I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Kaipātiki Local Board will be held on:

 

Date:

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

 

Wednesday, 17 July 2019

4.00pm

Kaipātiki Local Board Office
90 Bentley Avenue
Glenfield

 

Kaipātiki Local Board

 

OPEN AGENDA

 

 

 

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Chairperson

John Gillon

 

Deputy Chairperson

Danielle Grant

 

Members

Paula Gillon

 

 

Ann Hartley, JP

 

 

Kay McIntyre, QSM

 

 

Anne-Elise Smithson

 

 

Adrian Tyler

 

 

Lindsay Waugh

 

 

(Quorum 4 members)

 

 

 

Jacinda  Short

Democracy Advisor - Kaipatiki

 

10 July 2019

 

Contact Telephone: (09) 484 6236

Email: jacinda.short@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

 

 


 

 


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

ITEM   TABLE OF CONTENTS                                                                                        PAGE

1          Welcome                                                                                                                         5

2          Apologies                                                                                                                        5

3          Declaration of Interest                                                                                                   5

4          Confirmation of Minutes                                                                                               5

5          Leave of Absence                                                                                                          5

6          Acknowledgements                                                                                                       6

6.1     Sonia Nerheny                                                                                                      6

7          Petitions                                                                                                                          6

8          Deputations                                                                                                                    6

9          Public Forum                                                                                                                  7

10        Extraordinary Business                                                                                                7

11        Beach Haven (Hilders Park) Wharf Remedial Works                                                9

12        Land owner approval for stormwater upgrade works within Normanton Reserve     23

13        Proposal for a Glenfield Centre Plan                                                                        67

14        Auckland Transport Monthly Update                                                                        75

15        Allocation of Kaipātiki Local Board Community Safety Fund                               85

16        New community lease to Fernglen Native Plant Gardens Educational Charitable Trust at 36 Kauri Road, Birkenhead                                                                                         93

17        Kaipātiki local parks land classification programme                                            103

18        Service property optimisation - Bartley Street Toilets                                         135

19        Pathways to Preparedness: A Planning Framework for Recovery                     141

20        Kaipātiki Local Board Chairperson's Report                                                         165

21        Members' Reports                                                                                                     167

22        Governing Body and Independent Maori Statutory Board Members' Update   173

23        Workshop Records - Kaipātiki Local Board - June 2019                                      175

24        Governance Forward Work Calendar                                                                     183  

25        Consideration of Extraordinary Items 

 

 


1          Welcome

 

 

2          Apologies

 

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

 

3          Declaration of Interest

 

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

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

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

ii)      A non-financial conflict of 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 Kaipātiki Local Board:

a)         confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Wednesday, 19 June 2019, as true and correct.

 

5          Leave of Absence

 

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


 

6          Acknowledgements

 

6.1       Sonia Nerheny

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To acknowledge and congratulate Sonia Nerheny on her new role as Schools Engagement Facilitator for the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       In 2012, the Board chose to support Kaipātiki Community Facilities Trust (KCFT) to develop a work stream to address local youth unemployment and we have seen this project evolve and grow to where we are today, on the verge of opening the Northern Job Skills Hub on the corner of Kaipātiki and Glenfield roads.

3.       Since 2014, Sonia Nerheny has developed the work stream with a clear focus on the best process to deliver results for young people. Over this time, Sonia has built strong relationships with other agencies in the field and has secured their confidence to establish and fund a job skills hub in our local board area. As further testament to the professionalism that Sonia has shown she has now been appointed by the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment as their Schools Facilitator at the Job Skills Hub.

4.       While Sonia will be a loss to KCFT we all gain, as a community, where all young people have access to pathways towards worthwhile employment under the guiding hand of a young woman steeped in youth focused community development.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a)      acknowledge and congratulate Sonia Nerheny on her new role as Schools Engagement Facilitator.

b)      thank Sonia Nerheny for her hard work for young people in the community.

 

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 Kaipātiki 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.”


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

Beach Haven (Hilders Park) Wharf Remedial Works

File No.: CP2019/12726

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek approval of the concept design option two A for the renewal of the Beach Haven Wharf, which includes replacing the current loading platforms and stairs with a floating pontoon and gangway, in conjunction with the other required remedial works.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The Beach Haven Wharf was completely rebuilt in 2000 in a way that replicates the heritage character of the previous 1930’s structure. However, the seaward portion of the wharf has deteriorated significantly in that time from the ravages of the marine environment and is now hazardous to use. Safety advisory signage was erected in August 2018 and the loading platforms closed to the public.

3.       Various options, with costings, have been considered over the last eight years from demolishing and not replacing to a total rebuild costing over $1million. A recent review of all these options and a further assessment of the current condition of the wharf has given rise to an additional option being proposed that replaces the outer seaward portion of the wharf with a floating pontoon and gangway. It also eliminates the hazards associated with the loading platforms and stairs caused by marine growth.

4.       Following feedback from Auckland Council’s Heritage Unit, the concept plan has been modified to retain the full length of the existing wharf structure in order to retain the heritage character of previous wharves on this site.

5.       The pontoon and gangway are now proposed to extend off the southern side of the outer viewing platform. Most of the outer half of the wharf will need to be renewed with this amended Option 2.

6.       Consultation with the Hilders Park Frank Larking Boat community steering group has provided feedback on some minor amendments resulting in the option two A concept.

7.       Following concept approval from the local board the detailed design will be prepared in collaboration with the Engineering and Technical Support Coastal Team who have given some initial feedback on the option 2 two A concept design.

8.       Consents will be required for the proposed pontoon option that may impact on timelines.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a)      approve Beach Haven (Hilders Park) Wharf concept design option two A (refer Attachment A to the agenda report) proceeding to consenting and construction, noting the works to be undertaken include:

i)        replacing the loading platforms and stairs with a floating pontoon,

ii)       replacing decayed piles,

iii)      replacing the under-capacity load bearing handrails,

iv)      strengthening of the deck.

 

Horopaki

Context

9.       The recreational wharf at the end of Beach Haven Road was originally known as Hellyer’s Creek Wharf after it was built in 1887. It was later known as the Birkdale wharf, but since 1946 has been known by its current name of the Beach Haven wharf.

10.     Access to the wharf is from Beach Haven Road, via a wide and well-formed road that provides general access to both the new Beach Haven Commuter Wharf, Beach Haven Wharf and the vehicular access to the beach, via a boat ramp.

11.     The wharf is a recreational facility rather than a commercial one, reinforced with the building of the new commuter wharf in 2013. The wharf is generally used for light activities such as fishing, swimming and minor loading for small recreational vessels and servicing of the nearby swing mooring area.

12.     The below images depict the current appearance of the Beach Haven Wharf:

Aerial view

13.     The wharf is a timber structure some 40 metres long with a 2-metre-wide trunk that leads to an approximately 4m x 4m head/viewing platform at the outer end. Two loading platforms with stairs run off the southern end of the viewing platform.

14.     The current design of the balustrade is repeated both sides of the walkway and encloses the wharf with only an opening to allow access down to the loading platforms/landings used for recreational boat users and swimmers.

15.     The first lower loading landing is accessed by a flight of stairs to an unfenced/un-balustraded landing which continues to another flight of stairs down to a final line of two full height braced marine piles which protects the lower landing sections from marine collisions.

16.     Mathews & Mathews Architects provided a Heritage summary of the wharf that noted the wharf was completely reconstructed in 2000 including framing, decking and railings. There appears to be no original fabric remaining from the earlier wharf from the 1930’s.

17.     Mathews & Mathews Architects also advise that the wharf’s heritage values are closely associated with the historic use of this site as there has been continuously a wharf here since 1887. They further advise the physical features found today, following the full reconstruction in 2000, appear to maintain the design integrity from a reconstruction that occurred in 1938.

18.     The Auckland Unitary Plan contains a heritage designation map overlay of the Beach Haven wharf site.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Construction Overview

19.     The wharf can be considered in two parts:

1)    The landward part

2)    The seaward part

20.     These two parts are constructed slightly differently and are suffering different issues, due to the landward part being out of the water for a large part of the tidal cycle.

21.     The landward 23-26 metres of the wharf is founded on the rock intertidal platform. This part of the wharf is supported on raking hardwood piles set in concrete in the rock. It is exposed for most of the tidal cycle and largely unaffected by decay. The hardwood poles are more affected by bad splitting (checking) associated with drying of many hardwoods.

22.     The seaward 14-17 metres is within the all tide water and especially the outer 10 metres in deeper water. It is founded on vertical timber treated pine piles driven into the mud.  This seaward part includes the stairs and landings.

23.     The seaward part of the wharf is especially subject to significant decay and worm intrusion. Even relatively new treated poles have signs of worm infestation. While the round timber poles are affected, the sawn timber of the stairs and lower braces is even more prone to attack. This may be partly because of exposed end grain and the stairs have many cut faces, some of which are cut after treatment and therefore more prone to decay and worm attack.

24.     The wharf also has a non-complying handrail and is understrength in one long span (third from seaward end)

Structural Assessments and Issues Identified

25.     Several assessments and reports with cost estimates of the deteriorating wharf structure and advice on repair methods have been undertaken in 2010, 2012, 2015 and 2017.

26.     In March 2017, an asset condition assessment of Beach Haven Wharf conducted by the Council’s Community Facilities Asset Management Intelligence Support (AMIS) identified general concerns for the safety of the public due to the poor condition of a number of the piles, the stairs leading to the water, the handrail/balustrade and the decking in some sections. Safety advisory signage was erected in August 2018 highlighting the under-rate deck loading capacity, other structural deficiencies and no public access to the loading platform and stairs.

27.     Subsequently a full structural inspection was carried out by MSC consultants and Land Development and Exploration Ltd who assessed the piles. They recommending works required to renew the structure in order to meet the building code standards. These included:

1)    Additional joists to increase the loading capacity for the decking

2)    Replace handrails to cater for higher loading capacity

3)    Replace missing or corroded bolts and fixings

4)    Install handrails in the stair and landing area

5)    Repair or replace 11 out of the 30 piles where they have eroded to under half of their original diameter.

28.     In October 2018, Davis Coastal Consultants were appointed for design and consenting services for the remedial works to the wharf. Following a review of all the previous assessments and reports, additional issues were identified with the renewal of the loading platforms and stairs, as part of the Safety in Design audit when considering all renewal options.

