have been summarised in the following table:

Options	Pros	Cons
1. No formal local board views are provided		· Local board views will not be considered by the hearings commissioners
2. Formal local board views are provided at a business meeting	· All local board members contribute to the local board view · Provides transparent decision-making	· Local board meeting schedules and agenda deadlines are unlikely to align with statutory deadlines imposed by the planning process
3. Formal local board views are provided as urgent decisions	· Local boards can provide their views in a timely way that meets statutory deadlines	· Decisions are not made by the full local board · Urgent decisions may not be accompanied by full information and the discussion may be rushed · Not transparent decision-making because the decisions do not become public until after they have been made
4. Formal local board views are provided by separate and specific delegation for each application on which the local board wishes to provide their views	· Delegations can be chosen to align with area of interest and/or local board member capacity	· Local board meeting schedules and agenda deadlines required to make each separate delegation are unlikely to align with statutory deadlines imposed by the planning process · Decisions are not made by the full local board
5. Formal local board views are provided by way of delegation to one local board member (preferred option) for all applications	· Delegate will become subject matter expert for local board on topic they are delegated to · Local boards can provide their views in a timely way that meets statutory deadlines · Any feedback can be regularly reported back to the local board	· Decisions are not made by the full local board

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

22. This report seeks a delegation to a local board member for resource consents, plan changes and notices of requirement, to allow local boards to provide feedback in accordance with agreed timeframes on notified resource consents, plan changes and notices of requirement.

23. Any local board member who is delegated responsibilities should ensure that they represent the wider local board views and preferences on each matter before them.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

24. A decision of this procedural nature is not considered to have a positive or negative impact for Māori.

25. The Resource Management Act 1991 requires that the council consult with mana whenua of the area who may be affected, through iwi authorities, on draft plan changes prior to their notification. The council must also consider iwi authority advice in evaluations of plan changes.

26. For private plan changes, council seeks that the applicant undertakes suitable engagement with relevant iwi authorities and, where necessary, will undertake consultation before deciding whether to accept, reject or adopt a private plan change.

27. For notices of requirement, council serves notice on mana whenua of the area who may be affected, through iwi authorities. Requiring authorities must also consult with the relevant iwi as part of the designating process.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

28. A decision of this procedural nature is not considered to have financial implications on Auckland Council.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

29. If local boards choose not to delegate to provide views on notified applications, there is a risk that they will not be able to provide formal views prior to the submission closing date and may miss the opportunity to have their feedback presented and heard at a hearing.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

30. For notified applications of interest to the local board, local board members delegated under these resolutions will provide feedback and speak at hearings on behalf of their local board.

31. Additional training for local board members will be offered on the Resource Management Act and the preparation of effective feedback for applications notified as part of a Resource Management Act process.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Carol Stewart - Senior Policy Advisor

Authorisers

Anna Bray - Policy and Planning Manager - Local Boards

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Upper Harbour Local Board

21 June 2018

New road name for subdivision at 102-130 Clark Road, Hobsonville Point

File No.: CP2018/09238

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To seek approval to name a new road, created by way of a subdivision of Superlot BB6, in the ‘Buckley B Precinct’ of the development at 102-130 Clark Road, Hobsonville Point.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

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

3. These guidelines allow that when a new road needs to be named due to a subdivision or development, the subdivider/developer shall be given the opportunity to suggest their preferred road name/s for local board approval.

4. The applicants for this subdivision are development partners HLC Limited and Neilston Group Limited. They have submitted the following options for the new road created by way of this subdivision:

· Seaplane Lane (preferred)

· Fan Lane

· Airgraph Lane.

5. Existing roads in the ‘Buckley B Precinct’ of the Hobsonville Point development have names with an air force theme, acknowledging the history of the area as a former air force ‘off-base’ housing area. The proposed names for the new road serving Superlot BB6 support this theme.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) approve one of the following names for the new road, created by way of a subdivision of Superlot BB6, in the ‘Buckley B Precinct’ of the Hobsonville Point development at 102-130 Clark Road, Hobsonville:

i. Seaplane Lane (preferred)

ii. Fan Lane

iii. Airgraph Lane.

