Agenda of Howick Local Board

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

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

4 Confirmation of Minutes

That the Howick Local Board:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Monday, 17 September 2018, as true and correct.

5 Leave of Absence

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

6 Acknowledgements

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

7 Petitions

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

8 Deputations

Standing Order 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 Howick Local Board. This means that details relating to deputations can be included in the published agenda. Total speaking time per deputation is ten minutes or as resolved by the meeting.

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

9 Public Forum

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

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

10 Extraordinary Business

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Howick Local Board

15 October 2018

Auckland Transport October 2018 update to the Howick Local Board

File No.: CP2018/19065

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

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

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. A decision is not required this month but the report contains information about the following:

· The wider ‘context’ involving a summary of the strategic projects or issues effecting the HLB’s Area including new information about the Airport to Botany ‘Rapid Transit Network’.

· An update on the Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF).

· Progress on HLB advocacy initiatives.

· A summary of consultation about future Auckland Transport activities is included as an attachment.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a) receive the Auckland Transport October 2018 update report.

Horopaki / Context

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

4. Auckland Transport continues to deliver a number of strategic projects in the HLB area, discussed below.

Airport to Botany Rapid Transport Network

5. A key part of Auckland Transport’s public transport strategy is the plan to provide an east-west ‘Rapid Transit Network’ that links Auckland Airport with Botany via Manukau. This project involves the New Zealand Transport Agency, Auckland Airport and Auckland Transport working together over a number of years to plan and build a bus or light rail link between these points.

6. Auckland Transport briefed the Southern Local Board Cluster meeting on 17 September 2018. This briefing discussed the very wide long ‘list’ of options currently being considered and the possible ‘short list’ that was being developed.

7. At the briefing Auckland Transport outlined the process for further discussion including public consultation and providing an opportunity for local boards to engage in the process.

8. Like previous discussions with local boards, the September briefing was positive and local boards including the HLB (which has stated its support by resolution) continue to support the project. This was particularly evident with regard to the social procurement opportunities that the project is creating.

9. Finally, from HLB’s perspective the relationship between this project and AMETI is important to reinforce. AMETI – Eastern Busway Stage Four is the development of a public transport hub at Botany. This hub will provide a link between the East Auckland’s busways and the proposed east-west link provided by the Airport to Botany project.

AMETI - Eastern Busway

10. AMETI – Eastern Busway is a very large project that will build New Zealand’s first urban busway providing congestion free ‘bus only’ lanes for commuters running from Panmure Station all the way to Botany. When it is completed, people will be able to commute easily and quickly from Botany to Panmure and vice versa.

11. On 24 September 2018 AMETI – the Busway team, met with key political stakeholders and discussed the project.

12. The discussion focused on the Panmure to Pakuranga section, which is consented and planned to start early next year. Between now and the start date Auckland Transport is completing archaeological surveys of the area, demolishing buildings that are on properties acquired for the project and managing the procurement of contractors.

13. Auckland Transport is also working hard to plan for the disruption caused to traffic flows by this work. At the meeting, people discussed various aspects of the proposed plan including the provision of new bus services and infrastructure to help encourage people to use public transport. Soon public information will be circulated encouraging people to plan.

14. Other parts of the project were discussed, including the Reeves Road Flyover, the section of busway linking Botany and Pakuranga and development of a transport hub at Botany. The project is progressing well and more information will be made available soon.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

Local Board Transport Capital Fund

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

· Be safe.

· Not impede network efficiency.

· Be in the road corridor (although projects running through parks may be considered if they support a transport outcome).

16. The fund allows local boards to build transport focused local improvements in their areas. HLB’s total funding in this term is approx. $3.8 million (including new money allocated during the recent Council budget process shown in the ‘Financial Summary’). The following table provides an overall summary of the current LBTCF position, including the increased LBTCF approved by Council and applying from 1 July 2018.

Table 1: Howick LBTCF Financial Summary

17. At the August HLB monthly public meeting a range of new work was authorised and is listed in the table below.

18. The current projects that the HLB are working on are also summarised in the table below:

Table 2: Local Board Transport Capital Fund Projects

General Overview
Project	Current Status	Discussion
Half Moon Bay Ferry Pier and Bus Turnaround		Completed.
Buckland’s Beach Walkway Improvements		Auckland Transport and HLB have discussed two projects with estimated costs as follows: · Improved pedestrian facilities and one-way options on The Parade - Approx. $ 80,000 · A roundabout at the intersection of Buckland Beach and Whitcombe Roads – Approx. $ 450,000 The HLB decided not to support either and future reports will not include these projects.
Howick Village Centre Plan		Supporting the Howick Village Centre Plan.
Cascades Walkway		Building a footpath on Cascade Road that will provide access under the bridge on the western edge of the golf course to the walking track that follows the stream.
Aviemore Drive Pathway		Building a walking and cycling pathway in reserve land running parallel with Aviemore Stream.
Notes: A ‘traffic light’ code is used to summarize the status of projects. The colours are used as follows: Green – Project progressing ‘on time’ and on budget. Orange – An issue has been identified that may need to be resolved. Red - An major issue has been identified that needs to be resolved
Detailed Project Progress Report
Half Moon Bay Ferry Terminal The pier is complete and opened on 7 April 2017. The bus turn around area is finished and the opening ceremony was on 28 September 2018.
Bucklands Beach Update Auckland Transport has reported to the HLB about both projects including providing estimated costs. Both projects have been workshopped extensively and the HLB decided not to support either of them. Future reports will not include these projects.
Howick Village Centre Plan This project was workshopped with the HLB on 10 July 2018. Then on 20 August 2018, the HLB decided to support ‘detailed design’ and authorised use of up to $ 400,000 to plan and design the transport-orientated aspects of the project. A HLB Steering Group will lead the work, and a Council funded project manager will manage delivery. At this time, there is no significant information to report.
Cascades Walkway On 10 July 2018, Auckland Transport provided a ‘Firm Cost Estimate of $389,698 to the HLB. On 20 August 2018, HLB approved construction of the project. A rough timeline for the project is below: · Consent submitted soon. · By the end of 2018, the tender documents will be ready. · By the end of January the tender process will start. · Auckland Transport aims to award the tender by 2018. · The plan is construction will start in March 2018.
Aviemore Drive Pathway Auckland Transport is still considering this project and a ‘Rough Order of Cost’ will be provided as soon as possible.

New Projects

19. HLB are keen to investigate a number of new projects. The projects are:

· Installing a tourist map at Halfmoon Bay Ferry Terminal.

· Improving the crossing facilities in front of Botany Downs Secondary School.

· Building the footpath higher on the seaward side of ‘The Parade’ opposite the approx. Numbers 15-19 to help protect the road and these properties form inundation in storms.

20. All of these projects are discussed in detail in a separate ‘decision’ report.

Local board advocacy

21. The following table provides a summary of progress made towards the HLB’s ‘Advocacy Initiatives’.

Table 3: Howick Advocacy Initiative Summary

Advocacy Initiative	Key Initiative	Status
A well-integrated efficient public transportation system	Advocate to Auckland Transport to maintain and upgrade existing transportation systems, including improving safety at congestion hot spots.	Since the last report Auckland Transport has supported this ‘Key Initiative’ by: · Confirming that it plans to upgrade the intersection of Trugood and Cryers Roads · AMETI – Eastern Busway continues to progress and includes development of a transport hub at Botany. · The Airport – Botany project continues to progress and business case is expected by the end of 2018
Well designed and quality development in Howick	Continue to partner with Auckland Transport to develop the Half Moon Bay area as a transport hub	Auckland Transport has finished the bus turn around area at the ferry terminal. HLB are planning to fund the installation of tourist signage at the terminal.
Well designed and quality development in Howick	Continue to develop integrated planning solutions which co-ordinate the planning, design and management of public spaces	Auckland Transport is working with Auckland Council to develop the Howick Village Centre Plan. HLB has committed significant resources to detailed design work.
Parks and open spaces allow for a wide variety of recreational activities.	Continue to extend existing walkways and cycle ways, including informative signage.	Construction of a walking and cycling path that will provide access from Cascades Road to the Cascades Walkway has been authorised. Auckland Transport’s footpath budget includes a new footpath that will connect this pathway with Cascades Road.

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

Auckland Transport consultations

22. Over the last reporting period, Auckland Transport has invited the local board to provide their feedback on three proposals. Details are recorded with feedback received in Attachment A.