29.     Because they are in the intertidal zone the steps and loading platforms are subject to marine growth and siltation which makes the surfaces slippery and hazardous. While plastic mesh or artificial grass matting can partially mitigate this problem, the prolific marine growth (oysters, barnacles, mussels, etc.) on the lower stairs and piles creates a cutting and abrasion hazard. The presence of this material also makes it difficult to monitor worm attack to the timber while removal of this growth is difficult and time consuming.

30.     The constant need to replace and upgrade the seaward portion of the wharf due to low timber longevity, coupled with the health and safety risks, led to an alternative design proposal to utilize a floating pontoon rather than rebuild the seaward platform.

31.     Option one, as shown in the below image was proposed in November 2018:

 

Option one

 

32.     Benefits of option one includes:

·      Avoids using the timber structure most at-risk from worm attack, making it less expensive to maintain and replacement of piles can occur less frequently

·      Removes the need for slippery and marine growth encrusted stairs

·      The pontoon provides a far higher amenity for boat access. The wharf as originally designed was likely used for high sided scows that plied the Waitemata and Hauraki waters but is not very accommodating for modern watercraft.

33.     The wharf would be rebuilt using new timber piles sleeved in HDPE (high-density polyethylene) with braces attached using clamps so that there is minimal risk of future worm attack.

34.     Because the pontoon solution is a significant departure from the current wharf the draft proposal was presented to the community via the Hilders Park Frank Larking Save the Boat Steering Group (the community group) for comment.

35.     Understandably the community group value the heritage aspects but accept the improved performance and decreased maintenance associated with the proposed option one.

36.     The community group noted some aspects of the design that needed addressing including:

·      A water supply to the pontoon and fenders

·      Jumping off the wharf and fishing are also activities needing consideration

·      A viewing/seating position was requested.

37.     Auckland Council’s Heritage Unit were also requested to comment on the option one design.  Advice received was that the main 40 metres trunk of the wharf is important to retain for the heritage character, however replacement of the gangway pontoon was accepted.

38.     The pontoon concept design was then modified according to the feedback received, resulting in concept option two, as shown in the below image:

Option two

39.     Council’s Heritage Unit have since confirmed their support for concept option two.

40.     Feedback on option two was subsequently sought the community group on option two. The feedback is summarised below:

·      The retention of the full length of the wharf structure to maintain its visual heritage character, as well as maintaining the function of jumping/diving off the end of the wharf, was endorsed. This also removed the need for a diving platform on the pontoon.

·      Concern was raised as to the location of the covered viewing/seating spot as it may be climbed and used for jumping/diving from into shallow water over the rock shelf. Accordingly, the seat was moved to the end of the wharf and the roof removed from the concept.

·      Additional ladders and seating were also requested on the pontoon.

41.     Feedback from the community group resulted in an amended option two A as presented in the below image:

Option two A

 

42.     Auckland Councils Engineering and Technical Services Coastal Specialist has provided some initial feedback on the option two A, which will need to be considered during the detailed design phase, including:

·      Design may need to consider accidental ferry impact or emergency berthing due to its proximity to the Beach Haven ferry terminal.

·      The slope of the gangway appears to be steeper than the maximum recommended grade and the placement of the seat on the edge of the pontoon could be potentially unsafe for people sitting on it and falling into the water. 

·      The seat may need to be moved towards the centre of the pontoon.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

43.     The amended pontoon option reflects the views of consultation and input of the Council’s Heritage Unit, Engineering and Technical Services Coastal Unit and the Hilders Park community steering group as discussed in the previous section.

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

Local impacts and local board views

44.     The pontoon options for the wharf renewal were presented to the local board at workshop on 8 May 2019.

45.     Chairperson John Gillon and Member Adrian Tyler, attend the Hilders Park Frank Larking community steering group meetings and receive meeting minutes and are aware of the process that has occurred to date.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

46.     Ngati Whatua o Kaipara and Ngai Tai Ki Tamaki are on the distribution list for the Hilders Park Frank Larking Boat steering group communications and have been sent a copy of the pontoon option two A for their comment/information, although none has been received at the writing of this report. 

47.     Iwi will have further opportunity to provide feedback during the resource consent process.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

48.     Construction costs have been estimated for the all the concept design options, as well as to upgrade the wharf in the current configuration.

49.     Prior to this latest work, in July 2018, budget costing were obtained from Quantity Surveyors for wharf replacement as set out below:

Demolish and do not replace

$282,626

Repair the existing structure

$603,868

Demolish and rebuild

$1,081,565

 

50.     Auckland Council quantity surveyors also endorsed, as reasonable, a quote from a piling contractor for partial renewal of the wharf substructure of $145,000, although they recommended a 30% contingency be added ($190,000). The partial repair proposed involved replacing 1 pile,1 timber brace, the decking timber to the lower landing and wrapping 10 piles in grout filled fibre glass.

51.     Costs have been estimated for the replacement options one and two A including a 20% contingency based on recent prices for similar work. A breakdown of these costs is:

·      Option one - $400,000

·      Option two A - $480,000

52.     The current expenditure and proposed budgets to date is shown in the following table:

Financial Year

Budget

Expenditure to Date

2017/2018

$37,550

$37,550

2018/2019

$37,450

$24,525

2019/2020

$650,000

-

Totals

$725,000

$62,075

 

53.     Accordingly, the renewal of the wharf should be able to be completed with the current allocated budgets totalling $662,925.

54.     The pontoon option will require additional resource and building consents. These will have time and cost implications.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

55.     It is expected that the consent process should be straight forward if the final proposal has community and heritage support.

56.     It is proposed to replace the existing handrails with a similar style of a top and intermediate rail without the in-fill balustrades on the premise that children under the age of 6 years old are not using the wharf unless accompanied with an adult. This may be contended during the building consent process and may result in advisory signage being installed or in the worst case an application to the Building Control Authority for and exemption.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

57.     Following confirmation from the local board to proceed with the pontoon amended option two A, the next steps are:

·      Prepare and lodge a resource consent application – August 2019

·      Complete structural design for the increased deck loading and replacement handrails and other structural changes – August 2019

·      Prepare and lodge building consent application – August 2019

·      Prepare detailed design drawings, specifications and schedules for tendering – September 2019

·      Obtain quotes from a selection of specialist construction companies for the works – October 2019

·      Award a contract for the physical works – early November 2019

·      Completion of works – March 2020 (structural strengthening works before Christmas holidays and pontoon works February/March).


 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

17 July 2019 - Kaipātiki Local Board Business Meeting - Hilders Wharf -Pontoon Concept Option 2A plans & elevation

19

b

17 July 2019 - Kaipātiki Local Board Business Meeting - Hilders Wharf-Pontoon Option 2A 3D

21

      

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Peter Bilton – Senior Project Manager

Authorisers

Rod Sheridan - General Manager Community Facilities

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 



Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator



Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

Land owner approval for stormwater upgrade works within Normanton Reserve

File No.: CP2019/00661

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek land owner approval from the Kaipātiki Local Board for an application from Auckland Council’s Healthy Waters department to undertake stormwater upgrade works at Normanton Reserve.

2.       To gain approval from the Kaipātiki Local Board for the design of the amenity upgrades for Normanton Reserve.     

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

3.       The council’s Healthy Waters department is seeking land owner approval to undertake stormwater upgrade works within Normanton Reserve. Amenity upgrades to the reserve are also proposed as part of the storm water upgrade works.

4.       The works are required as the existing stormwater pipe that runs through the southwestern corner of Normanton Reserve is in poor structural condition. This creates a risk of flooding to a number of private properties if the pipe fails.

5.       The daylighting of the stormwater pipe will create a number of benefits including replacing an end of life stormwater pipe, improving the amenity of the reserve through recreational features, and increasing the ecological function of the reserve.

6.       Council’s Parks and Places Specialist, Senior Arboriculture and Ecological Specialist, and Maintenance Delivery Co-ordinator support the proposal.

7.       Staff recommend that the Kaipātiki Local Board grant land owner approval for the storm water works within Normanton Reserve.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a)      approve the application from Auckland Council’s Healthy Waters department to undertake a stormwater pipe upgrade within Normanton Reserve;

b)      note the Normanton Reserve Draft Concept Design April 2018 as presented in Attachment A to the agenda report.

c)      approve the project proceeding to consenting and construction based on the General Arrangement Plan for the Normanton Reserve stormwater upgrade as presented in Attachment C to the agenda report.

 

Horopaki

Context

8.       Council’s Healthy Waters department is seeking land owner approval to undertake stormwater upgrade works within Normanton Reserve. The works are proposed to start in October 2019 with a proposed completion of June 2020, and will involve the closing off of an area of the reserve while the works take place.

9.       The works are required as the existing stormwater pipe that runs through the southwestern corner of Normanton Reserve is in poor structural condition, creating a risk of flooding to a number of private properties if the pipe fails. There are known drainage issues with the reserve becoming boggy and the flooding of the Ashfield Road industrial area, which is downstream of the reserve. A draft concept plan for the project was produced in April 2018 to guide consultation. It provides detail on how the project has been developed (refer Attachment A).

10.     Healthy Waters plan to renew the existing asset by removing the pipe through the reserve to create an open stream and riparian environment to increase downstream capacity. Final designs have incorporated the results of the public consultation undertaken in October 2018 relating to possible amenity features. Proposed amenity upgrades include a BMX track, play hut, stepping logs, shelter and furniture. These changes have been included in the designs produced for resource consent and as outlined in the General Arrangement Plan (refer Attachment C).

11.     The proposed works are located in the south-eastern corner of Normanton Reserve, and will require the entire area within the loop footpath (fitness track) to be closed off from the public for safety reasons, while the works are undertaken. Once the works are completed, in June 2020, the site will be fully reinstated with planting and the replacement of the footpath. The existing exercise equipment will remain intact. The existing park assets are shown in the inset map 1 below.

Map 1: Normanton Reserve existing assets

 

12.     The proposal also requires the removal of five trees, the relocation of four others and the localised root zone alterations of various trees throughout the reserve as shown on the inset map 2 below.  An arboricultural report was prepared (refer Attachment B) which concluded that there will be a net positive effect on the reserve from the new planting and the creation of a riparian area. The Senior Arboriculture and Ecological Specialist will give final recommendations on the proposed tree relocation and placements when issuing the asset owner approval.

