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

 

Date:

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

 

Tuesday, 3 December 2019

1:00pm

Waitematā Local Board Office
Ground Floor
52 Swanson Street
Auckland

 

Waitematā Local Board

 

OPEN AGENDA

 

 

 

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Chairperson

Richard Northey, ONZM

 

Deputy Chairperson

Kerrin Leoni

 

Members

Adriana Aveñdano Christie

 

 

Alexandra Bonham

 

 

Graeme Gunthorp

 

 

Julie  Sandilands

 

 

Sarah Trotman

 

 

(Quorum 4 members)

 

 

 

Liz Clemm

Democracy Advisor - Waitemata

 

28 November 2019

 

Contact Telephone: (09) 353 9654

Email: liz.clemm@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

 

 


 

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 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                                                                                                       5

7          Petitions                                                                                                                          5

8          Deputations                                                                                                                    5

8.1     Western Springs Forest - options of management and tree risk assessment.   5

8.2     Proposed National Erebus Memorial - Ministry for Culture and Heritage     6

8.3     Proposed National Erebus Memorial - Jo Malcolm and Paul Baragwanath  6

9          Public Forum                                                                                                                  6

9.1     Public Forum                                                                                                        6

10        Extraordinary Business                                                                                                8

11        Councillor's report                                                                                                         9

12        Landowner approval for the National Erebus Memorial at Dove-Myer Robinson Park                                                                                                                                       33

13        Governance of Pukekawa / Auckland Domain                                                         51

14        Auckland Transport December 2019 Update                                                           57

15        Waitematā Quick Response Round One 2019/2020 grant allocations                  73

16        Auckland Council's Quarterly Performance Report: Waitematā Local Board for quarter one 2019/2020                                                                                                 79

17        Annual Budget 2020/2021 consultation                                                                  135

18        Local board governance work management for the 2019-2022 triennium         143

19        Local board appointments and delegations for the 2019-2022 electoral term   151

20        Appointment of Local Board members to external and internal organisations and boards                                                                                                                         159

21        Process for appointment of Local Government New Zealand National Council representative                                                                                                            165

22        Urgent decision-making process                                                                             171

23        Adoption of a business meeting schedule                                                             175

24        Elected Members Expense Policy 2019                                                                  177

25        Chair's Report                                                                                                            205

26        Board member reports                                                                                              233

27        Governance Forward Work Calendar                                                                      241

28        Waitematā Local Board Workshop Records                                                          245  

29        Consideration of Extraordinary Items 

 

 


1          Welcome

 

 

2          Apologies

 

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

 

3          Declaration of Interest

 

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

 

4          Confirmation of Minutes

 

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a)         confirm the ordinary minutes of its inaugural meeting, held on Wednesday, 30 October 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

 

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

 

7          Petitions

 

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

 

8          Deputations

 

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

 

8.1       Western Springs Forest - options of management and tree risk assessment.

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.   To discuss options of management and tree risk assessment for Western Springs Forest.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a)      thank Deborah Manning, resident and part of the Friends of the Western Springs Forest residents’ group, for the presentation and attendance at the business meeting.

 

 

 

8.2       Proposed National Erebus Memorial - Ministry for Culture and Heritage

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.   To present a proposal for locating the National Erebus Memorial in Dove-Myer Robinson Park, Parnell.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a)      thank Bernadette Cavanagh, Chief Executive - Manatū Taonga / Ministry for Culture and Heritage and Brodie Stubbs, National Erebus Memorial Project Lead - Manatū Taonga / Ministry for Culture and Heritage, for the presentation and attendance at the business meeting.

 

 

8.3       Proposed National Erebus Memorial - Jo Malcolm and Paul Baragwanath

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.   To present a proposal for locating the National Erebus Memorial at an alternative site to Dove-Myer Robinson Park, Parnell.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a)      thank Jo Malcolm, Parnell Resident, and Paul Baragwanath, Art and Culture Advisor, for the presentation and attendance at the business meeting.

 

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.

 

9.1       Public Forum

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       Public forum provides an opportunity for a member of the public to address a meeting and share an opinion to elected representatives.

2.       Formal approval from the Chairperson is not required.

Time

3.       A period of up to 30 minutes, or such other time as the local board or any of its committees may determine, will be set aside for a public forum at the commencement of meetings of the local board which are open to the public.

4.       Each speaker during the public forum section of a meeting may speak for three minutes.

5.       Standing orders may be suspended on a vote of not less than 75 per cent of those present to extend the period of public participation or the period any speaker is allowed to speak.

6.       This Standing Order does not apply to inaugural meetings and, where not appropriate, extraordinary meetings or a special consultative procedure.

Subjects of public forum

7.       The public forum is to be confined to those items falling within the scope or functions of that local board or committee. Speakers must not speak about a matter that is under judicial consideration or subject to a quasi-judicial process.

Questions of speakers during public forum

8.       With the permission of the chairperson, members may ask questions of speakers during the period reserved for public forum. Questions by members, if permitted, are to be confined to obtaining information or clarification on matters raised by the speaker.

9.       Members may not debate any matter raised during the public forum session that is not on the agenda for the meeting, or take any action in relation to it, other than through the usual procedures for extraordinary business if the matter is urgent.

10.     The meeting may not make any resolution on issues raised in public forum except to refer the matter to a future meeting, or to another committee, or to the chief executive for investigation.

[Note: s 76 – 81, LGA 2002, regarding decision-making]

Language for speeches

A member of the public may address a meeting in English, Māori or New Zealand Sign Language. However, the person should advise the chairperson of their intention to speak in a language other than English at least two clear working days before the meeting.

11.     Where practical, Auckland Council will arrange for a translator to be present at the meeting. The chairperson may also order the speech and any accompanying documents to be translated and printed in English or Māori or another language.


 

Chairperson’s discretion

The chairperson may:

·    direct a speaker to a different committee if they consider this more appropriate, given the proposed subject matter

·    prohibit a speaker from speaking if they are offensive, repetitious or vexatious, or otherwise breach these standing orders.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a)      thank all those who presented for their attendance at the meeting.

 


 

 

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.”


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 

Councillor's report

 

File No.: CP2019/20391

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To provide Waitematā and Gulf Ward Councillor Pippa Coom, Ōrākei Ward Councillor Desley Simpson and Albert-Eden Roskill Ward Councillors Christine Fletcher and Cathy Casey with an opportunity to update the Waitematā Local Board on regional issues.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a)      receive the written report update from the Waitematā and Gulf Ward Councillor, Pippa Coom and the verbal or tabled Ward Councillor reports.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Councillor Pippa Coom report November 2019

11

      

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Liz Clemm - Democracy Advisor - Waitemata

Authoriser

Trina Thompson - Relationship Manager/Senior Advisor Waitemata Local Board

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 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


 

PDF Creator


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 

Landowner approval for the National Erebus Memorial at Dove-Myer Robinson Park

File No.: CP2019/20014

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To present the consultation results and seek a decision on the landowner approval for the National Erebus Memorial at Dove-Myer Robinson Park, Parnell.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The proposed National Erebus memorial project is being sponsored and led by the Manutū Taonga Ministry for Culture and Heritage (MCH). The purpose of the memorial is to commemorate the 257 passengers and crew who lost their lives in what remains one of New Zealand’s worst civil disasters.

3.       Auckland Council in mid-2018 identified five potential sites for the proposed memorial and provided information on those sites to MCH.

4.       In November 2018, prior to the design process being started by MCH, the Waitematā Local Board and Ngāti Whātua Orākei supported in principle the location for the National Erebus Memorial. The board’s in principle support (resolution WTM2018/176) was given on the basis that the proposed memorial design would be assessed against fixed park outcomes and values.

5.       ‘Te Paerangi Ataata – Sky Song’ was selected as the favoured design for the chosen location in April 2019. Auckland Council was not involved in this design process and does not have decision making authority over the design of the memorial.

6.       ‘Te Paerangi Ataata – Sky Song’ is a walkway design that projects out towards Judges Bay. It will provide a space for visitors to reflect and remember those who lost their lives in the accident and also accommodate a wide range of additional users and interpretations.  

7.       MCH now require landowner approval from the Waitematā Local Board to progress this project.

8.       In September 2019, the local board resolved to undertake public consultation before making a decision on granting landowner approval. The public consultation process carried out in October 2019 has been collated and presented for the local board’s consideration.

9.       The council consultation produced a total of 953 submissions from individual people or groups, with 58 of these submitting more than once. A petition was also received with 604 signatures opposing the proposed memorial, with approximately a third of these having made individual submissions as part of the council consultation.

10.     The local board need to consider the impact of the proposed memorial on the park outcomes and values that the board agreed in November 2018.

11.     The local board also needs to consider the views and preferences of those people who gave feedback through the public consultation process.

12.     The proposal is viewed by staff as meeting the park outcomes and values set out in the November 2018 business report.

13.     Submissions have been collated to present the community views from the consultation. While more submitters felt that the memorial would impact negatively on their experience of Dove-Myer Robinson Park and reduce visitation, the feedback is more balanced when those who felt the memorial would have a positive impact and those who felt it made no difference to their experience or visitation, are considered together.

14.     The views of family members both in support and against the proposal, as well as the views of the local community, people who live outside of Auckland and international respondents have all been taken into consideration. Account has also been taken of the views of MCH in terms of their support for Dove-Myer Robinson as the preferred location for the memorial and all technical reports and information provided by MCH. 

15.     The proposed memorial meets the park outcomes and values criteria established by the local board and changes to the landscape at Dove-Myer Robinson Park are localised. The proposed siting of the memorial is therefore considered appropriate and will allow for commemoration of a significant event in New Zealand’s history.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a)      note the views of the community, family members where they have been expressed, Ngāti Whatua Orākei, the applicant, and the technical reports and advice provided in relation to the proposed National Erebus Memorial ‘Te Paerangi Ataata – Sky Song’ at Dove-Myer Robinson Park;

b)      approve the landowner approval application for the proposed National Erebus Memorial ‘Te Paerangi Ataata – Sky Song’ at Dove-Myer Robinson Park.

 

Horopaki

Context

16.     The proposed National Erebus Memorial project is being sponsored and led by the Ministry for Culture and Heritage (MCH). The ministry selected Dove-Myer Robinson Park as the preferred location from a short list of five sites in central Auckland put forward by Auckland Council. ‘Te Paerangi Ataata – Sky Song’ has been selected as the preferred design from six shortlisted designs.

17.     MCH must obtain landowner approval in order to proceed with the construction of the memorial at Dove-Myer Robinson Park.  The Waitematā Local Board has decision-making responsibility for landowner approval applications in local parks. As this is a landowner approval decision, the local board needs to consider the impact of the proposed memorial on the park.

18.     The local board needs to consider the views and preferences of those likely to be interested in, or affected by, this decision. This is in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002. When considering feedback provided as part of the consultation, the local board must receive the feedback with an open mind and give that feedback due consideration when taking its decision. 

The site 

19.     Dove-Myer Robinson Park, which incorporates Parnell Rose Garden, is located close to Auckland’s city centre on the edge of the Waitematā Harbour. The site sits between Fred Ambler Lookout and Judges Bay. Further to the east of Judges Bay is the Parnell Baths.

20.     The park, which is largely held as parkland under the Local Government Act, is 5.56 hectares in size and consists of open lawn areas enclosed by groups of large mature trees and a belt of bush that runs along the coastal edge. The site includes the Nancy Steen Rose Garden and a re-sanded beach on the edge of Judges Bay Lagoon.

21.     The area for the proposed National Erebus Memorial at Dove-Myer Robinson Park is in an open terraced lawn at the northern extent of the park. The proposed site provides views out over Judges Bay Lagoon and the Waitematā Harbour to Rangitoto.

22.     As part of MCH’s site selection process, MCH obtained a report from Boffa Miskell, an environmental planning and design consultancy, on the suitability of the site in Dove-Myer Robinson Park. That report included an assessment of the site against a list of Erebus Memorial site assessment criteria that had been developed by MCH to identify an appropriate site for the memorial.

23.     Across the nine criteria identified, the report scored the site good in relation to one criterion, adequate in relation to four criteria, adequate to poor across two criteria, and poor in relation to two criteria. No score of excellent was given.  A copy of the report is attached as Attachment E to this report. MCH have selected Dove-Myer Robinson as the preferred site for the proposed National Erebus Memorial.

Park outcomes and values

24.     MCH sought in principle landowner approval to locate a memorial at Dove-Myer Robinson Park. This ‘in principle’ approval was granted by the Waitematā Local Board in November 2018 (resolution number WTM/2018/176) on condition that the selected winning design for the memorial realised the following park outcomes and values:

·        blending in with and being sympathetic to the natural environment

·        protecting view shafts

·        maintaining open space values

·        allowing multiple uses of the area

·        being consistent with the heritage and mana whenua values of the park

·        accommodating current use types / patterns

·        increasing the use levels of this area of the park

·        providing additional amenity value.

25.     There is no management plan to guide planning decisions at the park but the following plans and guidelines have some relevance; the Parks, Sports and Recreation Plaques and Memorials guideline document (2011), the Parnell Plan (2019) and the Waitematā Local Board Plan (2017).

Strategic context

Plaques and memorials guidelines (2011)

26.     In June 2011, a guiding document was prepared for Auckland Council staff and local boards on the procedures for requesting plaques and memorials in Auckland Council parks.

27.     The guideline protocols state that where a reserve management plan does not exist the guidelines, which provide for the memorials linked to significant events, be applied. Such events include commemoration of international, national and local events.

28.     The proposed National Erebus Memorial was assessed under the guidelines and is supported by them.

The Parnell Plan (2019)

29.     The Parnell Plan provides direction and actions for development in Parnell over the next 30 years. It presents the local board and community’s vision for the area and provides key objectives, strategies and a set of actions to achieve the objectives.

30.     Five high level objectives are articulated in the plan. The following two are considered pertinent to the proposed National Erebus Memorial:

·        enable the community to use and enjoy its great places and spaces

·        value, protect and enhance Parnell’s natural environment.

31.     These objectives do not provide definitive guidance on the appropriateness of the proposed National Erebus memorial. It could be considered that the memorial impacts on the natural environment but in terms of ecology and biodiversity outcomes that are focused on in the plan, these impacts are negligible.

32.     With regard to ‘use and enjoyment’ the introduction of a memorial at Dove-Myer Robinson Park could be seen, as is reflected in consultation feedback, a positive or negative outcome.   

33.     The plan also identified the following in the implementation section:

·        Develop and implement improvement plans for local parks to reflect the particular nature, history and character of each reserve, notably Heard Park, Fraser Park, Alberon Park, Scarborough Reserve, Ayr Reserve, Gladstone Reserve, Dove-Myer Robison Park and Judges Bay Reserve.

34.     The drafting of ‘improvement plans’ at these sites are yet to be funded and actioned.

Waitematā Local Board Plan 2017

35.     The Waitematā Local Board Plan 2017 has six key outcomes to help provide a focus for development and improvements across the board. The most pertinent outcomes in relation to the proposed memorial are:

36.     Outcome 2 – Attractive and versatile public spaces that meet our communities’ needs.

37.     Outcome 3 – The natural environment is valued, protected and enhanced.

38.     Staff believe that the proposed memorial aligns with these local board outcomes.

National Erebus Memorial design features

39.     Following the site selection, MCH completed a design process where designs were submitted for the particular lawn at Dove-Myer Robinson Park. The selected design for the memorial structure, ‘Te Paerangi Ataata – Sky Song’, is a directional linear pathway that is made up of three key components; a white concrete walkway and two feature walls that rise either side of the walkway as it extends out over the terraced bank (see Attachment A).

40.     One wall is curved, made of stainless steel and will have 257 unique snowflake shapes cut out of it to represent those who lost their lives in the Erebus accident. The other wall will be made from precast white concrete and will have the names of those who lost their lives inscribed into the wall. There is a break in both walls to provide additional entry and exit points.

41.     The walkway is just over 17 metres in length and on a gentle, but perceptible, 1:20 incline towards its end. It is cantilevered over the last nine metres, with a glass balustrade at its apex providing views out over the harbour. Three speakers concealed in the structure will play sound drawn from the movement of the sea ice, wind and animals of Antarctica. The sound will be subtle and heard only when standing immediately beside the speakers.

Additional permanent features

42.     A gravel pedestrian path is proposed to connect the existing path to the memorial and will be of an accessible gradient to avoid trip hazards, steps and handrails.  A gravel path finish has been selected in order to provide a more tactile experience when approaching the memorial. In addition, the rough surface would deter skateboards and scooters, but would still be accessible for prams and wheelchairs.

43.     The proposed memorial will require new stormwater, water and electricity infrastructure to service the memorial. The stormwater infrastructure will be located only in the selected lawn area to accommodate the impermeable surface area. Most infrastructure will be buried and not visible. A cesspit and an outfall near the eastern walkway will be visible. The outfall will be downslope of the walkway and will not be overly visible.

44.     The water and electricity infrastructure will be connected to existing services and will traverse around the park, avoiding as many trees as possible, to the open lawn area. The power cables and water pipes will share the same route through most of the park. The infrastructure will be installed by trenchless method and there will be minimal ground disturbance. Most infrastructure will be underground, and the only visible infrastructure will be a new power cabinet in the northern end of the park, two ground level water tobys on the driveway and start of the new footpath and a surface light near the memorial (see Attachment A).

Temporary site access

45.     The applicant is required to construct a temporary haul road through Dove-Myer Robinson Park to accommodate the movement of large machinery, trucks and material safely to the proposed memorial area. The haul road is required to protect the subsurface archaeological and ecological features of the park.

46.     The entrance point is currently a ‘no entry’ access way and a traffic management plan will need to be implemented during vehicle movements. The traffic management plan will be assessed as part of the resource consent process. Contractors would need to be present to ensure public safety while vehicles are moving and operating on site.

Consultation

47.     After announcing ‘Te Paerangi Ataata – Sky Song’ as the winning design in April 2019, MCH undertook targeted consultation with the Parnell Heritage Inc, the Parnell Community Committee and other interested parties.

48.     At the business meeting on 17 September 2019, the Waitematā Local Board received an extraordinary item to consider approving the landowner application for the National Erebus Memorial at Dove Myer Robinson Park. The local board resolved to undertake public consultation before making a decision on granting landowner approval (resolution number WTM/2019/197).

49.     The public consultation requested by the board focused on the effects of the memorial on the people who use the park and have an interest in the project. The following two questions were asked and submitters were also invited to provide additional comments:

a)      Do you think the proposed National Erebus Memorial would affect your experience of Dove-Myer Robinson Park in Parnell?

b)      Would it change the amount of times you visit the proposed site at Dove-Myer Robinson Park?

Public consultation process

50.     The following consultation methods were used:

·        Online survey on the council’s Have Your Say consultation site from 25 September to 8 October 2019. This was then extended to 29 October 2019. In total the consultation ran for five weeks. Hard copy forms were also made available at the Parnell and Central City library. 

·        A drop-in session was held at the proposed site on Saturday 28 September from 1 to 3pm. The session provided a pegged outlay of the proposed memorial. Images of the design were made available and staff were present to explain key aspects of the design and respond to questions regarding the consultation.

·        Flyers were delivered to neighbouring Parnell homes on two occasions. The first flyers promoted the consultation and drop-in session. The second flyer drop advised that the consultation was being extended.

·        A3 posters were delivered to community venues such as Parnell and Central City library, Plunket, Parnell community centre and some nearby businesses.

·        Eight A2 posters were put up in Dove-Myer Robinson Park.

·        The consultation was included in the September edition of the Waitematā Local Board eBulletin and on the Waitematā Local Board Facebook page.

·        Key local stakeholders were informed of the consultation by email and submitters were informed of the extension by email and mail.

·        Two Our Auckland articles were published.

The local board’s role

51.     The Waitematā Local Board need to consider the impact of the proposed memorial on the park outcomes, as well as the views and preferences of persons likely to be affected or have an interest in the landowner approval.

52.     The local board do not have decision-making authority over the design of the memorial.

53.     The impacts have been assessed by the Urban Design Panel and relevant council staff to assist the local board in making a decision.

54.     The local board may consider that those likely to be most affected by or interested in the decision are those who regularly use the park. This is on the basis that it may be expected that those who reside in relatively close proximity to the park are more likely to regularly use the park.

55.     Submissions from others who reside outside the immediate area should still be considered as those who are affected or interested in the decision will not exclusively reside nearby. People may have a historic connection to the area, travel to the area or have another reason for being interested in the decision.

56.     Staff have split out the views received based on location so that the local board can give due consideration to the views of those most likely to be affected by the National Erebus Memorial at Dove-Myer Robinson Park.

57.     The public consultation results have been themed into common feedback the local board should consider and other frequent comments that were made by submitters.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Assessment against park values and outcomes

58.     The ‘Te Paerangi Ataata – Sky Song’ design was reviewed by the Urban Design Panel and Auckland Council’s Parks, Sport and Recreation department.

59.     The park outcomes and values were assessed on the following basis.

Blending in with and being sympathetic to the natural environment.

60.     The scale of the design is considered appropriate to, and fits well within, the park setting. 

Protecting view shafts

61.     The views of the Waitematā Harbour from the proposed location for the National Erebus Memorial are out to the north-east. The memorial is similarly aligned in a north-easterly direction and therefore views from this location will be largely unaffected. The project looks to enhance the current views from the grassed bank through the removal of three exotic Mexican Fan Palm trees that currently partially block the views.  

