Agenda of Upper Harbour Local Board

An apology from Member J McLean has 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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

4 Confirmation of Minutes

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Thursday, 18 April 2019, 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 Upper Harbour Local Board. This means that details relating to deputations can be included in the published agenda. Total speaking time per deputation is ten minutes or as resolved by the meeting.

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.”

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Upper Harbour Local Board open unconfirmed minutes - 18 April 2019	9
b ⇩	Upper Harbour Local Board minutes attachments - 18 April 2019	21

Upper Harbour Local Board

16 May 2019

New community lease to Waitākere City Racquets Sports Trust and new sub-lease to West Harbour Tennis Club Incorporated at Picasso Reserve, 31a Picasso Drive, West Harbour

File No.: CP2019/06623

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To grant a new community lease to Waitakere City Racquets Sports Trust for part of Picasso Reserve, 31a Picasso Drive, West Harbour.

2. To approve Waitākere City Racquets Sports Trust entering into a sub-lease with West Harbour Tennis Club Incorporated.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

3. Waitākere City Racquets Sports Trust has a community ground lease with the former Waitākere City Council for clubrooms and tennis facilities on part of Picasso Reserve, West Harbour. The trust’s lease commenced on 1 May 2003 and reached final expiry on 31 October 2017. The lease is currently holding over on a month-to-month basis.

4. There is a sub-lease arrangement between the trust and West Harbour Tennis Club Incorporated (formerly Belvedere Tennis Club Incorporated) for the operation of the clubroom and courts for the purposes of playing tennis.

5. As asset owner, the trust has applied for a new community ground lease and approval to enter into a sub-lease arrangement with the West Harbour Tennis Club to continue its activities.

6. As specified in the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012, groups that own their own buildings have an automatic right to apply for a new lease at the end of their occupancy term. There is no requirement to undertake an expression of interest process.

7. The reserve is held by Auckland Council in fee simple as a classified recreation reserve and is subject to the Reserves Act 1977. The operative reserve management plan for Picasso Reserve adopted in 1994 contemplates the activities of the club. Public notification and/or iwi engagement prior to granting a new lease is not required in accordance with section 54 (2A) of the Reserves Act 1977, as the activity is contemplated within the operative reserve management plan.

8. Previous plans for the reserve to be a sub-regional tennis centre with 20 courts did not eventuate due to site logistics and a lack of funding. The leased area has been reduced to accommodate the new site area and this is supported by the club.

9. This report recommends that the Upper Harbour Local Board grant a new community lease to Waitākere City Racquets Sports Trust for a term of 10 years, commencing on 16 May 2019 with one 10-year right of renewal, as specified in the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) grant a new community lease to Waitākere City Racquets Sports Trust for 10,132.8m² (more or less) on part of Picasso Reserve, 31a Picasso Drive, West Harbour, described as Lot 5 DP 1656558, part Lot 114 DP128337 and part Lot 301 DP 128372, (refer to Attachment A to the agenda report), subject to the following terms and conditions:

i. term: 10 years commencing 16 May 2019, with one 10-year right of renewal

ii. rent: $1 plus GST per annum if requested

iii. public access to the two tennis courts marked as public courts on the site plan (refer to Attachment A to the agenda report) are kept available for use by the general public at all reasonable times at a charge that is considered reasonable by the lessor

iv. the Waitākere City Racquets Sports Trust Community Outcomes Plan as approved be attached to the community lease document (refer to Attachment B to the agenda report)

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

b) grant approval for the Waitākere City Racquets Sports Trust to enter into a sub‑lease with West Harbour Tennis Club Incorporated to occupy and manage the tennis facility, being 10,132.8m² (more or less) on part of Picasso Reserve, 31a Picasso Drive, West Harbour, described as Lot 5 DP 1656558, part Lot 114 DP128337 and part Lot 301 DP 128372, (refer to Attachment C to the agenda report) on the following terms and conditions:

i. the sub-lease shall be for a term concurrent with the head lease, less one day, with or without a right of renewal.

Horopaki

Context

10. This report considers the granting of a new community lease to Waitākere City Racquets Sports Trust for part of Picasso Reserve, 31a Picasso Drive, West Harbour, and for Waitākere City Racquets Sports Trust to enter into a sub-lease with West Harbour Tennis Club Incorporated.

11. The Upper Harbour Local Board holds allocated decision-making authority relating to local, recreation, sport and community facilities, including community leasing matters.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Picasso Reserve

12. Picasso Reserve covers an area of approximately 7.73ha and sits centrally within a residential subdivision development in West Harbour. The Waipareira Stream runs through the northern part of the site, and the reserve connects to the upper Waitematā Harbour via a network of reserves to the east. The reserve is held by Auckland Council in fee simple and was classified as a recreation reserve in 1996.

13. The operative reserve management plan for Picasso Reserve adopted in 1994 contemplates the activity of tennis at this location, including two courts that will be freely available to the public at all times.

14. Public notification and/or iwi engagement prior to granting a new lease is therefore, not required in accordance with section 54 (2A) of the Reserves Act 1977.

Lease arrangements

Waitākere City Racquets Sports Trust

15. Waitākere City Racquets Sports Trust (incorporated society number 588326) occupies a site on Picasso Reserve under the terms of a community lease which commenced on 1 May 2003 and expired on 31 October 2017. It is holding over on a monthly basis. The trust owns the clubrooms and other improvements which are well maintained as assessed on a site visit 10 October 2018.

16. The trust’s charitable purposes are:

‘to provide, or assist in the provision in New Zealand of, facilities for the playing of sport (including but not limited to the playing of tennis) both indoors and outdoors, for the benefit of the public at large (including but not limited to members of the general public in the Waitākere city metropolitan area) and in the interests of social welfare, and by the provision of those facilities to make sport available to all members of the community, from school-aged children to young adults to middle-aged and retired people.’

17. The trust has made significant investment in its facilities. In December 2016, the pavilion roof was replaced, and in December 2017, four floodlit courts were resurfaced. There are seven courts owned by the trust, and the previous lease provided two courts be available for public use when not required by the club. This arrangement will be continued in the proposed new community lease and sub-lease.

West Harbour Tennis Club Incorporated

18. There is a sub-lease arrangement between the trust and West Harbour Tennis Club Incorporated (incorporated society number 223935) for land, buildings and tennis facilities.

19. West Harbour Tennis Club Incorporated was formerly known as Belvedere Tennis Club Incorporated and previous to that, the Massey Tennis Club Incorporated, which was incorporated under the Incorporated Societies Act 1908 on 12 November 1970.

20. The club is part of the Tennis Northern Region and its objectives are:

· to promote and foster the sport of tennis

· to enter and control club teams in competition wherever possible

· to promote fellowship by means of such sporting, social and other activities as the committee may from time to time arrange.

21. The clubrooms are a single-storey building providing a lounge, bar, kitchen and administration space. A site visit ascertained the building is well used, managed and maintained with the leased area in a neat and tidy condition. Park furniture, including wooden benches, are maintained by Auckland Council.

22. Previous plans for the reserve to be a sub-regional tennis centre with 20 courts did not eventuate due to site logistics and a lack of funding. The leased area has been reduced to accommodate the current developed areas and this is supported by the club.

23. Two of the courts within the new leased area are for public use, and access is provided to the public with the committee opening courts and collecting fees of $15 per court per hour.

24. The club has a membership of 180 playing members, of which approximately 52 are under 21 years of age.

25. The club runs after school and holiday programmes catering for children of all ages and abilities. The club also liaises with local groups to enhance community spirit and provides the clubrooms as a venue for:

· Zumba and fitness classes

· Tai Kwan Do

· Marina View School hockey practices

· Korean user groups

· engagement, wedding and birthday functions

· Barnardos

· local marae.

26. Financial accounts provided indicate that the trust holds funds sufficient to meet its liabilities and are being managed appropriately. All necessary insurance cover, including public liability insurance, are in place.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

27. Council’s Sport and Recreation team advised that a new lease is supported by the regional bodies, Tennis Auckland and Tennis Northern.

28. The council’s Sport and Recreation team are investigating increasing community access to tennis club facilities (leased) across the North Shore and Upper Harbour areas. Public access to courts has not been realised and is not being marketed to the community effectively, and are requesting clubs adopt (and part pay for) an online automated system for public access to courts. Increasing community access to the public courts located on Picasso Reserve will be considered and progressed separately from the granting of a new community lease and sub-lease.

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

Local impacts and local board views

29. The Upper Harbour Local Board holds allocated decision-making authority to approve the granting of a new community lease and sub-lease arrangement.

30. At its business meeting on 15 June 2017, the Upper Harbour Local Board resolved to approve the 2017/2018 Community Facilities work programme (resolution number UH/2017/84). The proposed new lease to the Waitākere City Racquets Sports Trust is listed on the 2017/2018 Community Lease work programme.

31. The proposal to grant a new community lease and approval to enter into a sub-lease was workshopped on 22 November 2018 with the local board. The board was informed that public notification and iwi consultation is not a requirement in the granting of a new community lease to the trust or approval to enter into a sub-lease.

32. The recommendations within this report support the 2017 Upper Harbour Local Board Plan outcomes of:

· empowered, engaged and connected Upper Harbour communities (outcome 1)

· healthy and active communities (outcome 3).

33. Community groups seeking a new lease are required to include a community outcomes plan as a schedule to the lease document. A community outcomes plan aligned with the 2017 Upper Harbour Local Board Plan has been negotiated and agreed with the club.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

34. Auckland Council is committed to meeting its responsibilities under Te Tiriti o Waitangi and its broader legal obligations to Māori. The council recognises these responsibilities are distinct from the Crown’s Treaty obligations and fall within a local government Tāmaki Makaurau context. These commitments are articulated in the council’s key strategic planning documents; the Auckland Plan, the Long-term Plan 2018-2028, the Unitary Plan and local board plans.

35. Additionally, the objective of community leases is to ensure community facilities are well maintained and accessible to all members of the community, including Māori.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

36. There are no financial implications associated with granting a new community lease and approval to enter into a sub-lease to the trust.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

37. If the new community lease and sub-lease is not granted, this will compromise the ability of the trust to give a sub-lease to the club allowing it to provide services to the community. This will have a negative impact on Upper Harbour local board plan outcomes.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

38. Subject to the granting of a new community lease and sub-lease, council staff will work with key representatives of the trust to finalise the deed arrangements.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Waitākere City Racquets Sports Trust site plan	47
b ⇩	Waitākere City Racquets Sports Trust community outcomes plan	49
c ⇩	Site plan for sub-lease to West Harbour Tennis Club	51

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Michelle Knudsen - Lease Advisor

Authorisers

Rod Sheridan - General Manager Community Facilities

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Upper Harbour Local Board

16 May 2019

Upper Harbour Local Parks Management Plan: Scope, engagement approach and approval for intention to prepare the plan

File No.: CP2019/06755

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To endorse the project scope, timeline and engagement approach for the Upper Harbour Local Parks Management Plan, and to approve public notification of the intention to prepare the plan.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Upper Harbour Local Board has approved the development of the Upper Harbour Local Parks Management Plan. The local parks management plan will provide a policy framework to manage use, protection and development of the Upper Harbour local parks network.