Map 2: Normanton Reserve tree assets

 

13.     Normanton Reserve is owned by the Auckland Council as a classified recreation reserve, subject to the Reserves Act 1977.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

14.     Healthy Waters decided to daylight the stormwater pipe beneath the reserve as it provided the same benefits as replacing or upgrading the poor condition pipe, but could also add additional amenity and ecological function to the reserve.

15.     The Maintenance Delivery Coordinator and Parks and Places Specialist support the application. The Parks and Places Specialist has requested that the trees to be relocated be moved to existing play space in the reserve, to meet the shade requirements of the shade strategy for play spaces.

16.     The Senior Arboriculture and Ecological Specialist reviewed the arboricultural report (refer Attachment B) and is in support of the proposal.  

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

17.     Truck movements to and from the reserve will be managed through a traffic management plan approved by Auckland Transport.

18.     There is a wastewater pipe running through Normanton Reserve which is in the vicinity of the daylighted area as shown in inset map 3 below. The wastewater pipe is located deeper than the proposed works, so will not be affected. No other underground services are known to exist in this area, although a full ‘before you dig’ investigation will be carried out prior to developed design.

Map 3: Normanton Reserve underground services

 

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

Local impacts and local board views

19.     Kaipātiki Local Board plan outcome 2 “Our natural environment is protected for future generations to enjoy” is met, as the proposal creates a more natural waterway and riparian area, serving as a habitat for local flora and fauna. The public will be able to see the quality of the water and will more easily identify when issues exist.

20.     Consultation was undertaken in October 2018 to establish the preferred recreational options of the community.  Overall 78% of respondents either agreed or strongly agreed with the proposal, while 13% strongly disagreed and 8% were neutral or didn’t know.

21.     On 10 April 2019, Healthy Waters and Community Facilities staff attended a workshop with the Kaipātiki Local Board to discuss the finalised designs with the board.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

22.     Te Aranga Māori Design Principles have been used to inform the design of this project. Healthy Waters are engaging with mana whenua who have an interest in the project and a site visit is scheduled to discuss further. Based on the designs and information provided so far, no significant concerns have been raised by mana whenua.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

23.     Healthy Waters will maintain the new planting within the reserve for five years before responsibility is transferred to the Community Facilities department. All other assets such as the play hut and bike track will be handed to Community Facilities once the works are completed. The consequential OPEX budget that was allocated to Healthy Waters from the CAPEX budget will be transferred to Community Facilities when the assets are transferred. 

24.     Community Facilities has conducted a consequential OPEX assessment for the proposed project at Normanton Reserve. The median OPEX cost estimated for the provided work is $19,282.86 once maintenance of all assets is transferred to Community Facilities.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

25.     There is a risk to council that if the proposed stormwater infrastructure through Normanton Reserve is not upgraded, there could be a failure causing flooding to private property. 

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

26.     If the Kaipātiki Local Board approves the land owner application and design, council staff will issue a land owner approval letter with relevant conditions.

27.     An application for ‘Tree Asset Owner Approval’ will be prepared in the near future. The Senior Arboriculture and Ecological Specialist will give final recommendations on tree relocation and placements.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

17 July 2019 - Kaipātiki Local Board Business Meeting - Draft Concept Plan - Normanton Reserve

29

b

17 July 2019 - Kaipātiki Local Board Business Meeting - Arboricultural assessment for Normanton Reserve stormwater upgrade

53

c

17 July 2019 - Kaipātiki Local Board Business Meeting - Normanton overall plan for resource consent

65

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Glenn Riddell - Land Use Advisor

Authorisers

Rod Sheridan - General Manager Community Facilities

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator



Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator



Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator



Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

Proposal for a Glenfield Centre Plan

File No.: CP2019/11067

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To approve the commencement of a Glenfield Centre Plan and the establishment of a working party to guide the development of the plan.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       A local plan will support the future growth of Glenfield.  The Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) enables growth within and around the Glenfield town centre.

3.       A local plan is proposed to explore opportunities and to develop actions to enhance Glenfield town centre and its surrounding residential area. It is expected that these actions will manage the impacts of growth as well as encourage growth and investment. Agreed actions may be carried out as funds permit in the future by the local board, the council group or local interest groups.

4.       Local board budget is available to commence a plan in the first quarter of the 2019-20 financial year.

5.       The proposed approach is for council staff to work closely with the local board and key community and iwi representatives to develop the draft plan. It is also proposed that initial wider community engagement be undertaken in November this year, to avoid clashing with the local government election period, and again in April 2020 for feedback on a draft plan. Adoption of a final plan by the board is anticipated to be in mid-2020.

6.       A working party, including representatives from the Kaipātiki Local Board and the Manager Strategic Broker - Community Empowerment is recommended to guide development of the plan.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a)      approve the commencement of a Glenfield Centre Plan.

b)      note the contribution of $45,000 for the preparation of a Glenfield Centre Plan.

c)      approve Local Board representatives, including the Chair and Deputy Chair, to participate in a working party to oversee the development of the Glenfield Centre Plan.

d)      delegate authority to the working party to approve the boundaries of the Glenfield Centre Plan.

 

Horopaki

Context

7.       Auckland Plan 2050: The Auckland Plan’s development strategy discusses the importance of ‘Building Strong Urban Centres and neighbourhoods’.  A local plan for Glenfield will support this direction, which is about creating strong, thriving and resilient centres.

8.       Kaipātiki Local Board Plan (2017): The Local Board Plan includes an objective to strengthen Glenfield town centre as a hub, with an increased sense of place.  It seeks the revitalisation of the town centre to become a place where people want to ‘stop, connect and take notice’. It specifically mentions the need for improvements to Glenfield Road and supporting the community centre to resolve its building issues.

In addition to the specific objectives for the Glenfield Centre, the Local Board Plan also sets out objectives relating to economic development, walking and cycling, recreation, open space, safety and sense of belonging.  It is anticipated that the Glenfield Centre Plan will consider and respond to all of these matters.

9.       Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part): The Unitary Plan provides for significant growth in and around the Glenfield town centre.  The town centre zone applies to the existing centre and provides for building heights of 18 metres and 27 metres and a broad range of activities.  The residential area immediately surrounding the centre, particularly west of Glenfield Road, includes a large amount of Terrace House and Apartment Building zone.  This zone provides for residential development up to 16 metres in height. Any redevelopment of these sites could result in increased activity and population within and in close proximity to the centre.

          Benefits of a Glenfield Centre Plan

10.     The benefits of a plan for Glenfield town centre include to:

·        take a community led approach – working party members will guide the plan’s development and local residents, visitors and workers will all be able to contribute to the plan through consultation processes;

·        focus on place making and identity- identify and protect or enhance valued local characteristics;

·        take an integrated approach to place making projects – including transport, accessibility, community facilities, open space and the environment;

·        inform the future provision of recreational facilities in and around the Glenfield town centre;

·        create a safe and healthy place to live, work and enjoy;

·        support growth – guide and influence development provided by the Unitary Plan; and

·        inform a 30 year programme to support growth with short, medium and long term projects for the local board to advocate for in the council’s and council controlled organisations’ work programmes.

11.     A plan is seen as the best option for providing an integrated approach to future issues of growth and amenity in and around Glenfield town centre. It will support the current Local Board Plan and will help to inform future Local Board Plans and funding proposals. There is also a range of information that has been gathered about the area over the last 10 years and this will provide a useful starting point for the plan.

Study Area

12.     The study area for the plan is proposed to focus on the Glenfield town centre and the area within walking distance from the centre.  It is proposed that the plan should reinforce the importance of the Glenfield town centre and respond to the growth provided for in the surrounding area.   It does not include the wider residential suburb of Glenfield. 

13.     Attachment A to the agenda report is a map of the proposed study area, based on a 500 metres walkable distance from the town centre.  It is proposed that the boundary be refined with the working party. 

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

14.     It is proposed that a working party comprising representatives of the Kaipātiki Local Board be established to guide the development of the plan. It is proposed that the role of the working party will include workshopping and directing content of the plan.

15.     The following table shows key milestones for developing the plan:

Milestone

Planned Date

Local Board endorses commencement of the plan and appointment of the Chair and Deputy Chair to a working party 

17 July 2019

Working party workshop No1

August 2019

Iwi and stakeholder consultation (including schools)

September- October 2019

Ist phase community consultation

November 2019

Working party workshop No 2

December 2019

Working party workshop No 3

January/February 2020

Draft plan reported to Local Board for consideration and endorsement for consultation

April 2020

2nd phase community and stakeholder consultation on draft plan

May 2020

Working party workshop No 4

June 2020

Final Glenfield Centre Plan approved by the Kaipātiki Local Board

August 2020

Implementation of action plan

Begins  September 2020

 

16.     It is proposed that the initial steps for the project are to set up the working party and to identify and consolidate findings from previous research undertaken about the area. This will help inform the first phase of consultation through September - November 2019 to identify issues and opportunities, which will be tested through the draft plan.

17.     Typically, the plan will include a number of short, medium and long term actions. In addition, to encourage community buy-in to the plan it is also proposed that a ‘feature project’ be developed alongside development of the plan itself. Options for a suitable project can be explored at the first working party workshop.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

18.     It is proposed that the Auckland Council project team will include specialist representatives from a number of internal departments and CCOs.  At this stage this includes Plans and Places, Auckland Design Office, Open Space, Community Services, Community Empowerment, Auckland Transport and Panuku. Other specialist teams may become involved as required and as research progresses.  This will ensure that the knowledge and views of these teams are incorporated into the plan, including into the development of actions.

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

Local impacts and local board views

19.     Key community stakeholders and the local community will be consulted at the start of the plan preparation and again on the draft plan. Feedback from previous engagement processes, including for the Local Board Plan and Annual Plan will also be used to inform the development of the plan.

20.     The working party will play a key role in the development and finalisation of the plan, before final adoption by the Local Board in August 2020.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

21.     The Kaipātiki Local Board Plan recognises the Local Board’s commitment to honour the principles of Te Tiriti o Waitangi and the importance of enhancing the natural environment in partnership with mana whenua. 

22.     The development of the Glenfield Centre Plan is expected to provide opportunities to recognise and celebrate local Māori identity and cultural heritage.