Maintaining open space values

62.     The memorial structure and path have a footprint of 175 square metres. This is a comparatively small footprint over a site of 55,600 square metres but noting the memorial presents a new built structure that will change the look and feel of the terraced lawn area within the park. 

63.     The land contours and spread of mature specimen trees across Dove-Myer Robinson Park mean that the proposed memorial would remain unseen from most other locations within the park. There is therefore little impact on the wider landscape within the park.

Allowing multiple uses of the area

64.     The memorial itself will add another dimension to the park in terms of providing a linear and directional pathway of high design quality. The end of the walkway will provide a vantage point from which views out to the Waitematā Harbour can be enjoyed.

Being consistent with the heritage and mana whenua values of the park

65.     The three following key values expressed by mana whenua have been identified and incorporated into the memorial design:

·        Whānaungatanga (relationship, kinship, sense of family connection)

·        Kaitiakitanga (guardianship)

·        Manaakitanga (hospitality).

66.     The ‘huarahi/journey’ that is established by the proposed memorial is set up to allow for an individual to create space in their heart and mind to keep the memories of their loved ones alive. 

67.     ‘Te Paerangi Ataata – Sky Song’ maintains and enhances visual connections to Taurarua and the wider Waitematā, as well as other significant sites such as Rangitoto – reinforcing the unique sense of place and identity of the location.

68.     It is proposed that the interpretive material at the memorial is given in both te reo Māori and English, and that the traditional name of the site Taurarua is recognised within it. 

Accommodating current use types / patterns

69.     The terraced open lawn area, the proposed location for the memorial, currently provides views to the harbour and is a place where people can sit, enjoy quiet respite and picnic. 

70.     The memorial structure will take up approximately one fifth of the open lawn and is set well into the southern half of this area. The northern half of the lawn remains untouched and will provide for continued enjoyment of current pastimes and capacity for formal gatherings of several hundred people. However, the proposed structure separates the open space whilst still providing a linking path and seating. 

Increasing the use levels of this area of the park

71.     The Erebus anniversary on 28 November is likely to be marked by one single annual event on site. Smaller family gatherings may also occur at other times but, across the year, visitation levels are predicted to increase at low levels.  

Providing additional amenity

72.     The memorial could be an attractive addition to the park and a feature that would become a destination in its own right attracting more visitors to the park and providing a space for events.

Assessment of submissions received

73.     A total of 953 submissions were received from people and groups via the online form, hard copy form and emails. Of these, 58 of the submitters had entered feedback more than once and therefore were not counted in the quantitative assessment. There were a total of 895 submissions that were used for the quantitative assessment which are summarised in Attachment B. All submissions have been attached as Attachment C to this report.

74.     The following organisations submitted feedback as part of the council consultation process:

·        Erebus National Memorial Advocacy Group (in support)

·        Occupy Garnet Road (in opposition)

·        Memorial Committee Dutch Veterans (in opposition)

·        Parnell Community Committee (in opposition)

The number of members linked to each group is unknown.

Petition

75.     One of the submissions received as part of the council consultation included a petition with 604 signatures opposing the proposed memorial at Dove-Myer Robinson Park. The petition collected people’s names, city of residence, email addresses and comments. The names and emails were cross checked with the council consultation and there were 200 signatories who also submitted individual feedback through the council consultation. The petition can be found under Attachment D of this report.

76.     The petition has been addressed to the Waitematā Local Board and Stephen Town, and stated the following:

·        the Dove-Myer Robinson Park and the pohutukawa tree are threatened by the construction of the memorial

·        the proposed structure will be up to eight metres above ground and its length many more

·        the project has not been well conceived and has been pushed through without wider community consultation

·        the large concrete and stainless-steel structure ruins this central park.

77.     Some comments made by signatories of the petition referred back to these points. Many signatories commented the structure is too large and is going to take up too much green space, and were concerned that the memorial would not fit in with the current features of the park. There were also comments made from people who were concerned about the future of the significant pohutukawa tree.

78.     The petition has still been considered by staff and all comments made under the petition have been read and included in the analysis. However, the petition has been excluded from the graphs summarising the response to the particular council consultation questions as the data required to populate the graphs was not available from the data given on the petition, for example, the local board area and responses to how frequently people would visit.

79.     It is clear, however, that those signing the petition add to the numbers in opposition to the proposal.

80.     Staff did a further analysis on the 406 people who signed and did not provide an individual submission through the council consultation process. The majority indicated that they lived in Auckland, but did not give a specific address.

81.     The petition organiser has advised that most signatories are from the Parnell area. There were 53 people who indicated they lived in the Waitematā Local Board area, 22 who indicated a specific suburb in Auckland but outside of the Waitematā Local Board area, and 9 who were from outside Auckland.

Overall summary of answers to survey questions

82.     Of those who submitted on the council consultation, 57 per cent felt they would have a more negative experience and 43 per cent would have more positive or same experience. The views of the public are relatively split between those who feel they may have a worse experience and those who may have a better or unchanged experience.

83.     There is also a relatively even split between those who would visit less often and those who would visit more often or not change how often they visit. Of those who submitted on the council consultation, 49 per cent would visit less often and 51 per cent would visit more often or not change how often they visit.

84.     Further analysis was done on the age group split of the submitters to identify if there were any trends across the age groups (see Attachment B). The following was observed:

·        829 of the 895 submitters disclosed their age

·        There were 229 submissions from people between 55 to 64 years of age, making it the largest age group of submissions

·        There were three submissions from people under 14 years of age who have all indicated they would have a worse experience and would visit the park less often.

·        More people between 25 and 34 years of age have indicated they would have a more positive or same experience (64 per cent) and would visit the park more frequently or the same amount (68 per cent) than any other age group.

·        More people over 75 years of age have indicated they would have a more negative experience (70 per cent) and would visit the park less frequently (61 per cent) than any other age group, not including the three submissions from those under 14 years of age.

·        In general, across the 15 to 64 year age groups, there was a relatively even amount of people who would have an improved or same experience, compared to those who would have a worse experience. The majority of people over 65 years of age have indicated they would have a worse experience.

·        There were marginally more people who would visit the park more often or the same amount in between the ages of 15 and 64 years. The majority of people over 65 years of age have indicated they would visit the park less often. 

Place of residence analysis – Waitematā Local Board responses

85.     This is a landowner decision in relation to a local park and it is, therefore, likely to be of particular interest to those who regularly use the park. Although there will not necessarily be an exact correlation, it may be expected that those most likely to regularly use the park will be those who reside in close, or relatively close, proximity to the park. To ensure the views of local residents can be clearly identified and considered, staff have split responses according to residential location.

86.     A total of 325 submissions were received from people who reside in the Waitematā Local Board area. 74 per cent of Waitematā Local Board area residents indicated they would have a more negative experience and 67 per cent would visit the park less often or had opposing comments.

87.     The majority of people across all age groups in the Waitematā Local Board area have indicated that they would have a more negative experience if the memorial was constructed in the park. In relation to the amount of times they visit, all age groups have more people who have indicated they would visit less often, except for the 25 to 34 years of age group.

Place of residence analysis – wider Auckland and outer Auckland responses

88.     A total of 450 residents from the wider Auckland area made up most of the submissions and there was a relatively even split between those who may have a worse experience (51 per cent) and those who would have the same or better experience (48 per cent). There were 96 submissions from outside Auckland and the majority of people would have a more positive or same experience (80 per cent) and would not change how often they visit or would visit more often (82 per cent).

Analysis of main themes from feedback

89.     The tables below provided a summary of the consultation results and the common themes that the local board should consider for the landowner approval, as well as additional themes that were common throughout the consultation. The feedback received as part of the petition has been included in this analysis.

More negative experience and likely to visit less often – Local board to consider

Theme

Staff comments

The proposed memorial will occupy open space, limiting recreational activities and obstructing views

The green open space at Dove-Myer Robinson Park is valued by many submitters who use the area for recreational activities such as walking and picnicking. There are concerns that the proposed memorial will have a negative effect on the ambience of the park and restrict existing views of the surrounding features, including the trees, harbour views and green space. There have been many comments that the size of the memorial is overpowering.

Staff recognise that the memorial is more significant than existing smaller memorials in the park and will change the look and feel of the specific lawn area. The memorial structure is proposed to occupy approximately 20% of the open lawn, set well into the southern half of the area. The northern half of the area would still provide significant space for visitors, allowing the area to be used for the usual activities.

The proposed memorial does not fit with the existing historic and natural features of the park

Many submitters commented that the national memorial did not fit well within the park and the existing features. Many commented on the existing heritage of the park and they felt the memorial did not blend in with the surrounding environment.

Submitters felt the proposed memorial was overwhelming and would have a negative visual impact on the park.

The design was selected by the Ministry Culture and Heritage as the preferred design following feedback from the local board, Ngāti Whatua Orākei and the Auckland Urban Design Panel. Ngāti Whatua Orākei have been providing support to MCH for all tikanga aspects relating to the project.

 

More negative experience and likely to visit less often – Additional themes

Theme

Staff comments

The proposed memorial is not suitable for this location.

Many submitters did not understand the association between Dove-Myer Robinson Park and the Erebus accident.

Many gave suggestions for it to be placed in other areas of Auckland and the country, with a particular preference for the memorial to be placed in a more open area or space linked to aviation or regional significance.

The site within Dove-Myer Robinson Park met a range of criteria including accessibility, safety, amenity, the ability to host both formal and informal events as well as being compatible with the use of adjacent space.

In addition, the site fulfilled a strong desire expressed by the families for a site with a peaceful park-like setting.

The site was selected before the memorial design was created. The design has been created specifically for this area in Dove-Myer Robinson Park and is not transferrable to another location. The designers have considered the association with Erebus and have proposed that the face of the ice wall is orientated towards Erebus.

The Ministry for Culture and Heritage is specifically requesting landowner approval for the proposed design in the proposed location.

The selected design is wrong, unappealing and will attract crime

Many were not supportive of the materials proposed for the memorial and thought the structure was too big. There were concerns that the area would attract rough sleeping, unpleasant behaviour and potentially graffiti.

Some submitters felt that the wrong design had been selected and would prefer to see a smaller, more natural memorial that is more subtle and takes up less space. The design for this location cannot be reconsidered as the Ministry has selected their preferred design which they feel meets all criteria.

The design and materials that have been selected for the proposed memorial have been assessed and lighting has been included to lessen the desirability to hide and seek shelter under and around the structure.

The materials require minimal maintenance and deliberate damage by the way of graffiti can be easily removed. The approaching path will be constructed from gravel rather than smooth concrete to make the area less appealing for skateboards.

The proposed memorial will have a significant impact on the surrounding trees, in particular the large pohutukawa.

Many submitters mentioned the significant pohutukawa tree in their feedback and expressed concerns that the tree may be threatened by the construction and placement of the proposed memorial.

An independent arborist and council arborist have confirmed the proposed works under the dripline of the tree are minor and will not have adverse effect on the tree.

A tree asset owner approval has been granted and all work will be undertaken in accordance with best arboricultural practice. 

Minor tree pruning will be required of a kanuka, cherry tree and two other pohutukawa. The trimming is expected to affect less than 10 per cent of the canopy and only branches less than 50mm in diameter will be trimmed.

Three exotic palms, a karo tree and an oak sapling will be removed. All trees will be replaced with appropriate native species. The final locations will be determined in consultation with the Community Facilities Arborist.

All proposed works on and around the trees at Dove-Myer Robinson Park have been approved under the tree asset owner approval.

 

More positive experience and likely to visit more often – Local board to consider

Theme

Staff comments

The proposed memorial will add another element to the park

Submitters felt that the proposed memorial will be another point of interest in the park and occupy a space at Dove-Myer Robinson Park that is currently not used by many people.

Many commented that the proposed memorial would be an attraction that would invite more visitors to Dove-Myer Robinson Park and enhance their experience of the peaceful location.

The proposed memorial would add to the serenity of the park

Submitters felt the memorial should be in a special place in the park that will benefit from a significant memorial and enhance their experience of a peaceful location.

People felt that there was a strong connection between the land and the design and felt that visiting the area of the park would provide an emotional and serene experience.

The proposed memorial will not have a negative impact on the other areas of the park

The submitters recognised that this area of the park is enclosed amongst beautiful trees and easily accessible from other areas of the park. Comments were made that the structure would not have an impact on the other features that make this park special such as the Rose Garden.

The spread of the mature trees across the park and the contour of the land mean that the proposed memorial will remain unseen from most other locations of the park.

 

More positive experience and likely to visit more often – Additional themes

Theme

Staff comments

The proposed memorial will provide a space for people to reflect and remember those who lost their lives.

Many submitters felt a memorial is long overdue and think the proposed memorial is a special place to reflect and learn about the significant event in New Zealand’s history.

Many shared their connection with the event and felt the memorial was appropriate and needed.

The proposed location in accessible area

Submitters commented on the location being suitable and were supportive of the fact the memorial was proposed in central Auckland.

Options

90.     The local board will need to consider granting landowner approval on the basis of the design fulfilling the park outcomes and values listed (section 22) and also consider the views expressed through the consultation process.

91.     If the local board approve the application, those opposed to the proposal would have their experience adversely affected and have indicated they would visit the area less often.

92.     If the local board declines the application, MCH would need to consider if, and how, they wish to restart the site and design selection process for a National Erebus Memorial in Auckland. ‘Te Paerangi Ataata – Sky Song’ is a site-specific design using the terraced glade at Dove-Myer Robinson to create a linear cantilevered walkway experience that creates universal emotions of both adventure and loss. The design is not transferable.

93.     Selecting a new site that fits MCH’s criteria for a peaceful park-like setting and fulfils flexibility, functionality and accessibility criteria will be challenging. There will then need to be consideration of how the design, consultation and land owner approval process is approached.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

94.     There are no anticipated impacts on the climate as a result of this proposal.

95.     The karo, oak sapling and three palm trees that are proposed for removal will be replaced with three native species. The gravel path that is proposed within the dripline of trees in the lawn area will be permeable and have less of an impact on the trees.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

96.     The following Auckland Council specialists have provided feedback on the landowner approval application for the National Erebus Memorial:

·        senior arboriculture and ecological specialist

·        manager landscape architecture

·        parks and places team leader

·        archaeology specialist

·        senior maintenance delivery coordinator

·        the central events team.

97.     The relevant specialists are supportive of landowner approval for the memorial at Dove-Myer Robinson Park.

98.     The council arborist has granted tree asset owner approval for all works on and in the vicinity of the trees at Dove-Myer Robinson Park. The project arborist, senior arboriculture and ecological specialist (Community Facilities) and heritage arborist (Plans and Places) have collaborated on this project. The arborists will also need to attend a prestart meeting and monitor the site if land owner approval is given and construction begins.

99.     Due to the significant heritage values in this park, the applicant is also required to obtain archaeological authority from Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga. This is a separate process to the landowner approval and the resource consent. The council archaeologist will also confirm, as part of the resource consent, whether the route of the haul road and the mitigation proposed is adequate. As with the arborists, the council archaeologist will also be required to attend the prestart meeting.

100.   The Parks Sports and Recreation and Community Facilities Departments have worked closely to ensure that the proposal meets all relevant council policies and guidelines and that wider park outcomes, such as those relating to ecology and archaeology, are protected.

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

Local impacts and local board views

Previous resolutions and input from the local board

101.   In November 2018, the Waitematā Local Board and Ngāti Whātua Orākei supported in principle, the location for the National Erebus Memorial (resolution number WTM/2018/176). The approval in principle was given subject to the memorial design accommodating the park values and outcomes that are outlined in this report.

102.   Further input was provided during the design selection process and ‘Te Paerangi Ataata – Sky Song’ was considered a favourable design as it met the outcomes set out by the local board. In addition, an outcome of the 2017 Waitematā Local Board Plan focuses on attractive and versatile public places that meet the communities’ needs. Public spaces should support wellbeing and bring people together to socialise, learn and relax.

103.   At the business meeting on 17 November 2019, the Waitematā Local Board received an extraordinary item to consider approving the landowner application for the National Erebus Memorial at Dove-Myer Robinson Park. The local board resolved to undertake public consultation before making a decision on granting landowner approval (resolution number WTM/2019/197).

104.   A workshop was held on 19 November to go through the park outcomes and present the consultation results.

Local impact

105.   There were 325 submissions from people in the Waitematā Local Board area. The majority of Waitematā Local Board residents indicated in the public consultation that they would have a worse experience and would frequent the park less often if the memorial was constructed in the park. This is a landowner approval in relation to a local park and it is therefore likely to be of particular interest to those who regularly use the park. It may be expected that those who live in relatively close proximity are more likely to regularly use the park.

106.   There were 53 people from the Waitematā Local Board area who signed the petition opposing the selected memorial at Dove-Myer Robinson Park. There may have been more from the area that signed the petition and indicated they lived in the Auckland area.

107.   Those who live locally generally felt that the memorial was not right for the site. People felt the area should remain an open grassed lawn and considered the memorial to not be a good fit with the existing park features. There were also people who were concerned with the significant surrounding trees in the area.

Regional and national impact

108.   The purpose of the memorial is to commemorate the 257 passengers and crew who lost their lives in what remains one of New Zealand’s worst civil disasters. The event is a significant event in New Zealand’s history and this year marks the 40 year anniversary. Many consultation comments were from people who knew someone that was on Air NZ flight 901.

109.   There were 450 submissions from people in the wider Auckland area (excluding Waitematā Local Board residents) and 96 from outside Auckland. Submitters in the wider Auckland area were relatively split on how the National Erebus Memorial would affect their experience of the park, and the majority of those outside Auckland would have a better or unchanged experience.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

110.   Dove-Myer Robinson Park – Taurarua Pā is a significant site within the Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei rohe.

111.   MCH began consultation with Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei in November 2018, and wider mana whenua consultation has been completed as part of the resource consent process. In addition to the direct engagement with Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei, MCH have sent the proposal to the following iwi for feedback:

·        Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki

·        Ngāti Maru

·        Ngāti Pāoa

·        Ngāti Tamaoho

·        Ngāti Tamaterā

·        Ngāti Te Ata

·        Ngāti Whanaunga

·        Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara

·        Te Ahiwaru - Waiohua

·        Te Ākitai Waiohua

·        Te Kawerau a Maki

·        Te Patukirikiri

·        Waikato – Tainui.

112.   Of these mana whenua groups, only one response was received from Ngāti Whanaunga. In August 2019, the mana whenua group requested the opportunity to prepare a report with recommendations to MCH. MCH responded to the request advising that an extensive review was not anticipated and advised the group that MCH were willing to discuss any specific concerns relating to the design or the archaeological assessment. There has been no further correspondence from the mana whenua group following the response from MCH.

113.   Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei support and acknowledge that this is a nationally important project. The proposed memorial provides a way for whanau of those lost in the tragedy to reflect and remember their loved ones but also accommodates a wide range of users and interpretations.

114.   Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei and the design team both recognise the site is a treasured piece of whenua which will complement and honour the memorial. The memorial is ideally positioned as a place to celebrate land, sea and sky and is extremely important to the hapu. The design acknowledges and strengthens these connections to the elements. Specifically, three key values have been identified and ingrained in the design:

·        Whānaungatanga (relationship, kinship, sense of family connection)

·        Kaitiakitanga (guardianship)

·        Manaakitanga (hospitality)

115.   The quality of the whenua is maintained with limited ground surface modifications. All temporary effects from construction will be restored on completion. The values of the land will be enhanced by the presence of Te Paerangi Ataata – Sky Song.

116.   ‘Te Paerangi Ataata – Sky Song’ is a title that incorporates both languages and the interpretive material proposed for the memorial is given in both te reo Māori and English.

Consultation results: People who identify as Māori 

117.   There were 46 submissions that were made by people that identified as Māori. There were 16 submissions from the Waitematā Local Board area, 27 from the wider Auckland area and three submissions from outside Auckland.

118.   Overall, 54 per cent of Māori thought the memorial would improve their experience or not change their experience of Dove-Myer Robinson Park, and 39 per cent thought it would worsen their experience. Seven per cent of Māori did not know whether it would affect their experience of the park. Some 59 per cent of Māori thought they would visit more often or not change how often they visited the park. The remaining 41 per cent said they would visit the park less often.

119.   The submissions from Māori were assessed further by the area of residence. The graphs related to this data are summarised in Attachment B.

120.   Māori who said they would have a more positive experience shared the views of Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei and many felt that the proposal added another feature to the park and provided a place of remembrance, while still being sympathetic to the surrounding environment.

121.   There were concerns from Māori who felt they would have a more negative experience that the National Erebus Memorial overwhelmed the area of the park and preferred to see it remain as is. There were also concerns that the significant pohutukawa tree was going to be damaged or removed. The pohutukawa tree will not be removed and all work around the tree must be completed in accordance with best arboricultural practice.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

122.   The construction and ongoing maintenance of the proposed memorial and associated features will be covered by MCH. There will be no financial cost to the local board for the National Erebus Memorial and associated infrastructure. A maintenance agreement will be confirmed prior to the completion of the memorial to ensure the maintenance costs are covered by MCH.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

123.   The following table identifies the risk of the two options; approving the landowner approval application, or declining the landowner approval application for the National Erebus Memorial at Dove-Myer Robinson Park. The risks associated with either option are considered to be high risk.