3. The development of the plan will follow the process outlined in the Reserves Act 1977.

4. Staff are seeking approval from the local board to notify the intention to prepare a plan and to invite written suggestions, pursuant to section 41(5) of the Reserves Act 1977.

5. The public notices are likely to be published in late May 2018, and the deadline for written suggestions will be the end of June 2018.

6. The scope of the local parks management plan includes land where the local board has allocated or delegated decision-making authority, and includes land held under the Reserves Act 1977 and the Local Government Act 2002.

7. Out of scope areas of open space are those:

· that are not owned or managed by Auckland Council

· where the local board does not have a decision-making role, e.g. regional parks, unformed legal road and drainage reserves.

8. For unformed legal roads and drainage reserves, the local board does have an advocacy role which can be expressed through the plan where these areas act as open space.

9. This report also outlines the engagement approach for the development of the local parks management plan, which provides engagement opportunities beyond the statutory requirements of the Reserves Act 1977 and the report seeks the local board’s endorsement for this approach.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) endorse the scope and engagement approach for the development of the Upper Harbour (omnibus) Local Parks Management Plan.

b) approve public notification of its intention to prepare a combined (omnibus) Local Parks Management Plan for all local parks and reserves in the Upper Harbour Local Board area and invite written suggestions on the proposed plan.

Horopaki

Context

10. The local board has decision-making responsibility for approximately 220 parks, reserves and other areas of open space in Upper Harbour. Sixty-seven parks are covered by existing reserve management plans.

11. In June 2018, the local board resolved to prepare an omnibus local parks management plan for all local parks in Upper Harbour (resolution number UH/2018/66).

12. This report outlines the scope of the omnibus local parks management plan and presents an engagement approach for the local board’s endorsement.

13. This report also seeks approval to publicly notify the intention to prepare a local parks management plan, as required under section 41(5) of the Reserves Act 1977.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Scope of the Upper Harbour Local Parks Management Plan

What is in scope of the Upper Harbour Local Parks Management Plan?

14. Reserve management plans are mandatory for most reserves held under the Reserves Act 1977 (RA), but not for parks held under the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA).

15. It is proposed that the local parks management plan covers all local parks held under the RA and the LGA as the plan is intended to be the guiding policy framework for managing use, protection and development of the Upper Harbour local parks network.

16. The plan will include general management principles and policies which will apply to all parks or park types across the local board area, as well as park-specific policies and guidance where required, and will replace all existing reserve management plans for local parks in Upper Harbour.

17. There are some areas for which the local board does not have allocated or delegated decision-making, but does have an advocacy role, especially where those areas act as park land. The objectives and policies in the plan will advocate the local board’s position on the management of those types of land. However, the final decision will rest with the Governing Body or the appropriate council-controlled organisation.

18. Examples of those areas acting as park land are:

· road to road accessways, e.g. Fields Parade to Horizon View Accessway

· stormwater reserves which also have a local park function, e.g. Albany Lakes.

What is out of scope of the Upper Harbour Local Parks Management Plan?

19. Park land that is out of scope of this plan, includes:

· open space owned and managed by the Department of Conservation (DOC), where council does not have a formal management agreement with DOC

· council owned sites lacking any public open space (e.g. entire park under lease agreement/s)

· legal roads or land held for roading purposes

· privately owned open space.

20. Attachment A gives an overview of areas within scope, out of scope and those areas where the local board does not have a decision-making role but may wish to advocate for particular outcomes on their management through the local parks management plan.

Approval to notify the intention to prepare a local parks management plan for Upper Harbour pursuant to the Reserves Act 1977

21. In the interests of developing an integrated local parks management plan, compliant with both the RA and the LGA, it is prudent to prepare the plan utilising the procedures for developing reserve management plans set out in the RA (as outlined in Attachment B).

22. The process required under the RA includes two formal rounds of public consultation. The purpose of the first round is to seek feedback to inform the development of a draft plan.

23. Staff are now seeking approval from the local board to publicly notify the intention to prepare the local parks management plan, as per section 41(5) of the RA.

24. Public notification of the intention to prepare the local parks management plan will invite written suggestions on the proposal to prepare a plan. Notices are anticipated to be published in late May 2019. The deadline for written suggestions will be 30 June 2019.

Community engagement for Upper Harbour Local Parks Management Plan – beyond statutory requirements

25. Staff are proposing to undertake consultation beyond the statutory requirements of the RA by providing additional opportunities for key stakeholders and the wider community to provide suggestions. This is to ensure that as many people as possible will be given the opportunity to have their say.

26. Engagement activities will include opportunity for face-to-face discussions with staff, paper and online tools and planned attendance at stakeholder groups’ meetings and events to capture informal comments and suggestions on individual parks. Staff also intend to engage with schools in the Upper Harbour area, to ensure that the plan reflects the needs and aspirations of young people. Attachment C gives an overview of the proposed engagement activities.

27. Staff will work with the local board office and relevant stakeholder groups to engage with Upper Harbour’s large population of residents born outside New Zealand. This will include translating some consultation literature into Mandarin as required.

28. Staff will work closely with mana whenua and the local board on the development of the draft local parks management plan.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

29. The programme of work to develop local parks management plans has been discussed widely with council units and council-controlled organisations, including Parks, Sport and Recreation, Infrastructure and Environmental Services, Community Facilities (including Leasing), Community and Social Policy, Legal Services, Panuku Development Auckland and Auckland Transport, amongst others.

30. Staff will continue to work closely with council groups to draft the plan and to ensure that it is aligned with the council’s other plans where possible, and that any direction provided in the plan on council’s activities on parks is understood.

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

Local impacts and local board views

31. The local board was briefed on the process of the development of the local parks management plan at a workshop on 7 February 2019.

32. Local board members provided informal feedback in support of the engagement approach and confirmed how they wished to participate in the land classification stage of the project.

33. To support the direction of development of the local parks management plan, the local board confirmed they wish to include the full local board as members of a working group to be brought together for informal discussions as required.

34. Local board members confirmed that they did not wish to put any reserves out of scope for the plan.

35. A workshop was held with the local board in early May 2019 to discuss the planned community engagement approach and seek their feedback and support.

36. Further workshops will be held with the local board throughout the development of the local parks management plan.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

37. The RA is one of the acts in the First Schedule to the Conservation Act 1987. Section 4 of the Conservation Act 1987 contains an obligation to give effect to the principles of te Tiriti o Waitangi/the Treaty of Waitangi.

38. As such, in performing functions and duties under the RA such as developing a reserve management plan, the local board must give effect to the principles of te Tiriti/the Treaty.

39. The principles of te Tiriti/the Treaty likely to be most relevant in making decisions on the Upper Harbour Local Parks Management Plan and classification work are:

· partnership – mutual good faith and reasonableness

· informed decision-making – being well-informed of the mana whenua interests and views; consultation is a means to achieve informed decision-making

· active protection – this involves the active protection of Māori interests retained under te Tiriti/the Treaty. It includes the promise to protect rangatiratanga and taonga.

40. The LGA also contains obligations to Māori, including to facilitate Māori participation in council decision-making processes (sections 4; 14(1)(d); 81(1)(a)).

41. Staff introduced mana whenua to the local parks management plan project at the Parks, Sport and Recreation Mana Whenua Forum in March 2019.

42. Mana whenua representatives from Te Ākitai Waiohua, Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki, Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara, Te Kawerau a Maki, Ngāti Te Ata, Ngaati Whanaunga, Ngāti Manuhiri, Te Patukirikiri, and Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whātua expressed an interest in the project and attended three subsequent hui to discuss the scope of the plan. Three hui were held to enable all interested mana whenua representatives to attend.

43. Ongoing involvement of mana whenua in the development of the local parks management plan will:

· enable te ao Māori to be incorporated into the management of the Upper Harbour local parks network

· provide an opportunity for mana whenua to express their kaitiaki role.

44. Further hui are planned to help inform the development of the draft plan.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

45. Costs for public notices and engagement activities will be accommodated from the Upper Harbour Local Parks Management Plan locally driven initiatives budget.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

46. There are no anticipated risks from making this decision.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

47. Suggestions from the first round of consultation will be given full consideration in preparing the draft plan.

48. The second round of public consultation on the draft plan is anticipated to commence in February 2020.

49. A high-level project delivery approach, including key project and consultation milestones, local board workshops and reporting, are set out in Attachment D.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Park land in scope of the Upper Harbour Local Parks Management Plan	59
b ⇩	Preparation of a Reserve Management Plan under Reserves Act 1977 s.41	61
c ⇩	Proposed engagement activities	63
d ⇩	Timeline for preparation of the Upper Harbour Local Parks Management Plan	65

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Jacquelyn Collins - Service and Asset Planner

Matthew Ward - Service & Asset Planning Team Leader

Authorisers

Lisa Tocker - Head of Service Strategy and Integration

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Upper Harbour Local Board

16 May 2019

Upper Harbour local parks land classification programme

File No.: CP2019/06627

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To declare and classify land held under the Local Government Act 2002, and to classify and reclassify land held under the Reserves Act 1977 and approve public notification where required.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. A comprehensive land status investigation of all Upper Harbour local parks has been completed which identified a large number of unclassified reserves held under the Reserves Act 1977. This is a preliminary task in the development of a local parks management plan.

3. Of the 719 parcels of park land within the scope of the local parks management plan, the investigation identified 697 land parcels held under the Reserves Act 1977 (RA), and 22 as held under the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA).

4. Considerations associated with the decision to retain land under the LGA or declare and classify reserves under the RA include:

· current and likely future use

· continuity with adjoining land parcels

· benefits and constraints of legislation.

5. For the 22 parcels of park land held under the LGA, the local board has the option to continue to hold land under the LGA or to declare the land as a reserve under the RA and classify it appropriately.

6. Staff have individually assessed the merits of each option (refer Attachments B and C) and propose that:

· 8 parcels be retained under the LGA (Attachment B)

· 14 parcels be declared as a reserve and classified under the RA (Attachment C).

7. Of the 697 land parcels held under the RA:

· 491 are unclassified and require classification to be included in the local park management plan (Attachments D and E)

· 18 parcels require reclassification to better reflect current or future use of the reserve (Attachment F)

· 188 require no further action.