Traffic Control Committee resolutions

23. Traffic Control Committee (TCC) decisions from June 2018 are included in the following table.

Table 4: Traffic Control Committee Decisions June 2018

Street

Area

Work

Decision

Flat Bush School Road, Rashni Road, Riwai Street, Obelus Road, Piringa Street

Flat Bush

No Stopping At All Times, Give-Way Control, Road Hump

Approved in Principle

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

24. In this reporting period one project has required iwi liaison. The Cascades Walkway Project.

25. Auckland Transport has identified and contacted relevant iwi and will involve iwi in the design process if the HLB decides to continue with this project.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

26. The status of the Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF) is the most significant financial implication this month. The new projects being investigated may reduce it but there is still a significant amount of money in this fund. Approx. $3.1 million.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

27. The proposed decision to receive the report has no risks. Auckland Transport has risk management strategies in place for all of its projects.

28. The large amount of LBTCF (approx. $3.8 million) still unallocated is a risk. This large a sum of money is unlikely to be allocated in a considered manner within the short time until the next local body election. Previously, Auckland Transport has suggested that the HLB consider steps to mitigate the risk including consideration of a ‘freeze’ on use of the fund. This would allow Auckland Council and Auckland Transport to start planning for the next term in a measured manner based on firm figures. Providing for the development of high quality advice and to plan the logistics of delivering a considerably larger than planned work programme in the 2019-21 electoral term. At this time the HLB is trying and allocate the LBTCF.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

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

30. With regard to the risks and mitigation measures discussed in the ‘Ngā raru tūpono / Risks’ section of this report Auckland Transport will discuss this suggestion with the HLB and if it is supported will then draft a decision report.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Summary of Consultation Information Sent to the Howick Local Board in September/October 2018	19

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Ben Stallworthy- Elected Member Relationship Manager

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon- Elected Member Relationship Team Manager

Nina Siers - Relationship Manager

Howick Local Board

15 October 2018

Local Board Transport Capital Fund Decisions

File No.: CP2018/19070

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. The purpose of this report is to support and record decisions about Howick Local Board’s (HLB) Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF) projects.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. Auckland Transport manages the LBTCF on behalf of the HLB. On an as required basis, Auckland Transport reports on progress, provides advice and supports decision-making.

3. This month decisions relating to the LBTCF are required.

4. The decisions and options were workshopped on 27 September 2018 and this report records the options discussed and provides the opportunity for the HLB to formalise its decisions by resolution.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a) request that Auckland Transport provide a ‘Rough Order of Cost’ including other reasonable options for installing a tourist information plinth at Half Moon Bay.

b) request that Auckland Transport consider options for improving the ability for Botany Downs Secondary School pupils to cross Chapel Road and report back with options and ‘Rough Orders of Cost’.

c) request that Auckland Transport consider options for raising the height of the footpath in the section ‘The Parade’ roughly opposite Numbers 15-19, to improve pedestrian amenity and to help prevent inundation during storms and report back with options and ‘Rough Orders of Cost.

Horopaki / Context

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

· Be safe.

· Not impede network efficiency.

· Be in the road corridor (although projects running through parks may be considered if they support a transport outcome).

6. HLB’s LBTCF currently has approx. $5.8 million of which approx. $1.9 million is allocated to projects, including some still being used for construction of Half Moon Bay landside works and some that is allocated to projects that are not yet authorised for construction.

7. This leaves a considerable amount, approx. $3.1 million able to be allocated. See Table 1 (below) for detailed figures.

Table 1 – Howick Local Board Financial Summary

8. The large amount of LBTCF still unallocated creates a risk. If the HLB does wish to deliver projects in this electoral term time is running out. This risk has been reported to the HLB.

9. This report records the results of the workshop on 27 September 2018.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

10. Auckland Transport conducted a detailed planning workshop with the HLB on 27 September 2018. At that workshop, the MOLB and Auckland Transport officers discussed issues related to the LBTCF and assessed three potential new projects.

Half Moon Bay Information Plinth

11. The recent completion of the bus turn around at the Half Moon Bay Ferry Terminal has created a much more pleasant environment in the local area and opportunities to promote Howick to visitors.

12. The Tourism Howick has requested that an information sign be installed in the area and Auckland Transport has agreed but cannot pay for it. Tourism Howick has put together the information that it feels would be relevant.

13. On 27 September 2018, the HLB discussed the options for installing a sign at this location. Auckland Transport provided advice that the best way to achieve this objective would be to use a standard Auckland Transport information ‘plinth’. See Figure 1 below.

Figure 1: Auckland Transport Information Plinth

14. The HLB supported this proposal. It wishes to request a ‘rough order of cost’ from Auckland Transport for installation of a standard Auckland Transport information plinth. A draft recommendation is provided above.

Botany Downs Secondary School Crossing

15. The HLB discussed a project to improve pedestrian facilities near Botany Downs Secondary School. The school is located on Chapel Road, which is very busy. See Figure e (below). The students are required to cross at signalized a crossing identified by the red circle.

Figure 2: Botany Downs School

16. With a large number of students now attending the school this crossing point has become difficult to manage. The HLB is interested in understanding if there are cost effective options that could improve safety and the ability to manage crowds of schoolchildren in this area.

17. At this stage, Auckland Transport officers could not provide detailed options and recommended that the HLB request a ‘rough order of cost’. During this process, technical experts will consider the situation and identify options that the HLB can consider.

18. The HLB supported this proposal. It wishes to request a ‘rough order of cost’ from Auckland Transport for installation of a standard Auckland Transport information plinth.

Higher Footpaths on ‘The Parade’

19. The HLB is concerned about two issues on ‘The Parade’:

· The HLB wants to improve pedestrian amenity.

· It is also concerned to try to protect the houses between roughly Numbers 15 and 19 from inundation in stormy weather.

20. Figure 3 (below) shows the rough area of interest. The HLB is keen to investigate building up the height of the footpath to provide protection from inundation particularly when it is linked with Auckland Council’s plan to rebuild and extend the nearby seawall.

Figure 3: The Parade Area of Interest

21. Although Auckland Transport was not able to provide technical advice at the workshop, the project can be considered and the first step is requesting a ‘rough order of cost’. Auckland Transport will consider this request and engineers will assess the feasibility of the idea. With expert opinion and some options, the HLB can make a decision about whether or not they wish to allocate LBTCF money to design work.

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

22. The project discussed in this report were workshopped with the HLB on 27 September 2018 and their views are recorded above.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

23. The projects discussed are at an early stage and do not require iwi liaison yet. If the HLB decided to invest in more detailed design work then there may be a requirement for iwi liaison.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

24. The requests do not have a financial implication to the HLB. Auckland Transport will complete the work at its cost. If the HLB decides to progress to detailed design the HLB would be required to release LBTCF.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

25. There are no significant risks.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

26. If the recommendations are approved, Auckland Transport will immediately start work to fulfil the requests. Auckland Transport will report on progress monthly.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Ben Stallworthy – Elected Member Relationship Manager

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon- Elected Member Relationship Team Manager

Nina Siers - Relationship Manager

Howick Local Board

15 October 2018

Howick Walking & Cycling Network Plan

File No.: CP2018/18256

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To adopt the Howick Walking & Cycling Network (HWCN) plan and approve detailed design work to begin for five priority connections.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. The HWCN plan was developed in response to the Local Board Plan outcomes. Adoption of the plan will enable the delivery of the following Local Board Plan 2017 outcomes:

· Our future growth is managed effectively

· A treasured environment

· Our people are active and healthy.

3. The HWCN plan defines the long-term walking and cycling network for the Howick Local Board area (Attachment A).

4. The purpose of the document is to provide a range of walking and cycling connections that link people with places of interest. The plan provides connections for commuter and recreational purposes and seeks to link residential areas to travel hubs, town centres and parks. It also identifies opportunities to provide ecological and biodiversity outcomes through delivery of the plan.

5. Adoption of the HWCN will enable the Howick Local Board to identify funding opportunities to deliver priority connections over the coming years.

6. Should the board adopt the HWCN, it is recommended that $20,000 LDI capex funding is provided for Community Facilities Investigation & Design team to develop detailed designs for selected priority connections.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a) adopt the Howick Walking & Cycling Network Plan

b) approve $20,000 LDI capex for Community Facilities Investigation & Design team to provide detailed costs and designs for the following short-term priority connections:

i. Lloyd Elsmore Park

ii. Cascades Walkway

iii. Cascades to Burswood

iv. Elm Park to Riverhills Park

v. Ti Rakau Drive to Smales Road (Greenmount Drainage Reserve).