 

Option 1 – Approve the landowner approval application

Risk description

Mitigation

Risk rating post mitigation

If the landowner approval is granted, those who signed the petition and indicated they would have a more negative experience in the council consultation, may be dissatisfied with the decision.

Ill feeling and protests in the community could also continue and potentially escalate. A memorial that aims to bring people together in loss could have the opposite effect at a local level.

If land owner approval is granted the decision could be judicially challenged and reviewed.

Throughout the process, the council has consulted with relevant specialists who are supportive of the memorial in the park. The proposal also aligns with the park outcomes and values.

As requested by the local board, the views of the public have been sought and the feedback has been considered. The staff understand that not all would appreciate the memorial in this setting but feel that concerns raised have been addressed. For example, visual amenity values will be maintained, there will still be significant lawn area for activities such as picnicking, and the arborists have advised there will be minimal disturbance to the trees. 

The risk of being judicially challenged can be mitigated by the local board ensuring that it carefully considers all of the relevant information put before it before taking a decision. The local board needs to ensure that it considers the views and preferences of those likely to be interested in or affected by the decision, receives views presented during the consultation with an open mind, and gives those views due consideration when taking its decision.

As with any new feature being introduced to park, there will be differing views on how people feel it impacts upon amenity values.

 

If the landowner approval is granted, there will be temporary risks with the construction of the memorial.

All works will need to be completed with significant consideration to the health and safety of park users.

All works on and near any significant trees will need to be completed to best arboriculture practices to ensure there is no detrimental damage to the trees during works.

The contractors must be vigilant and considerate to surrounding park users and the park setting. If correct procedure is followed, there is relatively low risk to the park and its users, during construction.

Option 2 – Decline the landowner approval application

Risk description

Mitigation

Risk rating post mitigation

If landowner approval is not granted, the families of the Erebus victims would have to wait longer for a memorial in another location.

MCH, who have invested considerable time and expense thus far, will have to restart the whole site selection and design process.

Dove-Myer Robinson Park could lose the opportunity to accommodate the National Erebus Memorial which has been designed specifically for this park.

Staff could work with MCH to find an alternative location for a national memorial.

Finding a high-quality Auckland site that provides a peaceful park-like setting, and that is befitting of a national memorial that accommodates the views of locals, will continue to be extremely challenging.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

124.   If the local board approves this application, the applicant will receive land owner approval for the National Erebus Memorial and the associated infrastructure at Dove-Myer Robinson Park. The landowner approval letter will be issued to the applicant with conditions that will mitigate any detrimental effects on the reserve. These include, but are not limited to:

·        a prestart meeting with all relevant specialists;

·        conditions to ensure the temporary construction has minor effects on the reserve and its users;

·        reinstatement conditions following works; and

·        health and safety conditions.

125.   Should land owner approval be granted MCH, the applicant, will need to gain archaeological authority from Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga. Further, the applicant will need to obtain resource consent approval from Auckland Council.

126.   If the local board declines this application, the National Erebus Memorial will not be granted landowner approval at Dove-Myer Robinson Park. MCH would need to restart the entire process of finding an appropriate location and designing a new memorial.


 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

National Erebus Memorial design plans (Under Separate Cover)

 

b

Auckland Council consultation results (Under Separate Cover)

 

c

Auckland Council consultation feedback (Under Separate Cover)

 

d

Save the Sir Dove Myer Robinson Lawn petition (Under Separate Cover)

 

e

Ministry Culture and Heritage - Boffa Miskell site report (Under Separate Cover)

 

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Neda Durdevic - Land Use Advisor

David Barker - Parks & Places Team Leader

Authorisers

Rod Sheridan - General Manager Community Facilities

Mace Ward - General Manager Parks, Sports and Recreation

Trina Thompson - Relationship Manager/Senior Advisor Waitemata Local Board

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 

Governance of Pukekawa / Auckland Domain

File No.: CP2019/19705

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       This report seeks Waitematā Local Board’s approval of the reestablishment of the Auckland Domain Committee and requests that the deputy Chair and two members of that Committee be appointed. 

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Allocation of decision making for Pukekawa / Auckland Domain is split between Waitematā Local Board and the Governing Body.  In the last political term a joint committee was established for Pukekawa / Auckland Domain.  This enabled the two governance arms of Auckland Council to consider issues collaboratively and make joint decisions in relation to Pukekawa / Auckland Domain.

3.       The Governing Body has endorsed the reestablishment of the Auckland Domain Committee based on the same terms of reference as previously established.  It is recommended that the Waitematā Local Board also support the re-establishment of the Auckland Domain Committee based on the terms of reference previously endorsed and re-established by the Governing Body.  It is also recommended that Waitematā Local Board appoint a deputy chair and two members to this committee. 

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a)      Approve the re-establishment of the Auckland Domain Committee in line with the terms of reference outlined in Attachment A

b)      Appoint a Deputy Chair and two members to the Auckland Domain Committee.

 

Horopaki

Context

4.       On 22 August 2013, the Governing Body resolved that decision making for Pukekawa / Auckland Domain (domain) be geographically split, with the Waitematā Local Board (WLB) being allocated decision-making responsibility for the playing fields and three recreational leases (Auckland Bowling Club and tennis clubs), with the balance of decision-making on the domain being allocated to the Governing Body.  This reflected the importance of the sporting facilities to the local communities and the significance and importance of the domain to the whole of the region. 

5.       On 12 November 2019 the Governing Body agreed to continue to support the Auckland Domain Committee, appointed Councillor Desley Simpson as Chair and Councillor Cooper and Stewart as Governing Body members.  While they also indicated Local Board Chair Richard Northey was appointed as deputy chair it is recognized that this is a decision for the WLB to make.

6.       The Independent Māori Statutory Board will appoint two members to the Auckland Domain Committee as they did in the last term.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

7.       Prior to the establishment of the Auckland Domain Committee there were a range of decisions that were difficult to navigate with split governance which required independent decision making.  This included events which affected the whole of domain, proposed sportsfield developments that would have impacts beyond the boundary of the fields, affected party approvals (e.g. for a height in relation to boundary infringements) and master planning.

8.       The Auckland Domain Committee was established in 2015 and since its establishment an events guideline, delegations, Tree Plan and Master Plan have all been agreed.  These collaborative joint decisions have provided clear strategic direction for the operation and development of the oldest park in Auckland. 

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

9.       As a 72 hectare park in the centre of a dense urban environment the domain plays a number of roles in combatting the impacts of global warming.  During the last term of the Auckland Domain Committee a number of initiatives were discussed which, if realised, would enhance the environment and contribute, in a small way, to addressing the effects of climate change.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

10.     Auckland Transport, Watercare Services and Auckland War Memorial Museum have vested and legal interests in the domain as prescribed in the Auckland Domain Act 1987.  Both Auckland Transport and Auckland War Memorial Museum have played an active role in working with the Auckland Domain Committee to carry out their functions.  They have also collaborated on the wider improvement programme for the domain. 

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

Local impacts and local board views

11.     The domain functions as both a park of regional significance and a local park.  The continuation of the Auckland Domain Committee seeks to ensure both of these views are represented. 

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

12.     Auckland Domain is considered of great importance to many iwi in the region. It is a historic site of conflict and peace amongst hapū in the Auckland region.  The name Pukekawa was re-established through the Ngā Mana Whenua o Tāmaki Makaurau Collective Redress Act 2014 which recognised the significance or Auckland’s maunga (mountains) to the 13 iwi of Tāmaki Makaurau that are included in that settlement. 

13.     The previous and proposed Auckland Domain Committee includes two members of the Independent Māori Statutory Board.  Mana whenua are being engaged and will have input to all developments that are proposed for at Pukekawa / Auckland Domain. 

14.     The reestablishment of the Auckland Domain Committee has not been discussed with mana whenua.  This is due to the fact that the subject of this report is about how delegated governance members function and does not propose any changes to the current allocation table and primary governance responsibilities.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

15.     There are no financial implications to the WLB from making this decision.  It is noted that the domain master plan and associated aspirations are not funded and the Waitematā Local Board, last term, made a significant impact through the provision of funds for paths and signage. 

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

16.     There are no substantial risks associated with making this decision. 

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

17.     Once appointed it is anticipated the Auckland Domain Committee will reconvene in February 2020 and meet every quarter.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Terms of reference adopted by the Governing Body November 2019

55

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Jane Aickin - Kaiwhakahaere Te Waka Tai-ranga-whenua

Authorisers

Mace Ward - General Manager Parks, Sports and Recreation

Trina Thompson - Relationship Manager/Senior Advisor Waitemata Local Board

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 

Auckland Transport December 2019 Update

File No.: CP2019/20121

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To provide an update to the Waitematā Local Board on Auckland Transport (AT) operations and activities in their area and to provide a summary and update on their transport funds including the Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF) and Community Safety Fund (CSF).

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       This report covers:

·    a summary of Auckland Transport projects and operations in the local board area

·    a summary of the local board’s Transport Capital Fund and Community Safety Fund

·    a summary of general information items sent to the local board.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a)   receive the Auckland Transport December 2019 report.

 

Horopaki

Context

3.       AT is responsible for all of Auckland’s transport services, excluding state highways. As set out in our Local Board Engagement Plan, we report on a monthly basis to local boards. This monthly reporting commitment acknowledges the important engagement role local boards play within the governance of Auckland Council on behalf of their local communities. 

4.       This report updates the Waitematā Local Board on Auckland Transport (AT) projects and operations in the local board area, it updates the local board on their advocacy and consultations and includes information on the status of the Local Board Transport Capital Fund and Community Safety Fund.

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

6.       The Community Safety Fund is a capital budget established by Auckland Transport for use by local boards to fund local road safety initiatives. The purpose of this fund is to allow elected members to address long-standing local road safety issues that are not regional priorities and are therefore not being addressed by the Auckland Transport programme.


 

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Auckland Transport projects and operations in the local board area

7.       The table below has a general summary of projects and activities of interest to the local board with their current status. Please note that all timings are indicative and are subject to change:

Item

Update

Connected Communities, Great North Road – A coordinated project of improvements to public transport, active transport, freight, deliveries, and on street parking and road safety.

The project team has developed the existing designs incorporating feedback from previous consultations with the local board and wider community. These will be brought to a workshop with the local board at the earliest convenient time. Following engagement with the local board, the team will contact key stakeholders to discuss the proposed designs.

Wellesley Street Bus Improvement Project (formerly Midtown bus route) – Improving how city centre buses operate.

The project team has developed further work on a staged delivery of the Wellesley Street bus improvements project. This still needs to be confirmed by project funders and then developed into a formal programme. An update will be brought to the Waitematā Local Board ahead of public consultation.

Westhaven to City Centre Cycleway - The purpose of the project is to deliver a commuter cycling facility linking Westhaven Drive with Quay Street.

The draft concept design and cost estimate are complete. The estimate is currently under internal review. Public consultation will hopefully take place before Christmas 2019.

Pt Chevalier to Westmere cycleway - A dedicated cycle route along Pt Chevalier Road and Meola Road ending near the Westmere Shops. 

Public consultation started on 20 November and is expected to close on December 20 2019. Following consultation, the project team will bring the results to a local board workshop.

Waitematā Safe Routes project, the two routes open for feedback are Route 1: Surrey Crescent to Garnet Road and Route 2: Richmond Road.

The public feedback report has been published on the AT project website. The concept design is currently being updated with consideration of the feedback received and it is anticipated that the revised design will be presented back to the community in February 2020.

The project team wishes to workshop the design with the local board at a convenient time.

Regarding remedial works in West Lynn village, AT has concluded the consultation for the drainage and footpath remedial works and preferred solutions have been agreed with the Grey Lynn Business Association and other invested stakeholders. The detailed design for those works is underway.

Herne Bay cycling and walking improvements – proposed changes to encourage slower driving speeds and improve routes for people walking and cycling.

The project team updated the local board and the Herne Bay Residents Association of the project’s progress on 25 September 2019. Following this, the project team has now put the physical works tender out to the AT contractor’s panel. The tender closed on 25 November 2019 and AT are looking to start construction in the New Year.

Victoria Street East-West cycleway - dedicated cycle route along Victoria Street West, from the Beaumont Street intersection to the Hobson Street intersection.

The detailed design is progressing. The project team is communicating the project scope to the affected stakeholders. The project team is working together with the CRLL team to ensure minimum disruption during physical works through a coordinated approach. The next steps following consultation on the design are to put tender documents together for procurement of physical works contractor.

Tamaki Drive cycle route (Quay Street to Ngapipi Bridge)

The physical work tender closed on the 21 November 2019. Construction work from Solent Street to Ngapipi Bridge will start January 2020.

The communication between AT’s senior managers and Ports of Auckland are still ongoing to determine a final resolution on the Solent Street intersection

The Strand intersection – road safety improvements to the intersections at Tamaki Drive and Gladstone Road

The project team has completed a response to local board feedback. Public consultation is expected to take place in November and December 2019. 

St Georges Bay Road - pedestrian crossing facility.

Construction of this project has been moved to 2020/2021 financial year to align with planned maintenance work.

Newmarket and Remuera Residential Parking Zone (RPZ)- proposed permit scheme for residents and businesses

AT has started the external consultation period for the Remuera and Newmarket RPZ’s (from 28 of October until 24 November 2019).

Grey Lynn parking scheme extension - proposed extension to the existing parking scheme.

The Grey Lynn Residential Parking zone was implemented in December 2018. The local board passed a resolution requesting to AT re-assess the parking situation in the remaining streets now the parking patterns have normalised.  Occupancy surveys have been completed and results are currently being analysed to establish if new areas need to be included in the current zone.

Parnell East Residential Parking Zone (RPZ) – project to install a residential parking zone and safety improvements on St Stephens Avenue, Lichfield Road and Crescent Road.

Public consultation has closed. We have been through over 400 responses from stakeholders some that required AT to undertake additional investigations. Once these are complete a feedback report will be published.

Wellesley Street and Sale Street – new intersection signals.

External consultation for the intersection traffic signals commenced at the beginning of November and ends on the 8 December 2019. Construction of the project is currently planned to start in March 2020.

Grafton Road – midblock pedestrian signal outside of University of Auckland.

Public consultation has been completed and close-out response will be released shortly. The project is proceeding and AT is still aiming to build the project before University of Auckland semester one 2020 begins.

Princes Street and Eden Crescent intersection - upgrade including raised zebra crossings.

Construction is underway.

Karangahape Road Enhancements Project – streetscape upgrade.

Construction is well underway on the northern side of Karangahape Road between Ponsonby Road and Howe Street. We plan to complete the section up to Hereford by the end November 2019

The area from Howe Street up to the over bridge is now underway with the removal of the streets art works.  Planed completion is end the of Jan 2020.

Construction is well underway on the southern side from Symonds Street to Upper Queen Street. Cycleway separators have been installed.

Please Note:

The project plans to continue with construction during December up to Christmas with the endorsement from the KBA and its directly affected members.  

Project updates and newsletters continue to be circulated to the community by JFC and AT focusing on the design and construction.

Wynyard Quarter street and park upgrades – central construction package.

Work on Daldy Street continues. Lighting is currently being installed.  The footpath on the south side of Gaunt Street is now complete. Work on the north side of Gaunt Street has now begun. Gaunt Street is currently reduced to a single lane with one-way traffic movement from east to west.

Downtown Infrastructure Improvement Programme

This includes:

·    Quay Street Strengthening 

·    Quay Street Enhancement

·    Britomart East

·    Lower Albert

·    Downtown Ferry

·    Waterfront Park

·    Mooring dolphin

·    Galway Street Enhancement

 

Quay Street: (Northern side): Works are progressing well and on time along Quay Street, with the strengthening programme and enhancement works in full swing. Through December the Princess Wharf entrance will intermittently become one lane in and one lane out. This will be accompanied by improved signage, increased monitoring of signal phasing by Auckland Transport Operations Centre and on-site traffic management. The project team are also working closely with Ports of Auckland to ensure that the traffic management can accommodate the additional traffic additions during upcoming cruise visits.

 

Seawall strengthening in the Ferry Basin has seen the deck removed and the seawall exposed. Vertical anchors are now being constructed into existing seawall. This involves a 76 mm hole being cored into the seawall and a stainless steel bar inserted and then grouted in. These vertical anchors strengthen the existing seawall.  Borehole investigation works are on-going just east of the Ferry Building as is micro-piling across the Queens Wharf gates, access will always be maintained. Palisade wall piling continues between Queens and Marsden Wharves with 61 of 102 piles now complete.

 

Quay Street: (Southern Side): Streetscape works continue along the southern side of Quay Street. The new bus stop foundations outside of the PWC building are complete, as are most of the utility trenches.  At lower Queen Street the stormwater connection into the brick stormwater main is complete and works are now progressing down to Commerce Street. There will be some fencing modifications over the next two weeks to the Queen Street pedestrian crossing. Works on the southern side are expected to be completed in March 2020, and by December 2020 on the northern side.

 

Ferry Basin Redevelopment: East-west detours through new ramped section continue. There is a strong presence of traffic management staff to guide people when crossing Quay Street at Lower Albert Street. Please note there are no changes for passengers catching ferries from Pier 3 and Pier 4.

 

Galway Street Upgrade: Works began in mid-October at the top end of Gore Street. Currently works involving trenching and ducting high voltage electricity cables through Galway Street. This will ensure when future upgrades happen the required utilities are already in place. The new shared space will deliver a safer environment for all. It will include an upgraded footpath, easily accessible public space, new trees and additional seating.

 

Up-coming works AT will be looking to maximise the opportunity to undertake significant works in Quay Street during the quiet time over the Christmas period from December 27. These will likely involve a number of road closures and / or lane reductions. The traffic management team is currently working through plans including discussions with affected stakeholders. We expect to have an update in the coming weeks.

 


 

8.       Downtown Infrastructure Improvement Programme, consent updates:

Project Consent

Consent Status

Next Steps

Ferry Basin Redevelopment - Stage 1

Approved

Commence construction

Queens Wharf Mooring Dolphin

Approved – appealed through the Environment Court

Mediation 6 Aug 2019, Hearing date still TBC

Downtown Public Space – Stage 1

Approved

Commence construction (December 2019)

Quay Street Enhancement

Approved

Commence construction

Quay Street Strengthening - Princes Wharf

Approved

Commence construction

Quay Street Strengthening - Ferry Basin

Approved

Commence construction

Quay Street Strengthening - Ferry Building

Lodged, notified

Currently in notification period, Council hearing November 2019, decision expected December 2019

Quay Street Strengthening - Queens Wharf to Marsden Wharf

Approved

Commence construction

Galway Street Enhancement – central block

Approved

Commence construction

Lower Albert St Bus Interchange

Approved

Commence construction

Traffic Control Committee resolutions

9.       Please see Attachment A which outlines decisions made in the Waitematā Local Board area in August, September and October 2019. Auckland Transport's resolution and approval process ensures the most appropriate controls and restrictions are put in place and can be legally enforced.

Community Safety Fund

10.     All local boards have finalised their prioritised lists of projects, received rough orders of cost, and approved the allocation of funds. The programme in total now stands at just under 100 projects.

11.     The table below has a general summary of Waitematā Local Board Community Safety Fund projects with their current status. Please note that all timings are indicative and are subject to change:

Project

Approved funding

Update

Safe Schools Toolbox - Newton Central School 

$615,000

Concepts are at an early stage, meeting with school stakeholders is anticipated prior to Christmas with consultation in early 2020.

Pedestrian Crossings - on West End Road / Fife St by the bus stops next to the West End Lawn Tennis Club

$300,000

Being investigated.

Pedestrian crossings formalised on Lower Domain Drive at Lovers Lane and at Domain Drive

$75,000

Improvements are in design phase, works are being coordinated with the street lighting upgrade.

Pedestrian crossing outside ACG Campus on Davis Cres to Olympic Reserve

$260,000

Pedestrian crossing facility, at investigation stage.

Hopetoun Street Improvements

$200,000

Proposed improvements include a speed table on Hereford Street at its intersection with Hopetoun Street and a raised zebra crossing on Hopetoun Street replacing the existing refuge outside no 7. This is currently being planned for implementation with the maintenance renewal works in early 2020.

Total

$1,450,000

 

 

Local Board Transport Capital Fund

12.     The previous local board had a total allocation of $3,073,725 for the 2016-2019 electoral period. From this sum they approved:

Project Name

Allocation

Status

Additional funds for the Ponsonby Road pedestrian improvement project.

$221,000

Complete.

Upgrading the footpath along the western side of Bourke Street, Newmarket.

$18,500

Complete.

Lighting the Victoria Park Greenway project

$76,800

Complete.

Install two sets of bollards in St Patricks Square

$41,000

Complete.

Greenway connection through Cox’s Bay Reserve to Wharf Road via Bayfield Park

$825,000

Being delivered by Community Facilities.

Current status is that the draft concept option will be shared publicly for consultation purposes.  Once complete, feedback will be used to refine the concept option and advance the recommended concept plan.   

Next steps:  Once consultation is complete and the draft concept plan is refined, a recommended concept plan will be presented to the local board at the next available workshop.

Auckland Domain:

·    connection from the Titoki Street carpark to Football Road footpath.

·    connection from the corner of the Winter Garden through to The Crescent.

·    connection from Centennial Path to Grafton Mews.

