Agenda of Puketāpapa Local Board

Member Julie Fairey will deliver the welcome message.

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 Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Thursday, 21 February 2019, including the confidential section, as a true and correct record.

5 Leave of Absence

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

6 Acknowledgements

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

7 Petitions

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

8 Deputations

Standing Order 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 Puketāpapa 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.”

Puketāpapa Local Board

21 March 2019

Puketāpapa Public Toilet Provision Assessment

File No.: CP2019/03149

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek adoption of the Puketāpapa Public Toilet Provision Assessment.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Auckland Council has a role to play in the provision of public toilets within public open space. Toilets enable people to spend longer in a reserve, particularly for families with young children, seniors and those with specific access needs.

3. In FY18/19 the Puketāpapa Local Board tasked Parks Services with the production of a provision assessment focusing on public toilets in open space in their local board area. The assessment considered toilets within parks and other public spaces such as town centers.

4. The aim of the provision assessment was to identify where public toilets are currently located across the network and suggest possible locations which will provide a robust public toilet network in Puketāpapa.

5. Initial investigations found the Puketāpapa Local Board area currently has a good network of public toilet facilities, with seventeen toilets across the local board area.

6. The Public Toilet Provision Assessment (Attachment A) recommends seven sites where new toilets could be considered over the short and long term, and outlines priorities for delivery.

7. Should the board adopt the attached assessment the recommended next step is that the board consider funding investigation and design of a new toilet at Turners Reserve.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) adopt the Public Toilet Provision Assessment document as per Attachment A to this report.

Horopaki

Context

8. Public toilets are an important part of park development. They enable increased use of public open space by allowing the public to spend longer within a reserve. This is particularly important for families with young children, seniors and those with specific access needs.

9. In FY18/19 the Puketāpapa Local Board tasked Parks Services with the production of a provision assessment focusing on public toilets found within public open space in their local board area. The assessment considered toilets within parks and also in other public spaces such as town centers.

10. The aim of this provision assessment was to identify where public toilets are currently provided across the network, and suggest possible locations for additional toilets to create a robust network in Puketāpapa.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

11. There are currently seventeen public toilets installed within public open space across Puketāpapa (see Attachment A). An additional four toilets are located just over the border in other local board areas which are likely also serving Puketāpapa residents. This is a good level of provision when compared with the Auckland network.

12. The only clear gaps in the existing network are found within the growth areas of Roskill South and Three Kings Quarry, and also at Waikowhai and east of Keith Hay Park.

13. New public toilets facilities require significant investment for their construction and ongoing maintenance. As such, they must provide significant benefits to the community for investment to be justified.

14. To identify appropriate locations for new public toilets, a range of principles were used as outlined below:

· The open space has a high level of visitation, or is a destination space.

· Open space users stay at the park for a significant amount of time.

· The park holds organised sporting activity.

· There is a significant playground or play space at the park.

· The park is situated on an important active transport / walking route.

· There is a lack of other toilet facilities nearby (e.g. businesses, malls, sports clubs).

· There is an appropriate location at the site to ensure safety and security.

15. The Parks and Open Spaces Strategic Action Plan (POSSAP) suggest that public toilets are provided within suburb parks, which are parks which serve a wider catchment of the community throughout a local board area. This was also taken into account when identifying new toilet locations.

16. Application of these principles resulted in the identification of seven sites where new toilets should be considered (see Attachment A). Details can be found in the attachment.

17. The lack of toilet facilities within the Roskill South area, combined with planned housing development, and existing youth facilities at Turners Reserve, made this park the highest priority for installation of a new toilet. It is recommended that a new toilet at Turners Reserve is considered by the board for inclusion in a future work program.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

18. The Community Facilities Department will be involved in the next steps of this project, specifically in the investigation, design and delivery stages.

19. Future delivery of public toilets will also impact the Community Facilities Operations, Management and Maintenance team, who are responsible for maintenance and safety of parks and assets such as toilets.

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

Local impacts and local board views

20. Improvement in toilet provision will help to meet outcome two and six of the Puketāpapa Local Board Plan 2017, “improved wellbeing and safety” and “vibrant and popular parks and facilities” through the provision of services supporting healthy and active lifestyles.

21. This will also directly respond to a need highlighted within the 2018 Accessibility in Parks study for improved provision of, and access to fit for purpose public toilet facilities and improve the usability of parks for those with access needs.

22. Workshops were held with the local board to discuss this assessment on 28 November 2018 and on 14 February 2019. Feedback from these meetings has helped to shape the final plan.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

23. It is not anticipated that this project will impact Māori disproportionately than people of other cultures within Auckland.

24. This project was discussed with mana whenua representatives at the Parks Sport and Recreation hui in December 2018. No specific feedback was given by mana whenua at the time.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

25. Further investigation and design work will be required to determine more accurate costings for the design and build of a new public toilet. Development of any new toilet is subject to funding available.

26. Investigation, design and delivery of outcomes identified in the Public Toilet Provision Assessment is included in the draft Community Facilities three year work programme as a proposed project, for discussion with the local board in early 2019.

27. New toilets identified in the document may be delivered as part of larger projects with alternative funding sources, such as town centre upgrades, significant housing development or planned projects on parks.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

28. Following further investigation and design work, the construction of a toilet at a proposed site may not be considered feasible due to factors outside of the scope of this study. This has been mitigated by the addition of several park options of varying priority for new toilet installations should one not prove achievable.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

29. Staff will include high priority sites for the board to consider for progression into the investigation and design phase in the Community Facilities FY19/20 work programme.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Puketāpapa Public Toilet Provision Assessment	11

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Thomas Dixon - Parks & Places Specialist

Authorisers

Mace Ward - General Manager Parks, Sports and Recreation

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

21 March 2019

Puketāpapa Drinking Fountain Provision Assessment

File No.: CP2019/03147

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek adoption of the Puketāpapa Drinking Fountain Provision Assessment.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Auckland Council has a role to play to increase the availability of drinking water in public open spaces in order to help reduce the impact of sugary drinks on our communities.

3. In FY18/19 the Puketāpapa Local Board tasked Parks Services with the production of a provision assessment focusing on drinking fountains found within public open space in their local board area.

4. The aim of this provision assessment was to identify where drinking fountains are currently installed across parks and open spaces, and suggest possible locations for additional drinking fountains to create a robust network across Puketāpapa.

5. Any improvements to the drinking fountain network within Puketāpapa will result in:

· Improved access to tap water in public open spaces.

· Behavioural change to reduce consumption of sugary drinks.

· Better physical and oral health and reduced levels of obesity.

· Less plastic waste and improved environmental health.

6. The Drinking Fountain Provision Assessment (Attachment A) includes a prioritised list of twenty proposed drinking fountains, and outlines a staged approach to implementation over the next five to ten years, focusing initially on high priority sites.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) adopt the Drinking Fountain Provision Assessment document as per Attachment A, to this report.

Horopaki

Context

7. In recent years increased importance has been placed on community health and wellbeing, with a focus on the issue of obesity. Access to unhealthy sugary drinks has been shown to have contributed to the rise of obesity. As a result, the Ministry of Health strongly encourages the consumption of water over sugary drinks. This is reflected in the National Healthy Food and Drink Policy 2018.

8. Auckland Council has a role to play to increase the availability of drinking water in public open spaces. While a proposed level of service for drinking fountains in public open spaces is in development, there is currently no policy as to where and why drinking fountains should be considered for installation in parks and open spaces.

9. In FY18/19 the Puketāpapa Local Board tasked Parks Services with the production a provision assessment focusing on drinking fountains found within public open space in their local board area.

10. The aim of this provision assessment is to identify where drinking fountains are currently installed across parks and open spaces, and suggest possible locations for additional drinking fountains to create a robust network in Puketāpapa.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

11. There are currently ten drinking fountains installed across eight parks within Puketāpapa (see Attachment A). An additional five drinking fountains are located just over the border in other local board areas which are likely also serving Puketāpapa residents.

12. Parks Services staff considered relevant literature around the provision of drinking fountains and the needs of park users, and have developed a list of principles and locations for new drinking fountain installations.

13. The principles for this assessment are that:

· The park is used for organised or informal sporting / active recreation purposes.

· The park is on an active transport / walking route or identified in a greenways plan.

· The park is used as a community gathering or picnic space.

· There is a significant playground or play space at the park.

· The park supports large events.

· There are no drinking fountains nearby (such as at businesses or schools).

· The park concept plan indicates a drinking fountain.

14. New drinking fountains were proposed for twenty sites, and prioritised for delivery in Attachment A.

15. The rough cost of a single installation is subject to further investigation and design work. Costs are expected to vary dependent on model, design, drainage, water connection, meterage and other factors. The final onsite location of new drinking fountains will also require further investigation, which will take into account drainage requirements, user needs (people & dogs), cultural impacts (distance from toilet) and level of use.

16. The delivery of a robust network of drinking fountains across Puketāpapa will help to reduce the impact of sugary drinks in the local community, and in combination with other programmes such as Wai Auckland, will help to turn the tide on obesity in Auckland.

17. In order to deliver a robust network of drinking fountains throughout the Puketāpapa Local Board area, the local board should consider funding an ongoing programme of delivery, focusing initially on high priority sites before moving down the list over time.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

18. The Community Facilities Department will be involved in the next steps of this project, specifically in the investigation, design and delivery stages.

19. Future delivery of drinking fountains will also impact the Community Facilities Operations, Management and Maintenance team, who are responsible for maintenance and safety of parks and assets such as drinking fountains.

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

Local impacts and local board views

20. Improvement to the drinking fountain network will help to meet outcome two and six of the Puketāpapa Local Board Plan 2017, “improved wellbeing and safety” and “vibrant and popular parks and facilities” through the provision of services supporting healthy and active lifestyles.

21. Improvement to the drinking fountain network aligns with the infrastructure strategy of the Wai Auckland initiative. This is a collaborative initiative between the Ministry of Health, Auckland District Health Board’s, Auckland Council, and Healthy Auckland Together (made up of 21 other key stakeholders and organisations within Auckland). It aims to displace sugary drinks through improving accessibility to potable water and through education and community engagement.