Horopaki / Context

7. The HWCN identifies walking and cycling connections for the Howick Local Board area.

8. The aim of the HWCN is to provide safe and pleasant walking and cycling connections while also improving local ecology and access to recreational opportunities.

9. To achieve this, the HWCN identifies connections through parks and street corridors. This network will link together areas of housing and employment, open spaces, town centres, recreational facilities, places of interest and transport hubs.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

1. The primary driver for developing the HWCN is to increase walking and cycling connections for recreation and commuter purposes. These connections provide for a range of different users within the walking and cycling network.

2. Local path - street: These high-use connections provide preferential use for cyclists and make use of a variety of street furniture to separate cyclists from motor vehicles. The pathways provide direct links to local and regional centres.

3. Local path – open space: These high-use connections provide for both cyclists and pedestrian users linking people with local centres, parks, transport links and schools.

4. Express path: Located on busy streets and off-road paths, express paths are major cycleways connecting people to main centres and form the base structure of the cycle network.

5. Trail path: Distinct from a Local Path in that it is found in rural or bush settings and is primarily for recreation. Many trails will connect to Local or Express Paths, but may also allow for horse riding alongside walking and cycling. A trail can also be a bush walk, which due to topography would not be shared by cyclists. Trails are not generally intended to form a connection between destinations, and often run in loops.

6. The HWCN identifies priority connections and high-level costs to deliver the pathways (Attachment A - HWCN section C, priority routes):

10. The costs to deliver the HWCN priority connections are based on:

· new pathway installation where none exist

· improvements to existing pathways – widen to 3m

· earthworks, where required

· resource consent fees

· ecological enhancements.

7. Priority routes and rough order of costs:

· Lloyd Elsmore Park:

1a) $715,000

1b) $640,000

· Cascades Walkway:

2a) $345,000

2b) $285,000

2c) $605,000

2d) $280,000

· Cascades to Burswood Drive:

o $770,000

· Macleans Park:

o $770,000

· Elm Park to Riverhills Park:

o $1.35m

· Ti Rakau Drive to Smales Road (Greenmount Drainage Reserve):

o $735,000

· Uxbridge Road (Howick Village to Howick Beach):

o Requires scoping and budget from AT

· Bucklands Beach (Little Bucks) to Half Moon Bay Marina:

o $100,000

· Panmure bridge to Pakuranga Town Centre (extension of Rotary Walkway)

o $650,000

· Pakuranga Road

o Requires scoping and budget from AT

· Smales Road

o Requires scoping and budget from AT

· Allens Road to Highbrook Drive

o Requires scoping and budget from AT

· Cryers Road

o Requires scoping and budget from AT

· Chapel Road

o Requires scoping and budget from AT

· Lloyd Elsmore to Half Moon Bay Ferry

o Where the route occurs on-road, scoping and budget estimating is required by AT at project phase

o Where the route occurs on parks - $325,000

8. The delivery of priority connections located entirely within parks is likely to be less complicated than those in the road corridor.

9. The following short-term development priorities have been identified on the basis of anticipated high-use connections through to key destinations:

· Lloyd Elsmore Park

· Cascades Walkway

· Cascades to Burswood

· Elm Park to Riverhills Park

· Ti Rakau Drive to Smales Road (Greenmount Drainage Reserve).

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

11. A ‘working party’ consisting of local board members and staff was established at the outset of the project to steer HWCN development.

12. Local board workshops were held in December 2017, February 2018 and May 2018, with board feedback captured during these sessions.

13. The HWCN was developed to meet the aspirations of the Howick Local Board and provide a mechanism for delivering the following Local Board Plan 2017 outcomes:

14. Our future growth is managed effectively: Increasing the network of safe walkways and cycleways in Howick, and encouraging their use as practical, healthy alternative modes of transport.

15. A treasured environment: The HWCN identifies opportunities to re-vegetate riparian ecological corridors. This will result in increased habitat for flora and fauna as well as providing a movement corridor for wildlife.

16. Our people are active and healthy: The HWCN plan provides a connected recreational network, allowing residents to move safely through and between their existing open spaces.

17. The network will provide positive health and wellbeing outcomes for all users. It also provides opportunities to meet and socialise with neighbours and increase the usage of existing recreational facilities in Howick.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

18. Parks and heritage is of fundamental importance to Tangata Whenua, their culture and traditions.

19. Delivery of the HWCN plan will benefit Māori by providing increased access to parks, sporting hubs, community centres and transport links. The plan also identifies opportunities for the protection and enhancement of taonga through ecological and water quality outcomes.

20. The activities identified in the report will impact mana whenua. Iwi will be engaged at a project level to assist in defining cultural requirements and park enhancements as priority connections are funded.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

21. The local board may choose to develop priority connections funded through LDI capex, Local Board Transport Capital Fund, renewals funding or in combination.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

22. The capital cost to deliver all fifteen priority routes identified in this report is prohibitive. Therefore, it is recommended that the local board supports the recommendations for Community Facilities to further investigate priority connections located in parks.

23. There is scope to deliver HWCN priority connections in the road corridor by aligning delivery with AT upgrade projects including the AMETI project in Ti Rakau and Pakuranga Road.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

24. It is recommended that $20,000 LDI capex funding is provided for Community Facilities Investigation & Design team to investigate delivery costs for the five priority connections outlined in this report.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Howick Walking & Cycling Network Plan (Under Separate Cover)

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Steve Owens - Parks and Places Specialist

Authorisers

Mace Ward - General Manager Parks, Sports and Recreation

Nina Siers - Relationship Manager

Howick Local Board

15 October 2018

Disposal recommendations report - 34 Moore Street, Howick

File No.: CP2018/05338

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. This report seeks the Howick Local Board’s formal position on the Panuku Development Auckland (Panuku) proposal to recommend to the Finance and Performance Committee the disposal of a council owned property in the Howick Local Board area.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. 34 Moore Street, Howick is a commercial property that Auckland Council has advised is not required to deliver a public work.

3. The rationalisation process for the property commenced in 2011. Following internal consultation and consultation with iwi authorities, the property was reported to the ACPL Board in February 2013. The ACPL Board approved that the property be recommended to the council for disposal. Although the Howick Local Board did not endorse the proposed disposal, the property was recommended to the council for disposal in July 2013 and again in April 2014. A decision on the proposed disposal was deferred in both cases, firstly for a heritage assessment to be completed and secondly for completion of the Howick Village Centre Plan. The heritage assessment and the Howick Village Centre Plan have both now been completed.

4. Council’s Heritage team advised that 34 Moore Street is not considered to be a heritage building and is unlikely to meet the criteria for scheduling in the Auckland Unitary Plan. An archaeological assessment reported that there are no recorded archaeological or other historic heritage sites located within 80 metres of the property.

5. The Howick Village Centre Plan, adopted by the local board in 2017, recognises the future development of 34 Moore Street as an opportunity to support and enhance the village atmosphere by offering improved connections, additional retail and residential, and well-integrated public spaces. A key action set out in the plan is for the local board to work with Panuku on the development of 34 Moore Street.

6. To capture the work undertaken since 2013, Panuku attended a local board workshop on 27 September 2018. Various options for the property, such as retaining the property for a public work use, have been investigated and were discussed at the workshop.

7. No current or future public work that is funded or can realistically be funded in the future has been identified by the council for the property through the rationalisation process.

8. Howick has been identified as a priority development location in the ‘Support’ category within the Panuku development programme. Given that no public work requirement has been identified by the council, Panuku assessed the development potential of 34 Moore Street and considers the property suitable for development for housing purposes in line with the council-approved Panuku Statement of Intent (SOI) development objectives.

9. Accordingly, Panuku recommends disposal of the property for development subject to appropriate controls to ensure strategic outcomes in line with the Howick Village Centre Plan and the Panuku SOI development objectives, specifically town centre regeneration and housing outcomes.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a) determine its formal position on Panuku Development Auckland’s recommendation to the Finance and Performance Committee to dispose of 34 Moore Street, Howick subject to appropriate controls to ensure strategic outcomes in line with the Howick Village Centre Plan and Panuku SOI development objectives. .

Horopaki / Context

10. Panuku is required to undertake ongoing review of council’s property assets. This includes identifying properties from within council’s portfolio that are no longer required for public work purposes and may be suitable for sale and development if appropriate. Panuku has a particular focus on achieving housing and urban regeneration outcomes. Identifying potential sale properties contributes to the Long-term Plan 2018-2028 (LTP) and the Auckland Plan focus of accommodating the significant growth projected for the region over the coming decades, by providing council with an efficient use of capital and prioritisation of funds to achieve its activities and projects.