·    connection from Parnell Station to Lovers Lane.

 

$198,275

 

 

$160,485

 

 

$88,484

 

$518,215

Being delivered by Community Facilities. Current status: Auckland Council staff have initiated the procurement process for a lead consultant.  Once awarded, the site investigation and design effort will commence.  

Next steps:  The Project Manager will award the contract to a lead consultant and site investigations will begin.   

Western Springs Greenway Project - Motions Road: Option 2

$690,000

Project initiation underway. This includes assigning a project manager to the project and determining the project timeline.

Western Springs Greenway – MOTAT2 walking and cycling connection

$130,000

AT are working with Regional Facilities Auckland in preparation of a funding agreement to allow the transfer of funds to RFA

Newmarket wayfinding and signage enhancements

$50,000

AT are working on a funding agreement with Scentre Group who are delivering the project.

Improvements to wayfinding and signage throughout the Waitematā Local Board

$80,000

Set up processes are complete. Currently awaiting availability of Project Management resource to commence project.

Total

$3,097,759

 

 

13.     The current Local Board has a total allocation of $3,896,643 for the 2019 – 2022 electoral period.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

14.     Auckland Transport are committed to minimising the negative effects that transport operations have on climate change. This includes encouraging emission neutral modes (walking and cycling) and low emission modes (public transport and ride sharing).

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

15.     The impact of the information in this report is confined to Auckland Transport and does not impact on other parts of the Council group.

16.     Any engagement with other parts of the Council group will be carried out on an individual project basis.

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

Local impacts and local board views

17.     The proposed decision of receiving the report has no local, sub-regional or regional impacts.

Local Board Workshops

18.     Auckland Transport attended workshops with the Local Board on 3 September 2019 with an update on the Pt Chevalier Cycleway project and an update on Auckland Transport’s renewals and maintenance programme.

General information items sent to the board:

19.     Please see below for a summary of items sent to the local board for their information or feedback:

Item

Date sent to Board

FYI: Downtown Programme - Seawall Strengthening Video

06/09/2019

Wakefield Street - Proposed bus parking relocation

06/09/2019

CSF: Hopetoun Street Update

09/09/2019

Update: West Lynn village - Footpath and Drainage report

09/09/2019

FYI: St Georges Bay Rd Raised Zebra Crossing

13/09/2019

FYI: Grafton Road - Mid-block crossing

16/09/2019

FYI: Ponsonby Terrace Footpath Renewal

17/09/2019

FYI: Newmarket Bus Lanes Trial

17/09/2019

FYI: Gaunt Street one way

18/09/2019

Update: Tamaki Drive

20/09/2019

FYI: Queen Street P5 Loading Zone

20/09/2019

FYI: Outcome: Newmarket, Grey Lynn, Grafton - Shared Parking Space

15/10/2019

FYI: Hardinge Street - Change of Parking Restrictions

15/10/2019

FYI: Greys Avenue - Raised Zebra Crossing

15/10/2019

FYI: Works notification on Remuera Road

17/10/2019

FYI: Karangahape Road - Trees

17/10/2019

FYI: Franklin Road - P120 Parking Restrictions

17/10/2019

FYI: The Strand Intersections - response to Board feedback

22/10/2019

FYI: SkyCity Convention Centre Building fire

22/10/2019

FYI: Public Consultation on Newmarket and Remuera Residential Parking Zones

23/10/2019

Update: Karangahape Road Enhancement project

25/10/2019

FYI: Customs Street East removal of bus only turn lane

25/10/2019

Westfield Newmarket - External Consultation

29/10/2019

Update: St Patricks Square Bollards

29/10/2019

Outcome: Queen Street P5 Loading Zone

29/10/2019

FYI: Davis Crescent - Footpath

30/10/2019

Outcome: Grafton Road - Mid-block crossing

31/10/2019

FYI: Kent Street - Shared Parking Space

1/11/2019

FYI: Pt Chev cycleway - draft plans

1/11/2019

FYI: Central Crosstown Consultation

4/11/2019

FYI: Tyler Street - Shared Parking Space and Restrictions

5/11/2019

Update: Marmion Street - Footpath

13/11/2019

FYI: Bus priority measures for CRLL works

13/11/2019

FYI: AT's Car Share Policy

15/11/2019

FYI: Wellesley and Sale Street Intersection - Improvements

15/11/2019

FYI: Jervois Road - Taxi Stand

18/11/2019

FYI: Public Consultation on Crosstown services

19/11/2019

Update: Pt Chevalier Cycleway

20/11/2019

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

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

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

21.     The proposed decision of receiving this report has financial implications as outlined in the resolutions, analysis and advice.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

22.     The proposed decision of receiving the report has no risks.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

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

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

August – October Traffic Control Committee Decisions

69

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Trina Thompson - Relationship Manager/Senior Advisor Waitemata Local Board

Authoriser

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 

August 2019 - Traffic Control Committee Decisions

Local Board

Street Name

Suburb

Type of Report

Nature Of Restriction

Committee Decision

Waitematā

Fanshawe Street

Auckland Central

Permanent Traffic and Parking changes Combined

Lane Arrow markings, No Stopping At All Times, Bus Shelter, Bus Stop, Loading Zone, Road Hump, Flush Median, Pedestrian Signal, Shoulder markings, Traffic Island, Pedestrian Crossing

Noted

Waitematā

Lower Hobson Street

Auckland Central

Permanent Traffic and Parking changes

Police Vehicle Only parking

Carried

Waitematā

Gudgeon Street, Hargreaves Street And College Hill

Freemans Bay

Permanent Traffic and Parking changes Combined

No Stopping At All Times, Police Vehicles Only parking, Loading Zone, P30 parking, Keep Clear Zone, Surface Friction Treatment

Carried

Waitematā

Federal Street, Wellesley Street West, Mayoral Drive

Auckland Central

Permanent Traffic and Parking changes Combined

No Right Turn, No Through Traffic, Lane Arrow markings, Shared Path, Shared Zone (Allowing Loading And Motorcycles), No Stopping At All Times, Traffic Signal

Carried

Waitematā

Whitaker Place

Grafton

Permanent Traffic and Parking changes Combined

No Stopping At All Times, Angle parking, Loading Zone, Mobility, Traffic Island, Footpath

Carried

Waitematā

Mahuhu Crescent, Tapora Street, Te Taou Crescent, Quay Street

Auckland Central

Amended Temporary Traffic and Parking changes (Event)

Temporary Traffic and Parking restrictions

Carried

Waitematā

Hobson Street, Federal Street, Mayoral Drive

Auckland Central

Temporary Traffic and Parking changes (Event)

Temporary Traffic and Parking restrictions

Carried

Waitematā

Vincent Street

Auckland Central

Temporary Traffic and Parking changes (Event)

Temporary Traffic and Parking restrictions

Carried

 


 

September

Waitematā

Lower Nelson Street

Auckland Central

Permanent Traffic and Parking changes

No Stopping At All Times, Loading Zone, Car Share parking

Carried

Waitematā

Customs Street West

Auckland Central

Temporary Traffic and Parking changes (Event)

Temporary Traffic and Parking restrictions

Carried

Waitematā

Mercury Lane / Cross Street / Canada Street / Upper Queen Street

Auckland Central

Temporary Traffic and Parking changes (Event)

Temporary Traffic and Parking restrictions

Carried

Waitematā

Parnell Road / Windsor Street / Akaroa Street / Ruskin Street / Denby Street / Gibraltar Crescent

Parnell

Permanent Traffic and Parking changes Combined

No Stopping At All Times, Loading Zone, Small PSV Stand, Tour Coach parking, Bus Stop, Mobility parking, Road Hump, Pedestrian Crossing, Stop control, Flush Median, Edge Line, Removal of Flush Median

Approved with Conditions

Waitematā

Princes Street / Eden Crescent / Shortland Street

Auckland Central

Permanent Traffic and Parking changes Combined

No Stopping At All Times, Angle parking, Pedestrian Crossing, Road Hump, Traffic Island, Stop control, Footpath

Carried

Waitematā

High Street

Auckland Central

Temporary Traffic and Parking changes (Event)

Temporary Traffic and Parking restrictions

Carried

Waitematā

Queen Street / Mayoral Drive

Auckland Central

Temporary Traffic and Parking changes (Event)

Temporary Traffic and Parking restrictions

Carried

Waitematā

Museum Circuit and surrounding streets

Parnell

Temporary Traffic and Parking changes (Event)

Temporary Traffic and Parking restrictions

Carried

 

October

Waitematā

Airedale Street / Queen Street / Rutland Street / Mayoral Drive / Wakefield Street / Greys Avenue

Auckland Central

Temporary Traffic and Parking changes (Event)

Temporary Traffic and Parking restrictions

Carried

Waitematā

Jellicoe Street / Halsey Street

Auckland Central

Temporary Traffic and Parking changes (Event)

Temporary Traffic and Parking restrictions

Withdrawn

Waitematā

Te Taou Crescent

Auckland Central

Temporary Traffic and Parking changes (Event)

Temporary Traffic and Parking restrictions

Carried

Waitematā

High Street

Auckland Central

Permanent Traffic and Parking changes Combined

No Stopping At All Times, Loading Zone, Road Hump, Mobility parking, Footpath, Pedestrian crossing

Carried

Waitematā

Ayr Street / Ayr Slip Lane

Parnell

Permanent Traffic and Parking changes Combined

No Stopping At All Times, Pedestrian Crossing, Road Hump, Traffic Island, Give-Way, Surface Friction Treatment

Carried

Waitematā

Beaumont Street

Auckland Central

Permanent Traffic and Parking changes Combined

No Stopping At All Times, Bus Parking, Stop, Give-Way

Carried

Waitematā

Marmion Street / Queen Street / White Street

Auckland Central

Permanent Traffic and Parking changes Combined

One-Way Road, Prohibited Right Turn, Prohibited Left Turn, Loading Zone, No Stopping At All Times, Traffic Island, Road Hump, Pedestrian Crossing, Footpath

Approved with Conditions

Waitematā

Pollen Street / Crummer Road

Grey Lynn

Permanent Traffic and Parking changes Combined

No Stopping At All Times, Loading Zone, P120

Carried

Waitematā

Hardinge Street

Auckland Central

Temporary Traffic and Parking changes (Works)

Temporary Traffic and Parking restrictions

Carried

Waitematā

Kingston Street / Federal Street

Auckland Central

Permanent Traffic and Parking changes Combined

No Right Turn, Paking Place for Police Only, Shared Vehicle Parking, No Stopping At All Times

Carried

Waitematā

Stanwell Street

Parnell

Temporary Traffic and Parking changes (Works)

Temporary Traffic and Parking restrictions

Carried

Waitematā

Westhaven Drive / Beaumont Street / Jellicoe Street / Halsey Street /  Viaduct Harbour Avenue / Customs Street West / Lower Hobson Street / Quay Street / Tamaki Drive / Ronaki Road

Auckland Central

Temporary Traffic and Parking changes (Event)

Temporary Traffic and Parking restrictions

Carried

Waitematā

Churton Street / Earle Street / Farnham Street

Parnell

Temporary Traffic and Parking changes (Works)

Temporary Traffic and Parking restrictions

Carried

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 

Waitematā Quick Response Round One 2019/2020 grant allocations

File No.: CP2019/19102

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To fund, part-fund, or decline applications received for Waitematā Quick Response Round One 2019/2020.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       This report presents applications received in Waitematā Quick Response Round One 2019/2020 (refer Attachment B).

3.       The Waitematā Local Board adopted the Waitematā Local Grants Programme 2019/2020 on 16 April 2019 (refer Attachment A). The document sets application guidelines for contestable grants submitted to the local board.

4.       The local board has set a total community grants budget of $170,882 for the 2019/2020 financial year. A total of $2,000 was previously allocated from the 2019/2020 community grants budget, to one grant from 2018/2019 Quick Response Round Three (WTM/2019/119). A further $64,000 was allocated in the previous local grant round. This leaves a total of $104,882 to be allocated to two quick response grant rounds and one local grant round in 2019/2020.

5.       Twenty applications were received for Waitematā Quick Response Round One 2019/2020, requesting a total of $64,528.40.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a)      agree to fund, part-fund, or decline each application in Round One of the Waitematā Quick Response Grants 2019/2020 listed in the following table:   

Table One: Waitematā Quick Response Grants 2019/2020 grant applications:

Application ID

Organisation

Main focus

Requesting funding for

Amount requested

Eligibility

QR2020-101

Cantorum Choir

Arts and culture

Towards the development of a website for the Cantorum choir.

$2,500.00

Eligible

QR2020-102

Parnell Community Trust

Community

Towards the Sustainable Urban Living workshops from 7 March to 30 May 2020

$1,226.00

Eligible

QR2020-105

Westhaven Radio Sailing Club

Environment

Towards the cost of an electric outboard motor for the clubs dinghy.

$1,000.00

Eligible

QR2020-106

Aaiotanga Peace Place Charitable Trust

Community

Towards a neighbours day event in Emily Place on 29 March 2020.

$2,840.00

Eligible

QR2020-107

Tardigrade World Limited

Community

Towards a recycling project to take the unsold mugs from the Karangahape Road opportunity shops for use in the local cafes.

$3,000.00

Eligible

QR2020-109

St Mary's College Board of Trustees

Arts and culture

Towards the hire of the Victory Convention Centre for the St Marys Bay College kapahaka event on 2 July 2020.

$2,250.00

Eligible

QR2020-112

St Columba Anglican Church vestry

Community

Towards the restoration of the St Columbra Labyrinth

$3,000.00

Eligible

QR2020-116

New Zealand Japan Society of Auckland Incorporated

Community

Towards costs for the Japanese language night classes at Ellen Melville Centre including wages, venue hire and administration.

$3,000.00

Eligible

QR2020-118

The New Zealand Dance Advancement Trust Company

Arts and culture

Towards artistic costs for the artistic production of "This Fragile Planet" in the Great Hall in the Town Hall between 3 February and 29 February 2020.

$3,000.00

Eligible

QR2020-121

The Auckland Womens Centre Incorporated

Community

Towards a couch and desk chair for the Womens Centre reception.

$1,164.35

Eligible

QR2020-122

Auckland Writers and Readers Festival Charitable Trust

Arts and culture

Towards the costs for "K Road Capers" specifically artists fees on 15 May 2020.

$3,000.00

Eligible

QR2020-123

Ponsonby Business Association Incorporated

Events

Towards the Ponsonby Carols in Western Park on 14th and 21 December 2019.

$2,500.00

Eligible

QR2020-124

Youthline Auckland Charitable Trust

Community

Towards a portion of the volunteer managers wages at Youthline from 16 December 2019 to 30 June 2020.

$3,000.00

Eligible

QR2020-126

The Actors" Program

Arts and culture

Towards writer costs for students to showcase a short film at an Auckland cinema and a theatre production at The Basement Theatre,

$2,500.00

Eligible

QR2020-127

The Auckland Film Society Incorporated

Arts and culture

Towards venue hire to hold six screenings and censorship fees for two fundraising screenings and advertising from March to November 2020.

$3,000.00

Eligible

QR2020-128

Auckland and District Pipe Band Incorporated

Arts and culture

Towards hall hire for the pipe band at Victoria Park main pavilion from 1 January to 30 June 2020.

$1,226.00

Eligible

QR2020-129

Whoa Performing Arts Trust

Arts and culture

Towards the "Tix4Nix" theatre programme for schools and communities from 6 January to 29 March 2020.

$6,750.00

Eligible

QR2020-130

Auckland City Mission

Community

Towards the purchase of a laptop, mobile phone and a desktop computer for the James Liston Emergency Housing Unit.

$2,606.83

Eligible

QR2020-133

The Others Club Limited

Arts and culture

Towards Take the Crown initiative at the Basement Theatre, including
producer, lighting, sound, costume and set designers.

$3,000.00

Eligible

QR2020-134

Asthma New Zealand Incorporated

Community

Towards the "Breathe Easy" Asthma education for the Waitemata Local Board area.

$3,000.00

 

QR2020-135

Hipold D'Souza

Arts and culture

Towards venue hire and production for a  play in the Konkani language

$1,000.00

 

QR2020-137

Social Innovation New Zealand University of Auckland Incorporated

Events

Towards the "Solveathon" a two-day challenge for students to find solutions to global issues on 9 and 10 May 2020.

$2,900.00

Eligible

QR2020-139

Nilam Patel

Arts and culture

Towards the production of a play focusing on the ancient Indian text the Kamasutra, originally written in Sanskrit at the Basement Theatre.

$1,000.00

 

QR2020-140

Grey Lynn Business Association Incorporated

Community

Towards a website upgrade for the Grey Lynn Business Association

$3,000.00

Eligible

QR2020-141

K E Longbottom

Arts and culture

Towards a weekend seminar to support people undertaking creative pursuits, including venue hire and tutor fees, food, marketing and materials.

$1,000.00

Eligible

QR2020-142

Westmere School Board of Trustees

Environment

Towards two closed compost bins for the Westmere School

$565.22

Eligible

QRTP2012-118

The Council of Christians and Muslims (NZ) Incorporated

Events

Towards costs for a community picnic “Peacenic 2020” including a public address system, advertising, waste management and health and safety equipment at the Auckland Domain on 15 March 2020.

$1500

Eligible

Total

 

 

 

$64,528.40

 

 

Horopaki

Context

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

8.       The Auckland Council Community Grants Policy supports each local board to adopt a grants programme.

9.       The local board grants programme sets out:

·        local board priorities

·        lower priorities for funding

·        exclusions

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

·        any additional accountability requirements.

10.     The Waitematā Local Board adopted their grants programme for 2019/2020 on 17 April 2018 and will operate two quick response and two local grants rounds for this financial year. 

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

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

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

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

13.     The local board grants programme aims to respond to Auckland Council’s commitment to address climate change by providing grants to individuals and groups for projects that support and enable community climate action. Community climate action involves reducing or responding to climate change by local residents in a locally relevant way. Local board grants can contribute to expanding climate action by supporting projects that reduce carbon emissions and increase community resilience to climate impacts. Examples of projects include local food production and food waste reduction; decreasing access to single-occupancy transport options, home energy efficiency and community renewable energy generation; local tree planting and streamside revegetation; and education about sustainable lifestyle choices that reduce carbon footprints.

14.     One applicant applying to quick response round one has indicated that their project supports climate change outcomes.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

15.     According to the main focus of the application, each one has received input from a subject matter expert from the relevant department. The main focuses are identified as arts, community, events, sport and recreation, environment or heritage.

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

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

Local impacts and local board views

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

18.     The board is requested to note that section 48 of the Community Grants Policy states; ‘we will also provide feedback to unsuccessful grant applicants about why they have been declined, so they will know what they can do to increase their chances of success next time’.

19.     A summary of each application received through round one of the Waitematā Quick Response 2019/2020 grant round is provided (refer Attachment B).

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

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

21.     Nine applicants applying to quick response round one, have indicated that their project targets Māori or Māori outcomes.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

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

23.     The local board has set a total community grants budget of $170,882 for the 2019/2020 financial year. A total of $2,000 was previously allocated from the 2019/2020 community grants budget, to one grant from 2018/2019 Quick Response Round Three (WTM/2019/119). A further $64,000 was allocated in the previous local grant round. This leaves a total of $104,882 to be allocated to two quick response grant rounds and one local grant round in 2019/2020.

24.     Twenty applications were received for Waitematā Quick Response Round One 2019/2020, requesting a total of $64,528.40.

25.  Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

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

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

27.     Following the Waitematā Local Board allocating funding for round one of the quick response grants, the grants staff will notify the applicants of the local board’s decision.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Waitematā Grant Programme 2019/2020 (Under Separate Cover)

 

b

Waitematā Quick Response Round One 2019/2020 grant applications (Under Separate Cover)

 

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Marion Davies - Grants and Incentives Manager

Authoriser

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Trina Thompson - Relationship Manager/Senior Advisor Waitemata Local Board

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 

Auckland Council's Quarterly Performance Report: Waitematā Local Board for quarter one 2019/2020

File No.: CP2019/20109

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To provide the Waitematā Local Board with an integrated quarterly performance report for quarter one 1 July – 30 September 2019.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       This report includes financial performance, progress against work programmes, key challenges the local board should be aware of and any risks to delivery against the 2019/2020 work programme.

3.       The work programme is produced annually and aligns with the 2017 Waitematā Local Board Plan outcomes.

4.       The key activity updates from this quarter are:

Activity

WP Ref

Update

RAG

(OLI) Ponsonby Park - develop civic park space

3304

This activity is in progress and on track

 

Operational Grant – TAPAC

745

This activity is in progress and on track

 

Arts Space Coordinator

3228

This activity is in progress and on track

 

Cox's Bay to Wharf Rd Greenway - new pathway and bridge renewal

1990

This activity is in progress and on track

 

Grey Lynn Park - develop new changing rooms

2077

This activity is in progress and on track

 

Pt Erin Pool - comprehensive renewal

2218

This activity is in progress and on track

 

Western Springs Lakeside Park - renew and upgrade playground

2245

This activity is in progress and on track

 

Myers Park Caretakers Cottage and shed - renew and restore

2327

This activity is in progress and on track

 

Home Reserve - renew playground

2415

This activity is in progress and on track

 

Auckland Domain – develop pathway connections

3274

This activity is in progress and on track

 

Heard Park - review concept plan for park improvements

3278

This activity is in progress and on track

 

Outhwaite Park - renew playground and adjacent carpark

3283

This activity is in progress and on track

 

Waitematā - Western Springs native bush restoration plan

3787

This activity is in progress and on track

 

Te Wai Ōrea restoration plan

650

This activity is in progress and on track

 

Additional hours to network standard: Central Library - Waitematā

930

This activity is in progress and on track

 

 

5.       All operating departments with agreed work programmes have provided a quarterly update against their work programme delivery (Attachment A).