23.     A process of engagement with mana whenua and mataawaka will be developed specifically for this plan in collaboration with the Māori Responsiveness team in the Chief Planning Office.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

24.     The total cost of developing and completing a Glenfield Centre Plan is estimated to be $45,000.  The Board has budgeted for this in its 2019/20 work programme.

25.     The development of actions and projects in the Glenfield Centre Plan is intended to assist the Local Boards to prioritise and advocate for future funds for project delivery.  This includes through the Long Term Plan, the Local Board Agreement, and CCO budgets.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

26.     The risks for the project are considered to be low. Sufficient resourcing will be provided in a project team drawn from across the wider council group and funding is available to develop and complete the plan.

27.     The most likely risks to this project are changes to the key milestone dates or local board priorities. The local board elections may influence timeframes and/or change local board priorities. 

28.     Public communication about any delays will be important to ensure people are kept informed and engaged through the process. A communications and engagement plan will be developed and will consider these risks.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

29.     The first meeting of the working party is recommended for August 2019.  At this stage it is proposed that this meeting should be used to confirm roles and the plan process, including the milestones listed above.  Council staff will also seek the working party’s endorsement of the proposed approach to stakeholder, iwi and community engagement at this meeting. 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

17 July 2019 - Kaipātiki Local Board Business Meeting - Draft Centre Plan Area

73

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Lisa Roberts - Planner

Authorisers

John Duguid - General Manager - Plans and Places

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

Auckland Transport Monthly Update

File No.: CP2019/02159

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       The Auckland Transport Monthly Update Kaipātiki Local Board July 2019 report is attached.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a)      note the Auckland Transport Monthly Update Kaipātiki Local Board July 2019.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

17 July 2019 - Kaipātiki Local Board Business Meeting - Auckland Transport Monthly Update July 2019

77

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Jacinda  Short - Democracy Advisor - Kaipatiki

Authorisers

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

Allocation of Kaipātiki Local Board Community Safety Fund

File No.: CP2019/12696

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To allocate the Kaipātiki Local Board portion of the Community Safety Fund to road safety projects in the local board area.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The 2018 Regional Land Transport Plan allocated $20 million for local initiatives in road safety in Financial Year 2019/2020 and 2020/2021. The funding has been apportioned to each local board area based on a formula that focuses on the numbers of Deaths and Serious Injuries (DSI) in that area. The Kaipātiki Local Board allocation of the Community Safety Fund is $775,730 over two years.

3.       The objective of the Community Safety Fund is to accelerate local community-initiated safety projects, around identified high-risk locations and local schools. The local board put forward a number of potential projects at a workshop in March 2019. These were assessed, scoped and an estimated cost developed. The scoped and costed list of projects was workshopped with the Board on 2 July 2019.

4.       As the full cost of eligible safety projects is greater than the apportioned budget available,  the local board is required to approve allocation to its priority projects.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a)      approve the following four projects to utilise the Community Safety Fund allocated to the Kaipātiki Local Board area:

i)    CSFK 1.11 Eskdale Road Vehicle Speeds - $40,000

ii)   CSFK 1.12 Rangatira Road – Kauri Park School Crossing - $260,000

iii)   CSFK 1.14 Upgrade Coronation Road and Archers Road Intersection - $450,000

iv)  CSFK 1.17 Rangatira Road Entrance to Beach Haven Primary School - $10,000

b)      request that should extra funding become available then project CSFK 1.9 Birkdale Road pedestrian safety measures be implemented.

 

Horopaki

Context

5.       The 2018 Regional Land Transport Plan allocated $20 million for Financial Year 2019/2020 and Financial Year 2020/2021 for local initiatives in road safety ($5 million in Financial Year 2019/2020 and $15 million in Financial Year 2020/2021).  In order to promote safety at the local community level, the fund is apportioned to each local board area based on a formula that focuses on the numbers of Deaths and Serious Injuries (DSI) in that area.

6.       The objective is to accelerate local community-initiated safety projects, around identified high-risk locations and local schools. Local Boards were invited to submit proposals for projects addressing safety issues their communities have identified

7.       The Kaipātiki Local Board portion of the Community Safety Fund is $775,730 over the two years.

8.       Criteria for the fund includes physical measures raised by the local community to prevent, control or mitigate identified local road and street safety hazards which expose people using any form of road and street transport to demonstratable hazards which may result in death or serious harm. Individual project cost is to be no greater than $1 million.  Projects must consist of best practice components, conform to Auckland Transport standards and comply with New Zealand law.

9.       The fund does not cover the following:

·      Projects that are funded by existing Auckland Transport road safety or other capital works programmes including, but not limited to setting speed limits, seal extensions, maintenance, renewals and planned footpath upgrades (but can be used to augment these projects).

·      Projects not within the street, including parks, rail corridor, beaches and property not owned or controlled by Auckland Transport.

·      Projects that have unacceptable effects on network efficiency or introduce unacceptable secondary hazards or effects. 

·      Projects with an unacceptably high maintenance cost.

·      Projects that clash with other planned public projects.

·      Complex projects that may take greater than 2 years to deliver including but not limited to projects requiring significant engineered structures, complex resource consents and complex traffic modelling. 

·      Projects containing unconventional or unproven components including new trials or pilot projects.

·      Projects or components of projects that have no demonstratable safety benefit unless they are integral with a safety project.

10.     The scoped and costed list of projects were workshopped with the Board on 2 July 2019 (refer to Attachment A).

11.     The list of projects from the Kaipātiki Local Board were costed by Auckland Transport. If this costing is more than the budget allocated to the particular local board under this funding, then the Local Board has the option of using any of its available Local Board Transport Capital Fund to top up the project budget.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

12.     The list of projects put forward for assessment and costing by the Board is shown in Attachment A to the agenda report.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

13.     The impact of information (or decisions) in this report is/are confined to Auckland Transport and do/does not impact on other parts of the Council group.

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

Local impacts and local board views

14.     The projects allocated funding in this report will improve the road safety environment in the communities within the Kaipātiki Local Board area.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

15.     The proposed decision of allocating budget to projects 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

16.     If the local board approves projects with costs greater than its allocation of the Community Safety Fund, this will require utilising Local Board Transport Capital Fund to top up project budget. If the local board doesn’t fully allocate its allocation of the Community Safety Fund at this time, the projects won’t be delivered this year and any remaining budget will be reallocated to other Auckland Transport projects.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

17.     There are no risks associated with this report.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

18.     Design and construction of approved list of projects will commence.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

17 July 2019 - Kaipātiki Local Board Business Meeting - Community Safety Fund Projects

89

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Marilyn Nicholls – Elected Member Relationship Manager, Auckland Transport

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon – Manager Elected Member Relationship Unit, Auckland Transport

Paul Edwards – Senior Local Board Advisor

 


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

New community lease to Fernglen Native Plant Gardens Educational Charitable Trust at 36 Kauri Road, Birkenhead

File No.: CP2019/12742

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To grant a new community lease to Fernglen Native Plant Gardens Educational Charitable Trust at 36 Kauri Road, Birkenhead.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Fernglen Native Plant Gardens Educational Charitable Trust holds an operative community lease for the site at 36 Kauri Road, Birkenhead.

3.       The lease commenced on 1 September 1996 and reached final expiry on 31 August 2016.  The lease is rolling over on a month-by-month basis until it is terminated, or a new lease is formalised.

4.       The trust has applied for a new community lease. The building and improvements are owned by the trust.

5.       After assessing the trust’s application, staff are satisfied that the trust meets the criteria for a new lease.

6.       Staff recommend that a new community lease be granted to the trust for a term of 10 (ten) years commencing 1 August 2019 with one 10 (ten) year right of renewal.

7.       The recommendations within this report support the Kaipātiki Local Board Plan 2017 outcome:  “Our community facilities and infrastructure are high quality and well managed” and “Services are well managed and meet community needs”.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a)      grant a new community lease to Fernglen Native Plant Gardens Educational Charitable Trust at 36 Kauri Road, Birkenhead, comprising approximately 380m2, delineated in red and marked A on Attachment A on the land described as Part Lot 1 DP 138961 on the following terms and conditions:

     

i)    term - 10 (ten) years commencing 1 August 2019 plus one right of renewal for 10 (ten) years with a final expiry of 31 July 2039

 

ii)   rent -$1.00 plus GST per annum if demanded

 

iii)   all other terms and conditions to be in accordance with Auckland Council’s Community Occupancy Guideline 2012.

 

b)      approve Fernglen Native Plant Gardens Educational Charitable Trust’s Community Outcomes Plan which will be appended to the lease and is attached to this agenda report as Attachment B.

 

 

Horopaki

Context

8.       This report considers the new community lease to Fernglen Native Plant Gardens Educational Charitable Trust at 36 Kauri Road, Birkenhead.

9.       The Kaipātiki Local Board is the allocated authority relating to local, recreation, sport and community facilities, including community leasing matters.

10.     The recommendations within this report align with the Kaipātiki Local Board Plan 2017 outcome: Our community facilities and infrastructure are high quality and well managed” and “Services are well managed and meet community needs”.

Land and Buildings

11.     The trust holds an operative lease for its building located at 36 Kauri Road, Birkenhead. The land is legally described as Lot 1 DP 138961 and is held in fee simple by Auckland Council under the Local Government Act 2002.

12.     In accordance with the Local Government Act 2002 any new lease for a period longer than 6 months requires public notification and iwi engagement prior to the granting of the lease.

13.     Public notification has been completed in accordance with the Act and no submissions opposing the lease were received.

14.     During a site visit, some concerns were raised pertaining to the trust’s building, in response to which council and the trust commissioned building condition reports. The minor issues such as cleaning of the exterior have been remedied. A potential structural issue is being investigated and dealt with. A pole at the south corner of the building which is fractured and in need of additional support, was detected by the groups independent inspector. Fernglen committee has sought the advice of an engineer and will be undertaking measures to ensure the pole in question is supported with a metal brace in accordance with the engineer’s feedback.

15.     The trust has a long-term maintenance plan in place which is incorporated in its Community Outcomes Plan. The trust will need to report on its long term maintenance plan on an annual basis as part of the Community Outcomes Plan. This will help ensure the building is maintained and kept up to standard.