8. Each individual parcel of reserve land has been assessed. Classification actions for unclassified reserve land and reclassification actions for some incorrectly classified reserves are being proposed.

9. Staff have considered the benefits and disadvantages of the RA and LGA in managing and enabling the use, protection and development of each local park, and developed a set of criteria to guide assessment of each land parcel.

10. These criteria incorporate guidance from the RA Guide^{^[1]} as follows:

· consideration of the local park’s values

· current and likely future use of the local park

· workshop feedback from the local board

· consultation with mana whenua.

11. Staff recommend that the local board approve classifying the land parcels that do not require public notification and notifying the classification or reclassification of other land parcels as outlined in this report.

12. Completing the reserve declaration, classification and reclassification processes will enable staff to proceed with preparing the draft Local Parks Management Plan once the first round of consultation has been completed.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) confirm eight parcels of land will continue to be held under the Local Government Act 2002 as described in Attachment B to the agenda report, dated 16 May 2019.

b) approve 14 parcels of land to be declared a reserve and classified according to their primary purpose, pursuant to section 14(1) of the Reserves Act 1977 as proposed in Attachment C to the agenda report, dated 16 May 2019.

c) approve the proposed classification of 488 parcels of reserve land pursuant to sections 16(1) and 16(2A) of the Reserves Act 1977 as described in Attachment D to the agenda report, dated 16 May 2019.

d) approve public notification of proposals to classify three parcels of reserve land pursuant to section 16(4) of the Reserves Act 1977 as described in Attachment E to the agenda report, dated 16 May 2019.

e) approve public notification of the proposals to reclassify 18 parcels of reserve land pursuant to section 24(2)(b) of the Reserves Act 1977 described in Attachment F to the agenda report, dated 16 May 2019.

f) approve a hearing panel, consisting of a minimum of three local board members in preparation for any requests to speak to objections or submissions on the proposed classifications that have been publicly notified under clause d) and e) above, noting that the role of the hearings panel will be to hear submissions and make recommendations to the local board on classification decisions.

Horopaki

Context

13. The Upper Harbour Local Board has allocated decision-making responsibility for all local parks in the local board area.

14. On 21 June 2018, the Upper Harbour Local Board resolved to prepare an omnibus Open Space Management Plan for all local parks in Upper Harbour (resolution number UH/2018/66).

15. The local parks management plan will cover park land held subject to both the RA and Local Government Act 2002, including land covered by existing reserve management plans.

16. The local parks management plan will be a statutory reserve management plan prepared in accordance with section 41 of the RA.

17. As part of preparing the local parks management plan, it is necessary to review whether local parks to be included in the plan are held under the LGA or RA, and if they are held under the RA, whether they have been appropriately classified.

18. The review of the land status of all land parcels which comprise local parks in the local board area has been completed. Principles underpinning the land classification process were presented to the local board at a workshop held on 7 March 2019. Key outcomes of the investigation were presented to the local board at a workshop held on 4 April 2019.

What we found

19. Eight-hundred and sixty-six land parcels, covering approximately 220 parks, were investigated. Of those investigated, 719 are included in scope of the local parks management plan.

20. One-hundred and eight land parcels are out of scope as the local board does not have allocated or delegated decision-making authority for them. Examples of this are drainage reserves, land managed by the Department of Conservation, and road-to-road accessways.

21. Around 39 parcels require further investigation to determine whether they are in scope of the local parks management plan.

22. Of the 719 parcels within scope, 697 are held under the RA, and 22 are held under the LGA.

23. Of the 697 parcels held under the RA, 491 are currently unclassified.

24. This report makes recommendations on actions for both land held under the RA and land held under the LGA.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

25. The local board has the option to hold park land under the LGA or the RA. For land held under the LGA the following options have been considered:

· continue to hold the land under the LGA, or

· declare land currently held under the LGA to be reserve under the RA and classify appropriately.

26. For land held under the RA, the following options have been considered:

· classify according to its primary purpose

· reclassify to align to its primary purpose

· revoke the reserve status and hold the land under the LGA, or

· continue to hold the land as unclassified reserve under the RA (status quo).

27. The option to continue to hold the land as unclassified reserve has been discounted as it would mean that the local parks management plan would not comply with the RA, the council would not be meeting its statutory obligations under the RA, and staff would not be able to recommend public notification of the draft plan once completed.

28. Attachment A summarises the different options for land held under the LGA and land held under the RA, as well as the most common classes for land held under the RA.

29. In considering whether to proceed with the options for each land parcel, staff have considered:

· the intended purpose of the land when it was acquired, for example, was it vested as a recreation or esplanade reserve on subdivision

· the long-term protection that the RA provides from inappropriate use and development

· the benefits of unified and integrated management of individual parks and the local parks network as a whole

· whether underlying Crown ownership of the local park prevents the reserve status being revoked

· whether statutory processes and future decision-making will be streamlined

· the need for greater flexibility and choice in how local parks are used by the public

· whether revoking the reserve status of a particular land parcel would materially lead to a greater range of park activities being able to occur.

30. The following sections outline in more detail the options for land held under the LGA and RA, and the criteria on which assessments of each land parcel have been based.

Proposed actions for land held under the LGA

31. When reviewing the future land status options for land under the LGA, staff considered the following:

· Why does the council own the land and how was it acquired?

· What is the primary purpose of the land?

· What is the status of adjacent parcels of land within the same park?

· What is the current and likely future main use of the land?

· What potential does the land have for protection, enhancement and development?

· Is there likely to be a need to retain flexibility for future use?

Proposal to retain some land under the LGA

32. In applying the criteria above, eight parcels of land have been identified as best suited to remain under the LGA (Attachment B). This is primarily because either the current use does not align with any of the classification options in the RA and/or there is a likely need to retain flexibility for future use. Ōtehā Valley Reserve is an example of an activity where this occurs.

33. No further action is required by the local board for land that is to remain under the LGA.

Proposal to declare and classify some land currently held under the LGA

34. Any land held under the LGA which the local board wishes to manage under the RA must be declared reserve and classified appropriately in accordance with the RA.

35. Fourteen parcels of land held under the LGA have been identified and recommended for declaring and classifying reserve under the RA (Attachment C). The predominant reason for declaring and classifying these parcels is to reflect the primary purpose of the land. Most of these parcels align with either recreation or scenic classifications.

36. Section 14(2) of the RA requires public notification when declaring and classifying land as reserve, where land is not zoned open space in the Auckland Unitary Plan.

37. The parcels proposed to be declared and classified are consistent with Auckland Unitary Plan zoning, which means that public notification is not required.

38. Staff recommend that the local board declare and classify the land identified in Attachment C.

Proposed actions for land held under the Reserves Act 1977

39. As outlined above, there are three valid options for land held under the RA:

· classification

· reclassification, or

· revocation of the RA status.

40. In the context of this investigation, staff have not identified any parcels of local park that warrant the reserve status to be revoked and being managed under the LGA.

Classification of land held under the Reserves Act 1977

41. Classification involves assigning a reserve (or part of a reserve) a primary purpose, as defined in sections 17 to 23 of the RA, that aligns with its present values. Consideration is also given to potential future values and activities and uses.

42. The investigation found 491 land parcels currently held as unclassified reserve under the RA, requiring classification.

43. Staff have considered the Reserves Act guide^{^[2]} and the following questions when determining the primary purpose and appropriate classification for each parcel:

· Why does council own the land? Why was it acquired?

· What are the main values of the land or potential future values, uses and activities?

· What potential does the land have for protection, preservation, enhancement or development?

· What is the status of adjacent parcels of land within the park?

· What potential does the land have for protection, enhancement and development?

· Is there likely to be a need to retain flexibility for future use?

44. Attachment D identifies 488 land parcels that require classification under section 16(1) or 16(2A) of the RA. These proposals do not require public notification under the act.

Public notification of classification

45. The RA requires public notification of the proposed classification of a reserve except where:

· the proposed classification aligns with the open space zoning in the Auckland Unitary Plan

· the reserve has been held under previous legislation for a similar purpose, or

· the proposed classification was a condition under which the land was acquired.

46. Attachment E identifies three unclassified land parcels that require the proposed classification to be publicly notified under section 16(4) of the act.

47. Objectors and submitters may request a hearing, in which case, it is proposed that a hearings panel consisting of at least three local board members is formed to hear any objections or submissions and to make recommendations to the local board on classification decisions.

Reclassification of some land held under the Reserves Act 1977

48. Reclassification involves assigning a different class to a reserve (or part of a reserve) to better cater for its primary purpose.

49. During the land classification investigation, 18 parcels of classified reserves were identified as requiring reclassification (see Attachment F) for the following reasons:

· to better align with the current or anticipated future use of the reserve, or

· to correct previous classification errors.

50. Section 24(2)(b) of the RA requires all proposals to reclassify reserves to be publicly notified together with the reasons for the proposed change in classification.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

51. The land classification investigations have been discussed widely with council units and council-controlled organisations, including Parks, Sport and Recreation, Infrastructure and Environmental Services, Community Facilities (including Leasing), Community and Social Policy, Legal Services, Panuku Development Auckland, and Auckland Transport amongst others.

52. Community Facilities staff manage land on behalf of the Parks and Healthy Waters units. Their advice is that LGA land be retained under that act, noting:

· the LGA allows for a wider range of uses (consistent with council’s role under that legislation)

· the RA introduces greater complexity into decision-making.

53. It is also noted that the local parks management plan will provide a consistent management direction for all parks and reserves regardless of whether the land is managed under the RA or LGA.

54. Heritage, biodiversity, parks and stormwater specialists have also informed the recommendations for declaration and classification of reserves according to their primary purpose.

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

Local impacts and local board views

55. At a workshop held on 7 March 2019, staff presented to the local board the principles that underpinned the investigation process and gave an overview of the methodology and rationale used to determine the recommendations for unclassified reserves.

56. Feedback from local board members was generally supportive of the rationale and proposals for classification under sections 16(1) and 16(2) and reclassification of reserves that were discussed.

57. At a workshop held on 4 April 2019, staff presented to the local board details of all parcels proposed to be reclassified, as well as parcels to be declared and classified, parcels to be retained under the LGA, and parcels to be classified as scenic 1(A) or scenic 1(B).

58. Local board members expressed support to retain some land under the LGA. An example of this was the land parcels on which Ōtehā Valley Reserve is situated.

59. Amendments have been made to the proposed classification programme based on feedback from local board members present at the workshop.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

Engagement with mana whenua

60. Staff have been working with interested mana whenua on land classification as part of the local parks management plan. Staff attended the Parks, Sport and Recreation Mana Whenua Forum in March 2019 and introduced both the wider local parks management plan project and the land classification work.