Horopaki / Context

6. Resource consent has been obtained for comprehensive development of Superlot BB6, to construct 31 new dwellings with associated earthworks and infrastructure, and to subdivide around each dwelling to create 31 freehold titles.

7. The council approved resource consent (reference BUN60304529) on 29 September 2017.

8. As this development services more than five lots or units, a new road name is required. A site plan of the road and development can be found in Attachment A.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

9. The council’s road naming guidelines and criteria typically require that road names reflect one of the following:

· a historical or ancestral linkage to an area

· a particular landscape, environmental or biodiversity theme or feature

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

10. Existing roads in the wider ‘Buckley B Precinct’ of the Hobsonville Point development have names with an air force theme, acknowledging the history of the area as a former air force ‘off-base’ housing area. Public roads in the development have been named after air force personnel and smaller roads have a general air force theme. The proposed names for the new road serving the Superlot BB6 subdivision support this theme.

11. The applicants have proposed the road names summarised in the table below:

Proposed names	Meaning	Criteria
Seaplane Lane (preferred)	Acknowledges the seaplanes that were assembled, maintained and were stationed at the former air base	Meets criteria: · historical link to the area and wider development · not already in use
Fan Lane	Slang for propeller	Meets criteria – as above
Airgraph Lane	A system of sending bulk mail in the smallest possible space – an airgraph was mail that was photographed and shrunk onto microfilm. The microfilm was sent from one country to another and was then enlarged and printed at the original size	Meets criteria – as above

12. Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) has confirmed the proposed names are acceptable and no duplicates exist. The proposed names and the road type of ‘Lane’ are all deemed to meet the council’s road naming guidelines.

Consultation process

13. The applicants consulted with the Hobsonville Point Placemaking Advisory Committee on the proposed road names. HLC Limited has established the placemaking committee to provide input to the placemaking approach for the Hobsonville Point development and to give feedback on planned projects. The committee is comprised of representatives from Te Kawerau a Maki, Ngati Whatua o Kaipara, the Upper Harbour Local Board, Auckland Council and the Hobsonville Point Residents Society.

14. The proposed road names and alternatives were circulated to the Hobsonville Point Placemaking Advisory Committee by email on 14 May 2018 and no objections were received. However, the representative from the Hobsonville Point Residents Society was less comfortable with the alternative names and raised concerns that the origins might not be linked to the air force theme by the general public as they are more obscure.

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

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

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

16. HLC Limited contacted local iwi by email and invited them to comment as part of the Hobsonville Point Placemaking Advisory Committee. Only Te Kawerau a Maki responded, and they were neutral on the proposed names. Their main comment was to indicate a preference for more Te Reo Māori names, but that they also recognise the important role the air force has had in the area.

17. The decision sought from the Upper Harbour Local Board is linked to the Auckland Plan Outcome, ‘a Māori identity that is Auckland’s point of difference in the world’. The use of Māori names for roads, buildings and other public places is an opportunity to publicly demonstrate Māori identity.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

18. The applicant is responsible for the installation of appropriate signage once approval is obtained for the new road names.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

19. There are no significant risks to the 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

20. Approved road names are notified to LINZ who will record them on their New Zealand-wide land information database.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Site plan for BB6 Superlot	225

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Emerald James - Subdivision Advisor

Authorisers

Trevor Cullen - Team Leader Subdivision

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Chairperson	Margaret Miles, QSM, JP
Deputy Chairperson	Lisa Whyte
Members	Uzra Casuri Balouch, JP
	Nicholas Mayne
	John McLean
	Brian Neeson, JP

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Upper Harbour Local Board record of workshop - 3 May 2018	235
b ⇩	Upper Harbour Local Board record of workshop - 10 May 2018	237
c ⇩	Upper Harbour Local Board record of workshop - 24 May 2018	239
d ⇩	Upper Harbour Local Board record of workshop - 7 June 2018	241

Authors	Cindy Lynch - Democracy Advisor
Authorisers	Eric Perry - Relationship Manager