6.       Most activities are reported with a status of green (on track), amber (some risk or issues which are being managed) or grey (cancelled, deferred or merged).

7.       There are no activities which have been reported this quarter with a red status (behind delivery, significant risk).

8.       The Community Facilities three-year work programme now contains the carry forwards from the last financial year and is recommended for adoption (Attachment C).

9.       The approved Community Facilities 2019/2020 work programme and 2020-2022 indicative work programme includes projects identified as part of the Risk Adjusted Programme (RAP).  These are projects that the Community Facilities delivery team will progress, where possible, in advance of the programmed delivery year. 

10.     Since approval of the local work programmes in June 2019 investigation and design (including forecasting of delivery) has commenced.  Two projects have been brought forward and are part of the risk adjusted programme.  They are as follows:

·     Studio One – Art Station – renew buildings (ID 2500)

·     Grey Lynn Library – refurbish facility (ID 2048)

11.     The financial performance report compared to budget 2019/2020 is set out in Attachment B.

12.     Overall, the net operational financial performance of the board is tracking close to the revised year to date budget (98 per cent). Revenue is slightly unfavourable to budget for the year to date but is likely to be on target for the full financial year.

13.     From the local board’s Locally Driven Initiatives (LDI) funding, most projects are underway and on track to be completed during the year.  Capital projects underway or completed include the Parnell Pools comprehensive upgrade, Western Park boardwalk and paving renewals, Albert Park Cottage renewals, and changing room and toilet development at Grey Lynn Park.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a)      receive the performance report for quarter one ending 30 September 2019.

b)      note that the Community Facility 2019/2020 work programme and 2020-2022 indicative work programme has been updated to reflect financial deferrals as part of the Annual Plan process as shown in Attachment C.

c)      approve the amendment to the Community Facilities 2019/2020 work programme and 2020-2022 indicative work programme to add the following projects to the Risk Adjusted Programme:

-     SharePoint ID 2500 Studio One – Art Station – renew buildings

-     SharePoint ID 2408 Grey Lynn Library – refurbish facility

 

 

Horopaki

Context

14.     The Waitematā Local Board has an approved 2018/2019 work programme for the following operating departments:

·        Arts, Community and Events

·        ATEED

·        Community Facilities: Build Maintain Renew

·        Community Services: Service, Strategy and Integration

·        External Partnerships

·        Infrastructure and Environmental Services

·        Libraries and Information

·        Parks, Sport and Recreation

·        Community Leases

15.     Work programmes are produced annually, to meet the Waitematā Local Board outcomes identified in the three-year 2017 Waitematā Local Board Plan. The local board plan outcomes are:

·        Outcome 1: Inclusive communities that are vibrant, healthy and connected

·        Outcome 2: Attractive and versatile public places that meet our communities’ needs

·        Outcome 3: The natural environment is valued, protected and enhanced

·        Outcome 4: A high-quality built environment that embraces our heritage

·        Outcome 5: An accessible, connected and safe transport network with well-designed streets

·        Outcome 6: An innovative, productive and resilient local economy.

16.     The graph below shows how the work programme activities meet local board plan outcomes. Activities that are not part of the approved work programme but contribute towards the local board outcomes, such as advocacy by the local board and projects funded by the transport capital fund, are not captured in this graph.

Graph 1: Work programme activities by outcome

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Local Board Work Programme Snapshot

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

 

Graph 2: Work programme by RAG status

 

18.     The graph below shows the activity status of activities which shows the stage of the activity in each departments the work programmes. The number of activity lines differ by department as approved in the local board work programmes. 

Graph 3: Work programme by activity status and department

 


 

Key activity updates from quarter one

19.     Updates for the following key activities for quarter one is as follows:

·    3304 (OLI) Ponsonby Park - develop civic park space

The delivery of the detailed business case remains on track and a resolution from the Finance and Performance Committee has approved the allocation of $5.5m of funding from the sale of 200 Victoria Street West to the project, subject to statutory processes. The detailed business case has progressed and the establishment of the Ponsonby Park Project Control Steering Group (PCSG) and a workshop with the local board planned by the end of 2019.  Next steps include progressing the detailed business case against the agreed timeline, including refinement of the Landlab concept plans and options analysis. PCSG meetings will be ongoing with collaborative refinement of two concept designs.

·    745 Operational Grant – TAPAC

In Q1, TAPAC had 52,838 visitors and holiday participation was up 13 per cent from 2018. The 10th Short + Sweet Festival featured 27 dance groups and 24 theatre groups with most shows sold out. TAPAC hosted bilingual puppets Matariki Glow Show and circus showcases from React Studios and The Earnest Fools. Fundraising shows from The Improv Bandits, Phoenix Bellydance, Tim Bray Theatre supported community causes while Proudly Asian Theatre’s free performance of Fresh off the Page by Renee Liang, explored bullying in the medical industry. Move: Create: Perform, a ten-week outreach programme for low-decile schools was launched.

·    3228 Arts Space Coordinator

At a workshop in Q1, staff proposed an Expression of Interest process to seek proposals from creatives on how best to set up and deliver the defined outcomes. The team at Monster Valley Ltd were successful in the assessment process and a services agreement will be finalised during Q2 when preliminary work will commence.

·    1990 Cox's Bay to Wharf Rd Greenway - new pathway and bridge renewal

The draft concept option will be shared publicly for consultation purposes over October 2019.  Once complete, feedback will be used to refine the concept option and advance the recommended concept plan.  A recommended concept plan will then be presented to the local board at the next available workshop.

·    2077 Grey Lynn Park - develop new changing rooms

Resource consent and building consent has been granted. Detailed design and preparation of Tender Documentation is due to be completed end of July 2019. Tendering for physical works will then occur with physical works planned to start following completion of Richmond Rover Rugby League winter season (October 2019).

·    2218 Pt Erin Pool - comprehensive renewal

Final design and scope of works is being undertaken in consultation with Iwi. The work is programmed and delivery of initial maintenance works to be carried out before opening of December 2019 season.  The final design will be presented to local board for approval.

·    2245 Western Springs Lakeside Park - renew and upgrade playground

The final concept has been approved by the local board. Detailed design and consent application are being finalised for lodgement by end of October 2019.  Project timelines have been moved to allow for construction after Pasifika Festival in March 2020.

·    2327 Myers Park Caretakers Cottage and shed - renew and restore

Consultants are currently being appointed (heritage architect, electrical and structural engineer, arborist, archaeologist).  The next step is to proceed onto detailed design. Once design is resolved, council leasing team will progress with putting out an expression of interest to potential user groups.

·    2415 Home Reserve - renew playground

The concept design has been finalised and approved by the local board. Detailed design is underway and a consent application is being prepared. Next steps include: Complete design and consent application for lodgement by end of October 2019. Project completion date is estimated at end of May 2020.

·    3274 Auckland Domain – develop pathway connections

Auckland Council staff have initiated the procurement process for a lead consultant. Once awarded, the site investigation and design effort will commence.  The Project Manager will award the contract to a lead consultant and site investigations will begin.

·    3278 Heard Park - review concept plan for park improvements

The project is progressing as planned.

·    3283 Outhwaite Park - renew playground and adjacent carpark

The developed design for carpark widening to meet safe parking and pedestrian access requirements has been completed while retaining protection of heritage tree. The next steps include completing the detailed design for consent purposes.

·    3787 Waitematā - Western Springs native bush restoration plan

Resource consent was approved by the Environmental Court on the 27 September 2019 with one of the conditions being that a Community Liaison Group be set up with representatives from the consent holder, community and stakeholders.  The planning for the project including requests for various cost estimates is already underway with physical on site works including pine removal planned for April - May 2020.

·    650 Te Wai Ōrea restoration plan

Procurement is complete for this project. The draft Western Springs Lakeside Te Wai Ōrea Park Development Plan finalisation is expected to be adopted by the local board in February 2020. The contractor will start the riparian restoration plan now for the riparian margins of the lake and wetland. Healthy Waters are funding the restoration of the filter lake, which provides sediment control, to complement this local board project. A community planting day is scheduled for 20 June 2020.

·    930 Additional hours to network standard: Central Library - Waitematā

Due to the extra hours, the Central City Library continues its outreach to underserved communities. We have been focussing on the LGBTIQ community to promote a sense of belonging and connection. Through engagement with customers earlier in the year, the library discovered that there is a lack of opportunities for socialising in queer friendly, sober spaces in Auckland. In order to meet this need, the library devised the event “Speed Dating for Queer Friendships", held on a Sunday, in which participants gathered to build new platonic relationships with one another. The library provided activities like bingo and quick-fire questions, some kai for sharing, and refreshed their LGBTIQ collections to encourage new memberships and borrowing. The event was well attended from people across generations and received positive feedback on social media that it was a “beautiful initiative – I hope there will be more in the future!”.

Activities with some risk

20.     The following work programme activities have been identified by operating departments as having some risk (amber status):

·    3284 St Stephens Cemetery - renew walkway

The project is on hold while awaiting further decisions as the renewal of paths is opposed by Heritage New Zealand and Council Heritage. The current budget allocation is insufficient for the required investigation and redesign. Initial scoping for the renewal of the footpath is underway. An investigation and design phase will determine the physical works required including any potential storm water solutions. Scope of works will be presented to the local board at a workshop for feedback and input

·    3729 Olympic Pool - replace main pool sparge line

A seismic report being discussed to determine the future of the facility and funding required for remedial works. Sauna and steam rooms to be relocated and existing bleachers to be repaired.

·    3745 Waitematā - Parks Improvement Projects – LDI

New works approved by the local board in December 2017:

§ Domain Signage - improve connectivity between the Domain and Parnell Rail Station: Handed over to the Domain team to deliver.

§ 254 Ponsonby Road - notice board signage: Liquor King and Panuku are no longer in support of the new signage and have requested the original noticeboard remain with no alterations. Compiling letter from Panuku to local board and community group.

§ 70-74 Wellington Street: Local Board increased scope in May 2018. Costs confirmed, $3,000 additional. In delivery June/July.

§ 4 Auckland Women's Centre - new signage: Signage installed and project complete. Kelmarna Community Gardens - redevelop entrance way.

§ Pollinator pathways Status: Costings estimate has been supplied by non Full Facilities Management contractor and supplied to Operational Management and Maintenance for review.

·    3755 Highwic House - renew roads and car parks

Delay due to consent requirements and capacity within Heritage New Zealand - project now progressing. Ongoing delays due to Heritage New Zealand requirement for investigation into historical pavement types and authority and consenting requirements to carry out archaeological investigation.  The pavement renewal options for paths, vehicle accessways and the carpark were agreed with Heritage New Zealand and Council's built heritage team at a meeting held on 24th September 2019.  A Heritage New Zealand appointed Archaeologist is preparing an Assessment of Effects in order to obtain an Authority to Modify and Resource Consent for the pavement renewal works, which is scheduled for implementation in February/March 2020.

·    3757 Albert Park - reinstate Zig Zag track FY17

All of the necessary consents are in place including engineering and resource consent, Heritage New Zealand Authority to modify and iwi approval.  A new budget is required for implementation in 2020 as the current budget allocation has been used to complete the Albert Park central desire line path which was consented in conjunction with the Zig Zag track project.

·    3765 Waitematā - renew utilities and furniture FY17

The renewal of the water fountains and signage is on hold pending final adoption of Western Springs Te Wai Ōrea Park Development Plan.  Draft renewal designs to be presented to the local board for approval in March 2020.

·    3479 Bayfield Park; 10 West End Road, Herne Bay: Renewal and variation Herne Bay Ponsonby Racquets Club Inc (Lease)

The lease project is dependent on the outcome of discussions between Parks, Sports and Recreation and the group regarding lease occupation and lease expiry date. This may result in requiring a variation to the lease expiry date.

Activities with significant issues

21.     There are no work programme activities identified as having significant risk for this quarter.

Activities on hold

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

·        3284 St Stephens Cemetery - renew walkway (amber status)

·        3479 Bayfield Park; 10 West End Road, Herne Bay: Renewal and variation Herne Bay Ponsonby Racquets Club Inc (amber status)

Changes to the local board work programme

Deferred activities

23.     The Good Citizens Awards – Waitematā (327) is deferred as it is held every second financial year and was held last financial year.  There is no LDI funding associated with this activity for this financial year.

Cancelled activities

24.     Western Springs - Develop Seddon Fields Greenway (3628) has been cancelled as the local board resolved to fund the greenway through the MOTAT driveway.  The funding is from the transport capital fund and was not allocated for the Seddon Fields Greenway.

Activities merged with other activities for delivery

25.     No activities have been merged with other activities for efficient delivery in this quarter.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

26.     Receiving performance monitoring reports will not result in any identifiable changes to greenhouse gas emissions.

27.     Work programmes were approved in June 2019 and delivery is already underway. Should significant changes to any projects be required, climate impacts will be assessed as part of the relevant reporting requirements.

28.     The recommendations on amendments to timelines in the Community Facilities work programmes are unlikely to have climate impacts.

29.     The local board is currently investing in a number of sustainability projects, which aim to build awareness around individual carbon emissions, and changing behaviour at a local level. These include:

·        184 Community-led placemaking: Waitematā gardens, food and sustainability

·        544 Waitematā Sustainability Kick Start Programme

·        3279 Ngahere (Urban Forest) Strategy - Waitematā Action Plan Delivery FY19/20

·        3281 Waitematā - Urban Forest Restoration

·        3787 Waitematā - Western Springs native bush restoration plan

·        458 Low Carbon Lifestyles

·        459 Waitematā Low Carbon Network

·        460 Low Carbon Multi-Unit Dwellings

·        470 Low Carbon Schools

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

30.     When developing the work programmes council group impacts and views are presented to the boards.

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

Local impacts and local board views

31.     This report informs the Waitematā Local Board of the performance for the quarter ending 30 September 2019.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

32.     Several key projects set out in this report have involved direct engagement with iwi and the projects themselves have been refined as a result of this engagement.  For example, the Western Springs Te Wai Ōrea Development Plan involved consultation with iwi for direction and refinement.

33.     The Waitematā Local Board will continue to ensure mana whenua have input into local board projects and that projects are refined in response to this valued input.

34.     The Waitematā Local Board supports the use of traditional iwi names and dual names for public spaces as a standard approach to Māori responsiveness and to reflect the history of the local board area and this will be reflected in the outcomes of Te Kete Rukuruku and for other naming opportunities.

35.     Mana whenua customary practices continue to be embedded into the opening events for the local board’s projects.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

36.     There are no financial implications associated with this report.

Financial Performance

37.     Operating expenditure relating to Asset Based Services (ABS) is above revised budget by $628,000 for the year to date, while the LDI operational projects are currently $295,000 below revised budget.  This is due to a variety of projects yet to draw down on budget allocations. 

38.     Capital spend of $1.3 million represents investments in the Grey Lynn Community Centre comprehensive renewal, Central Library roof renewals, Central Library boiler renewal and development of pathways at Symonds Street Cemetery. The local board has also seen progress on projects from their discretionary LDI capital fund.

39.     The complete Waitemata Local Board Financial Performance report can be found in Appendix B.

Revised Budget

40.     For quarterly reporting purposes, annual plan budgets are revised to reflect changes in timing of delivery for individual projects.

41.     Projects that were still in progress at 30 June 2019 have had their remaining required budget carried forward to the current or future financial years to fund the remaining works.

42.     If a multi-year capital project was completed earlier than anticipated, the annual plan budget is reduced or brought forward to 30 June 2019 to reflect early completion.

43.     Consideration is also given to the status of current capital projects and where required budgets are re-phased in whole or part to outer years to reflect current timelines for delivery.

44.     The net budgetary impact of these changes is reflected in the revised budget for the board.

45.     The Community Facilities Build Maintain Renew work programme financial allocations have been updated in accordance with the carry forwards (refer attachment C). A point to note is as follows:

·        SharePoint ID 1990 project ‘Cox's Bay to Wharf Rd Greenway - renew bridge and pathway’ includes a funding deferral into FY2019/2020 and FY2020/2021.  This is due to a delay in initiating public consultation on the concept options. Funding of $296,462 has been deferred into FY2019/2020 and $663,400 has been deferred into FY2020/2021. This is not expected to impact delivery at this stage.

Risk Adjusted Projects (RAP)

46.     The approved Community Facilities 2019/2020 work programme and 2020-2022 indicative work programme includes projects identified as part of the Risk Adjusted Programme (RAP).  These are projects that the Community Facilities delivery team will progress, if possible, in advance of the programmed delivery year. This flexibility in delivery timing will help to achieve 100 per cent financial delivery for the 2019/2020 financial year, by ensuring that if projects intended for delivery in the 2019/2020 financial year are delayed due to unforeseen circumstances, that other projects can be progressed while the causes for delays are addressed.

47.     Since approval of the local work programmes in June 2019 investigation and design (including forecasting of delivery) has commenced. As a result, it has become apparent that some projects that had been included for delivery in the 2019/2020 financial year may not be able to be progressed as quickly as anticipated.  Reasons for delays include matters such consenting, heritage items identified, and consultation requirements.

48.     Therefore, in order to enable 100 per cent delivery to budget Community Facilities request approval to add the following two projects to the risk adjusted programme for earlier delivery:

·        SharePoint ID 2500 Studio One – Art Station – renew buildings

·        SharePoint ID 2408 Grey Lynn Library – refurbish facility

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

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

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

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

51.     The local board will receive the next performance update following the end of quarter two, December 2020.

 

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Work programme update

91

b

Financial Performance Report

115

c

Updated Community Facilities BMR Work Programme 19-22

121

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Simon  Tattersfield - Senior Local Board Advisor - Waitemata

Authorisers

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Trina Thompson - Relationship Manager/Senior Advisor Waitemata Local Board

 



Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 



Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 


 


 


 


 



Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 

Annual Budget 2020/2021 consultation

File No.: CP2019/19580

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To approve local content and supporting information for consultation as part of the Annual Budget 2020/2021 process, along with a local engagement event.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       For each financial year, Auckland Council must have a local board agreement that is agreed for each local board area, between the Governing Body and the local board.

3.       Annual Budget 2020/2021 consultation will take place from 21 February to 22 March 2020. Consultation on the proposed content of each local board agreement which sets out the priorities for the next financial year must be included as part of that consultation.

4.       This report seeks approval from local boards on the local content and supporting information for consultation. It also seeks approval of the Have Your Say event that will be held in their local board area during the consultation period, to give Aucklanders an opportunity to provide face-to-face feedback.

5.       The Governing Body and local boards will approve regional and local items respectively for consultation by 13 December 2019. The regional and local consultation items will then be incorporated into the Annual Budget consultation document and supporting information, which will be adopted by the Governing Body on 12 February 2020.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a)      approve Attachment A local content for consultation and Attachment B local supporting information for consultation.

b)      delegate authority to the local board chairperson to approve any final changes required to the local content and supporting information for the Waitematā Local Board for the Annual Budget 2020/2021 consultation, including online consultation content.

c)      approve the following Have Your Say event in the local board area during the Annual Budget 2020/2021 consultation period:

i)        Hearing style event, Tuesday 3 March 2020 at 4.00pm at the Waitematā Local Board Office, 52 Swanson Street, Auckland

d)      delegate authority to the local board chairperson to approve any final changes required to the Have Your Say event.

e)      delegate to the following elected members and staff the power and responsibility to hear from the public through ‘spoken (or New Zealand sign language) interaction’ in relation to the local board agreement at the council’s public engagement events, during the consultation period for the Annual Budget 2020/2021:

i)        local board members and chairperson

ii)       General Manager Local Board Services, Local Board Relationship Manager, Local Board Senior Advisor, Local Board Advisor, Local Board Engagement Advisor

iii)      any additional staff approved by the General Manager Local Board Services or the Group Chief Financial Officer.

 

Horopaki

Context

6.       For each financial year, Auckland Council must have a local board agreement for each local board area, that is agreed between the Governing Body and the local board.

7.       Local board agreements set out (among other things) how the council will, in the year to which the agreement relates, reflect the priorities and preferences in the local board’s plan in respect of the local activities to be provided in the local board area.

8.       The proposed content of each local board agreement must be included in the Annual Budget 2020/2021 consultation document.

9.       Public consultation on the budget will take place from 21 February to 22 March 2020.

10.     Aucklanders will be able to provide feedback during the consultation process through a variety of channels which include face-to-face (verbal), written and social media.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

11.     Local boards held workshops during November 2019 to determine their priorities for their 2020/2021 local board agreement. Local boards are now requested to approve their local content and supporting information for consultation, as per Attachments A and B.

12.     During the document production stage, if changes to the local content and supporting information are identified, these will be provided to the local board chairperson to approve.

13.     Aucklanders who wish to have their views on the proposed content of the local board agreement and Annual Budget 2020/2021 considered by Auckland Council should be provided a reasonable opportunity to present those views in a manner and format that is appropriate to the preferences and needs of those persons, including face-to-face.