22. Improvement to the drinking fountain network will also align with one of the key outcomes in the Healthy Puketāpapa Action Plan (access to water).

23. Improvement to the drinking fountain network in combination with work by organisations such as Wai Auckland will help to reduce the impact of sugary drinks on the local community, resulting in health benefits including a reduction in obesity.

24. Workshops were held with the local board to discuss this assessment on 28 November 2018 and again on 14 February 2019. Feedback from these meetings has helped to shape the final plan.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

25. Obesity is an issue which disproportionately impacts Māori and Pacific communities within Auckland. Improved access to healthy eating and drinking options for Māori is a key outcome in the 2017/18 Māori Health Plan for the Auckland and Waitemata District Health Boards.

26. This project was discussed with mana whenua representatives at the Parks Sport and Recreation hui in December 2018. No specific feedback was given by mana whenua at the time.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

27. The rough cost of installation is expected to vary dependent on model, design, drainage, water connection, meterage and other factors. Further investigation and design work will be required to determine more accurate costs.

28. Investigation, design and delivery of outcomes identified in the Drinking Fountain Provision Assessment is included in the draft Community Facilities three year work programme as a proposed project, for discussion with the local board in early 2019.

29. Drinking fountains identified in the document may be delivered as part of larger projects with alternative funding sources, such as town centre upgrades, significant housing development or planned projects on parks.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

30. Several of the medium and long priority drinking fountain sites identified in the plan are located on parks and open space which are not under the governance of the Puketāpapa Local Board. This includes land managed by the Tupuna Maunga Authority and the New Zealand Transport Authority. Early engagement with these groups during the investigation and design stage will be required.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

31. Staff will include high priority sites for the board to consider for progression into the investigation and design phase in the Community Facilities FY19/20 work programme.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Puketāpapa Drinking Fountain Provision Assessment	21

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Thomas Dixon - Parks & Places Specialist

Authorisers

Mace Ward - General Manager Parks, Sports and Recreation

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

21 March 2019

Landowner approval for the installation of new permanent artwork in Fearon Park

File No.: CP2019/01973

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek land owner approval from the Puketāpapa Local Board for the installation of a piece of public artwork at Fearon Park, Three Kings.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Auckland Council Public Art team recently installed artwork in the southern area of the Fearon Park, off Akarana Avenue, where the main vehicle and pedestrian entrance to the park is located. This was completed as a wider upgrade of Fearon Park.

3. The public art team would like to install another artwork in Fearon Park. The new artwork is proposed at the Fearon Avenue entrance, alongside an existing footpath.

4. The proposed artwork will be funded from the 2018/19 Regional Public Art Capex budget.

5. Landowner approval is required from the Puketāpapa Local Board to allow the permanent installation of this artwork.

6. The public art team plan to install the artwork and maintain it in perpetuity. Specialists in the Community Facilities and Community Services departments support the proposal.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) approve the installation of artwork by the Auckland Council Public Art team in Fearon Park, near the Fearon Avenue entrance.

Horopaki

Context

7. The public art team have requested landowner approval to install new artwork within Fearon Park. The artwork has been proposed at the entrance of the park between 21 and 23 Fearon Avenue, Three Kings (see Attachment A).

8. The 2017 Puketāpapa Local Board Plan recognises the value of vibrant and popular parks. The purpose of the artwork is to enhance the entrance points to the park. Phase one of the project was focused on the main entry area located on the corner of Keystone Avenue and Akarana Avenue, Mount Roskill. The artwork was installed in June 2017. The artwork that is proposed at the Fearon Avenue entrance is phase two of the project.

9. The works have been created by artist Chris Bailey and feature three large scale stone carved sculptures that reference historic collection and working of stone. Each sculpture reflects a tool that would have been used in the area by mana whenua. The artwork will be placed within a low elevated basalt wall. This is in keeping with the theme of the phase one artwork.

10. The scale of the artwork is such that there are no anticipated effects on neighbouring properties. The largest element of the artwork is approximately 2.2 metres tall. The boundary fence between the park and neighbouring property is 1.8 metres high. In addition to the sculptures, the artist has developed a planting plan for the immediate area and the plantings will overtime negate any visual effects for the neighbouring properties.

11. The basalt edging that borders the artwork will be approximately 0.2 metres high. The border is intended to frame and protect the artworks from mowing damage and to contain low level native plantings that form a part of the artists design. The materials proposed for the artwork are Auckland region sourced basalt rock. This is in keeping with the phase one artwork and references the historic use of basalt within the local area, pre and post colonisation.

12. Two new Ti Kouka trees will be planted within the terraced area to tie in with the existing trees.

13. The public art team engaged iwi representatives at the commencement of the phase two artwork design process. The iwi representatives met with the artist on site at the beginning of the process and confirmed that the phase one artist’s brief was to be used to guide the development of the phase two artwork.

14. Minor earthworks will be required during construction of the basalt wall and landscaping. Pedestrian access will be maintained during the works.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Land status

15. The area in which the phase two artwork is proposed is legally described as Allotment 249 Section 10 Suburbs of Auckland. The land is a classified recreation reserve, subject to the Reserves Act 1977. The land is part of the Mt Roskill Domain and is owned by the Crown and vested in the Auckland Council, in trust, for recreation purposes. Auckland Council holds power under the Reserves Act 1977 to grant any action it sees fit to take place on the reserve.

Staff views

16. The parks and places specialist was supportive of the application and raised no concerns. The maintenance delivery coordinator had no issues with the proposal and noted that maintenance of the reserve will not be greatly impacted upon. The senior arboriculture and eco specialist was supportive and advised it is highly unlikely that there is any major root activity in the area.

17. The phase one artwork was completed in June 2017. To date, there have been no reported issues with the work and the council have not received any complaints regarding the project.

Options

18. The Puketāpapa Local Board has delegated authority to approve or decline this landowner approval application.

19. The recommended option is for the Puketāpapa Local Board to approve the land owner approval application as it aligns with the local board plan and enhances the entrance to Fearon Park.

20. The other option is for the Puketāpapa Local Board to decline the request for land owner approval. The public arts team will not be permitted to establish this artwork if this option is chosen.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

21. The proposed artwork will be located within the Fearon Park boundary. There are no Watercare assets near the proposed artwork. There are no Auckland Transport owned or managed assets that will be impacted by the artwork.

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

Local impacts and local board views

22. The 2017 Puketāpapa Local Board Plan recognises the value of vibrant and popular parks. An outcome of the local board plan seeks to achieve parks that are pleasant to look at, that can provide something for everyone in the community. It is considered that the proposed artwork achieves by providing artwork for the public to enjoy.

23. In general, public artworks have a positive effect on local communities. Experience has shown that public artworks that reflect local stories, contribute to creating a sense of place and pride for communities.

24. The proposed phase two artwork is a continuation of the artwork completed at the Akarana Avenue entry to the park and is intended to reinforce the narrative the artist has communicated with the completion of the phase one artwork. The narrative is related to the historic extraction use of stone in the local area.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

25. During the development of the phase one artwork the following iwi were engaged to develop that artist’s brief and to provide direction relating to local narratives that could be reflected in the artworks:

· Ngati Whatua Orakei

· Te Akitai Waiohua

· Te Kawerau A Maki

· Nga Tai Ki Tamaki

26. The public art team engaged the same iwi representatives at the commencement of the phase two artwork design process. The iwi representatives met with the artist on site at the beginning of the process and confirmed the same artist’s brief was to be used to guide the development of the phase two artwork.

27. The iwi representatives reviewed the concept design for the phase two artwork and endorse the design produced by the artist.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

28. The project is being funded from 2018/19 Auckland Council Regional Public Art CAPEX budget, and there are no known ongoing financial implications for the Puketāpapa Local Board, associated with the installation of the work at this location.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

29. There are no major anticipated risks associated with the installation of the artwork. No concerns have been raised by the public regarding phase one of the project which is similar to the proposed phase two artwork.

30. Public artwork generally has a positive effect on local communities. However, there is a possibility the artwork would not appeal to the entire community.

31. The ongoing maintenance of the artwork will be the full responsibility of council’s public arts team.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

32. If the local board approves the proposal, the public art team will be provided with a letter outlining the conditions of approval which will include installation, health and safety, and insurance responsibilities.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Phase Two Artwork Proposal - Fearon Park	33

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Neda Durdevic - Land Use Advisor

Authorisers

Rod Sheridan - General Manager Community Facilities

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

21 March 2019

Auckland Transport's Monthly Update

File No.: CP2019/02673

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide an update to the Puketāpapa Local Board (the Board) on transport related matters in their area.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. This report informs the Board of progress on its funded local board capital fund projects (LBTCF) and notes that a decision report on additional LBTCF projects is also to be considered by the Board in this agenda. There is currently $676,123 left in the LBTCF for allocation before July 2019.

3. It provides an update to the Board on significant Auckland Transport (AT) projects in the Board area.

4. Relevant consultations and any decisions of the transport control committee are noted, as they affect the Puketāpapa Local Board.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) receive the Auckland Transport March 2019 report.

Horopaki

Context

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

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

6. A separate report on this agenda provides advice to the Board on further projects that the Board has proposed, using its LBTCF.

Update on Puketāpapa Local Board Transport Capital Funded Projects

7. The table below reflects the status of projects which have been supported by resolution and are progressing using the LBTCF.