16.     The proposed lease is for the footprint of the building and for additional land to the south west of the building. The additional land will provide for the expected increase in the group’s level of service on the site.

17.     The proposed ground lease is approximately 380m2 (more or less) and is more accurately represented by the area delineated in red and marked A on Attachment A of the agenda report.

The Trust

18.     The Trust was incorporated on 8 August 1996, and currently consists of 75 members called the ‘Friends of Fernglen’.

19.     The objective of the Trust is to provide a collection of rare and endangered species of native plants, and to preserve and regenerate native bush.

20.     The gardens are open daily to public visitors, and the education facility is available for hire by other community groups.

21.     The gardens and education room are used by community groups to learn about New Zealand flora and fauna. These classes are run by volunteers.

22.     Some of the regular group attendees are local schools, university students, botanical groups, probus clubs, and the Hash House Harriers, which is a social running and walking club.

23.     The trust holds monthly working bees which are open to the public. These working bees are held at the gardens and involve weeding and removal of pests from the area.

24.     The trust holds two open days a year that include a guided tour, sale of plants that have been cultivated on site and artwork displays from local community groups.

25.     The trust works closely with the curator of the gardens to ensure the gardens are well preserved.

26.     Additionally, the trust also allows Pest Free Kaipātiki to operate from a room within their building. The two groups work in synergy to help preserve all native gardens and bush in the Kaipātiki area.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

27.     Auckland Council’s Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012 sets out the criteria for community occupancy agreements.

28.     Under the guidelines, the trust has an automatic right to reapply for a new lease at the end of its occupancy term, a right which it is exercising. It is recommended that a new lease be granted to the trust for a term of 10 (ten) years with one right of renewal for a further term of 10 (ten) years, in line with the guidelines.

29.     Local boards have the discretion to vary the term of the lease if it wishes. The guidelines suggest that where a term is varied, it aligns to one of the recommended terms contained in the Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012.

30.     After assessing the lease application and meeting with Fernglen Native Plant Gardens Educational Trust, staff have determined that it qualifies for a new community lease as evidenced below:

i)     It is a registered incorporated society

ii)     It has complied with the terms of the operative lease

iii)    It has developed a facilities management plan in response to the need for long-term maintenance to its building

iv)   It provides space to Pest Free Kaipātiki, further protecting and promoting the natural environment.

v)    It has a history of delivering quality services to the local community

vi)   The trust has provided a copy of its financial accounts, which indicate that its funds are sufficient to meet its liabilities

vii)   The trust is managed effectively as evidenced by its longevity.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

31.     The proposed lease to the trust was discussed with Service, Strategy and Integration as part of the larger local parks management plan and reclassification project for the Kaipātiki area. This project consulted with many departments within council. No concerns were raised and any change in land classification will consider the activities of the trust.

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

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

Local impacts and local board views

33.     The new lease to Fernglen Native Plant Gardens Educational Charitable Trust is contemplated in the Kaipātiki Community Lease Work Programme 2018/2019, line 2502.

34.     The local board indicated their preliminary support for this lease on 30 April 2019, subject to a long-term maintenance plan being included in the community outcomes plan and the trust’s financials being made available for scrutiny. Both conditions have been addressed by the trust.

35.     The recommendations within this report fall within the local board’s delegated decision-making relating to local, recreation, sport and community facilities.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

36.     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 2015-2025, the Unitary Plan and Local Board Plans.

37.     Support for Maori initiatives and outcomes are detailed in Whiria Te Muka Tangata, Auckland Council’s Maori Responsiveness Framework. An aim of community leasing is to increase targeted support for Maori community development projects.

38.     Iwi engagement has been completed and involved:

i)     a presentation at the North/West Mana Whenua Forum on 5 June 2019. Representatives at the forum requested that only native plants be chosen when new plantings are being considered by the trust. 

ii)     a formal written communication to iwi on 6 June 2019 containing detailed information on the land, Fernglen Native Plant Gardens Educational Charitable Trust, and the proposed new lease, inviting iwi representatives to hui and/or for a kaitiaki site visit to comment on any spiritual, cultural or environmental impact with respect to the proposal.

39.     No objections were raised or requests for hui or kaitiaki site visits were received from any of the iwi groups who responded.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

40.     There are no cost implications for the local board approving a new lease to The Fernglen Native Plant Gardens Educational Charitable Trust.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

41.     Should the Kaipātiki Local Board resolve not to grant a renewal of the community lease to The Fernglen Native Plant Gardens Educational Charitable Trust, this decision will materially affect the group’s ability to undertake its core activities.

42.     Additionally, where the group fails to appropriately maintain its building, there is a risk of the ownership of the building passing with the land under the Property Law Act 2007 and council may be liable for a structure that has no maintenance budget and is not contemplated in the Long Term Plan.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

43.     Subject to the grant of a new community lease, council staff will work with the trust to finalise the new lease document.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

17 July 2019 - Kaipātiki Local Board Business Meeting - Attachment A Site Plan - Fernglen Native  Plant Gardens Educational Charitable Trust

99

b

17 July 2019 - Kaipātiki Local Board Business Meeting - Attachment B Fernglen Native Plan Gardens Educational Charitable Trust - Community Outcomes Plan

101

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Phillipa Carroll - Community Lease Advisor

Authorisers

Rod Sheridan - General Manager Community Facilities

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

Kaipātiki local parks land classification programme

File No.: CP2019/12694

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

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

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Staff have completed a comprehensive land status investigation of local parks in the Kaipātiki Local Board area and identified many unclassified reserves held under the RA. Classification of reserves is required for developing a local parks management plan (LPMP) that complies with the RA.

3.       The local board have the option to hold park land under the LGA or the RA.

4.       Of the approximately 700 parcels of park land within the scope of the LPMP, the investigation found that approximately 90% are held under the RA; and the remainder managed under the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA).

5.       Attachment A to the agenda report summarises the different options for land held under the LGA and land held under the RA.

6.       In proposing land to be retained under the LGA or declared and classified reserve under the RA, our considerations included: the current and likely future use, continuity with adjoining land parcels and the benefits and constraints of legislation.

7.       For 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 reserve under the RA and classify it appropriately. Staff have individually assessed the merits of each option and propose that:

·      28 parcels (including a portion of one parcel) are declared as a reserve and classified under the RA (refer Attachment B to the agenda report)

·      37 parcels are retained under the LGA (refer Attachment C to the agenda report);

8.       The political working group for this project has indicated that the local board may wish to declare and classify as reserve the bulk of LGA land listed in Attachment C. Option B in Attachment C outlines classifications for each parcel should the local board wish to hold any LGA land under the RA.

9.       The parcel of land at Rosie Bolt Reserve is excluded from Attachment C as an appropriate RA classification has not been identified. We note legal advice provided to the board that if they wish to declare and classify this land, they will need to identify the purpose for which the land shall be classified. As this parcel is zoned Residential; that process will be subject to public notification.  

10.     Of the land parcels reviewed that are held under the RA:

·      189 are unclassified (or partly unclassified) and require classification to be included in the LPMP (refer Attachment D) 

·      37 parcels or portions of parcels require reclassification to better reflect current or future use of the reserve (refer Attachment E).

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

12.     These criteria incorporate guidance from the Reserves Act 1977 Guide, consideration of the local park’s values, current and likely future use of the local park, workshop feedback from the local board and consultation with mana whenua.

13.     Further work will be undertaken on a number of land parcels within scope of the LPMP, to inform subsequent classification recommendations to complete the review. This includes park land serving other functions such as stormwater, community facilities and/or town centre carparks for which further work is needed to clarify decision-making roles. In addition, park land affected by NZTA’s SeaPath project have been excluded while the implications of that work are investigated.

14.     The reserve declaration, classification and reclassification work will enable staff to proceed with preparing the draft LPMP after the first round of consultation.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a)      approve 28 parcels of land or portion of land to be declared a reserve and classified according to their primary purpose as described in Attachment B of this agenda report, pursuant to section 14(1) of the Reserves Act 1977

b)      confirm that Lot 2 DP 77223 being 472m2 of land at Rosie Bolt Reserve continue to be held under the Local Government Act 2002

c)      confirm 37 parcels of land will continue to be held under the Local Government Act 2002 as described in Attachment C of this agenda report.

d)      approve the proposed classification of those parcels of land pursuant to sections 16(1) and 16(2A) of the Reserves Act 1977 as described in Attachment D of this agenda report.

e)      approve public notification of the proposals to reclassify those parcels of reserve land described in Attachment E of this agenda report pursuant to section 24(2)(b) of the Reserves Act 1977.

 

Horopaki

Context

15.     In June 2018, the Kaipātiki Local Board approved the development of a multi-park management plan for parks in the Kaipātiki area (resolution number: KT/2018/114).

16.     The LPMP will cover park land held subject to both the RA and LGA, including land covered by existing reserve management plans.

17.     The LPMP will be a statutory reserve management plan prepared in accordance with section 41 of the RA.

18.     As part of preparing the LPMP, 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.

19.     The review of the land status of the majority of local parks in the local board area has been completed. This report does not consider all parcels within scope of the management plan; as a number of parcels require further work. This includes park land serving other functions such as stormwater, community facilities and/or carparks for which further work is needed to clarify decision-making roles. In addition, park land affected by NZTA’s SeaPath project have been excluded while the implications of that work are investigated. These will be reported to the local board prior to the approval of the draft LPMP for public notification.

20.     Staff investigated nearly 800 land parcels making up approximately 164 parks. Of these, around 700 are in scope of the LPMP. For further information on park land in scope of the plan, refer to resolution KT/2019/71 dated 15 May 2019).

21.     Of the parcels within scope, approximately 90% are held under the RA, and the remainder under the LGA.

22.     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

23.     For land held under the LGA we have considered the following options:

1.    continue to hold the land under the LGA

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

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

1.    classify according to its primary purpose

2.    reclassify to align to its primary purpose

3.    revoke the reserve status and hold the land under the LGA

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

25.     We have discounted the status quo option as it would mean that the LPMP would not comply with the RA, Auckland 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.

26.     Attachment A summarises the different options for land held under the LGA and RA.

27.     In assessing 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.

28.     The following sections outline in more detail the options for land held under the LGA and RA and the criteria for assessing each land parcel.

Proposed actions for land held under the LGA

29.     When reviewing the future land status options for land under the LGA, staff considered the following questions.

·      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 land parcels 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?