11. Once a property has been identified as potentially no longer required for public work purposes, Panuku engages with council departments and its CCOs through an expression of interest process, to establish whether the property must be retained for a strategic purpose or is required for a future funded public work. Once a property has been internally cleared of any public work requirements, Panuku then consults with local boards, mana whenua and ward councillors. All sale recommendations must be approved by the Panuku Board before a final recommendation is made to the Finance and Performance Committee. The Finance and Performance Committee makes the final decision whether to approve a property for sale.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

Property Information

12. 34 Moore Street is a vacant commercial property located on a 3754m² site. The property was acquired in the 1970’s for the purpose of accommodating the former Howick Borough Council offices. In 1995 the property was no longer required for this purpose and was leased out on a commercial basis.

13. NZ Police vacated the main building in mid-2012, continuing with a ground lease for the rear part of the property to accommodate the Howick community constable. The property was subsequently used as decant space while the refurbishment of Uxbridge Arts Centre was occurring. It has been vacant since 2016 and would require extensive refurbishment for a new tenant.

14. The Auckland Unitary Plan zoning is Business – Mixed Use. The property has a 2017 capital valuation of $4.67 million.

15. 34 Moore Street is not subject to offer back obligations to the former owner in accordance with section 40 of the Public Works Act 1981.

Internal Consultation

16. Internal consultation with council business units and CCOs for this site commenced in 2011 and has been revisited in 2013, 2017 and 2018. No alternative public work uses have been identified.

17. Council’s Heritage team advised that 34 Moore Street is not considered to be a heritage building and is unlikely to meet the criteria for scheduling in the Auckland Unitary Plan. An archaeological assessment reported that there are no recorded archaeological or other historic heritage sites located within 80 metres of the property.

18. Council’s Community Leasing team advised there is no requirement for the property in its leasing portfolio. The Community Leasing team undertook an expression of interest process for potential community use of 34 Moore Street in March 2017. No expressions of interest were received from the community as part of that process.

19. Councils’ Community Places team advised there is no requirement for 34 Moore Street for casual bookable space. The 2017 Howick Information Centre Review and Community Needs Assessment Report explored the requirements for and availability of casual and permanent community space in the Howick (and slightly wider) area. The report included a key finding that there is not a shortage of community facilities in the Howick area for community groups seeking casual (including regular) bookings. Other community spaces in the Howick area are operating well below capacity.

20. In 2018, at the request of the Howick Local Board, council’s Corporate Property team assessed the suitability of 34 Moore Street as a local board office and concluded that due to its size, configuration and extensive fit out costs the property is not a viable option for a local board office.

21. Panuku has identified Howick as being a “Support” development category within its development programme. Given that no public work requirement has been identified by the council for 34 Moore Street, Panuku assessed the development potential of the property and considers it suitable for development for housing purposes in line with council-approved Panuku SOI development objectives.

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

22. The Howick Local Board resolved in June 2013 to oppose the disposal of 34 Moore Street on the basis that it views the property as being of strategic importance to the Howick Village and considers that the property should be held for an as yet unidentified strategic purpose or used for a community service use.

23. In 2013 the local board submitted a business case to support retention of the property. An assessment by the Portfolio Review Steering Group (PRSG) declined the business case, advising it lacked sufficient financial analysis and evidence-based rationale to support retention of the property. A further PRSG review of the business case confirmed the conclusion of the previous assessment.

24. In 2014, at the request of the Howick Local Board, the Finance and Performance Committee agreed to defer its decision on the property pending completion of the Howick Village Centre Plan in order to identify the highest and best future use of the property.

25. The Howick Village Centre Plan was adopted by the local board in June 2017. The plan describes 34 Moore Street as a key site in a strategic location, the future development of which presents an opportunity to support and enhance the village atmosphere by offering improved connections, additional retail and residential, and well-integrated public spaces. A key action set out in the plan is for the local board to work with Panuku on the development of 34 Moore Street.

26. To capture the work undertaken since 2013, Panuku attended a local board workshop on 27 September 2018. Various options for the property, such as retaining the property for a public work use, have been investigated and were discussed. Previous advice from council business units was reiterated; the property is not required by the council for a current or future public work that is funded or can realistically be funded in the future.

27. At the workshop, Panuku set out the reasons the property is considered suitable for development and would be recommended to the council for disposal for this purpose. If approved for disposal, development of the property would be controlled by a development agreement, ensuring high quality design and outcomes in line with the Howick Village Centre Plan and Panuku SOI development objectives. Local board members requested involvement in any urban design brief. Panuku agreed that constructive input from the local board into a design brief could be accommodated.

28. Although consistent advice from council business units is that the property is not required for a public work, local board members provided feedback that they consider there is a need for community space at this property. Panuku advised that if the local board secures funding for a community space, consideration can be given to how this could be incorporated in a new development.

29. This report provides the local board with an opportunity to formalise its views regarding the property.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

30. Eleven iwi authorities were contacted regarding the potential sale of 34 Moore Street, Howick. The following feedback was received.

a) Ngāti Whatua Orakei

Ngāti Whatua Orakei advised there are no cultural significance issues regarding the property and registered a commercial interest. If approved for disposal, Panuku will follow up with Ngāti Whatua Orakei on potential commercial opportunities.

b) Te Kawerau a Maki

Te Kawerau a Maki advised the property has general cultural relevance to their iwi and registered a commercial interest. Following receipt of the advice, council’s Maori Strategy and Relations team agreed to work directly with Te Kawerau a Maki regarding property disposals. No further advice is on record, so Panuku will follow up with Te Kawerau a Maki again if this property is approved for disposal.

c) Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki

No feedback was received regarding the subject property.

d) Ngāti Tamaoho

Ngāti Tamaoho advised it has no site specific feedback regarding the subject property.

e) Te Akitai – Waiohua

No feedback was received regarding the subject property.

f) Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua

Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua did not provide site specific feedback but did request clarification regarding council processes/policies regarding the disposal of council-owned land, as opposed to the treaty settlement process for crown-owned land. A response was provided advising that council-owned property is not subject to right of first refusal provisions in accordance with treaty settlements. No further advice is on record, so Panuku will follow up with Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua again if this property is approved for disposal.

g) Ngāti Paoa

Ngāti Paoa advised there are no cultural significance issues regarding the property and registered a potential commercial interest. If approved for disposal, Panuku will follow up with Ngāti Paoa on potential commercial opportunities.

h) Ngaati Whanaunga

No feedback was received regarding the subject property.

i) Ngāti Maru

No feedback was received regarding the subject property.

j) Ngāti Tamatera

No feedback was received regarding the subject property.

k) Patukirikiri

No feedback was received regarding the subject property.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

31. Capital receipts from the sale of surplus properties contribute to Auckland Plan outcomes and the LTP by providing the council with an efficient use of capital and prioritisation of funds to achieve its activities and projects. In the 2018/2019 financial year, the LTP has forecast the disposal of non-strategic council assets to the combined value of $24 million.

32. In accordance with the Local Government Act 2002, the annual Panuku SOI states the activities and intentions of Panuku, the objectives those activities will contribute to and performance measures and targets as the basis of organisational accountability. For the 2018/2019 financial year Panuku is required to recommend to the council properties from within council’s portfolio that may be suitable for sale to a combined value of $30 million and to sell $24 million of property by 30 June 2019.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

33. 34 Moore Street is not required by the council for a current or future public work requirement that is funded or can realistically be funded in the future. To retain a non-service property for an undefined purpose is contrary to the council’s Revenue and Funding Policy principles and would require support from the Finance and Performance Committee given the impact of not realising the sale of a non-service property, and to allocate the operational budget required to hold the property.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

34. Should the Finance and Performance Committee approve the proposed disposal of 34 Moore Street, Panuku will explore disposal options to ensure outcomes in line with the Howick Village Centre Plan and the Panuku SOI development objectives, specifically town centre regeneration and housing outcomes.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Images of 34 Moore Street, Howick	39

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Anthony Lewis - Senior Advisor, Portfolio Review, Panuku Development Auckland

Authorisers

Rachel Hume - Team Leader Portfolio Review, Panuku Development Auckland

Nina Siers - Relationship Manager

Howick Local Board

15 October 2018

Locally Driven Initiatives (LDI) Capex Funding- Project Delivery Programme

File No.: CP2018/19184

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To approve a total funding allocation of $148,860 from the 2018/2019 LDI capex budget for the delivery of the following three projects:

· Enhancements to the Lloyd Elsmore Park Spashpad facility - $88,460

· Additional traffic bollards on Marine Parade - $44,400

· Two additional pieces of exercise equipment at Macleans Park - $16,000.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. An LDI project programme is being developed to assist the Board with identifying and delivering a variety of projects in Howick.