61. Three hui were subsequently held in March and April 2019. Mana whenua representatives from Te Ākitai Waiohua, Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki, Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara, Te Kawerau a Maki, Ngāti Te Ata, Ngaati Whanaunga, Ngāti Manuhiri, and Te Patukirikiri attended one of the three hui.

62. All mana whenua who had participated in the three hui were provided a summary of proposed reserve classification information and associated feedback received from the hui. A mana whenua representative from Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whātua was unable to attend any of the hui but received the full summary of land classification recommendations.

63. Over the course of the hui, most of the parcels proposed for classification or reclassification and all of the land held under the LGA were reviewed.

64. This has enabled all participating mana whenua to review all land classification recommendations for the project.

65. Mana whenua generally supported staff’s assessment, rationale and proposals for land classification. For some of the land parcels, mana whenua expressed a desire to give them a higher level of protection under the RA, i.e. classify a reserve as scenic reserve, instead of the proposed recreation reserve classification. However, this was balanced by mana whenua recognition of the need for ample access to recreational land in Upper Harbour.

66. Following engagement with the local parks and biodiversity staff, amendments were made to land classification recommendations to accommodate mana whenua feedback.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

67. Financial implications include costs for:

· public notices to declare and classify land held under the LGA (where required)

· public notices to classify (where required) and reclassify for land held under the RA.

68. These costs will be covered through Community Facilities’ existing operational budget.

69. Costs for hearings that may be required to hear any objections to the proposals will be covered by the Hearings team.

70. There are no financial implications associated with retaining land under the LGA.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

71. The following table outlines the risks and mitigation associated with classification and reclassification of reserves and declaring and classifying land to be reserve:

Risk	Mitigation
Perception that the LGA offers park land less protection from sale or disposal than if it was held under RA	Both acts require a public consultation process where land is proposed to be disposed of. Retaining land under the LGA has only been recommended where flexibility for future use is likely to be beneficial (e.g. commercial use).
RA classifications constrain the range of uses that land can be used for	Current and likely future use of each individual parcel proposed to be declared and classified under the RA has been assessed based on the considerations in paragraph 32 above and the Reserves Act guide.
Public objections to proposed classifications delaying the management plan process	A small number (21) of parcels require public notification. Due to the small number of parcels, the potential impact on timeframes for the management plan is anticipated to be minimal.
Potentially high number of submissions on proposed classifications, because the notification will be coupled with the notification of the intention to prepare the plan	Work with engagement team if additional resources are required.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

72. Next steps vary depending on whether land is held under the LGA or RA and on the action that is taken i.e. declare and classify (notified or non-notified) for land under the LGA and classify (notified or non-notified) or reclassification under the RA.

73. Attachment G outlines the next steps for each action for land held under the LGA and RA.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Possible actions Local Government Act 2002 versus Reserves Act 1977	75
b ⇩	Parcels to be retained under the Local Government Act 2002	77
c ⇩	Parcels to be declared and classified (public notification not required)	79
d ⇩	Parcels to be classified (public notification not required)	81
e ⇩	Parcels to be classified (public notification required)	93
f ⇩	Parcels to be reclassified (public notification mandatory)	95
g ⇩	Outline of next steps for different actions	97

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Jacquelyn Collins - Service and Asset Planner

Matthew Ward - Service & Asset Planning Team Leader

Authorisers

Lisa Tocker - Head of Service Strategy and Integration

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Upper Harbour Local Board

16 May 2019

Business Improvement District Programme compliance report to the Upper Harbour Local Board for the 2019/2020 financial year

File No.: CP2019/06117

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek the Upper Harbour Local Board’s recommendation to the Governing Body to strike the Business Improvement District (BID) targeted rate for Business North Harbour Incorporated for the 2019/2020 financial year.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Auckland Council’s BID programme supports business associations by collecting a targeted rate from commercial properties within a defined geographic area. The funds from the targeted rate are then provided by way of a grant to the relevant BID.

3. The BIDs are incorporated societies that are independent of council. For the council to be confident that the funds provided to the BIDs are being used appropriately, council requires the BIDs to comply with the BID Policy 2016 (Hōtaka ā-Rohe Whakapiki Pakihi).

4. The BID Policy was developed to encourage improved governance of BID committees and staff to improve financial management, programme delivery and transparency to their members.

5. This report indicates that Business North Harbour Incorporated complies with the BID Policy. Information presented in this report is based on documents submitted by this business association to council’s BID programme team.

6. Staff recommend that as the BID has met the requirements of the BID Policy, the Upper Harbour Local Board should, therefore, recommend to the Governing Body to strike the targeted rate sought by Business North Harbour Incorporated.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) recommend to the Governing Body to strike the targeted rate for inclusion in the Annual Budget 2019/2020 for the following Business Improvement District programme:

· $690,621 for Business North Harbour Incorporated.

Horopaki

Context

7. The council adopted the BID Policy (Hōtaka ā-Rohe Whakapiki Pakihi) in 2016. This policy outlines the following principles behind the council’s BID programme;

· creates the process for establishing, expanding, and disestablishing BIDs

· prescribes operating standards and guidelines

· sets accountability requirements.

8. Attachment A provides an overview of key elements of the BID programme.

9. BID targeted rates are applied to all commercially-rated properties within a designated area around a town centre or commercial precinct. Those funds are transferred to the business association operating the BID programme.

10. There are currently 48 BID programmes throughout Auckland which represent more than 25,000 businesses and a combined $17.7 million in targeted rates investment. Attachment B outlines current and proposed targeted rates budgets for all BIDs.

11. Under the Auckland Council shared governance arrangements, local boards are allocated several decision-making responsibilities in relation to BIDs. One of these is to annually recommend BID targeted rates to the Governing Body. The local board should recommend the striking of the targeted rate if it is satisfied that the BID is substantially complying with the BID Policy.

12. Recommendations arising from this report are put into effect with the Governing Body’s approval of the Annual Budget 2019/2020 and striking of the targeted rate.

13. This report is a requirement of the BID Policy 2016. The local board must decide whether to endorse the BID targeted rates.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

14. The council’s BID programme team monitors compliance with the BID Policy on an ongoing basis and provides governance advice to BID-operating business associations as needed or requested.

15. As BID programmes are operated by private independent societies, their programmes and services are provided according to their members’ stated priorities. In recognition of their independent corporate status, the policy does not prescribe standards for programme effectiveness. Staff, therefore, cannot base recommendations on these factors, but only on the policy’s express requirements.

Compliance with the BID Policy

16. The BID Policy is the means for council to ensure accountability for BID targeted rate funding and to encourage good governance. This is achieved by requiring regular reporting by BID-operating business associations, specifically by providing to council the following documents and staying in touch with their local board at least once a year:

· current Strategic Plan – evidence of achievable medium to long-term opportunities

· audited accounts – assurance that the BID-operating business association is managing its members’ BID targeted rate funds responsibly

· annual report on the year just completed – evidence that programmes are addressing priority issues that benefit BID targeted ratepayers

· business plan for the coming year – detailed one-year programme based on the Strategic Plan, to be achieved and resourced

· indicative budget for the following year – Auckland Council’s Annual Budget requires targeted rates to be identified a year in advance to inform the Annual Budget process which sets all rates

· board charter – establishes guidelines for effective board governance and positive relationships between the association and its members

· annual accountability agreement – certification that these requirements have been met

· programme agreement – a good faith agreement between each BID-operating business association and council that sets basic parameters of the council-business association relationship.

17. The BID Policy 2016 requires each business association to ratify the BID grant amount/targeted rate and budget for the following financial year. Business North Harbour Incorporated presented for members’ approval, its 2019/2020 BID grant amount/targeted rate and budget at its 2018 Annual General Meeting (AGM). Its 2018 AGM minutes show resolutions supporting this action and requesting the Upper Harbour Local Board to recommend to the Governing Body the striking of the BID targeted rate for 2019/2020.

18. Business North Harbour Incorporated complies with the BID Policy and, therefore, it is recommended that the Upper Harbour Local Board recommends to the Governing Body the striking of the targeted rate relevant to this business association.

19. The recommendation of this report is supported by evidence of compliance with the BID Policy by Business North Harbour Incorporated (refer to Attachment C for details).

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

20. The proposed decision does not impact other parts of the council group.

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

Local impacts and local board views

21. Recommending that the Governing Body strikes the targeted rate for Business North Harbour Incorporated means that this BID programme will continue to:

· be funded from targeted rates on commercial properties in its district

· provide services in accordance with its members’ priorities, as stated in its Strategic Plan.

22. By continuing these services and programmes, Business North Harbour Incorporated should better serve its commercial precinct and members and support business growth.

23. The council does not comment on the effectiveness of individual BID programmes as that is a matter for elected members to assess.

24. The Upper Harbour Local Board approved a similar recommendation for the BID programme last year (resolution number UH/2018/43), as did the other 17 local boards that have BID programmes operating in their areas.

25. Several local boards provide additional funding to local business associations. However, accountability for that funding is set by funding agreements between the local board and the business association. Those requirements are separate to the requirements of the BID Policy and are not covered in this report.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

26. BIDs work for the benefits of all members, including Māori businesses.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

27. There are no financial implications for the local board. Targeted rates for BID-operating business associations are raised directly from commercial ratepayers in the district and used by the business association for improvements within that district. The council’s financial role is only to collect the BID targeted rates and pass them directly to the business association on a quarterly basis.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

28. There are reputational risks to the council if ratepayer funds are misused, but this is rare. Otherwise, there are no direct financial risks to the local board or council that could result from this recommendation to approve the BID targeted rate.

29. The requirements of the BID Policy are intended to help minimise the potential for BIDs to misuse funds by requiring each BID to plan for the intended use of funds, report on its activities to its members, and to have its accounts audited.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

30. If the board endorses this report, it will recommend to the Governing Body that the BID targeted rate be struck as part of its approval of the Annual Budget 2019/2020.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	BID programme key elements	103
b ⇩	BID programme budgets	105
c ⇩	Business North Harbour Incorporated	107

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Paul Thompson - BID Programme Specialist

Authorisers

Alastair Cameron - Manager - CCO Governance & External Partnerships

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Upper Harbour Local Board

16 May 2019

2018/2019 Upper Harbour Local Grants round two applications

File No.: CP2019/05817

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To fund, part-fund or decline applications received for 2018/2019 Upper Harbour Local Grants round two applications, including multi-board applications.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. This report presents applications received for the 2018/2019 Upper Harbour Local Grants round two applications (refer Attachment B), including multi-board applications (Attachment C).