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

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

31.     Attachment B lists the land parcels held under the LGA that are being recommended to be declared a reserve under the RA and classified. 

32.     The predominant reason for declaring and classifying these land parcels is to reflect land primary purpose of the land; especially where that land has clear ecological and/or historic values which may benefit from the RA protections. Most of these land parcels align with either scenic or historic classifications.

33.     Section 14(2) of the RA requires public notification when declaring and classifying land as reserve, where that land is not zoned open space in the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part). In this case, all of the parcels listed are zoned for Open Space purposes in the Auckland Unitary Plan so public notification is not required.

34.     Staff have also noted several parcels where a further resolution will clarify the exact classification of the reserve.  These are identified in Attachment D with an additional notation “to remove doubt”. This is the case where:

·      Previous resolutions to classify land as scenic did not clarify whether the land was subject to the provisions of section 19(1)(a) or 19(1)(b) of the RA; or

·      Automatic classification of land as scenic by virtue of section 16(11)(b)(iii) of the RA did not clarify whether the land was subject to the provisions of section 19(1)(a) or 19(1)(b) of the RA; or

·      Previous resolutions to classify land did not follow the correct RA process.

35.     Staff recommend that the local board declare and classify the land identified in Attachment B.

36.     The following additional steps apply to land declared and classified as reserve:

·      Ministerial consideration of the resolution and any objections received; and a decision on whether to gazette the resolution or refuse to do so this decision is currently delegated to the General Manager of Community Facilities.

·      The General Manager may choose to refer the proposal to the Governing Body to exercise the Minister’s decision-making powers.

Proposal to retain some land under the LGA

37.     Attachment C lists the land parcels that have been identified as best suited to remain under the LGA by applying the criteria in paragraph 27 above. Land is recommended to remain under the LGA 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. 

38.     No further action is required by the local board for land that is to remain under the LGA. However, should the local board wish to declare and classify any of that land under the RA, Option B as identified in Attachment C provides a list of proposed classifications against each parcel of park land that the local board may use for that purpose. If this action is taken, an additional survey of the Watercare reservoirs at John Kay Park will be required so that the land underlying those is not also classified.

39.     Attachment C indicates which parcels will require public notification under section 14(2) of the RA, should the local board seek to declare and classify that land. This is because these areas are not zoned nor designated as open space under the Unitary Plan. In this case the process would require:

·      Public notification of the Local Board’s intention to declare a reserve under section 14(2) of the RA and a call for objections to the notice of intention

·      A period of one month to be given for the making of objections

·      A hearing should objectors and submitters request to be heard

·      Consideration of the objections

·      The making of a resolution declaring the land to be a reserve

·      Ministerial consideration of the resolution and any objections received; and a decision on whether to gazette the resolution or refuse to do so this consideration is currently delegated to the General Manager of Community Facilities

·      Governing body approval if the General Manager chooses to refer the decision to Governing Body

40.     The board would need to resolve to:

·      approve public notification of the intention to declare and classify those parcels for a stated primary purpose under section 14(1) of the RA and;

·      approve the full board as a hearing panel, in preparation for any requests to speak to objections or submissions on the proposed classifications that have been publicly notified and where the Unitary Plan zoning is not for public open space. The role of the hearings panel will be to hear submissions and make a decision on the classification  of that land.

41.     We note that Attachment C excludes land at Rosie Bolt Reserve which is considered separately; refer paragraphs 51- 56 below.

Proposed actions for land held under the RA

42.     As outlined in paragraph 24 above, there are three valid options for land held under the RA – classification, reclassification or revocation of the RA status.

43.     In the context of this investigation, staff have not identified any parcels of local park that warrant revocation of the reserve status and holding the land under the LGA.

Classification of land held under the Reserves Act 1977

44.     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, activities and uses.

45.     Attachment D lists the land parcels currently held as unclassified reserve under the RA, that require classification under section 16(1) or 16(2A) of the RA. These proposals do not require public notification under the RA.

46.     Staff have considered the Reserves Act Guide[1] and the following questions when determining the primary purpose and appropriate classification for each land parcel.

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

·      What are the main values of the land to protect and enhance?

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

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

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

Reclassification of some land held under the RA

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

48.     Attachment E to the agenda report lists the land parcels of classified reserves that we recommend are reclassified.

49.     The main reasons for the proposed reclassification are:

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

·      to create consistency of reserve classification with adjacent parcels.

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. The RA does not require hearings on objections to any proposal for reclassification.

Rosie Bolt Reserve

51.     On 18 April 2018, Panuku Development Auckland reported to the Kaipātiki Local Board on a proposal to dispose of R25 Alfred Street, Northcote Point (resolution number KT/2018/57).

52.     Advice from the council’s Parks and Recreation Policy team cited in that report was that “the subject site is not required for an open space function as it is located less than 300 metres away from Stafford Park and the site’s size does not provide adequate area for a range of recreational experiences”.

53.     The Kaipātiki Local Board resolved not to endorse the disposal and instead resolved to support in principle the declaration of R25 Alfred Street (Rosie Bolt Reserve) as a Local Purpose Reserve under the RA (18 April 2018, resolution number KT/2018/57, see Attachment I)

54.     Further advice from the legal team has since been given to the board on relevant considerations including procedural matters. 

55.     It is recommended that no action be taken to declare and classify the land at Rosie Bolt Reserve under the RA, as per previous specialist parks policy and legal advice.

56.     If the local board wishes to declare and classify this land however, they would need to identify the purpose for which the land shall be classified and follow the process outlined in paragraph 41 above.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

57.     Staff have discussed this land status review with council units and CCOs including Parks Sports and Recreation, Infrastructure and Environmental Services, Community Facilities (including Leasing), Community and Social Policy, Legal Services, Panuku Development Auckland, and Community Places. 

58.     Community Facilities staff manage land on behalf of the Parks Sports and Recreation and Healthy Waters departments. They prefer 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); and the RA introduces greater complexity into decision-making. 

59.     The LPMP will provide a consistent management direction for all parks and reserves regardless of whether the land is managed under the RA or LGA

60.     Heritage, biodiversity, and parks specialists have also informed the recommendations for declaring and classifying reserves according to their primary purpose.

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

Local impacts and local board views

61.     In June 2018, the Kaipātiki Local Board resolved to establish a political working group for the Kaipātiki Open Space Management Plan consisting of Chairperson J Gillon, Deputy Chairperson D Grant and Member A Smithson. 

62.     Staff met with the political working group to discuss progress on this work including discussion of particular park classifications at meetings between March to June 2019. A workshop with the full local board was held on 29 May 2019.  

63.     Staff made changes to the proposed classification programme based on feedback from local board members present at the workshops. There was interest in moving most of the LGA land into the RA.  Option B outlined in Attachment C has been created based on specific feedback received through the political working group process.

64.     The community will have an opportunity to comment on those classifications requiring public notification as outlined above.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

65.     Interested mana whenua have been working with staff on classifying land as part of the LPMP. Staff introduced mana whenua to the LPMP programme of works at the Parks, Sport and Recreation Mana Whenua Forum in March 2019.

66.     Mana whenua were invited to a series of hui covering the review of the land status and classification of park land in Kaipātiki as well as in Upper Harbour and Rodney for local park management plans being created for those boards. Representatives from Te Kawerau a Maki and Te Patukirkiri attended the hui for the Kaipātiki review. 

67.     Feedback from Te Kawerau a Maki and Te Patukirikiri was generally supportive of recommendations to classify or reclassify parcels with native bush as scenic reserve. Proposed reclassifications and several LGA parcels were also reviewed. Te Patukirkiri support scenic reserve classifications under section 19(1)(a) as the RA emphasises the removal of exotic vegetation as a primary management purpose. 

68.     Staff have also applied general feedback from mana whenua provided through the Rodney and Upper Harbour land status hui. These were attended by Ngai Tai ki Tamaki, Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara, Ngāti Manuhiri, Ngaati Whanaunga, Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whātua, and Te Uri o Hau.

69.     At those hui, mana whenua agreed in principle that:

·      Any parcels which abut water (sea, creeks, rivers, estuaries or lakes) should be classified as local purpose esplanade.

·      Any parcels which are in a significant ecological area (SEA) in the unitary plan should be classified scenic.

70.     Based on mana whenua feedback and technical advice from local parks and biodiversity staff, amendments were made to the proposed classification of relevant land parcels, including recommendations to declare and classify land at Telephone Bay and Needles Eye as Local Purpose (Esplanade) Reserve.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

71.     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 land held under the RA

·      Survey costs where only a portion of a parcel is sought to be classified or reclassified for a particular purpose (refer also to Attachment F indicating areas where surveys may be necessary)

72.     The operational budget of the council’s Community Facilities department will cover these costs.

73.     The Hearings team will cover costs for any hearings required to hear any objections to the proposals.

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

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

75.     The following table outlines the risks and mitigation for 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 the public to be consulted when there is a proposal to dispose of land.

Declaring land under the RA has been proposed for land with high ecological and historic values.

 

RA classifications constrain the range of uses for land

We have followed the considerations in paragraph 27 above and the Reserves Act Guide in assessing the current and likely future use of each individual land parcel we propose to be declared and classified under the RA.

Public objections to proposed classifications delaying the management plan process

A small number of land parcels require public notification. Due to the small number being notified, we anticipate the potential impact on timeframes for the management plan to be minimal.

 

Potentially high number of submissions on proposed classifications, because the notification will occur at the same time as public consultation on the intention to prepare the plan.

Work with engagement team if additional resources are required. 

 

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

76.     Next steps vary depending on whether land is held under the LGA or RA and on the action 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.