3. Three projects that have emerged from the programme were discussed with the Board at the Community Facilities Workshop on 20 September 2018.

4. These projects now require approval to proceed:

· Enhancements to the Lloyd Elsmore Park Splashpad have been suggested by users and staff at the facility. The enhancements include artificial turf for better underfoot conditions, seating, shade cover, tree planting and concrete footpath extensions. The majority of the cost for these additions can be met from the original contract budget, and work is already underway on the seating and shade cover. However there is a shortfall of $88,460 for artificial turf, tree planting and footpaths. It is proposed to fund these works from the LDI capex budget.

· Additional traffic bollards on Marine Parade have been requested by Board members on the first 332 metres of the seaward side of the road that is currently open and subject to damage by vehicles. The total costs of these bollards is $44,400. If this project is approved by the Board it is suggested that there is consultation with affected local residents, some of whom may regard bollards as a visual detraction and/or restrict their off-street parking.

· Two additional pieces of exercise equipment, specifically aimed at upper body strength, have been requested by users of the fitness facilty on Macleans Park. This additional equipment will complement the lower body gym equipment already in place on the park. The total cost of the additional equipment is $16,000.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a) approve the allocation of $88,460 from the 2018/2019 LDI capex budget for artificial turf, tree planting and footpaths to complete the enhancement of the Lloyd Elsmore Park Splashpad.

b) approve the allocation $44,400 from the 2018/2019 LDI capex budget for additional traffic bollards on Marine Parade subject to a consultation exercise with local residents.

c) approve the allocation of $16,000 from the 2018/2019 LDI capex budget for the installation of two additional pieces of upper body exercise equipment at Macleans Park.

Horopaki / Context

5. The LDI capex fund was established to ensure that locally important improvement projects can be delivered in the community.

6. The LDI capex fund can be used to fund projects that are delivered by either Auckland Council or the community.

7. An LDI project programme is being developed to assist the Board with identifying and delivering projects in Howick.

8. The project programme will prepare the scope, preliminary and detailed designs and costs for approval by the Howick Local Board.

9. The three projects discussed in this report are the first to emerge on the programme and are ready to proceed to the delivery stage.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

Lloyd Elsmore Park Splashpad Enhancements

10. The Lloyd Elsmore Park Splashpad is due to re-open in early November 2018 with an improved surface and enhancements requested by users and leisure centre staff.

11. The enhancements include hard-wearing artificial turf for better underfoot conditions, seating areas, sun shade cover, tree planting and concrete footpath extensions. These additions will improve the appearance and functionality of the facility.

12. Undertaking the enhancements aligns with the following Howick Local Board Outcomes:

· Outcome 1: Involved and connected communities

· Outcome 5: Our people are active and healthy.

13. The total cost of these enhancements is $245,960. There is, however, $157,500 left in the original Splashpad construction contract, leaving a shortfall of $88,460 to be funded from LDI capex.

14. In the interests of expediency in meeting the facility opening deadline, the work programme has been adjusted so that elements with a longer lead-in time, and that can be achieved within the existing $157,500 budget, have commenced. Those tasks that require a shorter lead-in time will commence when the additional LDI funding is available.

15. The most significant additional cost is $60,676 for the artificial turf areas. These costs have been separated out into earthworks, base construction, laying the turf and finished edging. These rates have been reviewed by the Quantity Surveyor Team who have confirmed that the individual rates provided are all reasonable with the excavation rate being lower than recently tendered rates for similar work.

16. Construction details and costings are attached for the Splashpad. (See Attachments A & B)

17. The Board have the option of not proceeding with the works at this time but to defer work to the next closed season. This is likely to result in higher costs because the of the contractors re-establishment costs on site. It would also give the Splashpad facility an unfinished feel for the upcoming summer.

18. The Board also have the option of not proceeding with the works at all. This would mean that access around the Splashpad remains less than ideal and that the new seating and shade cover may not fully utilised.

Additional Traffic Bollards on Marine Parade

19. The location for proposed additional traffic bollards on Marine Parade is shown on the attached plan with photos. (See Attachment C)

20. 332 metres of the seaward open space along Marine Parade is currently unprotected. Restricting vehicles from these areas will reduce damage to the grass areas, improve amenity values and contribute to public safety.

21. Installation of additional bollards aligns with the following Howick Local Board Outcomes:

· Outcome 1: Involved and connected communities

· Outcome 4: A treasured environment.

22. The total cost of additional bollards along the entire 332m is $44,400 but the Board has the option to treat just the first narrow section of Marine Parade (172m) for a cost of $23,000 or treat just the open section of Marine Parade (160m) for a cost of $21,500.

23. A public consultation exercise on these options will help inform the Board on the best way forward. Public consultation with local residents is recommended because bollards may be regarded as a visual distraction and/or they may restrict off-street parking options for some adjacent properties.

Additional Exercise Equipment at Macleans Park

24. Two additional pieces of exercise equipment, specifically aimed at upper body strength, have been requested by users of the fitness facility on Macleans Park. This additional equipment will complement the lower body gym equipment already in place on the park. The total cost of the additional equipment is $16,000.

25. Installing additional exercise equipment at Macleans Park aligns with the following Howick Local Board Plan Outcome:

· Outcome 5: Our people are active and healthy.

26. The proposed equipment and costs are attached. (See Attachments D & E).

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

27. These projects have been discussed with the Local Board at workshop sessions most recently on 20 September 2018.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

28. No consultation with Maori has been undertaken regarding these projects.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

29. There is sufficient budget available in the Howick Local Board LDI capex fund to meet these costs.

30. In accordance with the LDI capex framework and criteria document, the consequential opex resulting from projects funded from the LDI capex fund will met by the department responsible for delivering the asset-based service.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

31. The risk of not proceeding with the enhancements to the Lloyd Elsmore Park Splashpad is that the facility will not be complete when re-opened, or that re-opening will have to be delayed. This has the potential to create negative publicity.

32. The risk of not proceeding with the bollards at Marine Parade is continuing damage to the grass area and potential safety issues associated with vehicles leaving the road. However, the public consultation exercise will determine how local residents view the advantages or disadvantages of vehicle bollards along all or part of Marine Parade.

33. The risk of not proceeding with the additional exercise equipment at Macleans Park is not meeting expectations of the users in not providing options for a full-body work out.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

34. The Lloyd Elsmore Park Splashpad enhancements have full detailed drawings and have been fully costed and work is ready to proceed.

35. The additional bollards along Marine Parade have been surveyed and costed and work is ready to proceed subject to public consultation.

36. The additional exercise equipment at Macleans Park has been costed and installation can be instructed through a works order to contractors.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	LEP Splashpad Construction Drawing	45
b ⇩	LEP Splashpad Costings	47
c ⇩	Marine Parade Bollards Plan and Photos	49
d ⇩	Macleans Park Additional Equipment	53
e ⇩	Macleans Park Equipment Costings	55

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Johan Ferreira – Manager Project Delivery

Authorisers

Rod Sheridan – General Manager Community Facilities

Nina Siers - Relationship Manager

Howick Local Board

15 October 2018

Draft Facility Partnership Policy

File No.: CP2018/18174

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To seek local boards’ views on the draft Facility Partnerships Policy.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. A ‘facility partnership’ is where Auckland Council invests in a community facility alongside others. Done well, partnerships can enable and empower our communities, and help us provide more of the quality facilities Auckland needs, faster and more cost-effectively.

3. The council intends to meet more facility needs through partnerships in future, and a new regional policy (refer Attachment B) has been developed to guide their selection and support.

4. Key policy positions outlined in the draft Facility Partnerships Policy and summarised in Attachment A include:

· a focus on shared outcomes

· partnerships that recognise, value and honour Te Ao Māori

· multiple partnership models, with fit-for-purpose arrangements

· ‘Proactive’ and ‘Responsive’ partnership tracks

· principles to shape eligibility and investment priorities

· valuing (and costing) in-kind support

· a stronger focus on the partnership relationship

· greater acknowledgement of the complexity of developing/managing assets.