3. The Upper Harbour Local Board adopted the 2018/2019 Upper Harbour Local Board Community Grants Programme on 20 April 2018. The document sets application guidelines for community contestable grants.

4. The local board has set a total community grants budget of $113,425 for the 2018/2019 financial year. A total of $78,883.50 has been allocated in previous grant rounds. This leaves a total of $34,541.50 to be allocated to one local grant round and one quick response grant round.

5. Ten applications were received for round two of the 2018/2019 Upper Harbour Local Grants requesting a total of $49,055, and 15 multi-board applications were also received requesting a total of $67,144.96.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendations

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) agree to fund, part-fund or decline each application in 2018/2019 Upper Harbour Local Grants round two listed in the following table:

Application ID	Organisation	Main focus	Requesting funding for	Amount requested	Eligibility
LG1917-201	Whanau Marama Parenting Limited	Community	Towards facilitator salary and travel expenses for two parenting courses at Albany library in term three 2019	$1545	Eligible
LG1917-204	Bays Youth Community Trust	Community	Towards the annual travel costs to run the Bays Youth programmes from May to October 2019	$3000	Eligible
LG1917-208	The Scout Association of New Zealand - Camp Maynard	Community	Towards the cost of purchasing new dining trestle tables and chairs at Camp Maynard	$7796	Eligible
LG1917-209	Royal New Zealand Plunket Trust	Community	Towards the venue costs and staff wages to maintain operation of Hobsonville Pipis Playgroup	$4851	Eligible
LG1917-210	Asthma New Zealand Incorporated	Community	Towards the wages of two asthma nurse educators	$5000	Eligible
LG1917-211	Kids Safe with Dogs	Community	Towards administrator, instructors' wages and printing costs for the period 22 July 2019 to 20 December 2019	$8575	Eligible
LG1917-212	Youthline Auckland Charitable Trust	Community	Towards the salary costs for the Youthline helpline for calls in the Upper Harbour area	$5000	Ineligible
LG1917-213	Armenian Society of New Zealand	Community	Towards purchase of the society's sound system	$1814	Eligible
LG1917-207	East Coast Bays' and Districts Cricket Club Incorporated	Sport and recreation	Towards purchase of an electronic scoreboard	$8500	Eligible
LG1917-214	Windsor Park Community and Multisport Hub Incorporated	Sport and recreation	Towards the costs of supply and installation of netting at Windsor Community and Multisport Hub	$2974	Eligible
Total				$49,055

b) agree to fund, part-fund or decline each application in round two of the 2018/2019 Upper Harbour Multi-board applications, listed in the following table:

Application ID	Organisation	Main focus	Requesting funding for	Amount requested	Eligibility
MB1819-231	The Operating Theatre Trust	Arts and culture	Towards two productions, ‘We're going on a Bear Hunt’ and ‘The Little Yellow Digger’ including hosting volunteers, rehearsal room, venue and ticketing costs, costume and set materials held at The Pumphouse Theatre	$1000	Eligible
MB1819-206	North Shore Centres of Mutual Aid Incorporated	Community	Towards operational costs for the eight centres from 1 July to 31 December 2019	$3750	Eligible
MB1819-213	StarJam Charitable Trust	Community	Towards costs for StarJam Auckland: music performances for young people with a disability from 3 June 2019 to 3 February 2020	$2050	Eligible
MB1819-214	Tuileapa Youth Mentoring Service	Community	Towards a contribution for salaries of mentors operating services for Pacific and Māori youth	$2000	Eligible
MB1819-249	Children's Autism Foundation	Community	Towards the outreach service delivery for children with autism from 1 June 2019 to 1 May 2020	$8400	Eligible
MB1819-258	Neighbourhood Support North Shore	Community	Towards wages for a manager and operating expenses to maintain and grow neighbourhood support groups on the North Shore	$5000	Eligible
MB1819-263	PHAB Association (Auckland) Incorporated	Community	Towards wages and administration costs for the ‘PHAB diversity for all’ project from 3 June 2019 to 20 December 2019	$3600	Eligible
MB1819-271	Hearts and Minds NZ Incorporated	Community	Towards updating and printing the Support Services Directory 2019 to 2021 for the North Shore, Waitākere and Rodney areas	$3000	Eligible
MB1819-220	Project Litefoot Trust	Environment	Towards a contribution for the overall costs of the project, including salaries, materials installed at the club, administration costs, travel costs, and promotion for Project Litefoot	$2435.97	Eligible
MB1819-233	Environmental Education for Resource Sustainability Trust Paper4trees	Environment	Towards the purchase and delivery of 7433 native trees and to replace 825 classroom recycling bins in schools and preschools participating in the Paper4trees programme across Auckland	$2951.25	Eligible
MB1819-246	The Auckland King Tides Initiative The Institution of Professional Engineers New Zealand Inc	Environment	Towards the ‘King Tides’ project including costs for signage, gauges, website, data system and public launch	$5,736.25	Eligible
MB1819-212	Harbour Sport Trust	Events	Towards costs to run the Mud Rush event in 2019, including toilets, changing rooms, stage, sound system, fencing, ambulance, printing costs, bins, generators and heaters, water truck, and photographer	$3000	Eligible
MB1819-225	The Kids for Kids Charitable Trust	Events	Towards venue hire and production costs of the ‘Kids for Kids’ event in Takapuna	$471.49	Eligible
MB1819-270	Gymnastics Community Trust	Sport and recreation	Towards the school co-ordinator wages and new equipment for the gymnastic classes from 30 September 2019 to 30 March 2020	$23,750	Eligible
Total				$67,144.96

Horopaki

Context

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

7. The Auckland Council Community Grants Policy supports each local board to adopt a grants programme. The local board grants programme sets out:

· local board priorities

· lower priorities for funding

· exclusions

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

· any additional accountability requirements.

8. The Upper Harbour Local Board adopted the 2018/2019 Upper Harbour Local Board Community Grants Programme on 20 April 2018. The document sets application guidelines for community contestable grants.

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

10. The local board has set a total community grants budget of $113,425 for the 2018/2019 financial year. A total of $78,883.50 has been allocated in previous grant rounds. This leaves a total of $34,541.50 to be allocated to one local grant round and one quick response grant round.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

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

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

12. The main focus of an application is identified as arts, community, events, sport and recreation, environment or heritage. Based on the main focus of an application, a subject matter expert from the relevant department will provide input and advice.

13. The grants programme has no identified impacts on council-controlled organisations and therefore their views are not required.

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

Local impacts and local board views

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

15. The board is requested to note that Section 48 of the Community Grants Policy states:

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

16. A summary of each application received through round two of the 2018/2019 Upper Harbour Local Grants and multi-board applications is provided in Attachments B and C.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

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

18. Ten applicants applying to this round of local grants has indicated that their project targets Māori or Māori outcomes.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

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

20. The Upper Harbour Local Board has set a total community grants budget of $113,425. A total of $56,651.50 was allocated in round one of the 2018/2019 Upper Harbour Local Board Local Grants, leaving a total of $56,773.50 to be allocated. A total of $10,867 was allocated in round one of the 2018/2019 Quick Response Grants, leaving a total of $45,906.50 to be allocated. A total of $11,365 was allocated in round two of the 2018/2019 Quick Response Grants, leaving a total of $34,541.50 to be allocated to one local grants round and one quick response grants round.

21. In round one of the 2018/2019 Upper Harbour Local Grants, ten applications were received requesting a total of $49,055 and 14 multi-board applications were received, requesting a total of $67,144.96.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

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

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

23. Following the Upper Harbour Local Board allocating funding to round two of the 2018/2019 Upper Harbour Local Board Local Grants and multi-board applications, Commercial and Finance staff will notify the applicants of the local board’s decision.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	2018/2019 Upper Harbour Local Board Grants Programme	115
b ⇩	2018/2019 Upper Harbour Local Grants round two applications	119
c ⇩	2018/2019 Upper Harbour Multi-board Grants round two applications	163

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Erin Shin - Community Grants Coordinator

Authorisers

Marion Davies - Grant Operations Manager

Shane King - Head of Operations Support

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Upper Harbour Local Board

16 May 2019

PDF Creator

Upper Harbour Local Board

16 May 2019

Auckland Transport monthly report - May 2019

File No.: CP2019/06934

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. The purpose of this report is to provide:

· an update on the current status of the Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF)

· a summary of consultation material sent to the local board

· transport-related information on matters of specific application and interest to the Upper Harbour Local Board and its community.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. In particular, this report includes:

· rough order of costs information for five potential LBTCF projects

· updates on Auckland Transport (AT) major capital works in the Upper Harbour Local Board area

· consultation information sent to the local board for feedback and decisions of the Traffic Control Committee (TCC) as they affect the local board area.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) receive the monthly update report from Auckland Transport for May 2019.

Horopaki

Context

3. This report addresses transport-related matters in the Upper Harbour Local Board area.

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

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF) update

5. The LBTCF is a capital budget provided to all local boards by Auckland Council and delivered by 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.

6. The Upper Harbour Local Board’s LBTCF allocation was $1,835,080 for the current political term. In addition, there is a sum of $764,795 which was approved by the council and became available from 1 July 2018.

Upper Harbour Local Board Transport Capital Fund financial summary
Total funds available in current political term	$2,599,874
Amount committed to date on projects approved for design and/or construction	$2,560,814
Remaining budget left	$39,060

Rame Road project update

7. The Rame Road project is in the detailed design phase. AT is currently undertaking internal consultation and will report back to the local board at a workshop in May 2019 to report on the final design and the outcome of consultation.

Major capital works in the Upper Harbour Local Board area

Gills Road link

8. AT is planning to procure a single ‘design and construct’ contract for the detailed design and construction of the proposed new Gills Road link. This procurement is subject to approval by the AT Board, which is anticipated to happen in late May 2019.

Dairy Flat Highway / The Avenue

9. AT’s Executive Leadership Team have completed site visits and discussed the two projects. The recommendation is that the proposed transport interventions arising from the legacy Dairy Flat Highway upgrade and Gills Road link projects be strategically re-evaluated, taking a more holistic view of the issues and opportunities to determine the most appropriate improvements required. The review should consider the response to growth, the network in the locality (including safety and mode), and the place outcomes for Albany Village.

10. The proposal is to integrate the Gills Road link and Dairy Flat Highway projects with a focus on an integrated strategic solution, with place benefits to the local community and movement benefits for the wider growth community. AT will be presenting this to the AT Board later in May 2019 for consideration.

Medallion Drive link

11. Estimated design completion and consent approval is expected in late May 2019. Land negotiation and purchase is extended due to court proceedings. A hearing is scheduled for July of this year, which is expected to be complete by January 2020. The construction phase will start in February 2020 and will take 18 months. No further update was available at the time of writing this report.