14.     The council provides for this through its ‘Have Your Say’ events where Aucklanders can have a face-to-face dialogue with elected members or other council representatives with an appropriate delegation. The Have Your Say event recommended to be held in the Waitematā Local Board area is:

i)        hearing style event, Tuesday 3 March 2020 at 4.00pm at the Waitematā Local Board Office, 52 Swanson Street, Auckland

15.     The consultation period does not begin for a couple of months. If circumstances change between now and the consultation period and any change to the approved Have Your Say event is required, these will be delegated to the local board chairperson to approve.

16.     Should a proposal requiring an amendment to the council’s Long-term Plan (10-year Budget) be identified during the Annual Budget 2020/2021 process, this would necessitate use of the special consultative procedure. Where an amendment to the 10-year Budget is being consulted on at the same time as consultation on the Annual Budget, the Local Government Act 2002 requires the council to use the special consultative procedure in relation to both matters.

17.     The special consultative procedure requires the council to provide an opportunity for Aucklanders to present their views to the council in a manner that enables ‘spoken (or New Zealand sign language) interaction’ between the person and the council’s decision-makers or their official delegates. The recommended Have Your Say events, along with the recommended delegation, provides for this spoken interaction.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

18.     The decision to consult is procedural in nature and the small scale of the Have Your Say events mean any climate impacts will be negligible. These decisions are unlikely to result in any identifiable changes to greenhouse gas emissions. The effects of climate change will not impact the decisions.

19.     However, where practicable, events proposed will be in locations accessible by public transport, to reduce car travel but also increase the opportunities for attendance.  

20.     Some of the proposed initiatives or projects included in the consultation content may have climate impacts. The climate impacts of any initiatives or projects Auckland Council chooses to progress with as a result of this consultation will be assessed as part of the relevant reporting requirements. 

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

21.     The Annual Budget 2020/2021 is an Auckland Council group document and will include budgets at a consolidated group level.

22.     Consultation items and updates to budgets to reflect decisions and new information may include items from across the group.

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

Local impacts and local board views

23.     Local boards will have further opportunities to provide information and views as the council progresses through the Annual Budget 2020/2021 process.

24.     Aucklanders will have the opportunity to give feedback on regional and local proposals contained in the budget. All feedback received from submitters residing in the local board area will be analysed by staff and made available for consideration by the board, prior to finalising their local board agreement.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

25.     Many local board decisions are of importance to and impact on Māori. Local board agreements and the Annual Budget are important tools that enable and can demonstrate the council’s responsiveness to Māori. Local board plans, which were adopted in September and October of 2017, form the basis for local priorities.

26.     The approach to Māori engagement for the Annual Budget 2020/2021 will be finalised once consultation topics are confirmed, including development of bespoke materials subject to interest level of topics and confirmation of budget.

27.     Regionally supported local Māori engagement in the South and West will be provided subject to interest level of topics and confirmation of budget; this will be integrated with local board plan pre-engagement.

28.     There is a need to continue to build local board relationships with iwi and the wider Māori community. Ongoing conversations will assist local boards and Māori to understand each other’s priorities and issues. This in turn, can influence and encourage Māori participation in the council’s decision-making processes.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

29.     Event associated costs include venue hire, where council premises cannot be utilised, and catering.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

30.     Local boards must approve their local consultation content and supporting information by 13 December 2019 in order for it to be formatted and reviewed in time to be incorporated into the Annual Budget 2020/2021 consultation document and supporting information.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

31.     The Governing Body will approve the consultation document, supporting information and consultation process for the Annual Budget 2020/2021 on 12 February 2020.

32.     Following consultation, the Governing Body and local boards will make decisions on the budget and local board agreements respectively.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Local content for consultation

139

b

Local supporting information for consultation

141

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Beth Corlett - Advisor Plans & Programmes

Authorisers

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Trina Thompson - Relationship Manager/Senior Advisor Waitemata Local Board

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 


 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 

Local board governance work management for the 2019-2022 triennium

File No.: CP2019/19048

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To outline the options for efficiently and effectively managing the governance work of the Waitematā Local Board for 2019-2022 triennium.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       At the end of each triennium the Local Board Services (LBS) department delivers a review of local board work practices, including the organisational support they require and how well they support the boards in their governance role. The 2016-2019 triennium review gathered feedback from local board members, and staff from LBS and other council departments and Council-controlled Organisations (CCOs).

3.       In response to the review, this report outlines a recommended baseline working practice for local boards to manage their governance workload as follows:

·   maintain a key focus on annual work programmes and their implementation through quarterly reporting and regular workshops with the whole local board, with decisions made at business meetings

·   appoint nominated local board members who will be consulted on landowner consents and events, and who will provide feedback on liquor licences and resource consents

·   appoint nominated local board members to external organisations.

4.       These practices support the local board to undertake their governance role in an efficient and effective way, reflect the priority work of the local board and help the organisation focus its resources. Some of these practices require a decision of the local board, such as specific appointments of local board members, and separate reports cover these recommendations and associated advice.

5.       Local boards are also able to identify topic area leads who would act as a champion with the local board on specific topic areas. Leads would focus on work programme activities/ projects within their topic areas and understanding relevant community needs and preferences enabling other members to focus their time on other parts of the local board’s workload.

6.       The review feedback suggests the following advantages for having a full board involved in direction-setting discussions on issues, rather than identifying topic area leads:

·   staff are confident that the direction is the view of the whole board rather than one member

·   knowledge and information is retained by the full local board rather than one member

·   discussions with staff are less likely to enter into management or operational level detail

·   it avoids inefficient duplication, when conversations are held between staff and a lead, and then repeated with the full local board.

7.       The feedback from the review highlighted that if a local board does appoint topic area leads, the risks should be mitigated by providing a clear scope for that role and ensuring it does not lead to inefficiency or adversely affect staff receiving clear direction from the full local board.

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a)      endorse the following approach to effectively and efficiently manage the governance work of the local board for the 2019-2022 triennium:

i)        maintain a key focus on annual work programmes and their implementation through quarterly reporting and regular workshops with the whole local board, with decisions made at business meetings

ii)       appoint nominated local board members who will be consulted on landowner consents and events, and who will provide feedback on liquor licences and resource consents

iii)      appoint nominated local board members to external organisations.

 

 

Horopaki

Context

8.       The governance role of an elected member is to:

·   set direction and policy

·   set priorities

·   make significant decisions

·   test advice

·   monitor performance and risk

·   connect with and represent the community

·   be accountable to the public.

9.       At the end of each triennium the Local Board Services (LBS) department undertakes a review of the work practices of, and organisational support provided for, local boards and how this supports them in their governance role. Previous reviews have noted the progress the organisation has made in supporting the governance role of local boards over the past nine years. Improved support and delivery from the organisation have enabled local board members’ time to be used in a more effective and efficient manner as the governance model has matured.

10.     During the 2016-2019 triennium review, feedback was gathered from local board members and staff from LBS and other council departments and council-controlled organisations (CCOs) who work with local boards.

11.     Key themes from local board members related to having topic area leads. Both positives and negatives were identified.

12.     Key themes from staff were that clear direction is given from the full local board and local board members operate at the governance level. Staff identified both positive and negatives aspects of having topic area leads.

13.     The findings from the review have informed the content of this report.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Work practices supporting the governance role of local boards (recommended approach)

14.     There are established work practices in place which support the governance role of local boards as follows:

·   Local boards adopt an annual work programme each June for implementation by the council organisation in the next financial year (July-June). Local boards maintain a key focus on these annual work programmes and their implementation through quarterly reporting and regular workshops with the whole local board, with decisions made at business meetings.

·   Local boards appoint a nominated local board member who will be consulted on landowner consents and events by staff carrying out their delegations. Local boards can also appoint a nominated local board member to provide feedback and attend hearings on liquor licences and notified resource consents to ensure that local board views are taken into account in these timebound processes. These appointments are made via a separate report.

·   Local boards appoint nominated local board members to external organisations (via separate report) to exercise their role in the external organisation as per the relevant constitution on behalf of the local board.

15.     Together these practices constitute the recommended approach for managing the governance work of the local board for the 2019-2022 triennium, reflect the priority work of the local board and are the focus of the organisation’s staff and resources.

16.     This approach allows all members to have an overview and collective understanding of work programme matters, and for the whole local board to be able to provide direction to staff and track performance and delivery throughout the financial year. It also enables collective discussions that utilise individual member’s skills and knowledge and ensures elected member and staff time are used effectively and efficiently.

17.     Transparency to the public is ensured by local board decisions occurring through the formal business meeting process with associated standing orders.

Optional additional practice: Topic area leads (not recommended)

18.     An optional addition to the recommended baseline working approach is that the local board identifies topic area leads. Leads would:

·   act as a champion for the topic area in full local board conversations

·   focus on work programme activities/ projects within their topic area

·   maintain relationships with key stakeholders

·   understand relevant community needs and preferences.

19.     Leads may also:

·   be appointed as the nominated local board member to provide feedback on behalf of the local board on relevant matters (e.g. landowner consents) and appointed to related external organisations

·   undertake learning and development opportunities and attend conferences (using their individual development budget provided as part of the Kura Kāwana development programme) relevant to the topic area

·   highlight relevant issues and emerging priorities during local board plan and work programme development

·   act as a key contact for community groups and members of the public on the topic area.

20.     Topic area leads would enable individual local board members to use existing or build new knowledge and expertise in the topic area and enable other members to focus their time on other parts of the governance workload.

21.     Should the local board identify topic area leads, there are the following risks to consider:

·   a member may provide direction or views which do not reflect those of the full local board

·   staff may seek direction from a topic area lead instead of the full local board, or seek direction from a topic area lead prior to the full local board, resulting in duplication of work

·   key knowledge and information on a topic may be retained with the topic area lead and not shared with the whole local board

·   a topic area lead may enter into discussions at the management or operational level if meeting regularly with staff without a clear governance purpose for the discussion.

22.     These risks can be addressed by:

·   using the workshop process as the mechanism for all local board members to receive updates and provide governance direction on approved work programme projects

·   clarifying the limited resources available to any topic area lead.

23.     Staff resourcing is focussed on work programme development and delivery, along with advice to support workshops and business meetings. Topic area leads can be supported by staff to undertake the following responsibilities:

·   when issues arise at a full local board workshop, the lead can be directed to meet with staff on that issue and explore solutions; staff would report back to the full local board for direction, and the lead can assist with explanation and support during that discussion

·   develop local board feedback on regional policies, plans and strategies relevant to the topic area, for full local board approval

·   respond to constituent enquiries relevant to the topic area

·   report back to the local board at workshops, and publicly via board member reports at business meetings, on the activities undertaken as the topic area lead.

24.     If a local board does want to appoint topic area leads, it may wish to consider identifying alternates. The role of the alternate would be to support the topic area lead in their responsibilities and undertake any roles the lead has been formally appointed by the whole board when the lead is unavailable. Having an alternate means that the information, knowledge, skills and workload can be shared by more than one member, but it could also lead to confusion between the two roles where the alternate acts as a co-lead.

Waitematā Topic Area Lead Options:

 

25.     If the local board decides to develop topic area leads in additional to the recommended baseline working approach the following options outline possible topic areas for consideration.

 

Option 1 – Topic Area Aligns with the local board work programme

26.     This option aligns with the approved work programme structure for the local board and would include the following topics:

-    Community Facilities

-    Parks, Sport and Recreation

-    Infrastructure and Environment

-    ATEED and External Partnerships

-    Arts, Community and Events

-    Libraries and Service Strategy and Integration

 

Pros

Cons

·  Aligns with the existing work programme format and department structure

 

 

·   Excludes key topic areas such as planning and heritage

·   No clear fit for the delegation resource consent and liquor licensing delegation.

·   The Community Facilities work programme is a significant topic area compared to ATEED and External Partnerships and Libraries and Service and Strategy and Integration

·   Does not include Transport

 

 

 

Option 2: - Topic Areas based on significant areas of interest

27.     This option identifies topic areas that relate to significant areas of interest for the Waitemata Local Board area including:

-    Arts, Culture and Events

-    Community Development

-    Environment and Infrastructure

-    Parks, Sport and Recreation

-    Local Economic Development

-    Transport

-    Planning and Heritage

 

Pros

Cons

·    Groups the role into clear topics

·    This option splits out the Community Facilities work programme across two topic areas – Community Development and Parks, Sport and Recreation making it more manageable

·    Continuation of the previous term topic areas which provides a level of consistency and certainty for the organisation

·    Includes a topic area on planning and heritage, which aligns with the timebound delegation of inputting into resource consent notification and providing formal views on liquor licensing

·    There are seven topic areas

 

·   Topic areas don’t align with department structures

 

 

Option 3: - Topic Areas based on Local Board Plan 2017 Outcomes

28.     Option 3 is based on the current Local Board Plan 2017 outcomes and would include the following topic areas:

-    Inclusive communities that are vibrant, healthy and connected

-    Attractive and versatile public places

-    The natural environment is valued, protected and enhanced

-    A high-quality built environment that embraces our heritage

-    An accessible, connected and safe transport network with well-designed streets

-    An innovative, productive and resilient local economy

Pros

Cons

·    This option focuses the role of the topic lead on an agreed outcome

 

·    Topic areas would need to be updated following the adoption of the 2020 Local Board Plan

·    Attractive and versatile public places encompasses the work programmes of Community Facilities, Parks, Sport and Recreation making it a very large topic area. 

·    There are only six outcomes

 

 

29.     If a local board’s preference is to appoint topic area leads, this will require a local board decision via a resolution to this report.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

30.     This report is procedural in nature so does not have direct climate impacts. However, a key focus for the council in the current term will be how it responds to the climate emergency and this may be a consideration for how local boards manage their governance work.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

31.     Feedback was gathered from staff from the LBS department, and other departments and CCOs who work with local boards, about practices to manage the local board governance work through the 2016-2019 triennium review.

32.     The practices used by a local board to manage their governance work can impact on the efficiency of staff engagement with members. Some variation in practices is required to reflect local differences, but overall large differences in work practices is challenging and consistency is beneficial.

33.     In light of this, Local Board Services has provided consistent advice and recommendations on work practices to all local boards to consider when making decisions on how they will manage their governance work for the 2016-2019 triennium.

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

Local impacts and local board views

34.     Feedback was gathered from local board members about practices to manage local board governance work through the 2016-2019 triennium review. This included: a workshop attended by 13 local board members from 10 local boards; and a survey to all members, with responses provided by 29 members, from 13 local boards.  

35.     The practices used by a local board to manage their governance work can impact efficiency and effectiveness of engagement with communities and the opportunities that members have to provide local leadership beyond the formal decision-making process.

36.     The topic of managing the governance work of the local board was discussed at a workshop on 22 and 29 October 2019, as part of the Waitematā Local Board induction programme for the 2019-2022 triennium.  

37.     The local board supported applying the additional practice of topic leads as a way of managing the local board governance work.

38.     The local board indicated a preference of basing the topic area leads on significant areas of interest for the Waitematā Local Board area.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

39.     This decision is procedural in nature so does not have immediate impacts on Māori.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

40.     This decision is procedural in nature so does not have any financial implications.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

41.     The risks and mitigations of having topic area leads are outlined in the ‘Analysis and Advice’ section of this report.

42.     Risks relating to any specific decision required for the work practices that form the recommended approach are outlined in the respective separate reports relating to those decisions.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

43.     Staff from the Local Board Services department will work with staff from other departments and CCOs to ensure the practices of the local board are implemented.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Emma Reed - Local Board Advisor Albert-Eden

Authorisers

Kerri Foote, Operations and Improvements Manager

Oliver Roberts, Central Teams Manager

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Trina Thompson - Relationship Manager/Senior Advisor Waitemata Local Board

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 

Local board appointments and delegations for the 2019-2022 electoral term

File No.: CP2019/19049

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To recommend that the Waitematā Local Board appoints a local board member to:

·   be the nominated local board member for landowner consents (including affected party approvals)

·   be the nominated local board member for film applications

·   be the nominated local board member for events

·   provide formal reports on liquor licence applications and attendance at hearings

·   provide formal views on whether a resource consent should proceed as a non-notified, limited notified or fully notified application

·   provide formal views (feedback) on notified resource consents and attend the council hearings.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       In order to enable effective and efficient decision-making, the council delegates some responsibilities to staff or individual elected members. This report seeks to appoint nominated local board members who will be consulted on landowner consents and events, and who will provide feedback on liquor licences and resource consents.

3.       If local boards choose not to appoint a nominated board member for landowner consents staff will consult with the local board Chairperson, as outlined in the Local Board Delegation Protocols.

4.       District Licensing Committees consider, and grant or renew applications for liquor licences and manager’s certificates. These applications are publicly notified, and local boards can provide views on an application to the District Licensing Committee. A delegation to a nominated local board member is recommended to allow local boards to provide formal views as part of the liquor licensing process.

5.       Local boards can provide feedback on whether resource consent applications should be publicly notified. Local boards can also provide written feedback once the applications are notified and can subsequently speak to their feedback to support their views at the council hearing. A delegation to a nominated local board member is recommended.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a)      appoint a local board member and an alternate member as the nominated local board member for general landowner consents (excluding landowner consents for filming and events) and authorise them to:

i)        be the point of consultation for staff on all applications for general landowner consent and, at their discretion, refer any application for landowner consent to the local board for a local board decision, and

ii)       to be the point of consultation for staff on proposed asset renewal works and, at their discretion, refer any proposed asset renewal works to the local board for a local board decision

iii)      receive staff notifications of areas that may involve reputational, financial, performance or political risk

b)      appoint a local board member and an alternate, to be the nominated local board member for landowner consents for filming and authorises them to:

i)        to be the point of consultation with staff on all applications for landowner consent for filming and, at their discretion, refer any applications for landowner consent for filming to the local board for a local board decision

ii)       receive notifications from staff of areas that may involve reputational, financial, performance or political risk

c)      appoint a local board member and an alternate to be the nominated local board member for event notifications and event landowner consents and authorises them to:

i)        be the point of consultation for staff on all applications for event landowner consents and, at their discretion, refer any application for landowner consent to the local board for a local board decision

ii)       receive staff notifications of areas that may involve reputational, financial, performance or political risk

d)      delegate to a local board member and an alternate, to have the authority to prepare and provide local board views and speak to those local board views at any hearings on applications for liquor licences

e)      delegate to a local board member and an alternate member, the authority to provide the local board views on whether a resource consent should proceed as a non-notified, limited notified or fully notified application

f)       delegate to a local board member and an alternate member, the authority to prepare and provide local board views and speak those local board views at any hearings on notified resource consents.

 

Horopaki

Context

Background

6.       Decision-making within Auckland Council is shared between the Governing Body and local boards. Local boards have made a general delegation to the Chief Executive of all of their responsibilities, duties and powers subject to the exclusions, restrictions and clarifications set out in the Chief Executive’s Delegations Register. The Chief Executive has in turn delegated those responsibilities, duties and powers to staff. The exercise of those responsibilities, duties and powers is subject to a set of delegation protocols. These protocols provide a set of expectations and directions to staff and require a number of actions that are relevant to all local activities. These delegations help Auckland Council to operate efficiently and effectively.

7.       In some cases, delegations are given to individual local board members, usually due to short timeframes constrained by operational requirements, customer expectations and deadlines set by statute. Having a delegation in place to one local board member helps to ensure that council can continue to undertake its normal business practices without undue delays.

8.       Local boards have allocated responsibility for decision-making with respect to local parks and have delegated landowner consent decisions to staff subject to a number of delegation protocols. The delegation protocols require that the nominated local board member is consulted on every landowner consent. Landowner consents encompass a broad range of activities, including affected party approvals, filming and events. Local boards also are able to provide their formal views in a report at liquor licence hearings.

9.       Under the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 the Governing Body must consider any views and preferences expressed by a local board, where a Governing Body decision affects or may affect the responsibilities or operation of the local board or the well-being of communities within its local board area. Local boards’ ability to provide local views can be affected because of statutory timeframes or external agency deadlines. Delegating authority for providing local board views to individual members provides local boards the opportunity to give local views within prescribed timeframes.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Landowner consents

10.     Under Auckland Council’s Combined Chief Executive Delegations Register, council staff are delegated authority to approve landowner consents on behalf of local boards. This delegation is subject to the Local Board Delegations Protocols. These protocols require that before exercising their delegations, staff must consult with a nominated local board member for landowner consents. If required, by the nominated local board member, the staff member must refer the landowner consent decision to a local board business meeting for a decision.

11.     It is therefore recommended that the local board appoint a nominated local board member for landowner consents to enable staff to exercise their delegation.

Landowner consents for filming

12.     Screen Auckland (Auckland Tourism, Events and Economic Development) processes requests for filming in the Auckland Region, and seeks landowner consent from local boards. Over 600 permits are granted each year, with the largest number of permits being granted in Waitematā, Wāitakere Ranges and Rodney Local Board areas.

13.     Screen Auckland must process the applications within three to five working days, and therefore require feedback from local boards within two working days. These timeframes are short because filming activities often have a fast turnaround for productions from concept to delivery. To keep filming in Auckland, in a competitive international market, film crews often have to work within short timeframes.

14.     Due to the extremely short timeframes for film applications, where local boards have a large number of filming applications, it may be beneficial for this subset of landowner consents to be referred to a different nominated local board member, to manage workloads.