Project	Description	Status	Projected Cost
Richardson Road carpark realignment and Lighting project	A project to shift parking in the carpark to facilitate the construction of a shared path past the kindergarten. This will complete the missing link in the Mt Roskill safe route scheme.	Construction is well advanced and should be substantially complete in March 2019.	$220,000
Keith Hay Park Lighting – Southern Section	Continuing the lighting project from the northern section to the southern end of the park past Noton Road carpark to Richardson Road.	Contract for the work has been awarded with work to take place April to June 2019 to meet stakeholders’ requirements.	$350,000
Greenway Cycling Project – Route D (modified)	This route includes shared paths on Frost Road and then a combination of traffic calming measures, signs, markings along Britton and Dornwell Roads, shared paths through the laneways and then traffic calming on Hayr Road and Haughey Avenue through to, but not across Hillsborough Rd.	Material for public consultation is being prepared.	$600,000 (allocated)

Progress being made on significant investigations and projects in the Board area

Project	Details	Status
Safer Communities 2018-21	This programme focuses on walking improvements in the Mount Roskill community. It aims to create safer walking environments for local people to get to and from key destinations such as schools, public transport hubs, shops, community centres and more, on foot.	The project team is scheduled to discuss with the Board proposals for Mt Albert Road/Hayr Rd area and the analysis of the first consultation at it’s March workshop.
Mt Roskill Village Upgrade/ Dominion Road Double Decker Route	Changes are being made to the bus stops in the village area to accommodate double decker buses. The Board approved a draft streetscape design on 16 August 2018. Some changes arose from Auckland Transport internal feedback, an independent road safety audit and a hui. Key design themes are retained.	The work in the village is planned to integrate with other changes needed to accommodate double decker buses. Most of the work to accommodate double deckers in Mt Roskill was completed in March. The streetscape changes to the village are expected to follow.
Carlton Street	AT has reviewed the safety audit completed by consultants and provided responses to the matters raised at the May 2018 public meeting. AT has designed bus - friendly infrastructure designs that will ensure all vehicles travel slowly on Carlton Street.	Consultation on changes to the speed calming infrastructure in Carlton Street went live in early March, 2019.
Mt Eden Road Buslane Upgrade	Tender documents have been finalised and approval from the Traffic Control Committee has been obtained. The work in the Puketāpapa Board area between Mt Albert Road and Landscape Road is on hold. Mt Eden Road reseal in the same area will be confined to the traffic lanes and flush median.	The work around Mt Eden village will proceed in Q1 2019. The work in the Puketāpapa Local Board area is on hold. AT will update the Board in March 2019.
Duke Street Traffic Calming	Speed calming devices will be constructed on Duke Street similar in design to the existing devices.	A consent for a vehicle crossing has held up delivery of this project. This is being worked through.
Queenstown Road Pedestrian Facility	The provision of a mid-block signalised crossing to replace the existing pedestrian refuge.	Work on the signalised crossing is underway.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

8. The impact of information in this report is confined to Auckland Transport and does not impact on other parts of the Council group. Any engagement with other parts of the Council group will be carried out on an individual project basis.

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

Local impacts and local board views

Local Board Workshop – February 2019

9. AT held a workshop with the Board in February 2019. This provided an opportunity for the Board to discuss further projects it might like to consider with its local board transport capital fund and upcoming public consultations.

Auckland Transport Consultations

10. AT provides the Puketāpapa Local Board with the opportunity to comment on transport projects being delivered in their area.

Project

Description

Dominion Road

AT is proposing changes to the pedestrian crossing at the southbound approach of the Dominion Road and Denbigh Avenue roundabout in Mount Roskill.

This is expected to improve safety, specifically for pedestrians crossing the road in Mt Roskill. The current layout can block visibility. It is also a double-lane crossing, making it difficult to cross for some. Therefore we are proposing to reduce this approach to a single lane, and create a side-island to shorten the crossing distance.

AT also aims to improve the safety on the southern and eastern approach, by proposing to allow heavy vehicles to occupy both lanes on those two legs. This should reduce the risk of a collision taking place.

Carlton Street, Hillsborough

Auckland Transport (AT) is making changes to Carlton Street in order to encourage safer vehicle speeds and improve access to public transport. We would like your feedback on these proposed changes.

The improvements proposed include:

· replacing the existing speed tables with new speed tables that are more evenly spaced to encourage safer vehicle speeds

· making the new speed tables longer than the current speed tables, this results in less jarring for bus passengers however still slows down other road users

· installing four new bus stops on Carlton Street which will enable more people to access public transport

· removing 12 public car park spaces on Carlton Street to make room for the bus stops and new speed tables

Note the existing crossing used by the walking school bus outside Hillsborough Park will remain and will be painted with the zebra crossing lines.

Traffic Control Committee resolutions

11. These are the decisions of the Traffic Control Committee that affected the Puketāpapa Local Board area in February 2019:

Street/Area	Description	Work	Decision
Belfast Street, Hillsborough	Permanent Traffic and Parking changes Combined	No Stopping At All Times, SSP Restriction, P15 Parking, Lane Arrow Markings, Stop Control, School Crossing Point, School Patrol, Road Hump, Traffic Island, Shoulder Marking	Carried
Arundel Street, Mt Roskill	Permanent Traffic and Parking changes Combined	No Stopping At All Times, Angle Parking, Bus Stop, Mobility Parking, Pedestrian Crossing	Carried
Oriana Avenue, The Avenue, Lynfield	Permanent Traffic and Parking changes Combined	No Stopping At All Times, P10 Parking, AT Metro Bus Parking, Bus Shelter, Removal of Bus Shelter, Give-Way Control, Traffic Island	Carried

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

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

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

13. There are no financial implications that result from receiving this report.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

14. There are no risks associated with receiving this report.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

15. The Puketāpapa Local Board will consider recommendations in regard to its transport capital fund in March. AT will provide a further update report next month.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Lorna Stewart - Elected Member Relationship Manager

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon - Manager Elected Member Relationship Unit

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

21 March 2019

Local Board Transport Capital Fund - March 2019

File No.: CP2019/03352

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To consider the Puketāpapa Local Board’s (the Board) allocation of the Auckland Transport Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF) to projects in its area.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Local Boards can use the Local Board Transport capital fund (LBTCF) to deliver transport infrastructure projects that are not part of Auckland Transport’s (AT) work programme. There is $676,123 in the Board’s fund that needs to be allocated by June 2019.

3. The Board requested in November 2018 that Auckland Transport (AT) provide it with costings for six projects in its board area:

· installation of tetra traps in the Puketapapa portion of the Onehunga Bay catchment

· installation of tetra traps in the Te Auaunga Stream area, near May Road

· an improvement to bus stop 8345, on Dominion Road

· a traffic calming project on Potter Avenue, Wesley

· a traffic calming project on The Avenue, Lynfield

· two pedestrian facilities on Hillsborough Road – one in the vicinity of Haughey Street and one in the vicinity of Goodall Street

4. The budget for the two tetra trap projects has been refreshed and stands at $135,000 for the Onehunga Bay area and $35,000 for the smaller Te Auaunga Stream project.

5. The rough order of costs for the improvement to the bus stop 8345 on Dominion Road is $14,400 and AT is recommending that the Board proceed with this work.

6. AT has recommended to the Board that they do not proceed with single-street traffic calming as AT’s new approach to traffic calming is to treat an area, rather than one street in isolation.

7. If the Board was to consider area-wide traffic calming, the Wesley area is more suitable for the Board to fund due to its more compact nature. However, Hobsonville Land Company’s (HLC) plans on redevelopment in the area need to be more fully understood before area-based traffic calming can proceed here.

8. In the meantime, AT is recommending that the Board consider requesting rough order of costs for a speed feedback sign in The Avenue, Lynfield and that suitable safety measures on Potter Avenue to support Wesley Primary School are considered from the upcoming Community Safety Fund.

9. The pedestrian facility recommended for Hillsborough Road near Goodall Street is a signalised crossing. The rough order of costs for this project is $338,000.

10. The pedestrian facility recommended for Hillsborough Road near Haughey Street/Delargey Avenue is a pedestrian refuge with a rough order of costs of $90,000.

11. If the Board were to proceed with all these projects, the total cost is estimated to be $612,400 and would leave $63,723 remaining in the Board’s transport capital fund. This would still allow for a speed feedback sign to be installed in the The Avenue, Lynfield, if this was supported.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) receive this report.

b) allocate $338,000 for the installation of a signalised crossing on Hillsborough Road in the vicinity of Goodall Street.

c) allocate $90,000 for the installation of a pedestrian refuge on Hillsborough Road, vicinity of Haughey Street/Delargey Avenue.

d) allocate $14,400 for improvements at bus stop 8345 on Dominion Road, including extending the hard surface and area and the provision of a new seat, after successful discussions with the business owner.

e) allocate $135,000 for the installation of tetra traps in the Onehunga Bay Catchment.

f) allocate $35,000 for the installation of tetra traps in the area around Denny Avenue, May Road and Gifford Avenue to support the Te Auaunga Stream.

g) consider safety measures around Wesley Primary School with its Community Safety Fund allocation.

h) request a rough order of costs for a speed feedback sign on The Avenue, Lynfield and recommendations for its location.

Horopaki

Context

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

· be safe

· not impede network efficiency

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

13. This report gives details on the financial position of the Board’s LBTCF and asks the Board to consider if they wish to support projects relating to improved pedestrian facilities, stormwater improvements and an improvement for bus passengers.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

14. At its November meeting, the Board asked AT to provide rough order of costs for six projects for the Board to consider using its LBTCF.

Tetra Traps

November 2018 Resolution:

i) request Auckland Transport to confirm the rough order of costs to install tetra traps to complete the Puketāpapa Board area of Onehunga Bay catchment, previously reported as $120,000.

ii) request Auckland Transport liaise with Healthy Waters to confirm a rough order of costs to install tetra traps in the Denny Avenue, May Road and Gifford Avenue area to help prevent litter entering nearby waterways, particularly Te Auaunga.

Onehunga Bay Catchment Area

15. In 2017, Puketāpapa Local Board considered using the transport capital fund to install tetra traps in its part of the Onehunga Bay catchment area. This project was to complement work already carried out by Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board in their part of the Onehunga Bay catchment area.

16. Tetra traps provide physical barriers within catchpits to prevent floatable pollutants such as plastic bags and bottles from entering the receiving environment. They deliver most benefit when installed in areas of high public use and where the receiving environment is ecologically sensitive.

17. To complete the tetra trap installation in the Puketāpapa area of the Onehunga Bay catchment, AT previously estimated that the rough order of costs would be $120,000.

18. After reviewing this costing, AT now confirms that with cost escalations since 2017, the rough order of costs for this work is now $135,000.