Pedestrian signal on Ōtehā Valley Road

12. AT is working on the design phase and is expecting to have this ready for external consultation towards the end of May 2019. AT will consult with the local board at a future workshop, yet to be confirmed.

Dairy Flat Highway safety improvements 2018/2019

13. AT is currently in detailed design for a number of safety improvements, which include:

· new road markings at Pine Valley and Wilks Road

· new right turn bays at Bawden Road and into Potters Road.

14. The timing for construction of the individual upgrades is yet to be decided, although it is anticipated that this could take place in October/November 2019. This work also includes construction for the Coatesville-Riverhead/Dairy Flat Highway roundabout.

15. AT will provide monthly updates to the board on the project.

Albany park and ride

16. Construction is still in progress and AT anticipates this to be concluded by the end of May 2019.

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

Local impacts and local board views

Issues investigated and responses

17. The local board have requested the following issues be investigated, which are still under investigation:

· 102 and 102A Totara Avenue, Whenuapai

o health hazard

o maintenance of ditch

· Hooton Reserve parking controls – meeting with Auckland Council Parks Department on options

· Brigham’s Creek and Williams Roads, Hobsonville – intersection safety

· Unsworth Heights area – issues with road surface.

Spencer and East Coast Road safety concerns

18. AT has undertaken an initial review of the issue. Further detailed investigation now needs to be undertaken to ensure a comprehensive review is completed. This investigation has been prioritised and programmed for review and the local board can expect to receive an update from AT by late June 2019.

Bush Road parking removal and afternoon/evening clearway

19. AT have undertaken queue length observations and conducted a parking occupancy survey. The survey results were supportive of a clearway, although AT have received some negative feedback from Bike Auckland and similar, claiming broken yellow lines and/or installation of a clearway may degrade safety for cyclists. AT is currently having renewed discussions with internal teams to decide how to progress and will update the local board once this is completed.

Consultation documents on proposed improvements

20. Consultation documents for the following proposals have been provided to the Upper Harbour Local Board for feedback and are summarised below for information purposes only.

21. Following consultation, AT considers the feedback received and determines whether to proceed further with the proposal as consulted on or amend the proposal if changes are considered necessary:

· proposed north bus tracking (NBT) changes

· proposal to improve pedestrian crossings at 31 Constellation Drive, Rosedale

· proposal to improve road safety by installing broken yellow lines at Zara Court, Windsor Park.

Traffic Control Committee (TCC) report

22. Decisions of the TCC during the month of March 2019 affecting the Upper Harbour Local Board area are listed in the following table:

Street / suburb	Type of report	Nature of restriction	Decision
Albany Highway, Taimana Place, Upper Harbour Motorway, Greenhithe	Permanent traffic and parking changes combined	Lane arrow markings, no stopping at all times (NSAAT), bus stop, traffic island, roundabout controlled by give-way, flush median	CARRIED
Albany Highway, Rothwell Avenue, Albany	Permanent traffic and parking changes combined	Lane arrow markings, NSAAT, bus stop, bus shelter, cycle lane, cycle path, transit lane, ambulance service, shared path, removal of transit lane, traffic island, footpath, traffic signal control, flush median, delineators, removal of traffic island	CARRIED
Ōtehā Valley Road extension, Albany	Permanent traffic and parking changes combined	Loading zone, NSAAT, removal of NSAAT, give-way control, flush median	CARRIED
Sunset Road, Trias Road, Unsworth Heights	Permanent traffic and parking changes combined	NSAAT, bus stop, bus shelter, lane arrow markings, flush median, edge lines, stop control	CARRIED

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

23. Receipt of this monthly 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

24. There are no financial implications in receiving this monthly update.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

25. Receipt of this monthly report has no risks. AT has risk management strategies in place for the transport projects undertaken in the local board area.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

26. AT provides the Upper Harbour Local Board with the opportunity to comment on transport projects being delivered in the local board area.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Owena Schuster – Elected Member Relationship Manager, Auckland Transport

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon – Elected Member Relationship Team Manager, Auckland Transport

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Upper Harbour Local Board

16 May 2019

Road name approval: Six new roads at 165 Clark Road, Hobsonville

File No.: CP2019/06921

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek approval from the Upper Harbour Local Board to name six new roads and commonly owned access lots (COALs) created by way of a subdivision development in the special housing area (SHA) at 165 Clark Road, Hobsonville, and to approve an extension of an existing road.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

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

3. The applicant, Stellar Projects, has proposed the following names for consideration by the local board:

Proposed name for road extension

Road reference

Preferred name

Road type

Public road 1 (extension)

Proposed to extend existing name

Joshua Carder

Drive

Preferred and alternate names for six new roads and COALs
	OPTION 1 (preferred)		OPTION 2		OPTION 3
Reference	Preferred	Type	Alternate	Type	Alternate	Type
Road 8	Tahingamanu*	Road	Sager Midgley	Road	Sager Percy	Road
Road 13	Cornerpoint	Road	Ritika	Road	Riparian	Road
Road 14	Vaswani	Road	Manisha	Road	Hato	Road
Road 15	La Bella	Road	Qi	Road	Syke	Road
COAL 3	Katao	Way	Nant	Way	Matarua	Way
COAL 5	Allt	Way	Rivulet	Way	Stream	Way

4. The name in bold and marked with an asterisk in the above table was suggested by local iwi.

5. Any of the proposed road name options would be acceptable for the local board to approve for use in this location, having been assessed to ensure that they meet Auckland Council’s Road Naming Guidelines and the National Addressing Standards for Road Naming. Mana whenua were also consulted.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) approve the name ‘Joshua Carder Drive’ for the extension of one new public road (Road 1) in 165 Clark Road, Hobsonville (refer Attachment A to the agenda report).

b) approve the following names for the six new roads and commonly owned access lots (COALs) at 165 Clark Road, Hobsonville (stage 1) (refer to Attachment A to the agenda report):

i. public road 8:

ii. public road 13:

iii. public road 14:

iv. public road 15:

v. COAL 3:

vi. COAL 5:

Horopaki

Context

6. On 12 November 2015, resource consent was issued for the construction of 21 residential lots and eight super-lots which is to be subdivided and developed for residential purposes at a later stage. The resource consent was approved under the Housing Accords and Special Housing Area Act 2013 (HASHAA).

7. The development will also include five public roads and five commonly owned access lots (COALs). However, only two COALs are to be included in this application as the remaining three serve less than six lots each.

8. Joshua Carder Drive was approved by the Upper Harbour Local Board on 16 February 2017 (resolution number UH/2017/9) as part of the road naming application for 5 and 5a Clark Road, Hobsonville. The local board will need to approve an extension to Joshua Carder Drive as part of this report as it extends through 165 Clark Road and neighbouring properties.

9. In accordance with the National Addressing Standards for Road Naming (the AS/NZS 4819-2011 standard), the COALs require a road name because they each serve more than five lots.

10. Site and location plans of the development can be found in Attachments A and B respectively.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

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

12. Auckland Council’s road naming criteria typically require that road names reflect one of the following local themes, with the use of Māori names being actively encouraged:

· a historical or ancestral linkage to an area

· a particular landscape, environmental or biodiversity theme or feature, or

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

13. There is a stream that passes through the development which deposits into Bomb Bay. The applicant wishes to highlight this natural feature by proposing names that reference the stream and the flow of water into Bomb Bay. Other names proposed by the applicant have historical references, as well as spiritual meaning to the developer.

14. The applicant has proposed a road name where the person being commemorated (Rishi Vaswani), is still living. As referenced in the Auckland Council Road Naming Policy and Guidelines, the names of living people are actively discouraged as community attitudes and opinions can change over time. It is therefore recommended that the name ‘Vaswani Road’ not be approved.

15. The applicant’s proposed names and meanings are set out in the following table:

(alternate)

Road

number

Proposed names and preferences

Meaning

(as described by the applicant)

Road 8:

16.

Tahingamanu Road

(preferred)

Traditional name for the triangular point within the SHA near Bomb Bay. This is a place-based name suggested by Te Kawerau a Maki and is to only be used for Road 8.

Sager Midgley Road

Sager Midgley has historical reference to the ownership of the area, including and surrounding the subject property. The applicant has supplied a more detailed description of Sager Midgley in Attachment C.

Sager Percy Road

(alternate)

Sager Percy has historical reference to the ownership of the area, including and surrounding the subject property. The applicant has supplied a more detailed description of Sager Percy in Attachment C.

Road 13:

Cornerpoint Road

(preferred)

Corner Point is the name of the subdivision - being the corner of Hobsonville and Scott Point.

Ritika Road

(alternate)

Sanskrit/Norse word meaning ‘flowing’, to reference the stream passing through the development.

Riparian Road

(alternate)

Relating to wetlands adjacent to rivers and streams.

Road 14:

Vaswani Road

(preferred, but not recommended)

Rishi Vaswani has been an owner/resident of the property located at the site since 2002 where he raised a family of three children (Ritikia, Sheen and the late Bella). Mr Vaswani is also the developer of this site, which the applicant is submitting this road naming application on behalf of.

Manisha Road

(alternate)

The Hindu goddess of the mind, symbolising intelligence and desire.

The Scott Point project was awarded the best urban design in 2016. The applicant advised the developer took religious guidance from Manisha to help create a plan and design of this nature. They therefore wish to honor the goddess with this name.

Hato Road

(alternate)

Māori word meaning: (noun) saint.

The developer has linked this to the Hindu word ‘Rishi’, associated with saints and sages. The applicant described the process undertaken to create a plan of this nature requiring the developers to take religious guidance.

Note: Rishi is also the first name of the developer. The applicant originally submitted ‘Rishi’ as a proposed name. However, this name was removed as Land Information New Zealand advised it is already in use in the Auckland region. This also does not comply with the road naming guidelines as it is the name of a living person.

Road 15:

La Bella Road (preferred)

Italian, meaning: the beautiful.
To honour the developer’s late daughter named Bella.

Qi Road

(alternate)

In traditional Chinese culture, Qi is an active principle forming part of any living thing. Qi is frequently translated as ‘life energy’, ‘life force’, or ‘energy flow’. The stream helps to preserve the ecological system in Scott Point. The applicant has chosen the name ‘Qi’ to acknowledge the stream and its significance to the environment.

Syke Road

(alternate)

Middle English (northern dialect) meaning: small stream, rill.

To reference the stream passing through the development.

COAL 3:

Katao Way

(preferred)

Māori word meaning: (noun) water.

To reference the stream passing through the development.

Nant Way

(alternate)

Welsh word meaning: stream.

To reference the stream passing through the development.