Events

15.     Under the Local Board Delegations Protocols staff must consult with and obtain the views of the nominated local board member on:

·   applications to hold events on council-owned land in the local board area that require regulatory approval and involve one or more of the following matters:

o complete or substantial closure of the public open space

o more than 500 people

o road closure

o liquor

o ticketed event.

·   Any regulatory decision to set fees and charges for holding local events on council-owned local parks and reserve (and refer the matter to the local board to obtain local board views and input where required by the delegated local board member).

·   Staff are also required to notify the nominated local board member of:

o areas that may involve reputational, financial, performance or political risk

o decisions to approve events on council owned land in the local board area.

16.     The appointment of a nominated local board member for events is therefore recommended to enable staff to exercise their delegation.

17.     Under the Local Board Delegations Protocols landowner consent is also required for all event proposals on local parks. To avoid double-handling of applications, it is recommended that the local board member nominated for events is also nominated for landowner consents for events.

Formal submissions at liquor licence hearings

18.     District Licensing Committees consider, and grant or renew applications for liquor licences and manager’s certificates. When a business applies for an on-licence, off-licence, or club licence, new or renewed, they are publicly notified. On 25 September 2014, the Governing Body (GB/2014/103) agreed to a process where local boards can provide views on an application in a report to the District Licensing Committee. If the District Licensing Committee considers that the local board’s report has raised issues that it needs to hear more about, it can call a hearing and invite the local board to appear and talk to its report and respond to questions as a witness.

19.     Once the public notice has been posted online, the local board has 15 working days to provide their report to council.

20.     This report recommends a delegation to a nominated local board member to allow local boards to provide formal views as part of the liquor licensing process.

Notified resource consents

21.     Local boards can provide feedback, within the statutory timeframes, on whether resource consent applications should be publicly notified. This was resolved by the Governing Body on 28 July 2011 (GB/2011/156). Resource consent planners email the planning lead copies of applications that meet the triggers set by the local boards (last reviewed in 2017). The planning leads have three working days to provide comment on the matter of whether the application should be publicly notified or limited notified to particular persons who may be adversely affected by the proposal. Where comments are provided, these are included verbatim as part of the reporting planner’s notification report to the decision-maker.

22.     Local boards can also provide written feedback once resource consent applications have been notified. Written feedback needs to be provided prior to the submission closing date (usually 20 working days after public notification). Local boards can subsequently speak to their feedback to support their views at any hearing.

23.     This report recommends a planning lead for each local board to provide the local board’s formal views on whether or not resource consents should be notified or limited notified and to provide written feedback on notified applications and speak on the local board’s behalf at the council hearing.

Options considered

24.     Options available for local boards to input into landowner consents, events, planning processes and liquor licences have been summarised in Tables 1 and 2.

25.     It is recommended that local boards select both a nominated local board member and an alternate. The alternate is available to act when the nominated local board member is unable to act (eg leave of absence, illness) and has agreed (via written communication) that the alternate take the role of nominated local board member for a specified time period.

26.     We recommend that local boards appoint one nominated local board member (and alternate). Appointing more than one nominated local board member increases administration for staff and can create unnecessary confusion where local board members provide differing views to staff.

Nominated local board members under the Local Board Delegations Protocol

27.     The preferred option is that a nominated local board member is appointed for landowner consents and events (option two in Table 1). This option is preferred because it aligns with council’s existing delegations and local board delegation protocols and allows for council to undertake core business in a timely manner. There is reputational risk to council if it is unable to administer landowner consents in a timely manner.

Table 1: Options for local boards to address requirement for nominated local board members under the Local Board Delegations Protocol for landowner consents and events

Options

Pros

Cons

1.   There are no nominated local board members and staff must consult with the local board chairperson as a primary point of contact

·      The local board Chairperson will become the subject matter expert for the local board on landowner approvals and events

·      Local boards can provide their views in a timely way that better meets organisational deadlines

·      The local board Chairperson’s work-load will be increased

·      Decisions are not made by the full local board

·      Decisions are not made at a public meeting

2.   Nominated local board members appointed for landowner consents and events (preferred option)

·      The nominated local board member will become subject matter expert for the local board on the topic they are nominated for

·      Local boards can provide their views in a timely way that better meets organisational deadlines

·      Decisions are not made by the full local board

·      Decisions made under delegation are not made at a public meeting

Notified applications (resource consents and liquor licences)

28.     Local boards normally provide their formal views at business meetings (option two in Table 2). Because local board reporting timeframes do not usually align with process and statutory timeframes outlined above, in most instances reporting at a business meeting will not be a viable option. Providing a delegation to one local board member and one alternate (option three in Table 2) is considered the most efficient way of providing formal views for the matters discussed in this report.

Table 2: Options for local boards to provide their formal views on notification of resource consents and liquor licences

Options

Pros

Cons

1.   No formal local board views are provided

 

·      Local board views will not be considered by the hearing commissioners

2.   Formal local board views are provided at a business meeting

·      All local board members contribute to the local board view

·      Provides transparent decision making

·      Local board meeting schedules and agenda deadlines are unlikely to align with statutory deadlines imposed by the planning process

3.   Formal local board views are provided by way of delegation to one local board member for all applications (preferred option)

·      Nominated local board member will become subject matter expert for local board on topic they are nominated for

·      Local boards can provide their views in a timely way that meets statutory deadlines

·      Any feedback can be reported back to the local board

·      Decisions are not made by the full local board

·      Decisions made under delegation are not made at a public meeting (decisions are made public once submitted via the planning process)

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

29.     These decisions are procedural in nature and any climate impacts will be negligible. The decision is unlikely to result in any identifiable changes to greenhouse gas emissions. The effects of climate change will not impact the decisions.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

30.     This report recommends the appointment of nominated local board members to ensure that council can undertake its operational and statutory duties in a timely manner, while receiving local board input and decision-making in matters that are of local importance.

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

Local impacts and local board views

31.     This report seeks to appoint nominated local board members to perform particular functions.

32.     Any local board member who is appointed as a nominated local board member should ensure that they represent the wider local board views and preferences on each matter before them.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

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

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

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

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

35.     If local boards choose not to appoint a nominated board member for landowner consents (including film applications) and events, staff will need to seek feedback from the Chairperson. This could potentially lead to a busy workload for the local board Chairperson, in addition to their existing duties.

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

37.     If local boards choose not to delegate to provide their views on liquor licences, there is a risk that they will not be able to provide formal views prior to closings dates for submissions not coinciding with political meetings.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

38.     Nominated local board members providing feedback on landowner consents and events will engage with staff acting in accordance with the Local Board Delegation Protocols.

39.     Training for local board members will be offered on the Resource Management Act 1991 and the preparation of effective feedback for applications notified as part of a Resource Management Act 1991 process.

40.     Nominated local board members (and alternates) who are delegated to provide reports and speak at District Licensing Committee Hearings should sign-up to receive alcohol notices. This will ensure that they hear about new applications as soon as they are open for comment.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Carol Stewart - Senior Policy Advisor

Authorisers

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Trina Thompson - Relationship Manager/Senior Advisor Waitemata Local Board

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 

Appointment of Local Board members to external and internal organisations and boards

File No.: CP2019/19050

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To appoint board members to external and internal organisations and boards relevant to the Waitematā Local Board area.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Elected members participate as representatives of the local board on several external community and national organisations.

3.       The beginning of the new electoral term generates the need for new appointments. This report provides details of the external and internal organisations/boards relevant to the local board and requests that the local board nominates a lead and alternate member to represent the board on those external organisations for the 2019-2022 triennium.

4.       In addition, there are a small number of appointments which, due to legislation or the terms in a deed are the responsibility of the Governing Body, but because the relationship between the council and the organisation is local, the Governing Body has delegated its responsibility to nominate an elected member to the relevant local board.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a)      appoint the following board members to the external community groups and organisations listed below for the 2019-2022 triennium:

External organisation

 

Lead

Alternate

Business Associations

 

 

Heart of the City

 

 

Newmarket Business Association

 

 

Parnell Business Association

 

 

Ponsonby Business Association

 

 

K Road Business Association

 

 

Uptown Business Association

 

 

Grey Lynn Business Association

 

 

Other

 

 

Ponsonby Community Centre Board

 

 

Grey Lynn Community Centre Committee

 

 

Auckland Central CAB and Ponsonby/Grey Lynn CAB

 

 

CRL Aotea Community Liaison Group

 

 

CRL Karangahape Road Liaison Group

 

 

CRL Mt Eden Community Liaison Group

 

 

CRL Albert Street Business Forum

 

 

CRL C1 and C2 Community Liaison Group

 

 

 

b)      appoints the following members to the internal groups as listed below:

Internal organisation

 

Lead

Alternate

Auckland City Centre Advisory Board

 

 

Ponsonby Park Steering Group

 

 

 

Horopaki

Context

5.       A number of external organisations provide for the formal participation of Auckland Council elected members in their affairs. Elected member appointees will have a variety of duties and liabilities depending on the individual organisation.

6.       At the commencement of each triennium, the Governing Body and local boards make appointments to external organisations.

7.       As local board representatives, the nominated members represent the board, and do not attend in a personal capacity.  Nominated local board members will provide updates at local board meetings to regularly inform all local board members of discussions and decisions made of their activities, unless good reasons exist for confidentiality. These updates are in the form of business meeting reports which maintain public transparency.

8.       The reasons for elected member participation in external organisations can be described in a number of ways:

·   a trust deed, that requires Auckland Council to make an appointment to an organisation

·   an organisation of interest to the local board is inviting elected member representation at its meetings

·   associations entered into by the council which provide for elected member representation

·   organisation governance, or project or programme oversight, such as regional or local parks management groups

·   a statutory or regulatory provision (for example a regulation providing for a community liaison committee) or

·   a resource consent requiring the formation of a committee or hearing panel.

9.       In making decisions about these appointments, it is suggested that local boards are mindful of:

·   the elected member’s availability

·   any conflict of interests, including whether the local board provides funding to the entity

·   relevance

·   historical relationship with the organisation and Auckland Council.

10.     Members are delegated in their capacity as elected local board members. Should they no longer be a local board member, their nominations would be automatically repealed.

11.     Local board members may be part of any organisation in their private capacity and personal interests. They are encouraged to disclose memberships of external organisations in the conflict of interest register.

Relevant external organisations

12.     The details of the organisations relevant to the local board are detailed below.

Heart of the City Business Association; Uptown Business Association, Newmarket Business Association, Parnell Business Association, K Road Business Association; Ponsonby Business Association

13.     Business Improvement District (BID) Partnership Programmes are local economic development initiatives run by a business association in partnership with the council, supported by a designated targeted rate.

14.     The local board has a day-to-day relationship with the business associations as a joint partner in the BID Partnership Programme. The local board will work with the business associations to align the direction for the BID programme and local priorities expressed in the Local Board Plan. The local board will receive regular reporting on the BID Partnership Programme and review progress against objectives.

15.     The business association may invite the appointed member onto the BID Governance Board or Executive Committee. The discretion on whether this member has voting rights will lie with the business association under the rules of their constitution.

16.     It is recommended that the local board appoints a local board member and an alternate to each business association to represent the local board regarding all matters relating to the business association.

Grey Lynn Business Association

17.     Grey Lynn Business Association, which does not operate as a BID, supports and promotes the vitality, prosperity and sustainability of the businesses and communities of Grey Lynn and surrounding areas.

18.     The previous local board representative was Member Denise Roche.

19.     The local board is asked to appoint one member (and an alternate) to Grey Lynn Business Association.

Citizens Advice Bureau, Central Auckland; Citizens Advice Bureau, Grey Lynn/Ponsonby (CABs)

20.     Each CAB bureau is an incorporated not for profit organisation, operated by local community volunteers. Each bureau has a Management Board of elected volunteers who plan, govern and promote their CAB.  

21.     The local board members’ role would be as a point of contact for the CAB to liaise with the local board.

22.     No previous local board representatives were appointed.

23.     The CAB managers meet with local board representative on a quarterly basis.

24.     The local board is asked to appoint one member (and an alternate) as the board liaison to the CAB in Central Auckland and Grey Lynn/Ponsonby.

Ponsonby Community Centre Board

25.     Ponsonby Community Centre Board is the committee that is responsible for governance decisions and has oversight of the smooth running and financial well-being of the Ponsonby Community Centre.  The Board members are elected from the local community at the Annual General Meeting.  They have skills in management, finance and governance and have the interests and health of the Centre and its activities at heart.

26.     The previous local board representative was Member Richard Northey.

27.     The local board is asked to appoint one member (and an alternate) to the Ponsonby Community Centre.

Grey Lynn Community Centre Committee

28.     Grey Lynn Community Centre Committee is the organisation that operates the Grey Lynn Community Centre.  The role of the appointee is to provide relevant updates to the committee and a voice for the management of the centre.

29.     The previous local board representative was Member Denise Roche.

30.     The local board is asked to appoint one member (and an alternate) to the Grey Lynn Community Centre Committee.

City Link’s Community Liaison Groups

31.     As part of CRL designation and resource consent conditions, four Community and one Business Liaison Group (CLGs) were required to be established.

32.     The four Community Liaison Groups (CLGs) were established in 2015, following an invitation for expressions of interest, as an avenue for community involvement during planning and early works phases of the project.

33.     Each of the Community Liaison Groups consist of representatives of the local community – residents, businesses, property owners and interest groups.  The groups also include a representative of the local board and a representative of the relevant business association.

34.     The groups include:

·    Contracts 1 and 2 (C1/C2)

·    Aotea

·    Karangahape

·    Mt Eden

·    Albert Street Business Forum

Relevant internal boards and groups

Auckland City Centre Advisory Board

35.     The Governing Body adopted the Terms of Reference for the Auckland Centre City Centre Advisory Board at their meeting on November 12, 2019

36.     The Auckland City Centre Advisory Board advises on the spend of the City Centre Targeted rate for the development of the City Centre.

37.     The board supports the City Centre Masterplan’s vision to grow and consolidate the city centre’s international reputation as one of the world’s most vibrant and dynamic business and cultural centres.

38.     There are between 15 and 21 members at all times including three elected members, two from the Governing Body and one Waitematā Local Board member.

39.     The previous local board representative was Pippa Coom.

40.     The local board is asked to appoint one member (and an alternate) to the Auckland City Centre Advisory Board.

Project Control Steering Group – Ponsonby Park

·           The Ponsonby Park Steering Group (the Steering Group) ensures the right activities are taking place, in a timely manner, and are in alignment with the strategic goal of ensuring the delivery of the Ponsonby Park development. 

·           The Steering Group provides a forum to unblock any hurdles regarding delivery of the project and to provide advice to the project team.  The Steering Group discusses key issues or potential delivery risks that may have an adverse impact upon the delivery of the project and will provide support, guidance and maintain an oversight of progress.  The Steering Group also provide a means of sharing project updates to all stakeholders.

·           This is a newly established group to enable the delivery of the local boards One Local Initiative project.

·           The local board is asked to appoint one member (and an alternate) to the Project Control Steering Group – Ponsonby Park.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

41.     These decisions are procedural in nature and any climate impacts will be negligible. The decision is unlikely to result in any identifiable changes to greenhouse gas emissions. The effects of climate change will not impact the decisions.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

42.     This report enables Auckland Council to meet its requirements or duties to have representation on external community organisations.

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

Local impacts and local board views

43.     This report seeks the local board’s decision on representatives to external community organisations relevant to the local board area.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

44.     This report has no specific impact on Māori. It covers appointments of local board members to external organisations and community networks to represent the view of local communities, including Māori communities.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

45.     There are no financial implications as a result of this report.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

46.     Local board members may be part of any organisation in their private capacity and personal interests. They are encouraged to disclose memberships of external organisations in the conflict of interest register.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

47.     Local Board Services staff will inform each external and internal organisation/group of the name of the local board appointment. They will also inform the local board representative of the meeting time, date and location.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Carol Stewart - Senior Policy Advisor

Authorisers

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Trina Thompson - Relationship Manager/Senior Advisor Waitemata Local Board

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 

Process for appointment of Local Government New Zealand National Council representative

File No.: CP2019/19051

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To approve the process for making the local board representative appointment to the Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) National Council and inform elected members of changes to the LGNZ rules.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) amended its rules at its Annual General Meeting on 7 July 2019 and these were confirmed at a meeting of the LGNZ National Council in September. There are some key changes affecting Auckland.

3.       There are now three dedicated seats on the LGNZ National Council for Auckland Council representatives. These will be filled by the Mayor of Auckland (or his alternate) and representatives to be appointed by local boards and the Governing Body. The LGNZ rules require these appointments to be made within eight weeks of the triennial local government elections.

4.       This report outlines a recommended process to appoint the local boards representative to the LGNZ National Council through a local board selection panel. Local boards are being asked to delegate authority to one of its board members, preferably the Chairperson, to be part of the selection panel. This process will enable the representative to be appointed as quickly as possible.

5.       A call for nominations was made in November 2019 for the appointment of a local board representative to the LGNZ National Council.  This call for nominations was open to all local board elected members.

6.       The LGNZ rules now excludes Auckland from LGNZ Zone 1. Although not officially a member of an LGNZ zone group, the expectation is that Auckland Council schedules regular meetings with the president and chief executive (or their representatives) of LGNZ and organise itself as if it were a zone group. These meetings could be co-chaired by the councillor and local board member who are appointed to the LGNZ National Council.

7.       Other arrangements such as the sector-based groups remain unchanged. Auckland Council is eligible to be a member of the Metropolitan and Regional Groups and the Governing Body will be asked to select representatives to these groups.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a)      note the amended Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) rules.

b)      endorse Option A (selection panel made up of representatives from each local board) as the process for appointing the local board representative to the LGNZ National Council.

c)      delegate to the chairperson to be part of the selection panel to appoint the local board representative to the LGNZ National Council.

d)      agree in principle to two annual meetings of Auckland Council and LGNZ (or their representatives) with the arrangements to be decided by the three Auckland Council representatives to the LGNZ National Council and staff.

e)      endorse the proposal that the meetings of the Auckland Council/LGNZ meetings be co-chaired by the Governing Body and local board representatives appointed to the LGNZ National Council.

 

Horopaki

Context

Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ)

8.       LGNZ is an incorporated society (New Zealand Local Government Association Inc) which represents the national interests of councils around New Zealand and leads best practice in the local government sector.

9.       The objectives of LGNZ include promoting and advocating matters affecting the national interests of local government. LGNZ holds regular dialogue with government, parliamentarians and government agencies and provides thought leadership and research on matters of interest to local authorities.

10.     LGNZ is governed by a national council made up of members elected to represent geographic zones, representatives of various sector groups, Chair of Te Maruata (LGNZ’s national collective of Māori in local government governance roles), the president and three seats reserved for representatives of Auckland Council.

11.     The establishment of dedicated Auckland seats were made as part of amendments to the LGNZ Rules agreed at its AGM in July 2019 (available online). The amended rules stipulate that the composition of the National Council will include the Mayor of Auckland (or an alternate) and two further persons: one to represent the Governing Body and one to represent local boards. The appointments are for three years.

12.     LGNZ members are organized in zones and sectors generally. These zones and sectors make appointments to the National Council, provide advice on issues affecting their geographical or sector areas and provide information to their members.

13.     Auckland Council is no longer a member of any zone group. Due to its size and governance structure, it is expected that the council will organise itself as if it were a zone.

14.     The amendments did not change arrangements for sector groups. Auckland Council remains eligible to be a member of the Metro Sector Group and the Regional Sector Groups. The Governing Body usually appoints Auckland Council’s representatives to these groups and will be asked to do so again.

15.     Auckland Council’s benefits from its interactions with LGNZ include keeping abreast of national issues affecting local government, advocating for and influencing local government issues on the national agenda and providing a forum where elected representatives connect and network with their peers from across the country.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Appointment of local board representative to LGNZ National Council

16.     The appointment of a local board representative will need to be decided by local boards. This is outlined in LGNZ Rule E1A “(b) one person appointed by Auckland Council local boards, from Elected members of the local boards”.

17.     The restricted timeframes (eight weeks from start of the term) requires an agile selection process. Staff considered several options and recommend Option A as detailed in the following table:

Process for selection of local board representative to the LGNZ National Council

Option

Process

Details of process

A

Selection panel made up of representatives from each local board

·    Each local board delegates authority to one of their members to be part of a selection panel.

·    The selection panel can be called to meet once all candidates are confirmed and they will agree the voting system to be used.

·    One vote per local board is considered a fair way to select a single representative for all 21 local boards.

·    Members can utilise an existing meeting to get the selection panel together (such as the Chair’s Forum).

·    Process can start in mid-November with a two-week nomination period.

B

Reports to local boards seeking decision/preference (may require urgent decisions)

·    This would involve seeking a vote/preference from each local board through a formal report and resolution.

·    The report can only be produced once nominations have closed and the candidates list is available – this will delay the report to early December.

·    Where there is a tie between candidates based on local board votes, staff will need to be delegated authority to resolve the candidate by lot or go back to local boards for a decision.

·    This process is unlikely to produce an agreed appointment in a timely fashion.

 

18.     Staff also considered the option of a popular vote of all local board members. This would involve setting up an online voting system, where each local board member would have one vote. However, this option may not comply with the LGNZ Rules which anticipates a selection by local boards rather than by individual members. 