77.     Attachment G to the agenda report outlines the next steps for each action for land held under the LGA and RA

78.     This report does not consider all parcels of park land within the scope of the Kaipātiki LPMP. Those not identified in this report will come to the local board for approval prior to the approval to notify the draft LPMP.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

17 July 2019 - Kaipātiki Local Board Business Meeting - Possible actions under the Local Government Act 2002 vs the Reserves Act 1977

113

b

17 July 2019 - Kaipātiki Local Board Business Meeting - LGA land to declare and classify under s14(1) of the Reserves Act (not requiring public notification)

115

c

17 July 2019 - Kaipātiki Local Board Business Meeting - Land to retain under the LGA

117

d

17 July 2019 - Kaipātiki Local Board Business Meeting - Reserve Act land to classify

119

e

17 July 2019 - Kaipātiki Local Board Business Meeting - Reserve Act land to reclassify under section 24

125

f

17 July 2019 - Kaipātiki Local Board Business Meeting - Maps relevant to partial re/classification actions

127

g

17 July 2019 - Kaipātiki Local Board Business Meeting - Next Steps for land held under the LGA and RA

131

h

17 July 2019 - Kaipātiki Local Board Business Meeting - Previous resolutions of the Kaipātiki Local Board

133

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Tania Utley - Service and Asset Planning Specialist

Authorisers

Lisa Tocker - Head of Service Strategy and Integration

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator



Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

Service property optimisation - Bartley Street Toilets

File No.: CP2019/12714

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek approval from the Kaipātiki Local Board for Panuku Development Auckland to progress the optimisation of the site at 3 Bartley Street, Northcote Point.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       A project to decommission and relocate the public toilets currently located at 3 Bartley Street, Northcote Point to Jean Sampson Reserve is in the process of being implemented by the Council’s Community Facilities Project Delivery team.

3.       Panuku Development Auckland (Panuku) has been requested to investigate whether this project meets the service property optimisation policy and criteria.

4.       Panuku considers that the relocation of the toilets provides an opportunity to sell the 81m2 of land and release the latent value of the land.

5.       The Kaipātiki Local Board will have the opportunity to reinvest the proceeds of sale directly into an eligible project within its local board area to further enhance the local community.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a)      approve the sale of 3 Bartley Street, Northcote Point under the service property optimisation policy subject to the satisfactory conclusion of any statutory processes

b)      agree that the sale proceeds be ring-fenced for reinvestment into one of the Kaipātiki Local Board’s eligible projects; and

c)      agree that final terms and conditions be approved under the appropriate delegations.

 

Horopaki

Context

6.       The Kaipātiki Local Board Community Facilities work programme 2017/2018 approved the renewal of the Bartley Street toilets on 19 July 2017 (resolution number KT/2017/90).

7.       The relocation of the public toilet at 3 Bartley Street to Jean Sampson Reserve was approved on 20 September 2017 (resolution number KT/2017/129). This resolution requested advice on the alternative service use for the land at 3 Bartley Street and application of the service property optimisation policy on the asset.

8.       The Community Facilities’ Project Delivery team is in the process of implementing the approved project and decommissioning the Bartley Street toilets.

9.       Community Facilities’ Project Delivery team have confirmed that the physical works is scheduled to commence August 2019 and is expected to be completed by September 2019.

10.     It is timely that the advice and options requested for investigation in the above resolutions are reported back to the board for a decision on the future of 3 Bartley Street, Northcote Point.

Service Property Optimisation

11.     The service property optimisation policy was approved by the Finance and Performance Committee in March 2015. It seeks to maximise efficiencies from service assets while maintaining levels of service and releasing some or all of that property for sale or development. A key element of optimisation is that the sale proceeds are locally reinvested to advance approved projects and activities on a cost neutral basis.

12.     There is a clear need for a more creative approach to the way service property is utilised, developed and funded. Opportunities such as replacing current service assets in a more modern form, via the private sector, co-location, intensification or the closure and release of a site to deliver strategic value must be given more weight. The proposal is designed to enable these outcomes with optimal service provision on a cost neutral basis. In most cases, council owned landforms the base platform for service delivery.

13.     Optimisation is a tri-party relationship between Panuku, the relevant council business unit and the relevant local board.  If one of the parties is not supportive of the optimisation proposal, the project will not proceed.   

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

14.     The toilets at 3 Bartley Street, Northcote Point have been reviewed in line with the local board’s resolution KT/2017/129. The resolution requested that the councils Community Facilities Stakeholder and Land Advisory team identify potential future uses for the land including an assessment of a bicycle repair station, bicycle rack, garden and seating to compliment the safe cycle router and the option for optimisation. A further resolution passed on 18 April 2018 (resolution number KT/2018/56) nominated the land as a placemaking opportunity for consideration by the local board.

15.     There is an opportunity to assess the site against the criteria set out in the service property optimisation policy to consider whether the direct service reinvestment method can be applied.

16.     The direct service reinvestment method can be applied where the provision of service is required to being retained within the community but can be provided in a different form or at another more suitable location.

17.     In this case the service, being the Bartley Street public toilets, is being relocated to Jean Sampson Reserve.

Property Information

18.     The property 3 Bartley Street, Northcote Point, is 81m2 and is currently home to the Bartley Street public toilets.  The property was vested in the former Northcote Borough for public convenience in 1949 under the Public Works Act 1928. Public Convenience means public toilet and it is clear the property has been used as a public toilet over 70 years.

19.     The land is zoned residential – single house. The adjacent land is zoned Business - Neighbourhood Centre Zone. 

20.     The Auckland Unitary Plan provisions anticipate a residential dwelling (or similar equivalent use) within a defined building envelope. Given this zoning and the size of the parcel of land of 81m2, the site area is severely constraining the development possibilities for the site, as full or even partial compliance with the building envelope and setback controls is simply not possible.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

21.     The Kaipātiki Local Board resolutions were considered by a cross council group of officers and assessed against the relevant council policies. The collective view from staff is that the land does not provide any value for service use, as it is constrained by size, location and zoning.

22.     An assessment against the open space network was completed by the Councils Parks and Recreation Policy team and has confirmed that the land is not a park and does not provide value for the open space network due to the location and size of the land.

23.     Auckland council’s Community Empowerment Unit (CEU) has assessed the value of the land for placemaking potential. However, based on its size, location and the cost of investment required to prepare a suitable space, this would not be a recommended placemaking location. CEU officers would encourage the local board to consider releasing this asset and investing in other developments within the neighbourhood that provide greater opportunity for community amenity and placemaking.

24.     The Community Facilities Project Delivery team also supports the divestment of this land as direct service reinvestment under the service property optimisation. The team is of the view that the intervention at the site is to reduce and remove the instances of anti-social behaviour. While this may be reduced once the toilet block is de-commissioned the creation of a garden area with seating may encourage an element of anti-social behaviour to continue in this location.

25.     The property was acquired and held for a public toilet, which has now been relocated to a new location. Once the public toilet is removed from the property, its purpose is obsolete.

26.     The property is not a ‘park’ as defined under s138 of the Local Government Act 2002. The ‘use’ of the land should be defined by council’s LTP for the property. There was never any intention to use it as a ‘park’, as it was acquired and held for a public toilet. There is no legal requirement under s138 to consult with the public.

27.     Public has been consulted in 2017 on the use of the toilet, where the majority supported to demolish the toilet and rebuild it in Jean Sampson Reserve.

28.     The service provision on 3 Bartley Street (public toilet) is being relocated to a new location at Jean Sampson Reserve and there is no loss of service provision from Community Facilities’ perspective. The operational budget of the old toilet at 3 Bartley Street will follow to the new toilet and leave the bare land at 3 Bartley Street with no operational budget.

29.     Staff recommended that the Kaipātiki Local Board approve the sale of 3 Bartley Street, Northcote Point using service property optimisation as it meets the criteria set out in the policy. This will provide an opportunity to unlock the value of the land and apply the sale proceeds to an eligible project to further enhance the community.

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

Local impacts and local board views

30.     The approved project to relocate the existing toilet block from 3 Bartley Street, Northcote to Jean Sampson Reserve was initiated to solve the condition of the asset and to respond to complaints about antisocial behaviour.

31.     During the community consultation on the future of the Bartley Street toilets the community expressed concerns that the current anti-social behaviour would continue if the toilets were to remain.

32.     Given the board’s decision to relocate the service from Bartley Street to Jean Sampson Reserve and that staff have assessed that there is no alternative service use for the land, the application of the service property optimisation policy will provide the ability for the local board to approve the divestment of the land and ringfence the proceeds of sale to be applied to an eligible project.

33.     Should the board approve this recommendation consideration will need to be given on where the sale proceeds should be applied.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

34.     Mana whenua have been advised of the optimisation concept and a framework for engagement has been agreed through the Panuku Mana Whenua Governance Forum.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

35.     The 2017 rating valuation land value was assessed as $34,000.

36.     During the community consultation on the future of the Bartley Street toilets (and subsequently) an adjacent owner has expressed an interest in purchasing the land to enhance the carpark at the rear the commercial building.

37.     If the board approve the sale of the land under the service property optimisation policy, Panuku will follow up with the interested party. Independent valuation advice will be obtained to inform market value as part of the sales process.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

38.     The criteria set out in the Service Property Optimisation policy can be met through the relocation of the existing service asset which provides the local board with the opportunity to utilise the proceeds of sale directly to further enhance the local community.

39.     If the local board decide not to proceed with service property optimisation, where it has the ability to ring fence the funds to further enhance the local community, the council may request that Panuku consider the site as a potential candidate for disposal where proceeds of sale will be used to fund existing long term plan capital projects.

40.     In July 2018 the local board resolved as a matter of policy that it does not support the disposal of park land (or part thereof) within the Kaipātiki Local Board area (resolution number KT/2018/141). Panuku consider this to be a matter for the local board to determine whether the sale of land under the service property optimisation policy would be impacted by the resolved position.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

41.     Should the board approve the application of service property optimisation to 3 Bartley Street, Northcote Point, Panuku will progress any statutory processes to enable the sale of the property.

42.     Panuku will confirm the adjoining landowner interest in purchasing the site and commence with the sale accordingly

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.    

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Carlos Rahman - Senior Engagement Advisor

Rochelle Killey - Portfolio Specialist, Panuku Development Auckland

Gulina Monroe - Specialist Technical Statutory Advisor

Authorisers

Marian Webb - Manager Portfolio Strategy, Panuku Development Auckland

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

Pathways to Preparedness: A Planning Framework for Recovery

File No.: CP2019/12328

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek local board feedback on the draft Pathways to Preparedness: A Planning Framework for Recovery.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The draft Pathways to Preparedness: A Planning Framework for Recovery has been developed to ensure Auckland is better prepared to recover from a disaster.

3.       The planning framework document:

·        identifies community values and priorities

·        sets a vision for recovery

·        focuses on the consequences to be addressed in recovery

·        focuses on building capacity and capability and addressing barriers

·        identifies actions to build momentum.