Matarua Way

(alternate)

Māori word meaning: two-edged.

The subject site is at the edge of two points: Hobsonville Point and Scott Point.

COAL 5:

Allt Way

(preferred)

Scottish Gaelic word meaning: stream.

To reference the stream passing through the development.

Rivulet Way

(alternate)

A small stream of water, to reference the stream passing through the development.

Stream Way

(alternate)

To reference the stream passing through the development.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

25. The decision sought for this report has no identified impacts on other parts of the council group. The views of council-controlled organisations were not required for the preparation of the report’s advice.

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

Local impacts and local board views

26. The decision sought for this report does not trigger any significant policy and is not considered to have any immediate local impact beyond those outlined in this report.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

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

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

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

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

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

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

30. Approved road names are notified to LINZ and recorded on the New Zealand-wide land information database which includes street addresses issued by councils.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Site plan of new subdivision at 165 Clark Road, Hobsonville	243
b ⇩	Location plan of new subdivision at 165 Clark Road, Hobsonville	245
c ⇩	Historical background of Sager Midgler and Sager Percy	247

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Elizabeth Salter - Subdivision Technical Officer

Authorisers

David Snowdon - Team Leader Subdivision

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Upper Harbour Local Board

16 May 2019

Remuneration Authority - policy on child care allowances

File No.: CP2019/07364

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide feedback on the Remuneration Authority’s proposed policy on child care allowances.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Remuneration Authority has previously received submissions from members in other councils stating that if childcare were a claimable expense, then serving in local government might be a more realistic option for parents who are currently deterred from considering the role because of the costs of childcare. Some jurisdictions in other countries provide such allowances.

3. The authority has distributed its proposed policy in order to get feedback from councils and individual elected members. The proposed policy is in Attachment A. The authority has asked for feedback by 31 May 2019 and intends to include the provision in its determination that comes into force on 1 July 2019.

4. At present, the authority determines allowances for vehicle mileage, travel time and communications. Each individual council considers its approach to the expenses and allowances and writes its own policies within the upper limits set by the authority. If the authority determines that childcare allowances are permissible, the council could include, within the framework established by the authority, specific rules in the council’s expenses policy.

5. A draft submission on the proposed policy has been prepared and is attached as Attachment B. Elected members can provide individual comments to the Remuneration Authority if they wish by 31 May 2019.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) endorse the draft Auckland Council submission on the Remuneration Authority’s proposed policy on childcare allowances.

Horopaki

Context

6. Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) has formed a Young Elected Members (YEM) committee with members representing LGNZ zones. These are elected members who are under the age of 40 years. The YEM network has raised the matter of childcare costs with the Remuneration Authority. They cite examples such as a member of a smaller council who is 24 years of age and on a salary of $18,707. Another, struggling to pay for childcare on her councillor’s salary of $20,634, opted instead to bring her child to meetings^{^[3]}.

7. The group makes the point that other costs of attending to council duties can be claimed, such as mileage and communications, but not the cost of childcare. The group is broadly interested in developing the ability of younger elected members.

8. The Remuneration Authority has researched childcare allowances and is now inviting feedback on its draft policy, which includes the eligibility and payment conditions which will be included in the authority’s formal determination.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

9. The Remuneration Authority has recognised the need to address childcare costs if those with families are not to be deterred from standing for local government office.

10. Salaries paid to Auckland local board members and Governing Body members are generally higher than in smaller council districts in New Zealand, where it is likely elected members particularly struggle to meet childcare costs from their salaries. Nevertheless, the provision of the allowance may encourage greater diversity in those standing for election in Auckland.

11. The cost to the council and the ratepayer is reasonable in terms of the total budget for elected members’ remuneration but is a significant help for the member who has to arrange childcare. The policy places a cap of $6000 per annum for any member. LGNZ statistics show that approximately 6 per cent of elected members are 40 years of age or below^{^[4]}. On that basis, if 6 per cent of members (10 members) claimed the allowance, the cost to Auckland Council would be $60,000.

12. The Remuneration Authority indicates it is in discussion with the Inland Revenue Department about how the allowance will be treated for tax purposes (as income or as an expense reimbursement). It is possible it will be taxed at source (that is by the council) prior to payment.

13. Payment of the allowance under the proposed conditions requires evidence of the expense incurred. This is supported.

14. The allowance cannot be paid to family members. This is supported.

15. The proposed conditions state that a local authority may pay the childcare allowance as a contribution towards expenses incurred by the member for childcare provided while the member is engaged on local authority business. This wording may be too wide. Consider a member who has regularly arranged childcare, irrespective of undertaking council duties, deciding to spend two hours preparing for the next council meeting while the children happen to be in childcare. The member would be ‘engaged on local authority business’ and could claim the childcare cost of those two hours.

16. Staff researched conditions around payment by other councils in other jurisdictions. One council simply paid the full cost of child care. Another specified the meetings and events that could be claimed. Staff believe the intent of the provision is to make a contribution toward the cost of childcare where necessary in order for the member to undertake council duties, such as attend meetings. The wording should indicate more clearly that the payment is for childcare costs that are necessary in order for the member to undertake council duties, and are not simply childcare costs that are incurred at the same time the member is undertaking council duties and would have been incurred anyway, if the member was not attending to council duties.

17. Other conditions are:

(i) the child is under 14 years

(ii) payment cannot be greater than $15 per hour and cannot be greater than the actual expense

(iii) childcare cannot be for more than 8 hours in any 24-hour period.

18. These are supported.

19. Staff recommend that the council supports the proposed policy with the comment, outlined above, that the purpose should more clearly reflect that the expense is a necessary expense in order for the member to attend to duties.

20. Staff also note that the council itself will decide its own provisions to include in its expenses policy, within the framework set by the authority.

21. Members can provide individual comments to the Remuneration Authority if they wish, by 31 May 2019.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

22. The Remuneration Authority’s policy applies only to elected members and does not impact the group.

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

Local impacts and local board views

23. The policy affects all elected members, including local board members.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

24. The Remuneration Authority’s policy may assist those in the Māori community who are potential candidates for election but are deterred by the costs of childcare.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

25. There will be financial implications. As noted in the body of the report, the additional cost is likely to be less than $60,000 and will impact the cost centre for elected members’ remuneration.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

26. There is a small risk of the provision being abused (false claims submitted). The requirement for evidence of the amount paid will mitigate this risk.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

27. This report is being presented to local boards for their feedback. It is also being circulated to Governing Body members for their feedback. The draft submission will be amended if there is a clear majority position in favour of an amendment.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Childcare allowance proposed draft policy paper	257
b ⇩	Remuneration Authority draft policy - child care allowances - submission	265

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Warwick McNaughton - Principal Advisor - Democracy Services

Authorisers

Marguerite Delbet - General Manager Democracy Services

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Upper Harbour Local Board

16 May 2019

Auckland Council’s Quarterly Performance Report: Upper Harbour Local Board for quarter three 2018/2019

File No.: CP2019/06935

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide the Upper Harbour Local Board with an integrated quarterly performance report for quarter 3, 1 January to 31 March 2019.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. This report includes financial performance, progress against work programmes, key challenges the board should be aware of and any risks to delivery against the 2018/2019 work programme. This is a retrospective report intended to provide a transparent overview and reflect the progress of how the Upper Harbour Local Board work programme is tracking at the end of quarter 3 (Q3) for the 2018/2019 financial year.

3. The work programme is produced annually and aligns with the Upper Harbour Local Board Plan outcomes.

4. The key activity updates from this quarter are:

· Albany Community Hub, interim council management and programme delivery (sharepoint #1538):

o the first Upper Harbour Community Network meeting was held, with 15 community organisations attending.

· Albany Stadium Pool Operations (sharepoint #560):

o active visits have increased by 10 per cent compared to the same period last year.

· Rosedale Park – renew sports fields 3 and 4 (sharepoint #1678):

o this project has been completed.

· Industry Pollution Prevention Programme (sharepoint #286):

o 81 site visits took place in Q3. Issues were identified at 22 sites and reports recommending changes to practices have been sent to these businesses.

5. All operating departments with agreed work programmes have provided a quarterly update against their work programme delivery (refer Attachment A). Most activities are reported with a status of green (on track), amber (some risk or issues which are being managed) or grey (cancelled, deferred or merged). The following activities are reported with a status of red (behind delivery, significant risk):

· Inclusion and diversity – Age Friendly Upper Harbour (sharepoint #687)

· Hobsonville Headquarters development exterior landscaping and car park construction (sharepoint #1677).

6. The financial performance report compared to budget 2018/2019 is attached (refer Attachment B). There are some points for the local board to note.

7. Overall, the net operational financial performance of the board is tracking below the revised year-to-date budget (93 per cent). Revenue is well ahead of budget for the year-to-date and relates to the Albany Stadium Pool and Albany Community Hub. From the local boards’ locally driven initiatives (LDI) funding, the majority of projects are underway and on track to be completed during the year. Capital projects underway include:

· Sunderland Lounge renewals

· sports park development at Scott Point

· sports field renewals at Rosedale Park

· various other small parks asset renewals.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) receive the performance report for the financial quarter ending 31 March 2019.

Horopaki

Context

8. The Upper Harbour Local Board has an approved 2018/2019 work programme for the following operating departments:

· Arts, Community and Events

· Parks, Sport and Recreation

· Libraries and Information

· Community Services: Service, Strategy and Integration

· Community Facilities: Build Maintain Renew

· Community Leases

· Infrastructure and Environmental Services

· Local Economic Development.

9. Work programmes are produced annually to meet the Upper Harbour Local Board outcomes identified in the three-year Upper Harbour Local Board Plan. The local board plan outcomes are:

· Empowered, engaged and connected Upper Harbour communities

· Efficient and effective transport links

· Healthy and active communities

· A thriving local economy

· Our environment is valued, protected and enhanced.

10. The following graph shows how the work programme activities meet local board plan outcomes. Activities that are not part of the approved work programme but contribute towards the local board outcomes, such as advocacy by the local board, are not captured in this graph.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Local board work programme snapshot

11. The work programme activities have two statuses; red/amber/green/grey (RAG) status which measures the performance of the activity (amber and red show issues and risks); and activity status which shows the stage of the activity. These two statuses create a snapshot of the progress of the work programmes.

12. The following graph identifies work programme activity by RAG status. It shows the percentage of work programme activities that are on track (green), in progress but with issues that are being managed (amber), activities that have significant issues (red), and activities that have been cancelled/deferred/merged (grey).

13. The following graph shows the activity status of activities in each departments’ work programmes. The number of activity lines differ by department as approved in the local board work programmes.