19.     The recommended Option A will enable a fair process by giving each local board a vote and an opportunity for their representatives to properly consider each nominee. This selection can take place at the planned meeting of the Chairs’ Forum on 9 December 2019 to avoid arranging an additional meeting.

Nominations for the local board representative

20.     The LGNZ anticipates that all local board elected members are eligible to be a candidate for the LGNZ National Council. The nominations process will therefore need to allow self-nominations.

21.     To facilitate this process in the timeframes required, staff called for nominations on Friday 15 November and allowed a two-week period closing on 29 November 2019.

Auckland Council / LGNZ meetings

22.     The role of a zone includes receiving reports from LGNZ about matters of national interest to local authorities and communicating to LGNZ the issues and concerns. The key item of interest at Zone meetings is the national update from LGNZ.  The president and chief executive of LGNZ (or their representatives) attend to present the update.

23.     Auckland Council could continue to meet with the president and chief executive (or their representatives) of LGNZ on a regular basis. Although not expressly set out in the changes to the LGNZ Rules, there is an understanding that Auckland Council will continue with these meetings in order to ensure an ongoing regional dialogue and continue to identify and advise LGNZ on issues and concerns affecting the Auckland region.

24.     Staff recommend these meetings are co-chaired by the councillor and local board member appointed to the LGNZ national council. A co-chair approach recognises the shared governance role of local boards. Following discussions with LGNZ, staff also recommend that the meetings be open to all elected members.

25.     The proposed meeting dates for the Auckland Council/LGNZ meetings are 13 March 2020 and 11 September 2020.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

26.     These decisions are procedural in nature and any climate impacts will be negligible. Staff will look to schedule meetings of the Auckland/LGNZ on days where there are other city-based activities and meetings for elected members in order to minimise travel requirements. Staff will also explore the use of skype and livestreaming so elected members may choose to avoid travel.

27.     Regarding engagement with the LGNZ, Auckland Council has declared a climate emergency, along with other councils around the country, so there will be an opportunity for partnership and joint leadership on this issue.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

28.     Secretariat support for the Auckland Council/LGNZ meetings will be provided by the Governance Division.

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

Local impacts and local board views

29.     The changes to the LGNZ Rules and the designated seat on the LGNZ National Council acknowledges the role of local boards and gives it greater recognition in LGNZ.

30.     Local board chairs were briefed on anticipated changes at the May 2019 Chairs’ Forum.

31.     The amended rules were confirmed at a meeting of the LGNZ National Council in September. Due to the elections and end of term timeframes, staff were unable to seek the views of local boards on the process for appointing a representative.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

32.     These decisions are procedural in nature and do not impact on Māori.

33.     At the LGNZ level, the LGNZ has provided for representation on the National Council by the Chair of Te Maruata.

34.     Te Maruata is LGNZ National Council sub-committee which has the role of promoting increased representation of Māori as elected members of local government, and of enhancing Māori participation in local government processes. They provide support for councils in building relationships with iwi, hapu and Māori groups and provides Māori input on development of future policies or legislation relating to local government. 

35.     Appointments to Te Maruata are not made by councils. In the previous term Councillor Alf Filipaina was invited to be a member of the sub-committee.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

36.     Membership of LGNZ incurs a cost to ratepayers. Auckland Council’s annual subscription to LGNZ in 2019/2020 is $340,148 excluding GST.

37.     The establishment of Auckland Council/LGNZ meetings will incur expense currently unbudgeted for. Staff from the Governance Division will support the first meeting using existing resources. 

38.     As the Auckland Council/LGNZ meetings are expected to bring together all elected members from across the region including the islands, this will impact on governance administration budgets over time.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

39.     The LGNZ Rules require persons appointed to the LGNZ National Council to assume office within eight weeks of the triennial local government elections. This creates some difficulties in designing a process for all 21 local boards to agree their single representative. The recommended option (Option A) proposed in this report will enable the process to be completed as quickly as possible, on the first working day after the eight-week period. The LGNZ secretariat has indicated this would be acceptable.

40.     If all local boards do not endorse the same process (Option A), this would affect how quickly the appointment is able to be made.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

41.     The Governing Body will be making their appointment in November 2019 including appointment of Auckland Council representatives to the sector groups.

42.     Appointments of Auckland Council seats to the LGNZ National Council will be communicated to the LGNZ by 6 December 2019.

43.     Staff will work with the appointed representatives of Auckland Council to make arrangements for the first Auckland Council/LGNZ meetings.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Shirley  Coutts - Principal Advisor - Governance Strategy

Authorisers

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Trina Thompson - Relationship Manager/Senior Advisor Waitemata Local Board

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 

Urgent decision-making process

File No.: CP2019/19053

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek the Waitematā Local Board’s agreement to use the urgent decision-making process when appropriate.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The urgent decision-making process enables the local board to make decisions to manage unforeseen and urgent circumstances when it is not practical to call the full board together and meet the requirements of a quorum. By agreeing to this process, the local board delegates decision-making authority to the chair and deputy chair, or any person acting in these roles.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a)      adopt the urgent decision-making process for matters that require a decision where it is not practical to call the full board together and meet the requirements of a quorum

b)      delegate authority to the chair and deputy chair, or any person acting in these roles, to make urgent decisions on behalf of the local board

c)      agree that the relationship manager, chair and deputy chair (or any person/s acting in these roles) will authorise the urgent decision-making process by signing off an authorisation memo

d)      note that all urgent decisions will be reported to the next ordinary meeting of the local board.

 

Horopaki

Context

3.       The urgent decision-making process enables the chair and deputy chair, or any person acting in these roles, to make decisions to manage unforeseen and urgent circumstances when it is not practical to call the full board together and meet the requirements of a quorum. Examples include during the Christmas and New Year period or for providing input to the council’s central government submission process in tight timeframes.

4.       By agreeing to this process, the board delegates decision-making authority to the chair and deputy chair, or any person acting in these roles during that period.

5.       The Local Government Act 2002 provides for local boards to delegate to committees, members of the local board or Auckland Council staff any of its responsibilities and powers, with some specific exceptions (clause 32, Schedule 7). This legislation enables the urgent decision-making process.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

6.       The urgent decision-making process provides an alternative decision-making mechanism to an extraordinary meeting. An extraordinary meeting is called when an urgent decision is required on matters that cannot wait until the next scheduled business meeting of the local board.

7.       Urgent decisions are different from emergency decisions, which are only made if there is a risk to public health and safety.

8.       All requests for an urgent decision will be supported by a memo stating the nature of the issue, reason for urgency and the decisions or resolutions sought.

9.       The local board relationship manager will use the information in this memo to determine whether or not to authorise the urgent decision-making process.

10.     A number of factors will be considered by the relationship manager before approval to use the urgent decision-making process is given, such as:

·   the timing of the next scheduled meeting

·   confirmation that the local board has the delegation to make the decision

·   consideration of the rationale for the urgency

·   the significance of the decision and whether the urgent decision-making process is appropriate.

11.     Once the relationship manager authorises the use of the urgent decision-making process, the chair and deputy chair (or any person/s acting in these roles) also need to approve the use of the urgent decision-making process by signing the same memo.

12.     Once the authorisation memo has been approved, the chair and deputy chair will refer to the substantive report for advice and staff recommendations to inform their decision. This report will meet Auckland Council quality advice standards and adhere to the report authorisation processes.

13.     Any decision made using the urgent decision-making process will be reported as an information item to the next ordinary meeting of the local board and the signed approval memo will be attached.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

14.     This decision is procedural in nature and any climate impacts will be negligible. The decision is unlikely to result in any identifiable changes to greenhouse gas emissions. The effects of climate change will not impact the decision.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

15.     The urgent decision-making process proposed in this report enables the council group to progress urgent decisions efficiently, when it is not practical to call the full local board together.

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

Local impacts and local board views

16.     This report outlines the local board urgent decision-making process, and seeks the local board’s agreement to adopt this process.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

17.     A decision of this procedural nature is not considered to have specific implications for Māori, and the arrangements proposed in this report do not affect the Māori community differently to the rest of the community.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

18.     There are no financial implications arising from the procedural decision sought by this report.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

19.     To mitigate any risk that the urgent decision-making process could be used inappropriately, the relationship manager will assess a number of factors including timing of the next scheduled meeting, the reason for urgency, and significance of the decision. If a matter is of major significance, an extraordinary meeting can be called instead.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

20.     If the local board adopts the use of the urgent decision-making process, the local board relationship manager and delegated members will execute the urgent decision-making process outlined in this report if the need arises.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Anna Bray - Policy and Planning Manager - Local Boards

Authorisers

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Trina Thompson - Relationship Manager/Senior Advisor Waitemata Local Board

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 

Adoption of a business meeting schedule

File No.: CP2019/19052

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To adopt the Waitematā Local Board meeting schedule for the 2019-2022 electoral term.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) and the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (LGOIMA) have requirements regarding local board meeting schedules. In particular, clause 19, Schedule 7 of the LGA on general provisions for meetings requires the Chief Executive to give notice in writing to each local board member of the time and place of meetings. Sections 46, 46(A) and 47 in Part 7 of LGOIMA require that meetings are publicly notified, agendas and reports are available at least two working days before a meeting, and that local board meetings are open to the public.

3.       Adopting a meeting schedule helps with meeting these requirements. Adopting a business meeting schedule also allows for a planned approach to workloads and ensures that local board members have clarity about their commitments.

4.       A draft meeting schedule for the 2019-2022 electoral term has been developed and is included below for adoption by the local board.

5.       Commencing the business meeting during business hours will enable meetings to be productive and ensures best use of resources.

6.       One business meeting per month is sufficient for formal business to be considered. There are some instances for which the local board may need to have meetings in addition to this schedule. The specific times and dates for meetings for matters such as local board plans and local board agreements are yet to be finalised. Local board meeting schedules may need to be updated once these details are confirmed.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a)      adopt the meeting schedule outlined below for the 2019-2022 electoral term:

Year

Date

2019

December 03, Tuesday

2020

February 18, Tuesday

March 17, Tuesday

April 21, Tuesday

May 19, Tuesday

June 16, Tuesday

July 28, Tuesday

August 18, Tuesday

September 15, Tuesday

October 20, Tuesday

November 17, Tuesday

December 08, Tuesday

2021

February 16, Tuesday

March 16, Tuesday

April 20, Tuesday

May 18, Tuesday

June 15, Tuesday

July 20, Tuesday

August 17, Tuesday

September 21, Tuesday

October 19, Tuesday

November 16, Tuesday

December 14, Tuesday

2022

February 15, Tuesday

March 15, Tuesday

April 12, Tuesday

May 17, Tuesday

June 21, Tuesday

July 19, Tuesday

August 16, Tuesday

September 20, Tuesday

 

b)      agree to commence business meetings at 1pm to be held at the Waitematā Local Board Office, ground floor, 52 Swanson Street, Auckland Central. Public forum and deputations will be scheduled in the early part of the business meeting, to enable participation by the public and stakeholders in the democratic process.

c)      note the dates and time for meetings for local board plans and local board agreements are yet to be finalised.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Anna Bray - Policy and Planning Manager - Local Boards

Authorisers

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Trina Thompson - Relationship Manager/Senior Advisor Waitemata Local Board

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 

Elected Members Expense Policy 2019

File No.: CP2019/20022

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To present the draft Auckland Council Elected Members’ Expense Policy 2019 and provide for the local board to record its feedback for consideration by the Governing Body.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Each electoral term, the Remuneration Authority (the Authority) requires all councils to adopt an expense policy and forward the adopted policy to the Authority for its approval. 

3.       The expense policy provides the rules for elected members’ reimbursement for expenses they incur whilst performing their duties.  The Authority has set parameters for the following expense reimbursements:

i)     communications

ii)    mileage

iii)    travel time

iv)   childcare.

4.       The Authority has updated vehicle mileage allowance rates to reflect the new kilometre rates for self-employed people and employees published by the Inland Revenue Department on its website as at 7 June 2019.

5.       There is a change to approval processes so that approval for mayor and deputy mayor expenses is now by the chair of the Audit and Risk Committee. There are no other changes to provisions for these expenses.

6.       Reimbursement of childcare expenses is a new provision and the council has discretion around how this is applied, within the parameters set by the Authority. 

7.       In the previous term, a discussion paper about the proposed childcare allowance was published by the Authority and was reported to local boards.  Most local boards were generally supportive. Based on that feedback, this report proposes rules for inclusion in the council’s Elected Member Expense Policy 2019.

8.       The expenses policy also includes rules for the following, which relate to sensitive expenditure and there are no recommended changes to these rules:

i)     travel

ii)    accommodation

iii)    professional development

iv)   hospitality.

9.       The draft Auckland Council Elected Members Expense Policy is attached in Attachment A.

10.     The council’s Head of Assurance Services has reviewed the draft policy and is satisfied it is in compliance with the Local Government Members (2019/20) Determination and appropriate probity standards.


 

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a)      provide feedback on the draft Auckland Council Elected Member Expense Policy 2019.

 

Horopaki

Context

11.     The Authority sets remuneration for elected positions in local government annually.  It also sets the rules for reimbursement of costs met by members in undertaking their duties.

12.     Each electoral term, the Authority requires all councils to adopt an expense policy and forward the adopted policy to the Authority for its approval. The expense policy provides the rules for elected members’ reimbursement for expenses they incur whilst performing their duties.

13.     The Authority sets some work-related expenses for elected members:

·   the maximum allowances payable by councils to elected members for certain activities, such as transport and communications

·   the criteria for and amounts payable to, elected members sitting on resource consent hearings.

14.     The current policy was approved in November 2016.  The Authority has requested the council provide an Elected Members’ Expense Policy to the Authority for its approval at the beginning of this term. 

15.     In the previous term the Authority circulated a discussion paper seeking feedback on a proposed childcare allowance.  When the Authority issued its formal 2019/20 determination it included the childcare allowance.  The Explanatory Memorandum in the Determination includes:

   “This year, for the first time, the Authority has introduced a childcare allowance for members who have responsibility for caring for children under the age of 14 years. The allowance is a contribution towards expenses incurred by the member for the provision of childcare while the member is engaged on local authority business. The allowance is capped and is subject to certain conditions outlined in clause 14 of this determination.

   Payment of any or all of the allowances is at the discretion of each council. All the allowances included in this determination are reviewed annually.”

16.     The actual rule about the childcare allowance in the Determination is:

14      Childcare allowance

(1)     A local authority may pay a childcare allowance, in accordance with subclauses (2) and (3), to an eligible member as a contribution towards expenses incurred by the member for childcare provided while the member is engaged on local authority business.

(2)     A member is eligible to be paid a childcare allowance in respect of childcare provided for a child only if—

(a)   the member is a parent or guardian of the child, or is a person who usually has responsibility for the day-to-day care of the child (other than on a temporary basis); and

(b)   the child is aged under 14 years of age; and

(c)   the childcare is provided by a person who—

(i)    is not a family member of the member; and

(ii)   does not ordinarily reside with the member; and

(d)   the member provides evidence satisfactory to the local authority of the amount paid for childcare.

(3)     A local authority must not pay childcare allowances to a member that total more than $6,000 per annum, per child.

(4)     In this regulation, family member of the member means—

(a)   a spouse, civil union partner, or de facto partner:

(b)   a relative, that is, another person connected with the member within 2 degrees of a relationship, whether by blood relationship or by adoption.

17.     The other change in the Determination relates to vehicle mileage allowance rates to reflect the new kilometre rates for self-employed people and employees published by the Inland Revenue Department on its website as at 7 June 2019.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

18.     The major proposed change to the expense policy is to include a provision for childcare allowance in line with the new provision in the Authority’s Determination.

19.     Prior to the Authority including this allowance in its Determination, it circulated a discussion paper for feedback.  This was reported to local boards.  The submission to the Authority was:

   ‘Auckland Council supports the Remuneration Authority in addressing this issue which has been raised by members of other councils through submissions to the Authority.  The costs of childcare can be a barrier to people with families considering becoming candidates for local government elections.  The council commends the authority for recognising such barriers and for acknowledging the need to address them.

   The council’s view is that the proposed conditions to be placed in the authority’s determination are reasonable.  It is concerned though that the description of the purpose of the allowance is too wide.  The proposed wording is:

        “A local authority may pay a childcare allowance, in accordance with subclauses (2) and (3), to an eligible member as a contribution towards expenses incurred by the member for childcare provided while the member is engaged on local authority business.”

   The phrase “childcare provided while the member is engaged on local authority business” could include childcare that is incidental at the time the member is engaged on local authority.  For example, a member may arrange childcare on a regular basis, irrespective of undertaking council duties, and on a particular occasion attends to council business papers while the children are at childcare.  There could be uncertainty about whether this is claimable.  The council understands that the purpose of the allowance is as a contribution towards the cost of childcare where this is an expense of undertaking council business and suggests that the wording should capture this sense of necessary expense in order to undertake council business.’

20.     A summary of local board feedback on the submission is contained in Attachment B.  Most local boards endorsed the submission.

21.     The submission stated that the payment of a childcare allowance should recognise the additional cost that was caused by attending to council business rather than being paid if childcare was to be provided in any case.  In other words, it was to be paid because child-care was caused by attending to council business. This point was not included in the Authority’s final Determination.  However, any potential for over-use of the provision is controlled by the imposition of a cap of $6,000 per annum per child.

22.     The proposed wording for the childcare allowance in the Expense Policy is:

Childcare allowance

1        Elected members who are the parent, guardian or usually have responsibility for the day to day care of the child may receive the allowance set out in the Remuneration Authority Determination for childcare provided while the member is engaged on local authority business.  This is a contribution towards the expense and not intended as a full reimbursement.

2        The childcare allowance may only be claimed for childcare not provided by a family member (spouse, civil union partner or de factor partner or any relative that is connected to the members within 2 degrees of relationship, whether by blood relationship or by adoption) who does not ordinarily reside with the member

3        The allowance is only claimable:

a)    for children under the age of 14 years

b)    when attending official meetings or workshops of the council

c)    only for actual (or part thereof) expenses that have been incurred, net of any subsidies

d)    when elected members are not on recess

e)    when no other childcare arrangements would normally be made.

 

4        The allowance rates are as follows:

a)    For childcare services provided by a professional registered company, an hourly rate of up to $35 will be accepted with the receipt of a GST invoice

b)    For childcare services provided via an informal arrangement, an hourly rate of up to $20 will be accepted with the receipt of an signed invoice or signed log book

c)    The total Auckland Council may contribute is $6,000 per annum per child

5        On a case by case basis the General Manager Democracy Services and General Manager Local Board Services may make exceptions to the above provisions within the limits set by the Remuneration Authority.

23.     The maximum hourly rates are based on an informal survey of current market rates.

24.     Other changes in the draft expense policy are:

i)       approvals for the mayor and deputy mayor travel expenses have been changed to the chair of the Audit and Risk Committee, on her recommendation

ii)      an added section on health, safety and well-being which includes access to:

·    flu vaccinations

·    ergonomic assessments

·    personal support services (Employment Assistance Programme, manawa rahi and the well-being portal).

25.     The council’s Head of Assurance Services has reviewed the draft policy and is satisfied it is in compliance with the Local Government Members (2019/20) Determination and appropriate probity standards.

 

 

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

26.     The adoption of the expenses policy is largely an administrative decision.  Relevant to climate change is the statement in the policy (6.3): “Auckland Council promotes public transport and cycling as the preferred ways of moving around Auckland. Elected members are expected to use public transport in the first instance but may also use their private car or council vehicles when on council business.”

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

27.     The Authority’s Determination and the Auckland Council Elected Member Expense Policy only affect elected governing body and local board members.

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

Local impacts and local board views

28.     The feedback from local boards will be reported to the Governing Body when it decides the Auckland Council Elected Member Expense Policy.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

29.     The childcare allowance recognises that the cost of childcare deters some people from standing for election.  The provision of the allowance may encourage more people, including Māori, to consider standing.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

30.     The number of Auckland Council elected members who will be eligible to claim this allowance is unknown. LGNZ statistics show that approximately 6 per cent of elected members are 40 years of age or below[1].  On that basis, the cost to Auckland Council, if 6 percent of members (10 members) claimed the allowance, would be $60,000 (assuming one child each). 

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

31.     The expenditure that is the subject of this policy is sensitive expenditure. The policy needs to withstand public scrutiny and where there is discretion there needs to be a conservative approach. Staff believe that the conditions placed on reimbursement and the processes for approval are appropriate in this context.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

32.     Feedback from all local boards will be reported to the Governing Body when it decides the Auckland Council Elected Members Expense Policy.

 

 

 

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Draft Auckland Council Elected Member Expense Policy

183

b

Summary of local board feedback on the Remuneration Authority’s discussion paper on childcare allowances

201

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Warwick McNaughton - Principal Advisor - Democracy Services

Authorisers

Marguerite Delbet - General Manager Democracy Services

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Trina Thompson - Relationship Manager/Senior Advisor Waitemata Local Board

 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 


 


 


Waitematā Local Board

03 December 2019

 

 

Chair's Report

 

File No.: CP2019/18876

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To provide an update on projects, meetings and other initiatives relevant to the local board’s interests.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation

That the Waitematā Local Board:

a)      receive the Chair’s report for the period October to November 2019.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

R Northey - Waitemata Local Board Chair's Report December 2019

207

b

R Northey Inauguration Speech