5. During policy development, staff engaged with Māori to explore specific opportunities and barriers for facility partnerships with Māori. The findings from this engagement (refer Attachment C) have shaped a commitment in the draft policy to partner in ways that align with the Treaty Principles, and acknowledge the distinct characteristics of marae.

6. The draft policy was endorsed by the Environment and Community Committee in June 2018 for public consultation and formal engagement with local boards. The consultation activities carried out and the community feedback received are summarised in Attachment D. Public feedback was highly supportive of the draft policy overall.

7. Staff attended local board workshops on the draft policy during July and August. This report invites local boards to formally indicate their support for the proposed approach, and/or provide any additional feedback on the policy they would like the committee to consider.

8. A summary of all feedback and a final policy will be tabled for consideration and adoption by the Environment and Community Committee in November 2018.

9. Implementation of the new approach is expected to begin during the 2019/20 financial year.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a) support the adoption of the Draft Facility Partnerships Policy, and provide any additional feedback on the proposed approach for the Environment and Community Committee’s consideration.

Horopaki / Context

10. Auckland Council is a major provider of community, arts and sports facilities, but not the only provider. A ‘facility partnership’ is where the council invests in a community facility alongside others. Done well, partnerships can enable and empower communities, and help the council to provide more of the quality facilities Auckland needs, faster and more cost-effectively.

11. There are already around 300 of these arrangements in Auckland, and the council has signalled more facility needs will be met through partnerships in future. There is currently no regional policy to guide the selection and support of facility partnerships.

12. In 2016, a cross-council team began work on a new regional policy. The team met with a number of partners and experts to understand existing practice and how policy could improve decision-making in the partnering experience.

13. Findings from discovery work were shared in December 2016 at walk-throughs with elected members, staff and participating partners, and reported to the Environment and Community committee in February 2017 (resolution number ENV/2017/9).

14. A new approach was developed and tested at walk-throughs in February 2018. The committee endorsed the draft policy for public consultation and formal engagement with local boards in June 2018 (resolution number ENV/2018/74).

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

Facility partnerships benefit the council and the community

15. Auckland Council supports facility partnerships because they can:

· leverage external investment and community effort

· empower communities, and help us respond to Auckland’s increasing diversity

· optimise the existing facility network and reduce the need for new facilities.

Facility partnership selection and management is ad-hoc and inconsistent

16. Discovery work in 2016 and into 2017 identified a range of issues that are preventing the council from realising the full potential of facility partnerships.

17. Currently, facility partnership decisions are made on an ad-hoc basis. Often the lifetime costs and benefits of the partnership have not been fully considered, or how these relate to network gaps and evolving community needs.

18. Investment opportunities and selection decisions lack transparency, and our management processes tend to be uncoordinated and inconsistent. Many partners report that they feel under-prepared and insufficiently supported by council to deliver successfully.

Proposed policy provides strategic approach with tailored process

19. Staff have developed a new policy (refer Attachment B) to respond directly to these findings.

20. This will enable the council and partners to make more informed and strategic investment decisions. Advice will be based on clearer evidence of need and impact and comprehensive costings and will emphasise viability and sustainability.

21. The new approach introduces a more transparent and contestable selection process. Requirements will be tailored to reflect the scale, complexity and risk of each proposal. The policy recognises the importance of quality relationships, and the need to better coordinate staff expertise and support to improve partners’ experience and build capability.

22. The draft policy proposes:

· a focus on shared outcomes

· partnerships that recognise, value and honour Te Ao Māori

· multiple partnership models, with fit-for-purpose arrangements

· ‘Proactive’ and ‘Responsive’ partnership tracks

· principles to shape eligibility and investment priorities

· valuing (and costing) in-kind support

· a stronger focus on the partnership relationship

· greater acknowledgement of the complexity of developing/managing assets.

23. A summary of key policy positions relating to these themes is provided as Attachment A.

Public engagement held during July and August 2018

24. Staff undertook public consultation and briefed interested advisory panels between June and August 2018. Public consultation activities included six drop-in consultation events across Auckland, and online submissions via the council’s ‘Have Your Say’ website.

25. Public feedback was highly supportive of the draft policy overall. Those providing feedback generally saw the value of having a policy for this activity, and were positive about its intent. Responses to questions about specific aspects of the policy were also strongly affirmative.

Public feedback shows strong support for new approach

26. Key themes that emerged from the public consultation are:

· most respondents agree the new approach will better enable council to invest in the right facility partnerships, and ensure that partnerships work for both partners and council.

· the investment principles, the proposal to enable appropriate commercial activities in facilities, and the establishment of Lead Relationship Brokers were all positively received by the majority of respondents.

· the ‘Track, Type and Scale’ model was also welcomed for encompassing a wide range of facility partnerships, and the intention to ensure requirements are proportionate.

· respondents hope the new approach will make it easier for partners to navigate the multiple council systems and processes involved, and get good support from staff.

· using the Treaty principles to guide partnerships with Māori was welcomed by most, but this was acknowledged as a complex area.

· respondents appreciated a more visually appealing document that is easier to navigate.

Most public concerns relate to application of policy

27. Concerns identified included:

· how the investment principles will be applied in practice, especially where they must be ‘traded off’ against each other

· whether some communities will be unfairly advantaged by the new approach

· whether the higher level of staff support will be properly resourced, and implemented as intended across all parts of council

· whether the process is flexible enough to respond to the ‘messy reality’ of partnerships.

28. A full summary of the public consultation activities to date and a more in-depth description of key feedback themes is provided as Attachment D for local board consideration.

29. Key national and regional stakeholders will also be briefed prior to the draft being finalised.

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

30. Local boards have a strong interest in facility partnerships and some decision-making responsibility in this area, including:

· determining local outcomes and advocating for local investment priorities

· governing local and sub-regional facility partnership relationships and agreements

· allocating local discretionary funding and community leases of council property.

31. Staff have engaged with local boards informally at various stages throughout the discovery work and subsequent policy development. Local board member views and concerns have helped shape the draft policy.

32. During July and August 2018, local boards were offered a workshop to hear an overview of the proposed policy approach and seek clarification on any areas of local interest or concern. Eighteen local boards requested a workshop.

Formal local board feedback sought September and October 2018

33. Community feedback has now been summarised for local boards’ consideration. Staff are seeking to understand local boards’ views on the new approach, and requesting a formal indication of support at local board business meetings during September and October 2018.

34. Staff would particularly value local board feedback on the following parts of the draft policy (refer Attachment B), which are likely to have the most bearing on local board decision-making:

· the Tracks, Types and Scales model (p.16-23) to differentiate partnerships and customise the partnership process

· the draft investment principles (p.26) and priorities (p.33)

· proposed eligibility criteria for investment (p.27-30)

· the proposal to allow facility partnerships to generate revenue through appropriate commercial activities (p.31)

· the focus on quality relationships, as outlined in the proposed partnering principles (p.35) and supported by allocation of a lead relationship broker (p.38).

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

35. Marae are a focal point for Māori social, economic, environmental and cultural development, and are identified in the Community Facilities Network Plan as potential facility partners.

Engagement to better understand facility partnerships and Te Ao Māori

36. In 2017, staff undertook additional engagement with Māori, with a focus on marae, to ensure that the new policy incorporates any special context, barriers or opportunities for facility partnerships with Māori. A summary of the findings is provided as Attachment C.

37. The draft policy reflects these findings and commits the council to partnering with Māori in ways which align with the Treaty Principles and reflect the distinct characteristics of marae.

38. The draft policy approach and the findings report will be shared at hui with interested marae during September, as part of initial discussions on a new Marae Investment Policy.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

39. The Facility Partnerships Policy is not supported by a dedicated budget. Future investment in facility partnerships will be provided through existing budgets for facility development and operation, allocated through the Long-term Plan 2018-2028 and Annual Plan. Local boards may also award grants and community leases of council property to support facility partnerships.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

Risk	Mitigation
Adoption of a new policy may create expectations that there will be additional budget to support facility partnerships.	All public-facing communications and guidance about the new policy will reference the funding available from existing regional and local budgets and how this will be allocated.
Existing facility partners may be concerned that the new policy will impact arrangements already in place, or ongoing council investment.	The new policy will guide decisions on new facility partnerships only, unless an existing partnership is already scheduled for review, and guidance will clearly state this. Where existing partnerships are to be reviewed, staff will ensure partners are adequately supported to prepare.
The transition to the new policy approach will be operationally complex. It impacts multiple teams across the council, and new business processes, guidance and forms will need to be designed to support it.	Detailed implementation planning will be required to ensure the transition is as smooth as possible. Phased implementation over the first financial year (2019/20) may be necessary to achieve this.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

40. A summary of all feedback and a final policy will be tabled for consideration and adoption by the Environment and Community Committee in November 2018.