4.       It has been developed with local board engagement over 2018 and local board feedback is now sought particularly on:

·        community values

·        community priorities

·        the vision

·        the way we will work in recovery

·        the work to be done to be better prepared for recovery.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a)      provide feedback on the draft Pathways to Preparedness: A Planning Framework for Recovery.

 

Horopaki

Context

5.       Following the Christchurch and Kaikoura earthquakes, the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002 was amended and new guidelines were issued requiring better preparation for, and implementation of, recovery from a disaster.

6.       Auckland Emergency Management began development of the Resilient Recovery Strategy to ensure Auckland is better prepared. This included:

·        workshops on recovery with local boards between 24 May and 12 July 2018

·        reporting back on the workshops in September 2018

·        presentations to local board cluster meetings in March and November 2018

·        updating local boards on the development of the Resilient Recovery Strategy in November 2018 and advising that a draft would go the Civil Defence Emergency Management Group Committee in February 2019.

7.       At the beginning of this year, the Resilient Recovery Strategy was renamed ‘Pathways to Preparedness: A Planning Framework to Recovery’ (refer Attachment A) as it better described the document’s intent and contents.

8.       The Civil Defence Emergency Management Group Committee approved the draft pathways document for targeted engagement in February 2019.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

9.       The development of Pathways to Preparedness: A Planning Framework for Recovery followed the Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management’s ‘Strategic Planning for Recovery’ guidelines [issued by the Ministry of Civil Defence Emergency Management, DGL 20/17].

10.     The pathways document is structured around this process, as illustrated in the components of Figure 1 on page 3 of the document:

i)       Identifying community values and priorities

The planning framework set out in the pathways document is described as community centric. Community values and priorities guide us in our preparations enabling recovery to be set up and implemented in a way that helps to meet community needs and aspirations.

An initial set of community values and priorities was derived from workshops with local boards and advisory panels. They will be refined through community engagement as a part of actions to build a better understanding of recovery.

ii)      Setting the recovery vision

The pathways document sets the vision whereby ‘Auckland’s people, communities, businesses and infrastructure are well-placed to recover from a disaster.’

Being well placed means being well-prepared.

iii)     Anticipation of consequences and opportunities of Auckland hazards and risks

Anticipating potential consequences and opportunities from the impacts of Auckland’s hazards and risks provides insight into what might be required of a recovery. Auckland’s hazards and risks are identified in the Group Plan and some are the focus of the Natural Hazards Risk Management Action Plan. Building on previous work is part of the work programme resulting from the planning framework under the pathways document.

iv)     Building capacity and capability, addressing barriers to recovery

Another way in which the planning framework is community centric is in the way we will work in a recovery. Taking a collaborative, partnership approach means structuring and implementing recovery in a way that maintains its focus on community outcomes.

A significant recovery will require ‘big government’ structures and processes to effectively mobilise resources and coordinate large scale effort. Such approaches can seem remote from local communities. Effort is required to ensure good communication and community engagement are effectively maintained.

v)     Identifying actions to build momentum

Another significant focus is the work to be done to be better prepared. There are 43 actions identified under five focus areas: Recovery is communicated; Recovery is understood; Capacity and Capability is available; Collaboration is supported; and progress is monitored and evaluated.

The actions will form a work programme to be implemented in the lead-up to the review of the Auckland Civil Defence Emergency Management Group Plan which is due by October 2021, unless delayed by events.

11.     Against this background, comments and views on the pathways document strategy is particularly required on:

·        community values

·        community priorities

·        the vision

·        the way we will work in recovery

·        the work to be done to be better prepared for recovery.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

12.     Many parts of the Auckland Council group potentially become involved in responding to a disaster and subsequent recovery. The planning framework in the pathway’s document seeks to provide clarity about what will be required to support effective collaboration across the council group in recovery.

13.     Views from across the council group are being sought during targeted engagement through June and July 2019.

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

Local impacts and local board views

14.     Auckland’s hazards and risks may give rise to events with local, sub-regional or region-wide impacts. Their consequences will be influenced by the circumstances of the time and place in which the event took place.

15.     Local board views on their community’s values and priorities are important in determining the way we will work together collaboratively in recovering from a disaster.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

16.     Recovery addresses the consequences of an emergency and their impacts across the natural, social, built and economic environments. The goals, objectives and execution of recovery holds implications for iwi, environmental guardianship, Māori communities (iwi, hapu and mataawaka), marae, assets and the Māori economy.

17.     Building relationships amongst Auckland’s Māori communities to develop a deeper understanding of our potential collaboration across reduction, readiness, response, resilience and recovery, is a goal of Auckland Emergency Management. It is also part of the work plan arising from the planning framework set out in the pathways document.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

18.     There are no financial implications arising out of this report.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

19.     Pathways to Preparedness: A Planning Framework for Recovery and the work programme it will establish are intended to address the risk of Auckland being unprepared to recover from a disaster.

20.     Recovering from a disaster is complex, lengthy and costly. An absence or lack of preparation can:

·        delay commencement of recovery efforts and lengthen the time taken to complete recovery

·        inhibit multi-agency collaboration

·        lead to increased costs, disruption and distress for affected communities and individuals.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

21.     Local board feedback will be collated and considered for reporting to the Civil Defence Emergency Management Committee and incorporation into the final iteration of the pathways document.

22.     The Civil Defence Emergency Management Group Committee will receive the final iteration of Pathways to Preparedness: A Planning Framework for Recovery for approval in August 2019.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

17 July 2019 - Kaipātiki Local Board Business Meeting - Pathways to Preparedness: A Planning Framework for Recovery

145

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Wayne Brown - Principal Recovery Advisor

Authorisers

Jennifer Rose – Response and Recovery Manager

Sarah Sinclair – General Manager, Auckland Emergency Management

Louise Mason – General Manager, Local Board Services

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager , Local Board Services

 


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

Kaipātiki Local Board Chairperson's Report

File No.: CP2019/02090

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       An opportunity is provided for the Kaipātiki Local Board Chairperson to update members on recent activities, projects and issues since the last meeting.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a)      note the chairperson’s report.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Jacinda  Short - Democracy Advisor - Kaipatiki

Authorisers

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

Members' Reports

File No.: CP2019/02151

 

  

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

1.       An opportunity is provided for members to update the Kaipātiki Local Board on the projects and issues they have been involved with since the last meeting.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a)      note the written report from Member Anne-Elise Smithson.

b)      note any verbal reports of members.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

17 July 2019 - Kaipatiki Local Board Business Meeting - Member Report Anne-Elise Smithson

169

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Jacinda  Short - Democracy Advisor - Kaipatiki

Authorisers

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

Governing Body and Independent Maori Statutory Board Members' Update

File No.: CP2019/02083

 

  

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

1.       An opportunity is provided for Governing Body and Independent Maori Statutory Board members to update the board on Governing Body or Independent Maori Statutory Board issues, or issues relating to the Kaipātiki Local Board.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a)      note the Governing Body and Independent Maori Statutory Board members’ verbal updates.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Jacinda  Short - Democracy Advisor - Kaipatiki

Authorisers

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

Workshop Records - Kaipātiki Local Board - June 2019

File No.: CP2019/11125

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       The purpose of this report is to record the Kaipātiki Local Board workshop held on Wednesday 5 June, Wednesday 12 June and Wednesday 26 June. 

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       At the workshop held on Wednesday 5 June 2019, the Kaipātiki Local Board had briefings on:

·    Animal Management Bylaw Review

-    Animal Management Bylaw 2015 – Draft Review Findings Report May 2019.

·    Northcote Redevelopment (HLC)

3.       At the workshop held on Wednesday 12 June 2019, the Kaipātiki Local Board had briefings on:

·    Parks Sport and Recreation

-    Naturalisation of Parks Strategic Assessment

-    Netball North Harbour building works

·    Libraries

·    Community Facilities

-    Bridge repair at Smiths Bush Reserve

·    Rod’s Island Culvert Renewal, Little Shoal Bay

4.       At the workshop held on Wednesday 26 June, the Kaipātiki Local Board had briefings on:

·    Community Facilities

·    Arts, Community and Events

-    Kaipātiki Youth Funding Review Programme (draft report)

·    Infrastructure and Environmental Services

-    Small sites ambassador project

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a)      note the record for the Kaipātiki Local Board workshop held on Wednesday 5 June, Wednesday 12 June and Wednesday 26 June. 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

17 July 2019 - Kaipātiki Local Board Business Meeting - Wednesday 5 June 2019 Workshop Record

177

b

17 July 2019 - Kaipātiki Local Board Business Meeting - Wednesday 12 June 2019 Workshop Record

179

c

17 July 2019 - Kaipātiki Local Board Business Meeting - Wednesday 26 June 2019 Workshop Record

181

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Jacinda  Short - Democracy Advisor - Kaipatiki

Authorisers

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

Governance Forward Work Calendar

File No.: CP2019/02664

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To provide an update on reports to be presented to the board for 2019 and an overview of workshops scheduled for the month ahead.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The governance forward work calendar was introduced in 2016 as part of Auckland Council’s quality advice programme. The calendar aims to support local board’s governance role by:

·    ensuring advice on meeting agendas is driven by local board priorities;

·    clarifying what advice is expected and when; and

·    clarifying the rationale for reports.

3.       The calendar also aims to provide guidance for staff supporting local boards and greater transparency for the public. The calendar is updated monthly, reported to local board business meetings, and distributed to council staff.

4.       The August – September 2019 governance forward work calendar for the Kaipātiki Local Board is provided as Attachment A to the agenda report.

5.       The July – August 2019 workshop forward work plan for the Kaipātiki Local Board is provided as Attachment B to the agenda report. Scheduled items may change at short notice depending on the urgency of matters presented to the local board.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a)      note the Kaipātiki Local Board August - September 2019 governance forward work calendar and July – August 2019 workshop forward work plan.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

17 July 2019 - Kaipātiki Local Board Business Meeting - Governance Forward Work Calendar August - September 2019

185

b

17 July 2019 - Kaipātiki Local Board Business Meeting - Workshop Forward Work Plan July - August 2019

187

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Jacinda  Short - Democracy Advisor - Kaipatiki

Authorisers

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

17 July 2019

 

 

PDF Creator

    

    



[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