Tetra Traps in Te Auaunga

19. In 2017, the Puketāpapa Local Board also considered a smaller tetra-trap programme.

20. Healthy Waters were asked to provide advice for priority areas for treatment with tetra traps in the Board area. The advice received from Healthy Waters supported installation of tetra-traps in the area around Denny Avenue, May Road and Gifford Avenue and suggested a budget of $30,000.

21. AT has refreshed this rough order of costs and it is now $35,000.

Dominion Road Bus Stop Improvement

November 2018 resolution:

iii) request Auckland Transport to provide a rough order of costs to provide an increased concrete footing at the inbound bus stop at Dominion Rd/Denbigh Ave Roundabout, 1077 Dominion Rd (Stop 8435).

22. Stop 8345 is a popular bus stop with high boarding numbers. Those waiting for the bus take shelter under the shop canopy if it is wet, but as this area is grassed, it gets very wet and muddy in the winter.

23. The road corridor in this instance extends right up to the wall of the building. If undertaking this work, AT considers it prudent to continue the concrete pad to the driveway as there is little point in leaving such a small section of grass that would need mowing.

24. AT understands that the Superette has been approached and is supportive of the possibility of extending the concrete area as the area is muddy and unsightly in the winter.

25. The rough order of costs for the installation of a new concrete pad and a new seat is $14,400. A third of this cost can be attributed to traffic management costs, as this Dominion Road is a main arterial route with high volumes of traffic.

Dominion Road Bus Stop 8435

Hillsborough Road Pedestrian Facilities

November 2018 resolution:

iv) request Auckland Transport to provide a rough order of costs for two crossing points on Hillsborough Road; one in the vicinity of Goodall Street and the other in the vicinity of Haughey Avenue.

26. Hillsborough Road is a very busy route especially in peak hours and there are limited opportunities for pedestrians to cross safely.

27. AT has been investigating areas where pedestrian facilities may be introduced safely as there are difficulties with the often narrow footpaths, undulating nature of the road and the many existing driveways.

28. At the Board’s request, AT has looked in particular at the two areas the Board has requested, in the vicinity of Goodall Street and Haughey Street.

Hillsborough/Goodall Street

29. There is a straight section of road here promoting visibility. Putting it closer to the intersection with Richardson Road was considered, but the very narrow footpath in this area made this unsafe.

30. The recommendation is for a signalised crossing rather than a pedestrian refuge. Vehicles in this area may have just transitioned from the motorway and speeds in the past have been an issue. A speed camera nearby has helped to slow traffic down in this location and a signalised crossing is recommended for safety reasons. (See Attachment A)

31. The rough order of costs for a signalised crossing in this area is $338,000.

Hillsborough/Haughey Street

32. This pedestrian facility will support the Board’s cycle route (Greenways D) for access to Monte Cecilia Park and enable pedestrians to cross between the bus stops, near Delargey Avenue.

33. AT recommends a pedestrian refuge in this location and the rough order of costs for a pedestrian refuge in this location is $90,000. (See Attachment B)

34. The majority of this cost is to provide new street lighting at the refuge site to provide a compliant crossing point on an arterial road.

Traffic Calming In The Avenue, Lynfield and Potter Avenue, Wesley

v) request Auckland Transport to provide a rough order of costs for traffic calming and pedestrian safety measures on Potter Avenue, in the vicinity of Wesley Primary School.

vi) request Auckland Transport to provide a rough order of costs for a traffic calming project on The Avenue, Lynfield between the intersection with Commodore Drive and the southern intersection with Halsey Drive.

35. Cars speeding through residential streets is a common concern for Aucklanders and each year Auckland Transport receives more than 1,000 requests for speed calming to be installed on their street.

36. As part of Auckland Transport’s commitment to road safety, AT is looking to reduce speeds in residential areas. AT has adopted an area-based approach, as this is considered more effective in achieving survivable speeds and positively influencing driver behaviour to recognise the residential environment.

37. This is a change in approach from a street-by- street approach to area-based traffic calming. This change in approach has been adopted because:

· The street-based approach only allowed for the annual prioritisation of a small number of streets, approximately two to four. In contrast, an area based focus not only enables speed calming measures to be implemented on a larger number of streets, it would also enable any future reduction of the speed limit to 30km/h https://at.govt.nz/projects-roadworks/reducing-speed-limits/ within the area boundary.

· It is often observed that when speed calming is undertaken on one street, ‘rat-runners’ use other side streets to bypass congested roads and traffic signals. ‘Rat-runners’ are drivers using local roads to avoid streets that are perceived to be busier, such as arterials. However, since arterials are primarily designed to accommodate high traffic volumes and facilitate movement between key centres, it is preferred that the bulk of traffic uses arterial roads for travel.

· An area-based approach prevents such behaviour by reviewing all streets and the use of the road. This provides a more balanced use of the network for all users.

38. Previously, we had assessed the suitability of individual streets for the installation of speed calming measures such as speed tables and humps. AT will now assess the suitability of streets within an area, or clusters of streets.

39. AT has embraced Vision Zero principles, (https://at.govt.nz/projects-roadworks/reducing-speed-limits/) and with the increased funding enabled by the Regional Fuel Tax, we have been able to shift our focus from street-based to area-based speed calming. This enables us to consider a wider range of measures to support speed reduction including speed humps, speed tables including zebra crossings where required, raised intersections and/or kerb build-outs.

40. For these reasons, AT does not support speed calming on individual streets, even when funded by local boards as it goes against the area-based approach which has been adopted.

41. AT is currently developing the website which will clearly state how we have prioritised areas for speed-calming, and the shortlist of prioritised areas in the Auckland region. Local Boards can choose to fund from their LBCTF those areas that have come up in their local board boundary as needing intervention.

42. AT is still working on its priority list but both areas highlighted by the resolution are on this list but nearer to the end of the list, with most of the prioritised areas in the west and south.

43. The Wesley and Lynfield areas will not be built by AT in the next three years. AT will review the priority list in around two years’ time, but by then it is possible that a different set of sites may emerge that have a higher priority.

44. As it is unclear that either of these areas will be delivered beyond the three-year timeframe by AT, the Board could consider adopting one of these areas for future treatment. Then the areas could be developed ensuring that there is consistency in design and consultation process between all residential speed management areas.

45. Looking at both areas, the Wesley area would be more suitable for funding by the Board as it is more compact and already has some traffic calming features. However if HLC is planning a redevelopment in this area, it may be prudent to understand their timeframe. In the meantime, the Board could look at safety measures to support the Wesley Primary School located in Potter Avenue. It is likely that this could be funded by the Board’s allocation of the Community Safety Fund.

46. The area around The Avenue in Lynfield would require a significant investment to deliver effective traffic calming. AT recommends that this is best considered when the Board receives its next allocation of funding in the new term.

47. As an alternative to traffic calming, the Board could install a speed feedback sign in an appropriate location on The Avenue. These can be effective in helping motorists drive to the speed limit.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

48. The impact of information in this report is confined to Auckland Transport and does not impact on other parts of the Council group. Any engagement with other parts of the Council group will be carried out on an individual project basis.

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

Local impacts and local board views

49. The Board has workshopped the projects described in this report.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

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

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

Local Board Transport Capital Fund

Puketapapa Local Board Transport Capital Fund Financial Summary
Total Funds Available in current political term	$2,702,161
Amount committed to date on projects approved for design and/or construction	$2,026,038
Remaining Budget left	$676,123

51. If the Board were to proceed with all these projects, the total cost is estimated to be $612,400 and would leave $63,723 remaining in the Board’s transport capital fund.

52. This would still allow for a speed feedback sign to be installed in the The Avenue, Lynfield, if this was supported by the Board.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

53. The “Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications” section above summarised the Board’s LBTCF financial position. There is a significant amount of money in the LBTCF that still needs to be allocated before June 2019.

54. There are risks that the Board must consider before making decisions on the project described in this report.

Tetra Traps

· No risks have been identified in proceeding with this project.

Hillsborough Road/Goodall Street Pedestrian Facility

· The recommendation for a signalised crossing in this location represents a considerable financial outlay for the Board.

· AT is considering improving crossing facilities near Waikowhai School, which may also be a signalised crossing. This is not expected to be delivered until at least the 2020/2021 financial year.

· Some removal of parking may be necessary near Goodall Street.

Hillsborough Road/Haughey Street Pedestrian Facility

· Some removal of parking might be necessary near Delargey Avenue.

Dominion Road Bus Stop Improvement

· No risks have been identified to date with proceeding with the project though its noted that further discussions with the affected business will be necessary

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

55. That the Board is to allocate funds to the projects it intends to support.

56. That the Board consider safety measures on Potter Avenue, Wesley to support Wesley Primary School once the Community Safety Fund is finalised and consider requesting a rough order of costs for a speed feedback sign in The Avenue, Lynfield.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	20190321 Hillsborough Road Crossing - Attachment A	51
b ⇩	20190321 Goodall St - Attachment B	53

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Lorna Stewart – Elected Member Relationship Manager

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon – Manager Elected Member Relationship Unit

Victoria Villaraza – Relationship Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

21 March 2019

Healthy Environment Approach Principles - Puketāpapa

File No.: CP2019/03389

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To adopt the Healthy Environments Approach Principles (attachment A) and Events Guide (attachment B) for use across Puketāpapa Local Board funded events and Auckland Council run events in the local board area.

2. To endorse Community Facilities (leases) as a priority area for the Healthy Environment Approach.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

3. Healthy Families New Zealand is the Government’s major investment into reducing preventable chronic disease in New Zealand. It is based around a systems approach to health that addresses the environmental influences of health where people live, learn, work and play.

4. Healthy Families South Auckland has begun developing a Healthy Environment Approach to support council’s responsibility to provide spaces in the community that facilitate social, environmental and cultural outcomes, including wellbeing. Potential settings to be included in the overall approach include local board funded events, community grants, leisure centres, community facilities (lease’s) and community places.

5. The approach is intended to support Auckland Council officers, Local Boards and community to increase healthy choices and options through various settings to increase the availability and accessibility of healthy food and drink choices, reduce smoking, alcohol and drug related harm and increase opportunities that encourage movement.