41. Implementation of the new approach is expected to begin during the 2019/20 financial year.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Facility Partnerships Policy - summary of key policy positions	63
b ⇩	Draft Facility Partnerships Policy	65
c ⇩	Facility partnerships with Māori - Summary report	109
d ⇩	Draft Facility Partnerships Policy - Public feedback summary report	137

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Rebekah Forman - Principal Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Kataraina Maki - GM - Community & Social Policy

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Nina Siers - Relationship Manager

Howick Local Board

15 October 2018

Review of the Code of Conduct

File No.: CP2018/18845

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To seek local board feedback on the draft Code of Conduct.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. The council’s initial Code of Conduct was prepared by the Auckland Transition Agency prior to Auckland Council commencing. It was last reviewed in 2013. The Code of Conduct has worked well but there have been a number of issues identified. The Governing Body agreed that the Code of Conduct be reviewed through the Joint Governance Working Party. Presentations were made to local board cluster meetings earlier this year.

3. Based on feedback to date, an amended Code of Conduct has been drafted and the Joint Governance Working Party has approved it to be reported to local boards for feedback. The proposals contained in the draft Code of Conduct address the issues that were identified.

4. A comparison of the draft Code of Conduct with the current Code of Conduct can be summarised as follows:

· The draft Code of Conduct itself is more concise

· Material breaches are defined

· There are separate complaint processes depending on whether a complaint relates to a non-material breach, a material breach or conflict of interest

· The current independent review panel is replaced by a Conduct Commissioner, who can impose sanctions

· Findings of the Conduct Commissioner (for material breaches) will be made public to assist compliance with sanctions imposed by the Conduct Commissioner

· There is no political involvement in determining a complaint or imposing sanctions

· Related documents are bundled in with the draft Code of Conduct and key policies and protocols and adopted with the draft Code of Conduct:

o Conflict of interest policy

o Access to information protocol

o Election year policy

o Communications policy

o Media protocols

5. Local board feedback is being sought on the draft Code of Conduct.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a) provide its feedback on the draft Code of Conduct attached to this report.

Horopaki / Context

What is the Code of Conduct

6. A code of conduct (code) essentially sets out a council’s expectations about how members will conduct themselves. Every council is required to adopt a code of conduct (Local Government Act 2002, schedule 7, clause 15). It must set out:

“(a) understandings and expectations adopted by the local authority about the manner in which members may conduct themselves while acting in their capacity as members, including—

(i) behaviour toward one another, staff, and the public; and

(ii) disclosure of information, including (but not limited to) the provision of any document, to elected members that—

(A) is received by, or is in the possession of, an elected member in his or her capacity as an elected member; and

(B) relates to the ability of the local authority to give effect to any provision of this Act; and

(b) a general explanation of—

(i) the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987; and

(ii) any other enactment or rule of law applicable to members.”

7. Once adopted, a code of conduct requires a 75% majority to change it.

8. Members of local boards must comply with the code of conduct that is adopted by the governing body (Local Government Act 2002, schedule 7, clause 36B).

Reasons for reviewing the Code of Conduct

9. In working with the current code, the council has experienced a number of issues:

· It is not easy to follow. It includes principles, descriptions of roles and responsibilities and statements about relationships and behaviours. However, a complaint about a breach can only relate to the section on relationships and behaviours.

· Although a positive aspect of the current code is a focus, initially, on resolving complaints to the satisfaction of the complainant, it is not appropriate for an allegation about a conflict of interest to be resolved to the satisfaction of the complainant – conflict of interest allegations need to be tested against the law.

· The code does not distinguish between non-material and material breaches. All allegations of breaches are treated the same.

· The final point of escalation of a complaint is to the independent review panel which comprises three members. This process is valuable but is underused because it can be expensive with three members being required.

· There needs to be a requirement that a complainant has tried to resolve their complaint prior to submitting it to the formal complaint process in the code.

· The code is underused because it is seen to “lack teeth”. There needs to be a review of available sanctions.

10. PWC were commissioned to review the current code and the Governing Body agreed at its February 2018 meeting that the current code should be reviewed. The Joint Governance Working Party is overseeing the development of the code.

Engagement to date

11. Staff made presentations to local board cluster meetings and a Governing Body workshop earlier this year. Among the issues discussed, was whether a revised code should be concise and principles-based or prescriptive.

12. The approach to the draft code was discussed with the Joint Governance Working Party, whose guidance included that there should be no political involvement in the determination of complaints and the imposition of sanctions.

13. A draft was presented to the Joint Governance Working Party on 12 September which the working party approved for reporting to local boards for their feedback.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

The draft code

14. The draft code is at attachment A.

15. The draft code is presented as two documents:

(i) The code itself contains:

a. principles

b. descriptions of material breaches

c. the complaints process.

(ii) The second document contains attachments which provide more detail:

a. Policies and protocols which are adopted along with the code and are an intrinsic part of the code. Elected members must abide by the conduct set out in these documents.

b. Description of applicable legislation which the Local Government Act requires all codes to contain

c. Documents which are described as “external” in the sense that they are agreed outside the code but are relevant to the conduct of members. An example is the Expenses Policy which is agreed by the Finance and Performance Committee and approved by the Remuneration Authority. It is useful to have these documents included for easy reference and to provide context to some aspects of the code.

16. The code describes two key principles – trust and respect. The principle of trust captures the expectations of the community in their elected representatives. The community trusts that members will act in the interest of the community and not their own interest, for example. This principle encompasses the ethical dimension of conduct.

17. The principle of respect captures the expectations members have of each other in terms of their conduct towards each other and towards the public.

18. The principles are written in a style which indicates personal commitment (“I will…”).

The complaints process

19. The draft code contains definitions of “material breaches”. This defines what the bottom line is and at what point a breach needs to be treated more seriously than other breaches. A complaint which relates to a material breach is treated differently to a complaint which relates to a non-material breach.

20. A complaint is lodged with the chief executive. A complaint must set out what part of the code has been breached, must provide evidence of the breach and evidence of attempts to resolve the breach. (Where the code refers to chief executive this includes a nominee of the chief executive.)

21. If the complaint relates to a conflict of interest, the chief executive will arrange for the member to receive advice from either Legal Services or Audit and Risk. The complainant has no further role. If the member does not comply with advice, the matter becomes a material breach for investigation by the Conduct Commissioner.

22. In other cases, the chief executive refers the complaint to an “Investigator”. An Investigator is appointed by the chief executive and may be a staff member or external person.

23. The Investigator conducts a preliminary assessment of the complaint and has the discretion to dismiss the complaint if it is frivolous or vexatious or without substance.

24. If the complaint relates to a non-material breach, the Investigator may make non-binding recommendations, including a recommendation to apologise or undertake voluntary mediation.

25. If the complaint relates to a material breach, it is referred to a “Conduct Commissioner”. A Conduct Commissioner is a person of the calibre of a retired High Court judge and is selected from a list of such persons which has been approved by the Governing Body.

26. The Conduct Commissioner may direct mediation or conduct an investigation which may include a hearing.

Sanctions

27. The Conduct Commissioner has the power to impose sanctions, including a requirement to apologise, withdraw remarks or make a public statement. The report of the Conduct Commissioner is formal and made public, to promote compliance with the sanctions imposed by the Conduct Commissioner.

28. The Conduct Commissioner replaces the current independent review panel, which is not used frequently due to the cost associated with it having three members.

29. Staff had been asked to investigate whether there could be financial sanctions. The Remuneration Authority was asked whether it would agree to a reduction of salary paid to a member who breached the Code. The reply included:

The Authority is often asked whether the performance of an individual or individuals is considered when making a determination. Performance does not feature in the list of criteria that the Authority is required to take into account. Therefore, it has no mandate to consider performance.

Section 14 (implementation of determinations) of the Remuneration Authority Act 1977 says that every determination issued by the Authority must be implemented according to their tenor and it is unlawful to act contrary to a determination. This prevents a council from making deductions from an elected member’s salary.

Attachments to the code

30. The attachments include:

· Policies and protocols that are adopted along with the code:

o Conflict of interest policy

o Access to information protocol

o Election year policy

o Communications policy

o Media protocols

· A description of legislation that is required by the Local Government Act 2002.