Key activity updates from Q3

14. Arts, Community and Events:

· Placemaking: Greenhithe Community Trust, funding to deliver placemaking activities (sharepoint #689). Highlights for Q3 are:

o a men’s project facilitator has appointed by the trust to deliver programmed activities that encourage men connectivity and useful activity

o a newcomers Plunket Group was launched in March 2019

o a Greenhithe youth employment programme matched students to summer employment

o a range of activities were delivered that focused on promoting and building community connectivity.

· Children and Young People, youth engagement and capacity building (sharepoint #694)

o the Upper Harbour youth services mapping report was completed which will be presented to the board in Q4. A number of funding agreements to support a range of organisations to deliver youth programmes and activities were finalised.

· Albany Community Hub, interim council management and programme delivery (sharepoint #1538)

o the fairy doors initiative was completed in conjunction with Meadowood Community House and the Headquarters in Hobsonville. The first Upper Harbour Community Network meeting was held, with 15 community organisations attending.

15. Parks, Sports and Recreation:

· Greenways Plan service assessment (sharepoint #429)

o engagement is underway with internal departments and other agencies. Mana whenua engagement is planned which will be followed by targeted community stakeholder engagement.

· Albany Stadium Pool Operations (sharepoint #560)

o active visits have increased by 10 per cent compared to the same period last year. The swim school now has 1300 swimmers per week and gym membership has also increased, now being 2200.

· Ecological volunteers and environmental programmes (sharepoint #562)

o 1250 volunteer hours were recorded this quarter with volunteer activities focusing on plant and animal pest control, park clean ups, track maintenance and mulching. Three volunteer training days took place; first aid, grow-safe and risk assessment.

· Caribbean Drive sports field service provision assessment (sharepoint #3281)

o professional services have been engaged to deliver the assessment. A local board workshop will take place in May 2019 to present the draft assessment and seek feedback.

16. Community Facilities:

· Fernhill Escarpment – renew walkway and wayfinding signage (sharepoint #1675)

o a consultant has been engaged and a site walkover with the consultant was completed in March 2019. The planning assessment, including feasibility, developed design and associated cost estimate, is under preparation to inform board decision-making.

· Centorian Reserve – develop walkway (sharepoint #2881)

o works have commenced on site and are due to be completed mid-April 2019.

· Rosedale Park – renew sports fields 3 and 4 (sharepoint #1678)

o this project was completed on 3 April 2019.

17. Community Services: Service Strategy and Integration:

· Upper Harbour Open Space Management Plan (sharepoint #1387)

o the classification review is nearly complete. Two hui have been held with mana whenua to review land classification. A report will be made to the May 2019 business meeting on the intensification to notify the play and confirm land classification.

18. Infrastructure and Environmental Services:

· Industry Pollution Prevention Programme (sharepoint #286)

o 81 site visits took place in Q3. Issues were identified at 22 sites and reports recommending changes to practices have been sent to these businesses. Follow-up visits are scheduled for April 2019 and a report presented to a board workshop in May 2019.

19. Community Services: Libraries and Information:

· Children and youth engagement (sharepoint #1182)

o Kia Maia te Whai – Dare to Explore, the summer reading programme attracted 242 registrations at Albany library. A total of 14 events were run with attendance ranging from eight to 40.

20. Local Economic Development:

· Pop-up Business School (sharepoint #531)

o this event ran in March 2019 at the Millennium Centre with 56 registrations. A report will be available to the board in Q4.

Activities with significant issues

21. The following work programmes have red RAG status:

22. Arts, Community and Events:

· Inclusion and diversity – Age Friendly Upper Harbour (sharepoint #687)

o Age Concern had originally agreed to deliver this work, but subsequently withdrew due to a lack of capacity. Staff are engaging with another identified potential provider. However, with one quarter remaining, there is a risk that a provider with sufficient capacity to deliver the programme will not be found.

23. Community Facilities:

· Hobsonville Headquarters development exterior landscaping and car park construction (sharepoint #1677)

o The car park is significantly delayed. The contractor and developer (with whom Auckland Council has an infrastructure funding agreement) has not achieved compliance sign-off for the car park. The car park cannot open until sign-off has been achieved and the surrounding road network completed. The Headquarters has also been forced to close due to a wastewater failure. A new wastewater line is being constructed and once complete, will be connected to the Watercare network.

Activities with potentially significant issues

24. The following work programmes have amber RAG status:

25. Arts, Community and Events:

· Placemaking Albany CoCo Inc (sharepoint #688)

o the allocated budget is being directed towards community engagement to support the expression of interest (EOI) process for the Albany Hub, when the board decides to proceed with this process.

26. Community Facilities:

· Exeter Reserve – replace steps to Devonshire Place (sharepoint 1674)

o the current budget is insufficient to renew the steps to today’s standards. A business case is under preparation to help secure the necessary funding.

· Upper Harbour – renew walkways and paths (sharepoint #1683)

o changes to the national environmental standards for tracks adjacent to kauri may require alterations to the current resource consented design for the Paremoremo Scenic Reserve track.

· Upper Harbour – renew walkways and paths (sharepoint #2016)

o the current budget is insufficient to complete this work programme. A number of the sub-components for this project are being addressed through other processes and they are being removed from the project scope. Work continues on the remaining elements and a workshop is planned with the board.

· Sunderland Lounge – exterior and interior renewal (sharepoint #2966)

o due to issues around the existing stormwater and wastewater connections, the expected completion date for the works has been pushed out to the end of June 2019.

· Gills Reserve – install concrete walkway (sharepoint #3002)

o the budget for this project is very low. It is also dependent on an adjacent Auckland Transport project which is not progressing as fast as expected.

· Hoskings Reserve – demolish lower chicken shed (sharepoint #3001)

o the lower chicken shed has been removed and an asset management report is still to be completed. A final walk-over by the maintenance team will be undertaken before this project will be complete.

27. Infrastructure and Environmental Services:

· Sustainable Schools Project – our local streams (sharepoint #362)

o the project has been delayed due to the procurement process not happening as quickly as expected. Delivery is expected to be complete by the end of Q4.

Activities on hold

28. The following work programme activities have been identified by operating departments as on hold:

29. Arts, Culture and Events:

· Transition Albany Community Hub from council to community-led management (sharepoint #1530)

o this project has been deferred as the local board has decided to defer the EOI process.

30. Community Facilities – investigation and design:

· Hooton Reserve improvements (sharepoint #2116)

o this project is on hold due to expected major work by Auckland Transport in the area. Project delivery will be co-ordinated with Auckland Transport.

· Upper Harbour – implement actions from the marine sport facility audit (sharepoint #2124)

o this project has been placed on hold until the marine facility audit is complete.

31. Community Leases:

· Rosedale Park, North Harbour Softball Association Incorporated (sharepoint #2837)

o this is on hold as the Softball Association is revisiting its plans.

Changes to the local board work programme

Deferred activities

32. These activities are deferred from the 2018/2019 work programme:

· Upper Harbour – implement actions from the Greenways Plan (sharepoint #2717)

o the proposed Mallard Place to Calypso Way walkway was deleted from this year’s work programme by the board at its November 2018 meeting. The project will be considered further as part of the Greenways Plan refresh.

33. As advised to the local board in August 2018, the PC14 Waiarohia Ponds, Hobsonville Corridor, has been deferred to the 2020/2021 financial year in order to better align with the offset programme funding.

Cancelled activities

34. There are no cancelled activities.

Activities merged with other activities for delivery

35. There are no activities merged with other activities for efficient delivery.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

36. When developing the work programmes council group impacts and views are presented to the boards. As this is an information only report there are no further impacts identified.

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

Local impacts and local board views

37. This report informs the Upper Harbour Local Board of the performance for the quarter ending 31 March 2019.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

38. Legacy Auckland Regional Services Trust (ARST) contestable funding: Upper Harbour allocation (sharepoint 1718):

· the local board allocated the balance of its ARST funding to the Manuhiri Kaitiaki Charitable Trust (MKCT) who will be developing one or more pieces of public art for installation in the Albany area. This is expected to be workshopped with the board early in Q4. This agreement will further the relationship agreement signed between the local board and Ngati Manuhiri in 2017.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

39. This report is for information only and therefore, there are no financial implications associated with this report.

Financial performance

40. Operating expenditure relating to asset-based services (ABS) is tracking above budget by $159,000 for the year-to-date, while the LDI operational projects are currently $263,000 below budget. This is due to a variety of projects yet to draw down on financial allocations.

41. Capital spend of $3.6 million represents investments in the renewal at Sunderland Lounge, sports park development at Scott Point, sports field renewals at Rosedale Park, and various other small parks asset renewals. The board has also seen progress on a number of projects from their discretionary LDI capital fund.

42. The complete Upper Harbour Local Board Financial Performance report can be found in Attachment B.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

43. While the risk of non-delivery of the entire work programme is rare, the likelihood for risk relating to individual activities does vary. Capital projects for instance, are susceptible to more risk as on-time and on-budget delivery is dependent on weather conditions, approvals (e.g. building consents) and is susceptible to market conditions.

44. Information about any significant risks and how they are being managed and/or mitigated is addressed in the ‘Activities with significant issues’ section

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

45. The local board will receive the next performance update for quarter 4 following the end of the financial year (June 2019).

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Upper Harbour Local Board work programme update for quarter 3	277
b ⇩	Upper Harbour Local Board financial performance report for quarter 3	301

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author	Andy Roche - Local Board Advisor
Authoriser	Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

[1] Local Government New Zealand and Department of Conservation (n.d), Reserves Act Guide, retrieved from https://www.doc.govt.nz/Documents/about-doc/role/legislation/reserves-act-guide.pdf

[2] Local Government New Zealand and Department of Conservation (n.d), Reserves Act Guide, retrieved from https://www.doc.govt.nz/Documents/about-doc/role/legislation/reserves-act-guide.pdf

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

Requirement FY 2017-2018	Received	Comments
A Strategic Plan for next 3 – 5 years - reviewed every 3 years	a	NEW - 2018-2021 Strategic Plan
Audited financial accounts	a
Business plan	a
Annual review report: · Achievement of previous year’s objectives against business plan	a
2019-2020 Indicative Budget	a
Annual BID programme reporting and alignment meeting between Upper Harbour Local Board and business association	a	Held – 7 February 2019. BNH Chair reports keenness to form closer governance-to-governance links.
Annual Accountability Form	a	This is the annual checklist which brings together in one place all the accountability and reporting requirements.
Board Charter	a
Recommendation and Findings	Recommend Targeted Rate	Staff are satisfied that Business North Harbour Incorporated is in substantial compliance with policy reporting requirements for the purpose of the recommendation of this report.

Author	Cindy Lynch - Democracy Advisor
Authoriser	Eric Perry - Relationship Manager