6. Healthy Families South Auckland has completed its development of Healthy Environment principles (attachment A) and an event guide (attachment B) that targets events using a co-design methodology. This includes a range of options regarding Wai (water), Kai (food), Smokefree, Alcohol & Drug free and Movement which has been supported by the Auckland Council Events Team.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) adopt the Healthy Environment Approach principles and event guide for use at Puketāpapa Local Board funded events and Auckland Council run events in the Puketāpapa Local Board area commencing in the 2018/2019 events season.

b) endorse Healthy Families South Auckland to work with Community Facilities (leases) to create a Healthy Environment lens across settings that leasing has control over.

Horopaki

Context

7. The approach has been developed using co-design methodology. By starting with the lived experience of people, co-design can help explore, imagine and test new ideas and involve the people closest to the issues.

8. The co-design approach has assisted staff to determine what would be in scope regarding Healthy Environments. It helped create clarity from complexity, presented ideas to test and identified opportunities for collaboration.

9. The principles and guide is for everyone involved in delivering Auckland Council events. Our 4 practical principles are designed to be easy to implement and come with options, tips and plenty of resources (because we know it might mean doing things a bit differently). The following table provides an overview of activity:

Table 1: Co-design activity

FRAME

EXPLORE

IMAGINE

TESTING

Identified three local board funded events to test ways of improving access to healthy food and drink choices, reducing smoking and alcohol related harm and encouraging more movement.

Over a six-month period, staff worked with event organisers to understand what it would take to create a healthy environment at an event.

Event one (large scale) 1,750 participants and over 2250 spectators

Event two (small scale) 186 registered participants

Event three (medium scale) 1,500 people

Staff engaged with 653 different people, gaining real time feedback from event attendees, event organisers and vendors.

From the feedback, staff were able to make the necessary improvements for the next event. This approach enabled staff to adapt and learn quickly.

Ongoing learnings led to more efficient prototypes. These were tested during Auckland Council selected events. For example, staff adjusted the location of water to increase accessibility and uptake, prototyped types of water stations, and ensured promotion was clear and visible to event participants.

10. Healthy Families South Auckland understands the need to balance freedom of choice with offering healthy opportunities. It has sought to achieve the right balance that allows a common-sense approach and has taken this into consideration when applying the Healthy Environment lens over an event setting.

11. The benefits of adopting a Healthy Environment lens across a range of Auckland Council settings include:

· an increase in the availability and accessibility of healthy food and drink choices to reduce the risk of obesity and non-communicable diseases and improve life expectancy of Puketāpapa residents

· reduced smoking, alcohol & drug related harm to Puketāpapa residents

· increased opportunities that encourage movement for healthier living

12. A Healthy Environment Approach will enable the Puketāpapa Local Board to support residents to live healthier, more active lives and contribute to the fabric of community life in the local board area.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

13. Healthy individuals live, work and play in thriving healthy communities and Councils play a key role in creating these environments via partnership with key stakeholders around healthy eating, improved physical and mental health and wellbeing, as well as social connections and providing an avenue for sharing between various culturally diverse groups.

14. We know that conversations with communities about weight and the food children eat, can be sensitive and difficult, and we recognise how the realities can present challenges. That is why we seek to enable, empower and support communities by building on existing strengths and assets to help deliver improved outcomes.

Advantages

Disadvantages

Options

Plan and prioritise action to improve environments, based on current needs and opportunities.

Catalyst to begin conversations in Council about its role in supporting healthy environments.

Affirm current Council practices in relation to healthy environments.

Advocacy tool to work proactively with other internal and external stakeholders to implement effective and sustainable strategies.

Information and advice delivered at the right time and in the right way about food, physical activity etc.

Current built environments continue to grow a negative attitude to, and experience of food, physical activity etc.

Continue to be reactive instead of implementing preventative and/or effective community interventions.

Continue with the status quo and our children are not equipped with the knowledge to make positive choices, both for themselves and as the potential parents of the future.

Event organizers continue with the status quo and deliver a standard event as determined by them i.e. may not contribute to the context of the health and wellbeing of the community.

Operationalize Healthy Environments into events for sustainability, event organiser accountability and greater collaboration with external stakeholders regarding health and wellbeing outcomes.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

15. Over the past year, Healthy Families South Auckland has been working with event organisers (Auckland Council and Community) to test the Healthy Environment principles. Using the four stages of the co-design process, Healthy Families South Auckland and Auckland Council events team developed the Healthy Environment Approach principles and guide.

16. The Healthy Environment Approach that has been developed has a universal applicability across council settings. Staff have started using the Healthy Environment principles and event guide with event organisers.

17. The Event Facilitation Team are supportive of sharing and prompting the Healthy Environment Principles and Guide to community event organisers who apply for event permits, to empower the community to make healthier choices.

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

Local impacts and local board views

18. A review of 55 studies on childhood obesity concluded that the most effective strategies to reducing obesity include improving the supply of healthier options, environments that support healthier options and reducing the promotion of unhealthy options.

19. Success in reducing obesity requires as many interventions as possible by a range of private and public agencies. Local impacts such as obesity is a major risk factor for a wide range of non-communicable disease, including heart disease, stroke, type 2 diabetes, cancer, osteoarthritis and depression.

20. The Healthy Environment Approach is directly aligned to the Puketāpapa Local Board plan and can specifically contribute to Outcome; Improved wellbeing and safety. Objective; Provision and promotion of opportunities and services supporting healthy and active lifestyles.

21. Healthy Families South Auckland presented at a local board workshop on 31 January 2019 to seek input and feedback on the approach. Feedback received at the workshop was positive. This report has taken into account all feedback received to date.

22. Puketāpapa Local Board Support Healthy Families South Auckland to work with council’s community leasing staff to evaluate the settings that the leasing team advise on and implement, to progress the Healthy Environments Approach.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

23. Healthy Families South Auckland has partnered with Māori through the development of the approach. This includes prototyping Healthy Environments in local events and testing Healthy Environment principles such as making drinking water more accessible and promotion of water as the beverage of choice.

24. Staff have been able to gather insights and learnings from participants and spectators who attended local events in the south (a combined audience of over 4000 people), of which a high number were Māori. These insights contributed to the development of a Healthy Environment Approach.

25. The prototypes have also contributed to Māori wellbeing via augmented reality technology to bring Māori knowledge and physical activity together and enable participants to learn about some of the Manukau landmarks such as the Puhinui awa (stream) and about the tohu (signs) of spring according to the Maramataka (Maori lunar calendar). This has been very successful and enabled the community to experience an interactive process that supports health and wellbeing from a Te Ao Māori perspective.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

26. The guide is a prototype which will develop over time, this is a learning and development process therefore there are no financial implications associated with the Puketāpapa Local Board adopting the Healthy Environment Approach. Healthy Families South Auckland will continue the design and development of the process while it is embedded with operational staff across the organisation.

27. Healthy Families South Auckland are keen to learn from event organisers experiences by testing the principles and event guide via local board funded events. We will do this by approaching and supporting event organisers who are willing to engage with the testing and evaluation over the 2018/2019 events season.

28. Events have recommended to the Healthy Families South Auckland team that the Healthy Environments Approach be fed through the 2019/2020 Community Grants process so that up front when community groups apply for funding, it can be identified how the community group intends to meet the Healthy Environment Approach. This will give the local board clearer information when making decisions of what groups to fund and would go further to support the initiative. The Auckland Council events team are in support of the Healthy Environment Approach principles and event guide.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

29. The risk of cost for implementation will be mitigated via the Community Grants process.

30. The Events team are not resourced to lead in-depth discussions such as ‘Explore how to increase the amount of healthy food and drink available with vendors’ this would be mitigated via subject matter experts such as Auckland Regional Public Health Services (ARPHS) team and/or Healthy Families resource.

31. The Events team are not equipped or able to offer operational resources such as mobile water stations, this would be mitigated via the event guide resource.

32. All aspects of the event to reduce the impact of waste will be mitigated via the event Funding Agreement ‘Objectives and Measures’ section to take a proactive approach towards the goal of Zero Waste.

33. There are no risks associated with this report. The local board is being asked to adopt the Healthy Environment Approach principles and event guide for use at Puketāpapa Local Board funded events and Auckland Council run events in the Puketāpapa Local Board area. Any operational matters associated with this will be managed by staff.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

34. Healthy Families South Auckland will identify and work with both Auckland Council and Community event organisers who are willing to test and evaluate the Healthy Environment Approach principles and event guide.

35. Healthy Families South Auckland will initiate discussion with Community Facilities (leases) to create a Healthy Environment lens for use across settings that leasing has control over.

36. Healthy Families South Auckland will provide quarterly memo updates to the Puketāpapa Local Board regarding progress.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Healthy Environment Approach Principles - attachment A	61
b ⇩	Healthy Environment Approach Guide - attachment B	67

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Winnie Hauraki - Healthy Families South Auckland, TSI Lead Systems Innovator

Authorisers

Gael Surgenor - Director Community & Social Innovation, TSI

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

21 March 2019

ATEED six-monthly report to the Puketāpapa Local Board

File No.: CP2019/03354

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. This report provides the Puketāpapa Local Board with highlights of ATEED’s activities in the Puketāpapa Local Board area for the six months 1 July to 31 December 2018.

2. This report should be read in conjunction with ATEED’s Quarter 1 report to Auckland Council (available at www.aucklandnz.com) and the forthcoming Quarter 2 report to the Auckland Council CCO Finance and Performance Committee (available 11 March). Although these reports focus primarily on the breadth of ATEED’s work at a regional level, much of the work highlighted has significant local impact.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

3. This report provides the Puketāpapa Local Board with relevant information on the following ATEED activities:

· Locally-driven initiatives: Puketāpapa business engagement and Young Enterprise Scheme (YES)

· Supporting local business growth

· Filming activity

· Youth Connections

· Local and regional destination management and marketing

· Delivered, funded and facilitated events.

4. Further detail on these activities is listed under Analysis and advice.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) receive ATEED’s update to the Puketāpapa Local Board – February 2019.