· Documents that are external to the code but are included because they are relevant to conduct:

o Guide to governance roles and responsibilities

o Guide to working with staff

o Expenses policy

31. The attached policies include the conflict of interest policy which has been rewritten and a new “Access to information protocol.” All other documents attached to the code are from existing sources and are not new.

Conflict of interest policy

32. The Conflict of Interest Policy has been updated to reflect the current legal position relating to conflicts of interest and pre-determination, as the current policy is out of date.

33. It remedies a current inconsistency between the treatment of financial and non-financial interests (being automatically disqualified from decision-making for a financial interest, but not for a non-financial interest).

34. It includes a new section on pre-determination, which is a separate legal concept to conflicts of interest.

35. It places stronger emphasis on the interests of the council in the probity and integrity of its decisions, as the consequences of failing to manage are more commonly borne by the council.

36. It is intended to be more user-friendly and accessible.

New protocol included – Elected Member Access to Information

37. Included in the policies and protocols attached to the Code of Conduct is a new ‘Access to information protocol’. This protocol puts a framework around elected members legal right to council information under the ‘need to know’ principle. This protocol is in addition to the existing ways that elected members can gain access to information. It is aimed at addressing circumstances where there has been lack of clarity over requests for information where it is not clear if it is or is not confidential.

The need to know principle for elected members

38. In addition to rights under LGOIMA, elected members have a legal right to council information under the “need to know” principle established by the common law. Under this principle, a good reason to access council information exists if an elected member shows that access to the information is reasonably necessary to enable them to perform their statutory functions as a member of the council. In some limited cases elected members may also be able establish a “need to know” council information relevant to their representative duties.

Why we are proposing a protocol

39. The purposes of the draft protocol are to:

· Give effect to the legal ‘need to know’ principle.

· Enable elected members to properly perform their statutory functions as democratically elected local decision-makers; and to facilitate them in fulfilling their representative duties. This promotes democratic and effective local government.

· Provide elected members with better and more efficient access to council information than is provided for LGOIMA, by reducing the number of withholding grounds that can apply to the information and the timeframes for response.

· Provide for transparent and impartial Chief Executive decisions on requests under this protocol, and a democratic mechanism for the reconsideration of such decisions.

· To provide that confidential council information will be made available to elected members in a manner that reflects the council’s legal duty to protect the confidentiality of the information and does not prejudice the interests protected by LGOIMA.

40. We have agreed with the Chief Ombudsman that we will develop a protocol to better manage elected member access to information.

41. Because this is the first time that council is adopting such a protocol, staff are suggesting that it is revisited and reviewed within 18 months of its adoption to ensure that it is working effectively, best enabling elected members to properly perform their statutory functions as democratically elected local decision-makers and facilitating them in fulfilling their representative duties.

Summary of suggested process in draft protocol

42. The protocol sets out a framework and process for elected member requests for council information. In summary, the process in the protocol is:

· Elected members make a request for information held by council and explain why they need the information.

· Chief Executive makes a decision on whether the information is reasonably necessary for the elected member to exercise their statutory functions or performance of their representative duties, and whether any of the limited reasons to withhold may apply (for example if personal information should be redacted for Privacy Act reasons).

· Decision and the provision of information to the elected member (with conditions if necessary for confidential information) within 5 working days.

· If an elected member is not happy with the Chief Executive decision, they can ask it to be reconsidered by the Audit & Risk Committee.

Local board feedback

43. Local board views are being sought on the proposed changes in the draft code and the supporting policies that will be adopted alongside the code. In particular:

· The principles based and positive intent in the drafting of the code

· Defining material breaches and making the findings of complaints of a material breach public

· Replacing the current independent review panel with an independent Conduct Commissioner, who can impose sanctions which means having no political involvement in determining a complaint or imposing sanctions

· Support for the access to information protocol

44. Feedback from local boards will be considered by the Joint Governance Working Party at its meeting on 31 October 2018. The working party will then recommend a final draft code to the Governing Body for adoption. Once adopted by the Governing Body, the code applies to all elected members.

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

45. Local board feedback will be reported to the Joint Governance Working Party. The code impacts local boards in that all members must abide by it.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

46. The Code of Conduct is an internal procedural document. The principles and values expressed in the document provide for inclusivity and specifically disallow discrimination.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

47. There may be financial implications if the Investigator that the chief executive appoints is external. Escalation to the Conduct Commissioner will have lesser financial implications than referral to a full review panel as provided in the existing code, but because of the reduced financial cost, may be utilised more often.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

48. There is a risk that some elected members will not be fully socialised with the new code. Staff will investigate how best to ensure all elected members are fully aware of the new code.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

49. The feedback from local boards will be reported to the meeting of the Joint Governance Working Party on 31 October 2018. The working party will then recommend a final draft code to the Governing Body for adoption.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Draft Code of Conduct	155
b ⇨	Draft Code of Conduct attachments (Under Separate Cover)

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Warwick McNaughton - Principal Advisor - Democracy Services

Authorisers

Marguerite Delbet - General Manager Democracy Services

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Nina Siers - Relationship Manager

Howick Local Board

15 October 2018

New road and private way names in the subdivision at 242 Flat Bush School Road, Flat Bush by Xinhao Developments Limited

File No.: CP2018/18258

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To seek approval from the Howick Local Board for a name for a new public road in the subdivision at 242 Flat Bush School Road, Flat Bush by Xinhao Developments Limited.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

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

3. The Applicant has submitted the following names for consideration for the new public road at 242 Flat Bush School Road, Flat Bush:

· Whakauru Road (preferred name)

· Tohatoha Road (alternative name)

· Hononga Road (alternative name)

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a) approve the new name ‘Whakauru Road’ for the new public road in the subdivision at 242 Flat Bush School Road, Flat Bush, in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974.

Horopaki / Context

4. A 31-lot residential subdivision of 242 Flat Bush School Road was granted in May 2017 (referenced BUN60081466) and an additional resource consent was granted in September 2018 (referenced BUN60323284) for the construction of 11 dwellings and subdivision and a new road, shown as Road 5 in Figure 2. The subdivision will be accessed by this new road off Flat Bush School Road for which the Applicant now seeks a name.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

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

· A historical or ancestral linkage to an area;

· A particular landscape, environment or biodiversity theme or feature; or

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

· The use of Māori names is actively encouraged.

The Applicant has proposed the following names for consideration for the new road at 242 Flat Bush School Road, Flat Bush:

Preference	Proposed New Road Name	Meaning
Preferred Name	Whakauru Road	Together, to include, join
First Alternative	Tohatoha Road	To share, spread around, distribute
Second Alternative	Hononga Road	Union, connection, relationship, bond

6. Land Information New Zealand’s addressing team has reviewed the above names and confirmed that ‘Whakauru Road’ and ‘Hononga Road’ are acceptable, however, ‘Tohatoha Road’ is not acceptable, given that there is a Toatoa Place approximately 13km from the site.

7. The proposed suffix of ‘Road’ is deemed acceptable as it accurately describes the characteristics of the road.

8. The names proposed by the Applicant are deemed to meet the road naming guidelines.

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

9. 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

10. The Applicant has consulted with local iwi, and responses were received from Ngai Tai Ki Tamaki, Ngati Paoa and Te Kawerau. Ngai Tai Ki Tamaki supported the proposed names, and Ngati Paoa and Te Kawerau deferred interest to other iwi. No other feedback was received.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

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

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

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

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

13. Approved road names are notified to Land Information New Zealand who records them on their New Zealand wide land information database which includes street addresses issued by councils.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Locality Plan	179
b ⇩	Scheme Plan	181

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Danielle Ter Humme – Intermediate Planner

Authorisers

Trevor Cullen - Team Leader Subdivision

Nina Siers - Relationship Manager

Chairperson	David Collings
Deputy Chairperson	Katrina Bungard
Members	Garry Boles
	Jim Donald, JP
	John Spiller
	Mike Turinsky
	Adele White
	Bob Wichman
	Peter Young, JP

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Workshop record 6 September 2018	185
b ⇩	Workshop record 11 September 2018	187
c ⇩	Workshop record 13 September 2018	189
d ⇩	Workshop record 18 September 2018	191
e ⇩	Workshop record 20 September 2018	193
f ⇩	Workshop record 25 September 2018	195
g ⇩	Workshop record 27 September 2018	197

Author	Vilecea Naidoo - Democracy Advisor
Authoriser	Nina Siers - Relationship Manager