Horopaki

Context

5. ATEED has two areas of focus:

Economic Development – including business support, business attraction and investment, local economic development, trade and industry development, skills employment and talent and innovation and entrepreneurship.

Destination - supporting sustainable growth of the visitor economy with a focus on destination marketing and management, major events, business events (meetings and conventions) and international student attraction and retention.

6. These two portfolios also share a common platform relating to the promotion of the city globally to ensure that Auckland competes effectively with other mid-tier high quality of life cities.

7. ATEED works with local boards, Council and CCOs to support decision-making on local economic growth, and facilitates or co-ordinates the delivery of local economic development activity. ATEED ensures that the regional activities that ATEED leads or delivers are fully leveraged to support local economic growth and employment.

8. In addition, ATEED’s dedicated Local Economic Development (LED) team works with local boards who allocate locally-driven initiatives (LDI) budget to economic development activities. The LED team delivers a range of services[1] such as the development of proposals, including feasibility studies that enable local boards to directly fund or otherwise advocate for the implementation of local initiatives.

9. ATEED delivers its services at the local level through business hubs based in the north, west and south of the region, as well as its central office at 167B Victoria Street West.

10. Additional information about ATEED’s role and activities can be found at www.aucklandnz.com/ateed

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Economic Development

Locally Driven Initiatives:

11. Puketāpapa business engagement: The Local Board requested a realignment of this programme in July. A subsequent tender process received two proposals. Following the tender close, the Local Board gave direction at a workshop in September to step back from pursuing a/multiple Business Association(s). The Pop-up Business School has been recommended as an alternative project for this financial year. ATEED staff are awaiting the Board's decision.

12. Young Enterprise Scheme (YES): The Auckland Chamber of Commerce invoiced for the allocated funds from Local Boards and payment was made during Q2. During the period, there were 56 schools participating in the Auckland YES programme, representing 1,334 students completing the programme. Marcellin College and Onehunga High School are the two schools from the Puketāpapa Local Board area participating in the YES programme.

Supporting Local Business Growth

13. This area is serviced by the Business and Enterprise team in ATEED’s central office, located at 167B Victoria Street West, Auckland CBD. The team comprises of two Business and Innovation Advisors and administration support. The role of this team is to support the growth of Auckland’s key internationally competitive sectors and to support to provide quality jobs.

14. A key programme in achieving this is central government’s Regional Business Partnership Network (RBPN). This is delivered by ATEED’s nine Business and Innovation Advisors (BIA), whose role is to connect local businesses to resources, experts and services in innovation, R&D, business growth and management.

15. ATEED’s BIAs engage 1:1 with businesses through a discovery meeting to understand their challenges, gather key data, and provide connections / recommendations via an action plan.

16. Where businesses qualify (meet the programme criteria and/or align to ATEED’s purpose as defined in the SOI) the advisors facilitate government support to qualifying businesses, in the form of:

· Callaghan Innovation R&D grants (including Getting Started, project and student grants (https://www.callaghaninnovation.govt.nz/grants)

· Callaghan Innovation subsidised innovation programmes (https://www.callaghaninnovation.govt.nz/innovation-skills)

· RBPN business capability vouchers (NZTE), where the business owner may be issued co-funding up to $5,000 per annum for business training via registered service providers. Voucher co-funding is prioritised to businesses accessing this service for the first time, in order to encourage more businesses to engage with experts to assist their management and growth.

· NZTE services such as Export Essentials (https://workshop.exportessentials.nz/register/)

· Referrals to NZ Business Mentors via The Chamber of Commerce.

17. During the reporting period, ATEED Business and Innovation Advisors met with 14 businesses in the Puketāpapa Local Board area, six for innovation advice and services and 10 for business growth and capability advice and services (two were returning clients). From these engagements:

· Two connections were made to Callaghan Innovation services and programmes

· Four RBPN vouchers were issued to assist with business capability training

· Four referrals were made to Business Mentors New Zealand

· Seven connections were made to ATEED staff and programmes

· Thirty-eight connections were made to other businesses or programmes.

Other support for new businesses

18. During the period, ATEED also ran workshops and events aimed at establishing or growing a new business and building capability. Five people from the Puketāpapa Local Board area attended an event as below:

· Starting off Right workshop - 1

· Business clinic – 4.

Filming activity within the Puketāpapa Local Board area

19. ATEED’s Screen Auckland team facilitates, processes and issues film permits for filming activity in public open space. This activity supports local businesses and employment, as well as providing a revenue stream to local boards for the use of local parks.

20. Between 1 July and 31 December 2018, a total of 312 film permits^{^[2]} were issued in the Auckland region, five of these permits were issued in the Puketāpapa Local Board area. During the period, 75 permits were issued for TV commercials in the Auckland region, making up 32 per cent of permits issued. A third of total TVCs are destined for an international market.

21. The Puketāpapa Local Board area’s share of film permit revenue was $1,113.04^{^[3]} for the period (total for all boards combined was $46,729.13).

22. Some of the key film productions that were issued permits to film in the Puketāpapa Local Board area were:

· The Gulf

· The Luminaries.

Youth Connections – transfer to The Southern Initiative (TSI) / Western Initiative (WI)

23. Following an independent review, and with support from the major philanthropic funder, the Youth Connections programme transferred to TSI in November 2018. This transfer reflects the high numbers and concentrations of Auckland youth who are not in education, training or employment (NEET) in the southern and western initiative areas. ATEED supported the independent review, and is now working with the TSI/TWI team to support the transfer. In 2019, we will partner to evolve the ATEED-led Youth Employer Pledge with Auckland-region employers.

Local Jobs and Skills Hubs

24. ATEED is the regional partner for the network of Auckland Jobs and Skills Hubs. These multi-agency hubs support employers at developments where there is a high and sustained demand for local labour and skills development. The Auckland network includes Ara (Auckland Airport development), CBD (Wynyard Quarter and city centre development), and Tāmaki hubs. During 2018, the Hubs placed nearly 400 people into work (more than half came off benefit), and over 1,800 people were trained. ATEED is the backbone organisation for the CBD Jobs and Skills Hub, where Māori represented over a third (37 percent) of job placements, and a further 30 percent were Pasifika.

25. The Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment commissioned a review of the hubs in late 2018 which found that these pilots have been a success, and made recommendations to scale up and strengthen hubs operations in Auckland and nationally. Two new hubs will be open by June 2019, in Kaipātiki (Northcote), and Manukau (town centre) to support local employment and upskilling for these developments. ATEED supports employers and local communities to design and benefit from hub services, and is leading a schools-engagement project in CBD Jobs and Skills Hub, which will identify options for connecting local schools and employers to grow awareness of employment and career pathways.

Destination

Local destination management and marketing activity

26. In early September, ATEED supported the Ngā Iwi o Tāmaki Tourism hui, presenting insights on tourism opportunities in Tāmaki Makaurau and contributing to the direction of an iwi-led and iwi-driven Tāmaki Makaurau tourism strategy for 2030 and beyond. ATEED will continue to support this group as they develop the strategy and deliver on these aspirations.

27. ATEED presented to and is supporting a collective of around 27 urban marae (Te Kotahi o Tāmaki – Marae Collective) based around Tāmaki Makaurau that have come together to seek opportunities and work collaboratively to support our Māori communities.

28. ATEED is a part of the Council-wide Te Kete Rukuruku – beneath our feet project to support mana whenua-led sharing of stories that raise awareness of and curiosity about the wide range of cultural stories and unique Māori identity of Tāmaki Makaurau.

Regional destination management and marketing activity

29. Regional dispersal continues to be a priority for ATEED. During the period, ATEED’s Winter Campaign, Made for Winter showcased Auckland’s food and beverage stories from across the Auckland region, targeting domestic visitors. Traditionally, this campaign focussed on CBD restaurants, however for the past two years, it has extended to the wider Auckland region. There were six videos in total, each one highlighting a specific Auckland F&B theme.

30. The videos all feature Sir John Kirwan talking to the creators of Auckland’s F&B industry, getting to the heart of who they are, their story, their product and what makes Auckland’s F&B proposition unique and special. The following businesses were featured in the videos:

· Gourmet Hāngi video – featuring Rewi Spraggon, Hāngi Master

· HIPGROUP – featuring Mike de Vries (Executive Chef)

· Matakana Markets and Village - featuring stallholders, Nico from Honest Chocolat

· Sawmill Brewery – featuring Mike Sutherland and Kirsty McKay (owners)

· Ben Bayley at The Grounds

· Kai Pasifika.

31. As part of the spring media programme, ATEED partnered with travel, foodie and leisure influencers, bloggers and media personalities to create high-end, inspirational and visually impactful content illustrating Auckland as a top spring/summer destination. The core narrative was Auckland’s unique food and beverage offering, complimented further by entertainment experiences. Influencers took their audience on a journey as they explored some of the greater Auckland region’s food experience and offerings, such as the Ōtara markets, Auckland Airport region, Chelsea Bay, Takapuna, Matakana, Kumeu, Kingsland, Mission Bay and a number of other Auckland areas. The influencer content were supported with an editorial partnership with Fairfax and NZME highlighting the wider region’s experiences.

Delivered, funded and facilitated events

32. During the period, ATEED delivered the Auckland Diwali Festival which was held at Aotea Square and Upper Queen Street from 20-21 October 2018. There was an attendance of 59,900 down by 7 per cent from the 2017 festival, due mainly to the event being held on Labour Weekend. Results from the customer survey showed an overall customer satisfaction score of 87 per cent, with 89 per cent of people surveyed agreeing that the festival increased pride in Auckland and 95 per cent agreeing that the festival makes Auckland a more enjoyable place to live.

33. During the period, residents of the Puketāpapa Local Board area were also able to enjoy events funded or facilitated by ATEED across the Auckland region, including the FIBA Basketball World Cup 2019 Asian Qualifier, Pan Pacific Youth Water Polo Festival, New Zealand International Film Festival, Auckland On Water Boat Show, Rugby League New Zealand vs Australia and Australia vs Tonga games, Auckland Diwali Festival, ASB Auckland Marathon, Auckland Tuatara Baseball home games, the ITM Auckland SuperSprint, Monster Energy S-X Open Auckland, Farmers Santa Parade, and the Wondergarden.

34. A full schedule of major events is available on ATEED’s website, aucklandnz.com

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

35. ATEED assesses and manages our initiatives on a case-by-case basis and engages with the Council group where required.

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

Local impacts and local board views

36. Local Board views are not sought for the purposes of this report. Local Board views were sought for some of the initiatives described in this report.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

37. The proposed decision to receive the six-monthly report has no impact on Māori. ATEED assesses and responds to any impact that our initiatives may have on Māori on a case-by-case basis.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

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

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

39. The proposed decision to receive the six-monthly report has no risk. ATEED assesses and manages any risk associated with our initiatives on a case-by-case basis.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

40. ATEED will provide the next six-monthly report to the Local Board in August 2019 and will cover the period 1 January to 30 June 2019.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Samantha-Jane Miranda - Operational Strategy Advisor (ATEED)

Authorisers

James Robinson - Head of Strategy and Planning (ATEED)

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

21 March 2019

Allocation of funding to Citizens Advice Bureaux

File No.: CP2019/03392

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek local board feedback on the proposed new model for allocating funding to Citizens Advice Bureaux (CAB) and on increasing the baseline grant to Auckland Citizens Advice Bureaux Incorporated (ACABx) by $200,000 in 2019-2021.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. There are 32 CAB sites in the Auckland region, operated by 11 separate CAB organisations. Bureaux staff and volunteers offer free information, advice, referral and client advisory service to local communities.

3. Local boards hold relationships with their local bureaux, which report on service usage and other matters of interest to the community.

4. In 2018/2019, council granted $2.067 million to ACABx conditional on staff and ACABx jointly developing a new funding model to be agreed by 1 April 2019.

5. The new model developed with ACABx is population-based with a deprivation factor to reflect communities with high needs and access constraints.

6. Feedback is sought from the local board on the new funding model and the retention of the additional $200,000 to baseline funding of $1.867 million provided to ACABx in 2018/2019.

7. Local board feedback will be included in the report to the Environment and Community Committee in May 2019 to approve a new funding model for CAB.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) approve feedback on the new model for allocating funding to Citizens Advice Bureaux (based on 90 per cent population and 10 per cent deprivation) and on increasing the baseline grant to Auckland Citizens Advice Bureaux Incorporated by $200,000 in 2019-2021 (refer to Attachment A to the agenda report).

Horopaki

Context

8. ACABx was established in 2012 to provide a support structure for funding from council and other bodies and the development of a strategic direction for the service in the Auckland region.

9. Currently there are 32 Auckland CAB sites in 18 local board areas (refer Attachment B). There are no sites in Franklin, Great Barrier and Upper Harbour.

10. Auckland bureaux are members of ACABx and Citizens Advice Bureau New Zealand (CABNZ). The role of CABNZ is to support membership standards and influence development of social policies and services at a national level.

11. In 2018, a joint working group of council staff and ACABx was established to develop a new funding model for Auckland bureaux.

Auckland Council funding of CAB

12. In 2018/2019, council granted $1.867 million to ACABx, which distributes funding to bureaux to provide services across Auckland.

13. Through council’s 10-year Budget 2018-2028, an additional one-off grant of $200,000 was approved to maintain and develop the service in the 2018-2019 financial year (resolution number GB/2018/91). The ACABx board have distributed $90,300 of this grant to bureaux facing financial pressure (Helensville, CAB Auckland City, Māngere). The remaining funds will be used to test new ways of delivering the service and develop a regional network provision plan.

14. Council provides accommodation for bureaux at minimal cost under community lease arrangements, which is equivalent to a $641,000 subsidy per annum. In addition to the funding through ACABx, some local boards also provide grants to bureaux for specific purposes.

15. The Environment and Community Committee set four conditions for the 2018/2019 operational grant, as shown in Table 1 (resolution number ENV/2018/48).

Table 1: Funding conditions 2018/2019

Funding condition	Progress to date
A joint review between Auckland Council and ACABx of the funding model	· Joint working group established · Considered what to include in the funding model · Agreed a new funding model and transitional arrangements
Updated Strategic Relationship Agreement to include the development of a regional network provision plan	· Revised Strategic Relationship Agreement signed between Auckland Council and ACABx with scoping and timeline for regional network provision planning to be agreed by June 2019
Improved reporting and access to consistent data on the service provided at regional and site level	· Council, CABNZ and ACABx jointly developed new report templates for bureaux to provide data and commentary on their activities · CABNZ is currently rolling out an improved database and data collection system (CABNET) which will impact the Q3/Q4 reports for 2018/2019
Strengthened and more strategic relationships between local boards and bureaux	· The revised Strategic Relationship Agreement sets out guidance on the relationship between local boards and bureaux

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Current funding model

16. The current model allocates the funding received by ACABx to sub-regional clusters of bureaux based on 2013 census population data.

17. The current funding model was implemented by ACABx with support from council as an interim approach to transition from legacy council funding to regional funding.

Council staff model

18. In April 2016, the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee resolved to:

seek information from staff regarding a review of the service after consultation with the 21 local boards on the issues raised by the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board regarding Auckland Citizens Advice Bureaux Incorporated funding, to achieve greater equity and fairness, taking into consideration social issues in local communities across Auckland (resolution number REG/2016/22).

19. A review of CAB services was undertaken, and council staff developed a revised funding allocation model using 70 per cent population, 25 per cent client usage, and 5 per cent deprivation. This model responded to the review findings and focused on funding to achieve greater equity and fairness.

20. This model was not supported by ACABx who strongly objected to the introduction of client usage as a funding factor.

New model from joint working group

21. The joint working group have developed a new funding model for bureaux using:

· 90 per cent population, using annual Statistics New Zealand population estimates

· 10 per cent deprivation to increase the capacity of bureaux to meet the complex needs of communities with higher levels of deprivation. This will support the development of new service approaches to increase the access to CAB services within these communities.

22. ACABx advise that this model will be difficult to implement at the current funding level as funding will be reduced to bureaux in the north, central and Ōtara. Some bureaux are experiencing financial pressure and any decline in funding would lead to a significant reduction in services.

23. If the annual grant of $1.867 million is increased by $200,000 per annum, ACABx have indicated that the new funding model could be implemented without service reductions if bureaux continue to receive funding at the 2018-2019 level at a minimum. To further moderate the redistribution impacts of the new funding model at a bureau level, population-based increases in funding would be capped at 10 per cent for 2019-2021.

24. The application of the new funding model is shown in Table 2.

Table 2: New funding model allocations

Bureau	2018/2019 Actual	New model (current funding)	New model (plus $200,000)	Percentage difference between 2018/2019 Actual and New model plus $200,000
Helensville	$40,365	$36,872	$40,365	0
Hibiscus Coast	$51,712	$58,713	$58,920	14
Wellsford	$38,298	$36,770	$38,298	0
CAB North Shore (5 sites)	$309,030	$250,153	$309,030	0
WaiCAB (5 sites)	$298,746	$300,401	$344,999	15
CABAC (10 sites)	$499,901	$487,965	$553,597	11
Māngere (3 sites)	$169,849	$179,162	$190,494	12
Manurewa (2 sites)	$82,775	$114,454	$118.217	43
Ōtara	$86,927	$78,215	$86,927	0
Pakuranga (2 sites)	$98,662	$109,188	$109,262	11
Papakura	$86,471	$110,844	$112,628	30
Total	$1,762,737	$1,762,737	$1,962,737	11

Note: Based on 2018-2019 funding allocated. Excludes provision for premises lease payments to Auckland Council and ACABx fee (2 per cent)

25. The new funding model developed by the joint working group is the preferred model for implementation in 2019-2021. During this period, the regional network provision plan will be developed, and council’s level of investment can be confirmed and provided for as part of the 10-year Budget 2021-2031.

26. The new model supports The Auckland Plan 2050 outcome, ‘Belonging and Participation’:

· Focus area two – Accessible services and social and cultural infrastructure that are responsive in meeting people's evolving needs

· Focus area six – Focusing the council’s investment to address disparities and serve communities of greatest need.

27. The criteria applied to assess the models were developed by the joint working group. Consideration is given to equity, responsiveness to population growth and community need. Under the Auckland Plan 2050, adopting an equitable approach means prioritising the most vulnerable groups and communities to achieve more equitable outcomes. An assessment of the funding allocation model is shown in Table 3.

Table 3: Funding model assessment

Criteria X does not meet ü partially meets üüfully meets	Current model	Council staff model	New model from joint working group (preferred model)
Equity	X	ü	üü
Population growth	X	üü	üü
Community need	X	üü	üü
Advantages	ACABx used the current funding model to transition to regional funding from legacy arrangements	Uses latest population estimates to reflect future growth Deprivation factor supports equity for populations with complex issues and access constraints Client usage as a proxy indicator of community need which takes into consideration that service users do not necessarily just access services in the area they live	More equitable across Auckland with population-based funding covering all the region except Great Barrier Island Uses latest population estimates to reflect future growth Targeted deprivation factor (NZDep2013, deciles 8-10) supports equity for populations with complex issues and access constraints Provides platform for Auckland Council and ACABx to work together to develop a regional network provision plan Supported by ACABx if additional funding is retained
Disadvantages	The legacy cluster funding arrangements do not provide for service development Relies on 2013 census data Does not target funding for populations with complex issues and access constraints	Not supported by ACABx because client usage data does not consider the range of complexity in interactions from simple information requests to lengthy interviews Redistribution of bureaux funding within current funding envelope could lead to service reduction unless alternative funding is sourced	Redistribution of bureaux funding within current funding envelope could lead to service reduction unless alternative funding is sourced

28. A comparative overview of the funding models is provided in Attachment C.

29. ACABx support the new model conditional on the retention of the additional 2018-2019 one‑off funding of $200,000 as part of the baseline operational grant. This increased funding level would ensure that no bureaux would lose funding when the model is implemented in 2019-2020. Increased funding enables the inclusion of the Franklin population in the new funding model.

30. ACABx has indicated that the funding for deprivation will be allocated to bureaux for initiatives to enhance access to services and to trial the development of new service models.

31. Staff support the new model as it starts to address equitable services across Auckland through population-based funding and targeted deprivation. The model provides a platform for future service growth and the development of a regional network provision plan for CAB services.

32. Staff support the addition of $200,000 to the ACABx baseline grant from 2019-2020 to implement the new model and extend service funding across the region. All bureaux will receive their current or increased level of funding if council increases baseline funding by $200,000.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

33. Council staff from across the business work cooperatively on matters concerning CAB. Council departments and units that were consulted on the new model and involved in regional network provision planning include:

· Community Facilities and Community Places – administration of the leases for CAB premises and facility operation

· Libraries and Information – some CABs are co-located with libraries

· Service, Strategy and Integration – expertise in service design and integrating service offers.

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

Local impacts and local board views

34. Local boards provided input to the 2017 review of CAB services, which has informed the development of the new funding model. Local boards generally agreed that a higher level of funding was required to maintain services, and that any funding model needed to consider the area’s demographics and other needs in addition to overall population.

35. Overall, local boards reported that they had a good relationship with bureaux, that they were providing valuable, wide-ranging services to the community, and that there was room to improve reporting, service responsiveness and equity of funding.

36. Feedback is sought from the local board on the proposed new funding model and the retention of the additional $200,000 to baseline funding of $1.867 million provided to ACABx in 2018-2019.

37. Local board feedback will be included in the report to the Environment and Community Committee in May 2019 to approve a new funding model for CAB. The report will also reflect views on the implementation of the new model from ACABx consultation with bureaux.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

38. CAB services are available to all, and there is currently limited targeting of services to groups, including Māori.

39. Staff and ACABx have worked together on development of the new model and no specific engagement with Māori was undertaken.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

40. It is recommended that the additional $200,000 is retained in the ACABx baseline grant, bringing the annual total to $2.067 million in 2019-2021. This excludes any consumer price index adjustment.

41. The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board has provided funding from 2015-2018 to Māngere CAB to operate a CAB agency in Ōtāhuhu. Reliance on the local board funding would reduce under the new model, as the Māngere CAB would receive increased funding of 12 per cent if the $200,000 is retained in the ACABx baseline grant.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

42. In applying the new model without the retention of the additional $200,000, funding to the following bureaux would decline:

· Helensville (-9 per cent)

· Wellsford (-4 per cent)

· CAB North Shore (-19 per cent)

· CAB Auckland City (-2 per cent)

· Ōtara (-10 per cent).

43. If the grant is increased by $200,000 per annum, no bureaux would face a reduction in funding.

44. There is a risk of reduction in CAB services in some communities if funding declines to bureaux. To mitigate this risk, it is recommended that the additional $200,000 is retained.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

45. Local board feedback will be included in a report to the Environment and Community Committee in May 2019 to approve a funding model.

46. Staff will work with ACABx to scope a regional network provision plan project by June 2019. The plan development will involve bureaux and other stakeholders in setting the direction for the CAB service from 2021 onwards.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Local board feedback template	93
b ⇩	Map of bureaux locations by local board	95
c ⇩	Comparative overview of funding models	97

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Sibyl Mandow - Advisor - ACE

Authorisers

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

21 March 2019

2019 Local Government New Zealand Conference and Annual General Meeting

File No.: CP2019/02714

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To inform local boards about the Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) Conference and Annual General Meeting (AGM) in Te Whanganui-a-Tara Wellington, from Sunday 7 July to Tuesday 9 July 2019, and to invite local boards to nominate elected members to attend.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The LGNZ Conference and AGM takes place at the TSB Arena, Te Whanganui-a-Tara Wellington from 1.30pm Sunday 7 July to 12.30pm on Tuesday 9 July 2019.

3. Local board members are invited to attend the conference. As the venue for 2019 is in Te Whanganui-a-Tara Wellington and given the cost of elected member attendance, staff recommend that one member per local board attend.

4. The Governing Body can select up to five Governing Body members to attend the conference.

5. In addition to the official delegates, LGNZ requires prior notice of which local board members plan to attend the AGM. Members wishing to attend are asked to register their intention with the Kura Kāwana programme by Friday 12 April 2019 so that this information can be provided to LGNZ.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) nominate one elected member to attend the Local Government New Zealand 2019 Conference and Annual General Meeting in Te Whanganui-a-Tara Wellington, from Sunday 7 July to Tuesday 9 July 2019.

b) confirm that conference attendance, including travel and accommodation, will be paid for in accordance with the current Auckland Council Elected Member Expense Policy.

c) note that any members who wish to attend the AGM must provide their names to the Kura Kāwana programme team by Friday 12 April 2019 to ensure that they are registered with Local Government New Zealand.

Horopaki

Context

6. This year, the LGNZ conference and AGM will be held at the TSB Arena, Te Whanganui-a-Tara Wellington, from Sunday 7 July to Tuesday 9 July 2019. The AGM will commence at 1.30pm on Sunday 7 July 2018, with the conference programme commencing at 4.30pm on that day and concluding at 12.30pm on Tuesday 9 July 2019.

7. The conference programme has the theme ‘Riding the localism wave: Putting communities in charge’. The high-level programme is attached (refer Attachment A).

8. The AGM takes place on the first day of the conference. The LGNZ constitution permits the Auckland Council to appoint four delegates to represent it at the AGM, with one of the delegates being appointed as presiding delegate.

9. Elected members who hold LGNZ roles are:

Mayor Phil Goff	Metro Sector representative on the National Council
Councillor Penny Hulse	Chair of Zone One and Zone One representative on National Council, Member Conference Committee
Deputy Mayor Bill Cashmore	Auckland Council representative on Regional Sector
Councillor Wayne Walker	Auckland Council representative on Zone One
Councillor Alf Filipaina	LGNZ Te Maruata Roopu Whakahaere
Councillor Richard Hills	Member Policy Advisory Group
Waitematā Local Board Chair Pippa Coom	Member Governance and Strategy Advisory Group

10. Traditionally the four AGM delegates have been the Mayor, the Chief Executive and two Governing Body members who hold LGNZ roles.

11. The Governing Body will consider an item on AGM attendance at its meeting on 28 March 2019 which includes the recommendation that Mayor Phil Goff be the presiding delegate and the other three delegates be comprised of either:

· two members of the Governing Body who hold a formal representation role with LGNZ and the Chief Executive, or

· one member of the Governing Body who holds a formal representation role with LGNZ and the Chief Executive, and a local board member.

12. Delegates in 2018 were:

· Mayor Phil Goff

· Deputy Mayor Bill Cashmore

· Councillor Penny Hulse

· Local Board Chairperson Pippa Coom.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

13. Local board members are invited to attend the conference. As the venue for 2019 is in Te Whanganui-a-Tara Wellington and given the cost of elected member attendance, it is recommended that one member per local board attend.

14. This means that a maximum of 26 Auckland Council elected members would attend the conference.

15. Delegates who attend are encouraged to report back to their local boards.

16. In addition, local board members can attend the AGM as observers, or as a delegate (depending on the Governing Body decision), provided their names are included on the AGM registration form, which will be signed by the Mayor.

17. LGNZ requires prior notice of which local board members plan to attend the AGM. Members wishing to attend are asked to register their intention with the Kura Kāwana programme by Friday 12 April 2019 so that this information can be collated and provided to LGNZ.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

18. The Governing Body will also consider an item on conference attendance at its meeting on 28 March 2019 which includes the recommendations that the Mayor is appointed presiding delegate to the AGM and that three other delegates be appointed (one of which may be a local board member). It is recommended that these delegates also attend the LGNZ conference, along with any other Governing Body members up to a total of five attendees.

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

Local impacts and local board views

19. The LGNZ Conference has relevance to local board members and their specific roles and responsibilities and is in line with the purpose provided for in the elected member development budget.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

20. The LGNZ National Council has a sub-committee, Te Maruata, which has the role of promoting increased representation of Māori as elected members of local government, and of enhancing Māori participation in local government processes. It also provides support for councils in building relationships with iwi, hapu and Māori groups. Te Maruata provides Māori input on development of future policies or legislation relating to local government. Councillor Alf Filipaina is a member of the sub-committee. Te Maruata will hold a hui on 6 July 2019.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

21. The normal registration rate is $1410 (early bird) or $1510 (standard).

22. Costs of attendance for one member from each local board are to be met from the elected members’ development budget, as managed by the Kura Kāwana Programme.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

23. The key risk is of delayed decision-making impacting costs and registration choices.

24. The sooner the registration for the nominated local board member can be made, the more likely it is that Auckland Council can take advantage of early bird pricing for the conference and flights, all done via bulk booking.

25. Delayed information may also impact registration into preferred conference streams or events.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

26. Once members are confirmed to attend, the Kura Kāwana programme will co-ordinate and book all conference registrations, as well as requests to attend the AGM.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Programme for 2019 LGNZ conference and AGM	123

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Linda Gifford – Programme Manager Kura Kawana

Authorisers

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

[1] This activity is subject to local boards prioritising local economic development, and subsequently allocating funding to local economic development through their local board agreements.

[2] This does not reflect all filming that takes place in studio, private property or low impact activity that wouldn’t have required a permit.

[3] This includes Local Board fees only, other permit fees directed to Auckland Transport (Special Events) and Regional Parks. Figures exclude GST and are as per the month the permit was invoiced, not necessarily when the activity took place.

Chairperson	Harry Doig
Deputy Chairperson	Julie Fairey
Members	Anne-Marie Coury
	David Holm
	Shail Kaushal
	Ella Kumar, JP

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Anne-Marie Coury's report, 01 February - 28 February 2019	107
b ⇩	Julie Fairey's report, 08 February - 07 March 2019	111
c ⇩	Shail Kaushal's report, 08 February - 07 March 2019	115
d ⇩	Ella Kumar's report, 27 November 2018 - 28 February 2019	117

Author	Selina Powell - Democracy Advisor - Puketapapa
Authorisers	Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Author	Selina Powell - Democracy Advisor - Puketapapa
Authoriser	Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager