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

 

Date:

Time:

Venue:

 

Tuesday, 22 September 2020

10.00am

Via Skype for Business

 

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

 

OPEN AGENDA

 

 

 

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Chairperson

Chris Makoare

 

Deputy Chairperson

Debbie Burrows

 

Members

Don Allan

 

 

Nerissa Henry

 

 

Peter McGlashan

 

 

Maria Meredith

 

 

Tony Woodcock

 

 

(Quorum 4 members)

 

 

 

Tracey Freeman

Democracy Advisor

 

16 September 2020

 

Contact Telephone: 021 537 862

Email: Tracey.Freeman@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

 

 


 

 


Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

22 September 2020

 

 

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     Kristian Eek - NZ Film Industry                                                                           5

9          Public Forum                                                                                                                  6

9.1     Dr Nicki Jackson - Alcohol Healthwatch                                                           6

10        Extraordinary Business                                                                                                6

11        Governing Body Member's Update                                                                              9

12        Chairperson's Report                                                                                                  11

13        Board Member's Reports                                                                                            17

14        Project Streetscapes: Weed Management report                                                    19

15        Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Multi-Board Round One 2020/2021, grant allocations      59

16        Auckland Transport – Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board Innovating Streets Pilot Fund Project – Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Low Traffic Neighbourhoods                  103

17        Auckland Transport  - Allocation of Local Board Transport Capital Fund         117

18        Auckland Transport Monthly Update September 2020                                         123

19        Governance Forward Work Calendar                                                                      133

20        Record of Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board Workshops                                  137

21        Auckland Council’s Year End and Quarterly Performance Report: Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board for quarter four 2019/2020                                                     143

22        Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board Annual Report 2019/2020                             171  

23        Consideration of Extraordinary Items 

PUBLIC EXCLUDED

24        Procedural Motion to Exclude the Public                                                               175

21        Auckland Council’s Year End and Quarterly Performance Report: Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board for quarter four 2019/2020

b.      Maungakiekie-Tamaki Local Board Quarterly Report - Financial Appendix 175

22        Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board Annual Report 2019/2020

a.      Draft 2019/2020 Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board Annual Report          175

C1       Statement of proposal for a new Navigation Safety Bylaw                                  176  

 


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 Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

a)         confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Tuesday, 25 August 2020, 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 Maungakiekie-Tāmaki 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       Kristian Eek - NZ Film Industry

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       Providing Kristian Eek the opportunity to address the board in relation to several film industry organisations and the process for filming in public spaces within the local board area.  

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       As per standing orders the Chairperson has approved the deputation request from Kristian Eek.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

a)      thank Kristian Eek for his attendance.

 

 

 

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       Dr Nicki Jackson - Alcohol Healthwatch

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To give Dr Nicki Jackson of Alcohol Healthwatch the opportunity to provide the board with additional feedback on the draft Local Board Plan.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Dr Jackson submitted written feedback on the draft Local Board Plan during the consultation period and expressed an interest in presenting further feedback to the board at their next business meeting.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

a)      Thank Dr Nicki Jackson for their attendance.

 

 

 

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.”


Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

22 September 2020

 

 

Governing Body Member's Update

File No.: CP2020/07517

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To update the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board on local activities that the Governing Body representative is involved with.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       To provide the Governing Body Member an opportunity to update the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board on regional matters.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

a)      receive the Governing Body Member’s update.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.      

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Tracey Freeman - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Nina Siers - Relationship Manager for Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Puketāpapa

 


Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

22 September 2020

 

 

Chairperson's Report

File No.: CP2020/07524

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To keep the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board informed on the local activities that the Chairperson is involved with.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Providing the Chairperson with an opportunity to update the local board on the projects and issues they have been involved with since the last meeting.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

a)      receive the Chairperson’s report for September 2020.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Chairperson C Makoare Monthly Report

13

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Tracey Freeman - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Nina Siers - Relationship Manager for Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Puketāpapa

 


Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

22 September 2020

 

 


 


 


Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

22 September 2020

 

 

Board Member's Reports

File No.: CP2020/07535

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To keep the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board informed on the local activities that the local board members are involved with.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Providing board members with an opportunity to update the local board on the projects and issues they have been involved with since the last meeting.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

a)      receive the board members report.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Tracey Freeman - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Nina Siers - Relationship Manager for Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Puketāpapa

 


Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

22 September 2020

 

 

Project Streetscapes: Weed Management report

File No.: CP2020/12814

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek feedback from local boards on the recommended regional methodology to edge and maintain weeds on footpaths, berms and the kerb and channel on more than 5000km of urban roads in the Auckland region.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Auckland Council manages edges and weeds on footpaths, berms and the kerb and channel in the urban road corridor for statutory, asset protection, amenity, and health and safety outcomes.

3.       The service level for weed management on berms and in the kerb and channel is the same across Auckland. However, the methodologies for edging and weed control on hard surfaces, either plant-based, synthetic herbicides or thermal, e.g. hot water/steam, differ between local board areas. In some cases, different methods are used within the same local board boundaries. This reflects the continuation of legacy council approaches.

4.       In April 2019, Auckland Transport transferred services and budget to the council’s Community Facilities department to manage weeds within the road corridor on their behalf. Auckland Transport retains responsibility for the road corridor as per the Local Government Act 1974 and the Land Transport Act 1998.

5.       The transfer was completed as part of Project Streetscapes (which did not include the Hauraki Gulf Islands), a variation to the Community Facilities outcome-based maintenance contracts. Part of the project included developing recommendations for a regionally consistent approach for edging and weed control on hard surfaces in the road corridor.

6.       Community Facilities has continued with the legacy approach to weed control while completing a review of weed management methodologies. The scope of the review and recommendations are for edging and weed control on hard surfaces within the urban road corridor, excluding the Hauraki Gulf Islands. Rural roads are not included due to differences in population, roading infrastructure and land use in rural areas.

7.       The evaluation criteria for the review’s recommendations include environmental impacts, community input, the council’s commitment to reduce carbon emissions in Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland's Climate Plan and the objectives of the council Weed Management Policy for effective, efficient, and sustainable outcomes.

8.       A council People’s Panel survey was conducted in October 2019 as one mechanism to gauge how Aucklanders feel about managing weeds on footpaths and kerbs (see Attachment A).

9.       The recommendation of this review is for a combination of plant-based herbicide with spot spraying of glyphosate for difficult to manage weeds. This is estimated to lead to a reduction in glyphosate, carbon emissions and water usage across the region while achieving effective control. This approach is estimated to be achievable within existing operational budgets.

10.     Feedback is sought from local boards to be included in the recommendation to the Governing Body on a standardised approach for edging and weed control on hard surfaces in the road corridor (see Attachment B). This will be presented at the Environment and Climate Change Committee on 12 November 2020.

11.     Should a local board choose to utilise alternative methodologies to those agreed, they have the option of using locally driven initiative (LDI) funding to cover the cost difference between the agreed regional weed management method and the alternative.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

a)      provide feedback on the recommended approach to a standardised methodology to managing weeds on footpaths, berms and the kerb and channel across more than 5000km of urban roads.

 

 

Horopaki

Context

12.     Community Facilities carries out edging and weed management on footpaths, berms and the kerb and channel across more than 5000km of Auckland urban roads. This is done for asset protection and amenity, as well as health and safety outcomes, including:

·        preventing root intrusion causing damage to the road surface, kerb and channel, footpaths and other road assets

·        ensuring vegetation growing in the kerb and channel does not interfere with water flow

·        ensuring the safety of pedestrians and road users by maintaining clear sight-lines and minimising trip hazards

·        maintaining the streetscape in a tidy and aesthetically pleasing condition.

13.     Auckland’s moderate and wet climate makes the area particularly vulnerable to the detrimental effects of weeds. The climate causes vigorous growth, easy establishment, and increased infestation of weeds. The road corridor provides a dynamic environment for the spread of weeds including through vehicle and water dispersal.[1]

14.     Uncontrolled weeds on footpaths and the kerb and channel cause damage that can lead to increased repairs and renewals with a funding and environmental impact. This damage may create trip hazards, putting people at risk.

15.     Agrichemicals are used for edging and weed control in the urban road corridor. Edging is required on both sides of the road, which is over 10,000km of footpaths and berms. The Auckland Council Weed Management Policy guides the use of herbicide by the council and supports best practice weed control.[2] All agrichemical use must follow the rules of the Unitary Plan, which ensures that, when used correctly, agrichemicals can make a positive contribution to sustainable land use.[3]

16.     The outcome-based contract specifications for the road corridor do not permit herbicide application outside schools or early learning services on days that these institutions are in use. There are limitations on the time of spraying in urban areas and the contract specifications include instructions to not complete weed control where the berm is clearly being maintained by the adjacent property owner.[4]

17.     All of Auckland is covered by a ‘no-spray register’ for berms adjacent to private property. Any resident who agrees to manage weeds to a specified standard can apply to ‘opt out’ of weed management completed by the council, through recording their intent on the no-spray register. Residents can register through a dedicated form on the council website or through the council call centre.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Weed management in the road corridor

18.     The service level outcomes for weed management on berms and in the kerb and channel are the same across Auckland. However, the methodologies for their maintenance, either plant-based, synthetic herbicides or thermal, e.g. hot water/steam, differs between local board areas. In some cases, different methods are used within the same local board boundaries. These differences reflect the weed control methods and herbicides that were used by the legacy councils of Auckland City Council, Manukau City Council, Waitākere City Council, North Shore City Council, Papakura District Council, Rodney District Council and Franklin District Council prior to amalgamation.

19.     In April 2019, Auckland Transport transferred services and budget to the council’s Community Facilities unit to manage weeds within the road corridor. Auckland Transport retains responsibility for the road corridor as per the Local Government Act 1974 and the Land Transport Act 1998.

20.     Weed management on footpaths, berms and the kerb and channel is now part of the outcome-based Full Facilities contract for streetscapes. These include pest plant control, mowing, town centre cleaning, and waste removal completed on behalf of Auckland Transport.

21.     Community Facilities has continued with the legacy approach for edging and weed control on hard surfaces, while completing a review of the methodologies with a view to making recommendations to the Environment and Climate Change Committee for a consistent regional approach. The scope of the review and recommendations is only for the urban road corridor and does not include rural areas or the Hauraki Gulf Islands. This reflects the differences in population, roading infrastructure and land use in rural areas.

Comparison of weed management methodologies

Synthetic herbicide – glyphosate

22.     The synthetic herbicide used for edging and weed management on footpaths, berms and the kerb and channel in the urban road corridor in Auckland is glyphosate. Glyphosate is used by the council for weed management on parks and reserves, and by most road controlling authorities in New Zealand to control vegetation in the road corridor.[5]

23.     Glyphosate is a low toxicity broad-spectrum non-selective herbicide which is particularly effective on broadleaf weeds and grasses. Glyphosate is a systemic herbicide that is absorbed through green plant tissue and is then translocated throughout the plant, including the root system, to kill the entire plant.[6]

24.     Glyphosate is diluted with water and applied via foliar spray with a small left-hand steer vehicle in the urban road corridor. It is the most cost-effective method as it needs to be applied less frequently than other methods. In the urban road corridor, spot spraying with glyphosate typically occurs six times per year to achieve the desired level of service.

25.     There is some community and international debate about the health risk of glyphosate with several regions no longer using, or minimising the use of, glyphosate for weed control in public areas.

26.     Auckland Council’s agrichemical use is guided by the New Zealand Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in their role as the regulator of hazardous substances in New Zealand. The EPA gathers information from multiple credible sources when deciding whether substances are safe to use. The EPA has granted approval for the use of glyphosate-containing substances in accordance with the EPA code of practice. Should the EPA change their position on glyphosate, the council would respond appropriately.

27.     In October 2019 the EPA stated the following:

Products containing glyphosate are considered safe, provided that all of the rules around their use are followed. …We are aware that some reports linking glyphosate to health impacts are causing concern. We are in alignment with the vast majority of regulatory bodies around the world – including in the European Union, United States, Australia and Canada - which agree that glyphosate is unlikely to cause cancer.[7]

28.     For all agrichemical use, the council complies with the Environmental Protection Agency Code of Practice (NZS 8409:2004 Management of Agrichemicals) for the storage, mixing, use, disposal and certification of contractors.

29.     Glyphosate is strongly absorbed into soil and has no residual activity.[8] Community Facilities only uses approved formulations of glyphosate, with no human hazard ratings, within the road corridor.[9] While the formulation being used within the road corridor is also approved for use in the aquatic environment, it does have a hazard rating for toxicity for aquatic life at high concentrations.[10] As per the Code of Practice, glyphosate is only used in appropriate weather conditions to minimise spray drift by rain and wind.

30.     A caution for the use of glyphosate is the development of resistance in some weed species.[11]

31.     Local boards that use spot spraying of glyphosate for weed management include Franklin, Henderson-Massey, Howick, Māngere-Ōtāhuhu, Manurewa, Ōtara-Papatoetoe, Papakura, Rodney, Waitākere Ranges, and Whau. All methodologies include some mechanical removal of weeds.

Plant-based herbicide

32.     Plant-based herbicides used in the urban road corridor include Biosafe and Bio Weed Blast. The active ingredient is a fatty acid which is a contact herbicide. When applied to weeds, it burns off the foliage, thus preventing or reducing seed production and restricting growth.

33.     As plant-based herbicides are not systemic, i.e. they do not kill down to the root, they must be applied more frequently than glyphosate to meet service levels. Although they can kill annuals, generally they will not kill longer-lived mature perennial weeds, as they re-sprout from specialised (e.g. rhizomes) root tissue after the foliage has been burned off. Fatty acid-based herbicides need to be applied to young or small plants for acceptable weed control.[12]

34.     Plant-based herbicides are diluted with water and applied via foliar spray with small left-hand steer vehicle in the urban road corridor, approximately 12 times per year. The exclusive use of plant-based herbicide is approximately three times more expensive than glyphosate because of the additional frequency and quantity of product required.[13] There is an additional cost consideration due to the corrosive impact of the fatty acid on equipment which needs to be replaced more regularly.

35.     While plant-based herbicides are inactivated on contact with the soil and have no residual activity[14], there is a health and safety risk to be managed by the operators. The active ingredient is an eye, skin and respiratory irritant. There is a strong notable odour from plant-based herbicide which can be, and has been, the source of complaints from the public.

36.     For all agrichemical use, the council complies with the Environmental Protection Agency Code of Practice (NZS 8409:2004 Management of Agrichemicals) for the storage, mixing, use, disposal and certification of contractors.

37.     Plant-based herbicide is approved for use in Auckland and has been used since prior to amalgamation. Although there are no restrictions imposed by the EPA for application within the road corridor, the products have a hazard rating for toxicity for aquatic life. Instructions from the manufacturer include applying when conditions are dry, and rain is not expected in the road corridor within the next two hours.[15]

38.     Local boards that use plant-based herbicide exclusively, include Albert-Eden, Puketāpapa, Waitematā (excluding the central business district), Waiheke and Ellerslie in Ōrākei. All methodologies include some mechanical removal of weeds.

Thermal – steam and hot water

39.     Thermal technologies include steam and hot water. Water heated to high temperatures is applied to weeds with a hose and lance to destroy the foliage. Thermal weed management leaves the roots primarily untreated.[16]

40.     Thermal technology requires significant water use, using between 10-12L of water per minute.[17] Non-potable water sources can be used to mitigate demand on treated water sources, however non-potable water is not currently available in most areas of Auckland. This leaves the implementation of this method vulnerable to water restrictions as we have seen in 2020.[18]

41.     This method utilises mobile diesel boilers to heat water to 98 degrees. Diesel boilers use up to 9L[19] of diesel an hour with associated carbon emissions of 24kg.[20] Thermal technology is more expensive than herbicide. A two-person team is required, and the application rate is slower as it requires a prolonged application to cover the foliage. Application speeds are approximately 1.1km/hr[21] for thermal compared to 1.8km/hr for herbicide.[22] Like plant-based herbicide, thermal weed management needs to be applied more frequently, approximately 12 times a year, to meet weed management service levels.

42.     Local boards that use thermal technology include Devonport-Takapuna, Kaipātiki, parts of Upper Harbour and Hibiscus and Bays. There is some use of spot spraying of glyphosate to address persistent weeds. All methodologies include some mechanical removal of weeds.

 

 

Thermal – hot foam

43.     A product called Foamstream has been trialled in Auckland in 2020. Foamstream is a soluble concentrate which is added to hot water to create a foam and has been used in the United Kingdom for weed management. [23] The foam acts as an insulator to keep the heat higher for longer. The manufacturer claims that the use of foam could reduce the frequency of treatment cycles compared to using steam/hot water alone. A review of the trial is currently underway and, if the product proves suitable, staff will seek approval from Auckland Transport and Healthy Waters for its use in the road corridor.

Combination of synthetic and plant-based herbicide

44.     This approach uses a combination of both glyphosate and plant-based herbicide. Plant-based herbicide is applied throughout the year to manage weeds, with the use of glyphosate by spot spraying at peak weed growing times on difficult to control weeds.

45.     An integrated approach results in a reduction of both products and provides more effective control of persistent weeds than by using plant-based herbicide alone. This methodology is used in the Auckland Botanic Gardens to reduce the use of glyphosate. The use of herbicide with a different mode of action in combination with glyphosate is one of the main strategies to avoid glyphosate resistance.[24]

46.     Local boards that use a combined approach include Maungakiekie-Tāmaki and Ōrākei (except for Ellerslie where only plant-based herbicide is applied). All methodologies include some mechanical removal of weeds.

Methodology comparison

47.     In 2015, a comparison of methodologies was completed (see Attachment C). The data in the table was reviewed by Price Waterhouse Coopers (PWC) and the effectiveness, environmental and human health information was independently peer-reviewed by the firm AECOM.

48.     For the current review, further analysis was completed to estimate quantities of water, herbicide and operational carbon emissions per methodology. This reflects the council’s commitments within Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland's Climate Plan[25], the Auckland water efficiency strategy and the Weed Management Policy. The data on herbicide volumes has come from contractor reporting for the urban road corridor (as the data includes pest plant control, the use for edging and hard surfaces is expected to be lower). Water usage and fuel consumption are from product specification sheets and supplier data. These are estimates only, with volumes of herbicide and water varying by area, season and weed levels.

49.     For the purpose of this review, updated supplier costings for a regionally consistent approach were requested. The difference in pricing for alternative methodologies compared to glyphosate was expected, reflecting the different frequencies and volume of product needed. For plant-based weed control to achieve similar outcomes, more frequent treatments are required than glyphosate, thereby increasing the costs of materials, labour and fuel. Thermal technology is applied at the same frequency as plant-based herbicide, 12 times a year, with a slower application rate requiring a two-person team. These are estimates only and may not include costs for change implementation e.g. purchase of machinery etc.


 

       Table 1: Comparison of estimated operational carbon emissions, volume of water, herbicide and cost per km per year for each weed management approach

Methodology

Carbon emissions[26]

Water usage

Herbicide

Active Ingredient

(kg)

Application rate

Cost

Glyphosate

(6x per year)

1.1kg

180L

1.8L

0.9kg glyphosate

 

1.8km per hour (single operator)

$783

Combination of plant-based/ glyphosate

(10x per year)

1.9kg

870L

0.7L of glyphosate & 8L of plant-based

0.4kg glyphosate

5.6kg fatty acid

1.8km per hour (single operator)

 

$1293


Plant-based herbicide

(12x per year)

2.3kg

1350L[27]

13.5L

9.5kg

fatty acid

1.8km per hour (single operator)

$2265

Thermal technologies – steam and hot water

(12x per year)

264kg

6545L

Approx. 0.5L of glyphosate

0.25kg

glyphosate

1.1km per hour (two operators)

$3485

 Auckland Council – People’s Panel survey

50.     In October 2019, a People’s Panel survey was conducted as one mechanism to gauge how Aucklanders view management of weeds on footpaths and kerbs. The survey was sent to 39,789 members of the People’s Panel. They were provided with the information on the council website on the different methodologies[28]. However, at the time of the survey, estimated emissions, volume of herbicide, and cost were not available.

51.     Of the 5686 respondents, 66 per cent stated that they ‘care’ about the weeds on our footpaths and kerbs. The results showed that 43 per cent of residents use synthetic herbicide (e.g. glyphosate) for weed management on their own property. Synthetic herbicide (e.g. glyphosate) was the least preferred method for weed management in the road corridor by 52 per cent of respondents.

52.     Nineteen per cent were willing to pay higher rates for the council to use alternatives to synthetic herbicide, 42 per cent were not willing to pay extra, and 36 per cent indicated they may be willing to pay more[29]. There were differences in responses by local board area as detailed in Attachment A (People’s Panel results by local board).

53.     There are members of the community that believe glyphosate should not be used by Auckland Council.

Regional review recommendation

54.     The review of methodologies to manage weeds in the urban road corridor takes into consideration the Auckland Weed Management Policy, Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland's Climate Plan and community input.


 

Table 2: Summary of the advantages and disadvantages of the different weed management methodologies

Methodology

Advantages

Disadvantages

Synthetic herbicide – glyphosate

Low cost, low frequency of application, effective weed control

Reduced carbon emissions

Risk of community objection to the use of glyphosate

Restricted weather conditions for application

Herbicide resistance in some species

Plant-based herbicide

Reduction in glyphosate used by council for weed control

Immediate effect on weeds

Increased frequency and therefore a greater volume of herbicide compared to glyphosate

Plant-based herbicide is two to three times more expensive than glyphosate

The product is corrosive and has a strong odour

Restricted weather conditions for application

Thermal technology steam/hot water/hot water with a foam additive

Thermal technology does not use herbicide

Can be applied in any weather

Immediate effect on weeds

 

High water usage and carbon emissions

Spot spraying glyphosate is still required on high volume roads and to address persistent weeds

Thermal technology is more expensive than glyphosate

Combination of plant-based and synthetic herbicide, e.g. glyphosate

An estimated region-wide reduction in the use of glyphosate, carbon emissions and water use

Minimising the volume of agrichemical use across the region

Reduction in risk of plants developing glyphosate resistance

An increase in herbicide use in some local board areas

55.     The recommendation for a standardised methodology is a combination of plant-based herbicide with spot spraying of glyphosate for difficult weeds. This is estimated to lead to a reduction in glyphosate, carbon emissions and water usage across the region. There would be an increase in the use of plant-based herbicide. This approach is estimated to be achievable within current operational budgets.

56.     Thermal methodologies, including hot foam, could be used for sensitive areas but are not recommended for a region-wide approach due to their high emissions, water usage and cost. The exclusive use of plant-based herbicide is not recommended due to the additional volume of herbicide required and its cost.

57.     Local board feedback is sought on the standardised regional recommendation and on local priorities for weed control on footpath and kerb and channel (see Attachment B). Local board priorities will be included for consideration by the Environment and Climate Change Committee on 12 November 2020.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

58.     Climate change adaptation – changes in Auckland’s climate may alter the prevalence and spread of weeds within the road corridor. In the future, different methodologies and products may need to be considered depending on weed species.

59.     Climate change mitigation – Auckland Council adopted Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland's Climate Plan on 21 July 2020, which includes the reduction target for council to halve its carbon emissions by 2030 and reach zero net emissions by 2050.

60.     The choice of weed management methodologies has an impact on the council’s carbon emissions. The region-wide adoption of thermal would lead to an increase in carbon emissions at an estimated 1335 tons[30] or approximately 5 per cent of the council’s operational emissions for 2018/2019. This reflects the energy required to heat large volumes of water to 98 degrees with diesel boilers. The increase for the regional adoption of this methodology would impact on the council’s ability to meet the reduction targets of the Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland's Climate Plan.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

61.     Community Facilities undertakes the maintenance of green spaces within the road corridor under contract to and on behalf of Auckland Transport. Auckland Transport “manages and controls” the Auckland transport system as per the Local Government Act 1974 and the Land Transport Act 1998.

62.     Auckland Council adopted a Weed Management Policy for parks and open spaces in August 2013 (resolution number RDO/2013/137). The Weed Management Policy is to guide the management of weeds in Auckland’s parks and open spaces, including the road corridor.

63.     The recommendation for a standardised approach has been provided in consultation with Auckland Transport and with consideration of the objectives of the Weed Management Policy.

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

Local impacts and local board views

64.     The recommendations of this report will have differing impacts on local boards (except the Hauraki Gulf local boards which are excluded from the regional approach) given the different approaches currently in place. This report is to request feedback from local boards regarding their priorities for an effective, efficient, and sustainable standardised regional weed management methodology (see Attachment B).

65.     Should a local board choose to utilise alternative methodologies to those adopted as the region-wide approach, they are able to use locally-driven initiative (LDI) funding to cover the cost difference between the agreed regional weed management method and their preferred alternative.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

66.     The recommendations of the review take into consideration the Weed Management Policy, with the objective to minimise agrichemicals, and Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland's Climate Action Framework which were developed in consultation with mana whenua.

67.     An overview of the current methodologies and the priorities of the review were presented at the Infrastructure and Environmental Services Mana Whenua hui. The analysis and recommendations of the review will be presented to mana whenua for feedback in September 2020.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

68.     Different methodologies to manage weeds have different financial implications. This reflects the associated costs of the methodologies to achieve weed management outcomes.

Table 3: Estimated cost of weed management methodologies per km per annum[31]

Methodology

Estimated cost per km (per annum)

Estimated cost (per annum) across 5055km

Synthetic herbicide, e.g. glyphosate

$783

$3,958,000

Combination of plant-based and synthetic herbicide

$1293

 

$6,536,115

Plant-based herbicide, e.g. biosafe

$2265

$11,499,575

Thermal technology steam/hot water

$3485

$17,616,675

69.     The recommended approach, a combination of plant-based herbicide and spot spraying of glyphosate for difficult weeds, is estimated to be able to be delivered within the existing operational budgets.

70.     To standardise thermal and plant-based methodologies across the region would require an increase in budget to meet weed management service levels. As there is no additional operational budget for streetscape maintenance, methodologies requiring additional expenditure could impact on other Full Facilities services delivered to local boards e.g. town centre and park maintenance, replanting of gardens, and ability to respond to a request for service.

71.     Should a local board choose to utilise alternate methodologies to those adopted as the region-wide approach, they could use LDI funding to cover the cost difference between the agreed regional weed management method and their preferred alternative.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

72.     The outcomes of this project have the following risks:

Options

Risk

Mitigation

No change

Continuing with legacy arrangements, with inconsistent funding

Communication on the rationale for any decision to continue with legacy weed management methodologies

Standardising a regional weed methodology

Depending on the choice of the methodology, there would be different environmental and social impacts, including community concern

Local board decision-making enables the prioritisation of funding for local priorities and the services that their communities most value

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

73.     Local boards provide feedback on the recommended approach to weed management in the kerb and channel and footpaths and rank their priorities for weed management in the road corridor.

74.     Once the feedback is received, it will be collated and included in a report to the Environment and Climate Change Committee on 12 November 2020.

75.     At the meeting of the Environment and Climate Change Committee, a decision will be made on the methodology to be applied across the Auckland region for weed management.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Results of October 2019 People's Panel survey

31

b

Local board feedback on weed management impact priorities

49

c

Weed control methodology table

53

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Jenny Gargiulo – Principal Environmnetal Specialist

Authorisers

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Nina Siers - Relationship Manager for Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Puketāpapa

 


Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

22 September 2020

 

 

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


Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

22 September 2020

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator



Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

22 September 2020

 

 

PDF Creator


Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

22 September 2020

 

 

PDF Creator


Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

22 September 2020

 

 

PDF Creator


Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

22 September 2020

 

 

PDF Creator


Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

22 September 2020

 

 

PDF Creator



Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

22 September 2020

 

 

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Multi-Board Round One 2020/2021, grant allocations

File No.: CP2020/13234

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To fund, part-fund or decline the applications received for Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Multi-Board Round One 2020/2021.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       This report presents applications received for the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Multi-Board Round One 2020/2021(Attachment B).

3.       The Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board adopted the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board Community Grants Programme 2020/2021 on 28 April 2020 (Attachment A). The document sets application guidelines for community contestable grants.

4.       The local board has set a total community grants budget of $120,000 for the 2020/2021 financial year. A total of $38,908.46 was allocated in the previous grant round. This leaves a total of $81,091.54 to be allocated to two local grants and one multiboard round.

5.       Eight multiboard applications were received requesting a total of $22,709.72.

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

a)      agree to fund, part-fund or decline each application in Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Multiboard Round One 2020/2021, listed in Table Two below:

Table One: Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Multiboard Round One 2020/2021

Application ID

Organisation

Main focus

Requesting funding for

Amount requested

Eligibility

MB2021-138

The New Zealand Society of Authors Te Puni Kaituhi o Aotearoa (PEN NZ Incorporated)

Arts and culture

Towards the recording of oral histories of people who have made significant contributions to New Zealand literature.

$2,000.00

Eligible

MB2021-150

The Kids for Kids Charitable Trust

Arts and culture

Towards venue hire and production costs for the Kids Youth Choir performance at the Vodafone Events Centre.

$2,000.00

Eligible

MB2021-110

Fahima Saeid

Community

Towards the cost of hosting a “Refugee Ball” at the Flicking Centre, including venue hire, sound, volunteer, food, transport, artists and performers costs.

$1,000.00

Eligible

MB2021-134

Community Think Ltd

Community

Towards “Camp 2021” costs, including venue hire, food, and a donation for the presenter.

$2,000.00

Eligible

MB2021-139

Babystart Charitable Trust

Community

Towards babystart boxes, including clothing, blankets, towels and mother and baby goods, packaging materials, logistics and courier costs.

$3,954.72

Eligible

MB2021-136

The ReCreators Ltd

Environment

Towards the costs of Christmas upcycling workshops in local board areas including the costs of facilitators, materials, preparation, project management and administration.

$3,755.00

Eligible

MB2021-114

Auckland Softball Association Incorporated

Sport and recreation

Towards operating expenses for the Auckland Softball Association.

$6,000.00

Eligible

MB2021-137

CLM Programmes LTD

Sport and recreation

Towards entry fee cost for 350 children across the local boards to participate in the Building Champions Obstacle Challenge Series.

$2,000.00

Eligible

Total

 

 

 

$22,709.72

 

 

Horopaki

Context

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

7.       Auckland Council’s Community Grants Policy supports each local board to adopt a grants programme.

8.       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.

 

9.       The Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board adopted the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board Community Grants Programme 2020/2021 on 28 April 2020 (Attachment A). The document sets application guidelines for community contestable grants.

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

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

11.     Due to the current COVID-19 crisis, staff have also assessed each application according to which alert level the proposed activity is able to proceed, under alert level two only 10 people are able to gather. Events and activities have been assessed according to this criterion.

12.     The aim of the local board grants 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 with projects that support community climate change action. Community climate action involves reducing or responding to climate change by 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 use of single-occupancy transport options

·        home energy efficiency and community renewable energy generation

·        local tree planting and streamside revegetation

·        education about sustainable lifestyle choices that reduce carbon footprints.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

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

15.     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

16.     Local boards are responsible for the decision-making and allocation of local board community grants.  The Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board is required to fund, part-fund or decline these grant applications in accordance with its priorities identified in the local board grant programme.

17.     Staff will provide feedback to unsuccessful grant applicants about why they have been declined, so they can increase their chances of success in the future.

18.     A summary of each application received through Maungakiekie-Tāmaki multi-board round one 2020/2021applications is provided in Attachment B.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

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

20.     Five applicants applying to Maungakiekie-Tāmaki multiboard round one 2020/2021 indicate projects that target Māori or Māori outcomes.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

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

22.     The local board has set a total community grants budget of $120,000 for the 2020/2021 financial year. A total of $38,908.46 was allocated in the previous grant round. This leaves a total of $81,091.54 to be allocated to two local grants and one multiboard round.

23.     Eight multiboard applications were received requesting a total of $22,709.72.

24.     Relevant staff from Auckland Council’s Finance Department have been fully involved in the development of all local board work programmes, including financial information in this report, and have not identified any financial implications.

 

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

25.     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

26.     Following the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board allocating funding for round one of the multiboard grants, grants staff will notify the applicants of the local board’s decision.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board Grants Programme 2020/2021

65

b

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Multi-Board Round One 2020/2021 - grant applications

69

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Moumita Dutta - Senior Grants Advisor

Authorisers

Fran Hayton - Principal Grants Advsr & Incentives TL

Nina Siers - Relationship Manager for Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Puketāpapa

 


Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

22 September 2020

 

 


 


 


Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

22 September 2020

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

22 September 2020

 

 

Auckland Transport – Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board Innovating Streets Pilot Fund Project – Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Low Traffic Neighbourhoods

File No.: CP2020/13484

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek local board support for the delivery of the Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency - Innovating Streets Pilot Fund project and confirm local board funding for its share of the Innovating Streets Pilot Fund project, “Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Low-Traffic Neighbourhoods”.

2.       Delegate authority to a representative(s) from the local board to work with the Innovating Streets Pilot Fund project team to deliver this project by June 2021.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

3.       In April 2020, Waka Kotahi NZ Transport introduced the Innovating Streets Pilot fund, which supports council projects that aim to transition streets to be safer and more liveable spaces. In the second round of funding, Waka Kotahi requested expressions of interest from local boards.

4.       The Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board submitted the “Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Low Traffic Neighbourhoods” project to the fund.  This project seeks to establish two low-traffic neighbourhoods - one in Maungakiekie (Onehunga) and one in Tāmaki (Eastview). 

5.       The application was supported by Auckland Transport and was submitted to Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency in July 2020.

6.       The Innovating Streets Pilot Fund project for Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board – “Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Low Traffic Neighbourhoods”, was approved in the second round of funding announced by Waka Kotahi in late-August 2020.

7.       This report seeks endorsement of local board support for the “Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Low Traffic Neighbourhoods”; allocation of the local board’s share of 10 percent ($58,000) of the total cost of the project; and for the board to delegate a local board representative/s to work with the Innovating Streets Pilot Fund team to deliver this project by June 2021.

8.       The Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF) has a balance of $224,712 for Financial Year 2020/2021.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

a)      confirm its support for the delivery for the delivery of the Innovating Streets Pilot Fund project – “Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Low Traffic Neighbourhoods”, in partnership with Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency and Auckland Transport; and

b)      allocate $58,000 from the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board’s - Local Board Transport Capital Fund to meet Waka Kotahi New Zealand Transport Agency 10 percent funding requirement for the “Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Low Traffic Neighbourhoods” project; and

c)      delegate authority to a member(s) of the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board as its representative to work with the Innovating Streets Pilot Fund project team to    progress community engagement and its delivery by June 2021.

 

 

Horopaki

Context

9.       This section provides an overview of the Innovating Streets Pilot Fund, provides the local boards current funding position to assist the local board decision-making to deliver the proposed Innovating Streets Pilot Fund project listed below:

·     “Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board Low Traffic Neighbourhoods”

 

10.     Due to the tight timeframe required by Waka Kotahi for delivery of this project, this report also seeks to delegate authority to a board member(s) in order that the delivery of the project is streamlined and its possible to complete and deliver this project by June 2021.

Innovating Streets Pilot Fund

11.     Earlier this year on 3 April 2020, Waka Kotahi NZ Transport released the Innovating Streets for Pilot fund, which supports council projects that aim to transition streets to be safer and more liveable spaces. The fund encourages the use of ‘tactical urbanism’ techniques, such as pilots and pop-ups - interim treatments that can be delivered within a short timeframe to test and help demonstrate the value of future permanent street changes that make walking and cycling easier. Projects that Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency aims to support include:

·        temporary, or semi-permanent, physical changes to streets

·        improvements that test a permanent fix and prototype a street design

·        activations that help communities re-imagine their streets.

 

12.     The fund makes up to $1 million available for each project in 2020/21. Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency will provide a financial assistance rate of up to 90 percent, as well as support for capability building for successful applicants.

13.     Local boards, as part of the application process, were required to indicate that they could fund a 10 per cent local share of the total cost of the proposed project.

14.     Initially, the fund allocated seven million for projects across New Zealand. This cap was lifted on 12 April 2020 to an unspecified amount with the actual amount to be distributed dependent on the quality of the bids received.

15.     There were two application rounds for the pilot fund. The first round opened on 3 April and closed on 8 May 2020. Successful applicants in round one were announced in June 2020. The second round was from 8 June till the 3 July 2020, with successful applicants announced in late August 2020.

16.     Attached to this report is an example of the Funding Agreement used for successful applicants of the Round 1 process (Attachment A).  A further funding agreement between the parties to cover the successful Round 2 applications is also being drafted by AT but was still being developed at the time of writing.

17.     The expectation is that projects from both Round 1 and Round 2 will be delivered by the end of June 2021.

Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF)

18.     As noted above, Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency will provide financial assistance of up to 90 percent of the successful proposals. Applicants are expected to fund the remaining 10 percent as its contribution. Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board indicated in its expression of interest that it would fund its portion from their LBTCF.

19.     Due to the financial impacts of Covid-19, local boards have a revised LBTCF budget, with which to deliver their 20/21 programme. Workshops have been undertaken with local boards to determine their reprioritisation of this year’s programme. Local boards with successful Innovating Streets Pilot Fund proposals are expected to allocate funding to meet their share of the project.

20.     The proposed budget for the “Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Low-Traffic Neighbourhoods” is $580,000, with $522,000 funded by Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency. The local board share of 10 percent is $58,000.

21.     There is currently $224,712 remaining in the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki LBTCF which. This has to be spent by June 2021.

22.     The local board held a workshop on 1 September 2020 to discuss the prioritisation of their LBTCF which included consideration of this project for funding.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Nominated project for Innovating Streets Pilot Fund funding

23.     The following potential project was nominated by the local board for the Innovating Streets Pilot Fund in July 2020:

·        “Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Low-Traffic Neighbourhoods”

24.     This project was highlighted as priority by AT and the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board for the following reasons:

·        Maungakiekie-Tāmaki has the 9th highest 2019 DSI numbers of all Urban Local Boards in Tāmaki Makaurau and it remains on a 5 year upward trend.

·        It also has the fifth highest exposure rate per capita to Serious Injuries. 48% of the DSi involved people outside private vehicles such as cyclists and pedestrians.

·        As the narrowest point of the Auckland isthmus, traffic flowing efficiently in and round the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki area is critical to the successful functioning of the city’s traffic system as a whole.

·        Due to this geographical pinchpoint, many residential streets within the area have become rat-runs for vehicular traffic trying to avoid congestion on the surrounding arterial roads, which turns quiet local streets into loud, busy places and puts the most vulnerable users of those streets, people walking and cycling, at risk of serious injury, harm or even death.

·        Large truck and trailer units currently rumble along narrow residential streets due to the neighbourhood’s existing permeability.

·        Maungakiekie-Tāmaki is fortunate to have seven of the 40 railway stations in Auckland so is well-served by the rail network, however access to these by active modes (walking, cycling or scootering) is currently indirect, limited and unsafe.

·        Public consultations undertaken when drafting the Local Board Plan, fed back that road safety, congestion and a lack of active transport options for residents were some of their main priorities.

25.     While these areas are of concern for the community, the Local Board and Auckland Transport, it is unlikely that any permanent projects planned will be delivered as anticipated, due to the recent pandemic.

26.     This situation is disappointing for the Local Board who advocated for safer walking and cycling in its community, and reduced speeds and rat-running through residential areas to make them safer.

27.     The Innovating Streets Pilot Fund allows Auckland Transport to trial the concept of a Low Traffic Neighbourhood in both Onehunga and Eastview – the “Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Low-Traffic Neighbourhoods”.

28.     A Low Traffic Neighbourhood is typically low-speed area that provides access to vehicles but prevents rat-running through residential roads and allocates more road space to walking and cycling. This is typically achieved through the use of ‘modal filters’, turning restrictions, ‘parklets’ or strategically placed planters and other placemaking measures.

29.     The concept of a Low Traffic Neighbourhood in particular, is in sync with a tactical urbanism approach as typical measures used to achieve a Low Traffic Neighbourhood (e.g. turn restrictions) can generally be delivered at low-cost with a quick-turnaround timeframe, and therefore, have high potential for testing and adapting to fit with community needs.

30.     One of the cornerstones of a tactical urbanism approach, is the testing and adaptation of proposed changes, with and by the community that the changes are supposed to serve.

31.     Tactical urbanism, and this particular fund from Waka Kotahi, provides a unique opportunity to test non-traditional solutions to problems, and non-traditional delivery mechanisms, while being on this journey with our communities.

32.     Subsequently, due to the nature of the project which includes working closely with the local residents, community groups and schools, and the requirement to deliver this project by June 2021, it is recommended that the local board delegate to a member or small group of members to work closely with the delivery team in alignment with the tactical urbanism approach.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

33.     Auckland Transport engages closely with Council on developing strategy, actions and measures to support the outcomes sought by the Auckland Plan 2050, the Auckland Climate Action Plan and Council’s priorities.

34.     One of AT’s core roles is providing attractive alternatives to private vehicle travel, reducing the carbon footprint of its own operations and, to the extent feasible, that of the contracted public transport network.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

35.     The impact of information in this report is mainly confined to Auckland Council and Auckland Transport.  Any further engagement required with other parts of the Council group, such as Panuku, 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

36.     Local board views, informed by local community engagement, were incorporated into to the development of the application to Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency as discussed in this report.

37.     The Auckland Unitary Plan recognised these areas as high growth locations. Projects that focus on modal shifts and improving active transport infrastructure, will be vital as the housing density increases and the population swells.

38.     This proposal fits well with the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board Plan which sets the direction for local government in the region for the next three years. The plan has a particular focus on active transport and ensuring safe and accessible multi-modal transport options for its residents.

39.     Local boards will continue to be engaged with the projects as they progress via their local board representative working with the project team and through Auckland Transport’s Local Board Monthly report.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

40.     There are no specific impacts on Māori by the project specified in this report. AT is committed to meeting its responsibilities under Te Tiriti o Waitangi-the Treaty of Waitangi and its broader legal obligations in being more responsible or effective to Māori.

41.     Our Maori Responsiveness Plan outlines the commitment to with 19 mana whenua tribes in delivering effective and well-designed transport policy and solutions for Auckland. We also recognise mataawaka and their representative bodies and our desire to foster a relationship with them.

42.       This plan in full is available on the Auckland Transport Website.

43.     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

44.     The financial implication of the board approving recommendations b) of this report is the allocation of $58,000 of the LBTCF. This leaves $166,712 remaining.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

45.     Auckland Transport will put risk management strategies in place on a project by project basis.

46.     There is a risk to the project through inability to meet the Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency deadline of June 2021, particularly if there are significant delays to allocating the local board’s share of funding or delegation of decision-making authority to local board members.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

47.     An agreement is being developed by AT which will outline how AT and the local board will work together.

48.     Auckland Transport and Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency will begin design and delivery of this project in consultation with the delegated local board member/s.

49.     Formal reporting to the local board will be continue through the AT monthly report to the local board.

 

 

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

ISPF Funding Agreement

109

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Lorna Stewart – Elected Member Relationship Manager

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon – Elected Member Relationship Team Manager

Nina Siers - Relationship Manager for Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Puketāpapa

 


Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

22 September 2020

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

22 September 2020

 

 

Auckland Transport  - Allocation of Local Board Transport Capital Fund

File No.: CP2020/13478

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       For the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board to allocate its FY 2020-2021 Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF) to transport safety projects in its area. 

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       This report outlines:

·        confirmation of the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board’s transport capital fund allocation for 2020/2021 as $224,712;

·        an update on the progress of Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board’s LBTCF projects begun in 2016-2019 political term;

·        a brief overview of the Innovating Streets Pilot Fund and the local board’s application to that fund with a project called “Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Low-Traffic Neighbourhoods”;

·        a recommendation that the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board allocate its 2020/2021 LBTCF allocation to the Innovating Streets project known as “Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Low-Traffic Neighbourhoods” and a raised pedestrian crossing at 89 Tripoli Road, Glen Innes.

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

a)      notes that there is a separate report on this agenda requesting the local board to consider the allocation of $58,000 from its transport capital fund to the “Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Low-Traffic Neighbourhoods” project;

b)      allocate $166,712 of its Local Board Transport Capital Fund to the raised crossing project located at 89 Tripoli Road.

 

 

Horopaki

Context

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

4.       Any LBTCF projects selected must be safe, must not impede network efficiency, and must be located in the road corridor or on land controlled by Auckland Transport (though projects running through parks can be considered if there is a transport outcome).

5.       Auckland Council consulted on an Emergency Budget in May-July 2020 to take into account the effects of COVID-19 on its financial position. This has affected the amount of funding available to local board to deliver LBTCF projects.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF)

2.       Following the setting of the Emergency Budget the LBTCF programme received $5,000,000 for the FY2020/2021 year for allocation across the 21 local boards.

3.       Decisions about the 2021/2022 and 2022/2023 financial years will form part of the Long-term Plan/Regional Land Transport Plan discussions but early indications are that these years will also see a more constrained capital programme than prior to the COVID crisis.

4.       Advice from the Finance Department set the following criteria for the fund following the setting of the Emergency Budget:

·        The $5,000,000 for 2020/21 will be split using the Local Board Funding Policy

·        Currently, with budgets unknown for financial years 2021/2022 and 2022/2023, Boards are unable to combine future years allocations into a single project.

·        Boards are encouraged to target delivery of smaller projects or complete design and documentation for a project that can be physically delivered in 2021/2022.

5.       The Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board’s share of the 2021/2022 allocation is $224,712.

 

Progress Report LBTCF Projects 2016-2019

Project Name

Status

External Consultation Complete

Estimated Cost to Complete

Tripoli Road Raised Crossings ( 2 sites )

Both projects are ready to tender the physical works.

Yes

89 Tripoli $185,000        33 Tripoli $180,000       

Tamaki Shared Paths

( Auckland Council project Board are contributing to)

2nd stage in early design, budget not needed in 2020/2021.

No

$60,000

(can be split over years)

Jubilee Shared Bridge

( Auckland Council project Board are contributing to)

Project in developed design.

Likely to be ready for construction in the 2021/2022 financial year

No

$700,000

Line/Taniwha Raised Crossings

( Auckland Transport project Board are contributing to)

AT has funding to complete design in 2020/2021. Funding not yet confirmed for 2021/2022.

No

$190,000

(can be split over years)

Onehunga Mall Raised Crossing Points

( Panuku project Board are contributing to)

Currently project on hold whilst design and budgets are confirmed. More time is needed to work with community, retailers and business association in an agreed outcome.

Initial consultation held. Will need further consultation when design developed further

$300,000

 

 

TOTAL

$1,615,000

 

 

Allocation of the LBTCF 2020/2021

6.       AT attended a workshop with the Board in September 2020 where a progress report was given on the Board’s 2016-2019 LBTCF projects as well as discussion on how to plan for the next two years as it now appears that budgets will continue to be constrained.

7.       The Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board’s position is outlined above - the Board has several  projects ready or almost ready to be delivered but only a limited ability to fund them. AT outlined some options on how to deliver these projects over the next three years assuming increases in the LBTCF budget become available.

8.       As public funds have already been expended in getting these projects to delivery stage, AT’s advice is to prioritise their delivery rather than to seek out new projects.

9.       The Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board has also been successful in its application to Waka Kotahi for funding for its “Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Low Traffic Neighhourhoods” project. This triggers a contribution from the local boards LBTCF of ten per cent of the value of the project. The amount of LBTCF needed for this project would be $58,000.

10.     Once the budget for the Innovating Streets project, “Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Low Traffic Neighhourhoods” is accounted for, this leaves $166,712 in the LBTCF.

11.     Discussion at the workshop canvassed views allocating funds to the “Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Low Traffic Neighhourhoods” (discussed below)  and which other projects should take next priority. It was noted that the project at 89 Tripoli Road was outside Tamaki Primary School and would be of benefit to school children who are considered vulnerable road users.

12.     Other priorities were discussed for future financial years and local board members noted their strong desire to deliver a new Jubilee Bridge in this political term.

13.     Auckland Council Communities Facilities Group indicated that it would explore funding the Tāmaki Shared Paths project through alternative resources.

Innovating Streets Pilot Fund

14.     Earlier this year on 3 April 2020, Waka Kotahi NZ Transport released the Innovating Streets for Pilot fund, which supports council projects that aim to transition streets to be safer and more liveable spaces. The fund encourages the use of ‘tactical urbanism’ techniques, such as pilots and pop-ups - interim treatments that can be delivered within a short timeframe to test and help demonstrate the value of future permanent street changes that make walking and cycling easier.

15.     The fund makes up to $1 million available for each project in 2020/21. Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency will provide a financial assistance rate of up to 90 percent, as well as support for capability building for successful applicants.

16.     The local board nominated that the project “Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Low-Traffic Neighbourhoods” be considered for funding under the Innovating Streets Pilot Fund. 

17.     The application was successful and a separate report appears on this agenda requesting that the local board allocate the necessary ten percent of LBTCF this project requires plus a nominate a local board delegate to steer the project.

 

Tripoli Road Crossings

18.     In late 2018, the local board allocated LBTCF to improve pedestrian crossing facilities at two locations being 89 Tripoli Road and at second on Tripoli Road between Stewart Avenue and Matapan Road. 

19.     These proposals have now both been through public consultation and detailed design. As the crossings are both discrete, it is easy to split the project so that one crossing is potentially deliverable in 2020/2021 with the available funds.

20.     AT’s recommendation to the local board is to deliver the raised crossing facility at 89 Tripoli Road as it is located close to Tāmaki Primary School and will benefit vulnerable road users.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

21.     Auckland Transport engages closely with Council on developing strategy, actions and measures to support the outcomes sought by the Auckland Plan 2050, the Auckland Climate Action Plan and Council’s priorities.

22.     Auckland Transport’s core role is in providing attractive alternatives to private vehicle travel, reducing the carbon footprint of its own operations and, to the extent feasible, that of the contracted public transport network.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

23.     The impact of information in this report is mainly confined to Auckland Transport.  Where LBTCF projects are being progressed by Auckland Council’s Community Facilities department, or another part of the council family, engagement on progress has taken place. Any further engagement required with other parts of the Council group will be carried out on an individual project basis.

24.     Auckland Council Communities Facilities Group indicated that it would explore funding the Tāmaki Shared Paths project through alternative resources.

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

Local impacts and local board views

25.     AT attended a workshop with the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board in September 2020 where options on how to get best value from its 2020/2021 LBTCF allocations were discussed as well as planning for future financial years.

26.     The board indicated its support for both the “Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Low-Traffic Neighbourhoods” and 89 Tripoli Road crossing and its support for the Jubilee Bridge as a priority project for allocation of LBTCF in future years, as funds become available.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

27.     Any engagement with Māori, or consideration of impacts and opportunities, as result of decisions in this report, will be carried out on an individual project basis.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

28.     There is currently $224,712 in the local board’s transport capital fund.

29.     If the local board allocates LBTCF budget to the Innovating Streets project, “Maungakiekie- Tāmaki Low Traffic Neighhourhoods”, it would leave $166,712 in the LBTCF.

30.     The next priority recommended for the board to consider is the 89 Tripoli Road crossing project. It is estimated to cost $185,000 which is leaves a shortfall of approximately $20,000.  AT anticipates that it’s possible that savings can be made on the $185,000 through the tendering process, making this project achievable in the 2020/2021 financial year.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

31.     There is a risk that the costs for the project at 89 Tripoli Road might come in over the remaining budget in the LBTCF.  If this is the case, AT will seek funding from other sources and if this is not possible, we will report back to the board as soon as possible.

32.     There is also a risk around delivery of other LBTCF projects as the amount of LBTCF that will be available to local boards in FY 2020/2021 and FY 2021/2022 is uncertain at this time.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

33.     AT will report back on the progress of the confirmed projects through its monthly reporting process.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.    

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Lorna Stewart – Elected Member Relationship Manager

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon – Elected Member Relationship Team Manager

Nina Siers - Relationship Manager for Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Puketāpapa

 


Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

22 September 2020

 

 

Auckland Transport Monthly Update September 2020

File No.: CP2020/13483

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To provide an update to the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board on Auckland Transport (AT) matters in its area.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       This report provides an opportunity to highlight Auckland Transport activities in the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board area and contains information about the following:

·     general advice on the 2019-2022 Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF) and the Community Safety Fund;

·     an update on AT and its response to COVID-19 levels;

·     an update on the AMETI project;

·     notice of a slow-down of Auckland rail services and temporary closure of the Eastern rail line; and

·     decisions of AT’s Traffic Control Committee that affect the local board area.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

a)      receive the Auckland Transport September 2020 update report.

 

 

Horopaki

Context

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

4.      This report updates the local board on AT projects and operations in the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board area, it summarises consultations and Traffic Control Committee decisions, and includes information on the status of the Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF) and Community Safety Fund (CSF).

5.       The LBTCF is a capital budget provided to all local boards by the Governing Body 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.       With the Council’s emergency budget now confirmed, the LBTCF for the 20/21 Financial Year has been set at $5,000,000 million, for allocation across the 21 Local Boards. Allocation will still be based on the Local Board Funding Policy. Decisions about the 2021/2022 and 2022/2023 Financial Years will form part of the LTP/RLTP discussions but early indications are that these years will also see a more constrained capital programme, than prior to the COVID crisis.

7.       The specific budget available for the LBTCF in 2021/2022 and 2022/2023 will be determined by the prioritisation of the capital programme through the RLTP and will be subject to the usual consultation and submission processes.

8.       The CSF 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.

9.       The Community Safety Fund is funded from Auckland Transport’s safety budget and is dependent on the level of funding Auckland Transport receives from Council. Current indications are that this level of funding will be significantly constrained. Public consultation and design work is progressing so that projects are designed and ready to go when money becomes available.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF)

10.     Following the setting of the Emergency Budget the LBTCF programme received $5,000,000 for the 2020/21 year for allocation across the 21 local boards.

11.     Decisions about the 2021/2022 and 2022/2023 financial years will form part of the Long-term Plan/Regional Land Transport Plan discussions but early indications are that these years will also see a more constrained capital programme than prior to the COVID crisis.

12.     Advice from the Finance Department set the following criteria for the fund following the setting of the Emergency Budget:

·     The $5,000,000 for 2020/21 will be split using the Local Board Funding Policy

·     Currently, with budgets unknown for 2021/2022 and 2022/2023 Boards are unable to combine future years allocations into a single project.

·     Boards are encouraged to target delivery of smaller projects or complete design and documentation for a project that can be physically delivered in 2021/2022.

13.     The Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board’s share of the 2021/2022 allocation is $224,712.

14.     AT attended a workshop with the Board in September 2020 where a progress report was given on the Board’s 2016-2019 LBTCF projects as well as discussion on how to plan for the next two years as it is very likely that budgets will continue to be constrained.

15.     The Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board current position is that it has various projects in different stages of progress but the local board only has a limited ability to fund them to delivery.

16.     If budgets continue to be constrained, the local board will not have the financial ability to deliver on all of these projects from the 2016-2019 term. The local board then discussed which of the 2016-2019 LBTCF projects should take priority.

17.     The local board also received notice in late August 2020 that its application to the Innovating Streets Pilot Fund had been successful with a project known as “Maungakiekie- Tāmaki Low Traffic Neighbourhoods”.  The success of this application triggers the need for a ten percent allocation from the LBTCF of $58,000.

18.     A separate report on this agenda requests the local board to consider the allocation of its 2020/2021 LBTCF.

 

Community Safety Fund Projects

19.     The Community Safety Fund is funded from AT’s safety budget and is dependent on the level of funding AT receives from Auckland Council. This level of funding has been constrained through the Emergency Budget process.

20.     Projects will be prioritised according to DSI (death and serious injury) data and therefore local board community safety projects will continue with planning and design but may not be delivered in the 2020/2021 financial year.

21.     Public consultation and the design work on local board community safety projects is progressing, with a view to having projects designed and ready to go, when money becomes available.

22.     The local board’s Community Safety projects are noted below.

·     Selwyn St pedestrian safety improvements;

·     Farringdon pedestrian safety improvements;

·     Elstree Ave pedestrian safety improvements;

·     Bailey Rd pedestrian safety improvements;

·     Panama Rd School pedestrian safety improvements (installed;)

·     Harris Rd pedestrian safety improvements (installed);

·     Electronic speed feedback signs at Apirana Ave and Dunkirk Rd;

·     Hamlin Rd pedestrian safety improvements (red-line project).

 

Auckland Transport COVID-19 Update

COVID-19 Level 3

23.     In August 2020, community transmission of COVID-19 was confirmed in Auckland.  The government took Auckland back to Alert level 3 while the outbreak was contained.

24.     While at Alert Level 3, the Government’s advice was to stay home. Public transport continued to operate with strict health and safety requirements in place. Following Government advice, customers were asked to maintain physical distancing and wear a face covering. Fares continued to be charged through Alert Level 3 and cash fares were not accepted on public transport.

25.     Our planned renewal works continued such as road surfacing, repair and footpath works as well as essential maintenance activities such as fixing potholes continued.

26.     AT’s construction sites operated under strict Health and Safety guidelines based on Ministry of Health Guidance and industry best practice.  Each site developed a Health and Safety Plan based on Ministry of Health Guidance and industry best practice.

COVID-19 Level 2 in Auckland

27.     As per Government advice, Auckland moved down to Alert Level 2 at 11:59pm on Sunday 30 August.

28.     The Government has advised that the general rule for Alert Level 2 is to play it safe. This means that if you are feeling sick you should stay home. Do not go to work or school feeling unwell. Do not socialise, and if you are showing symptoms of COVID-19 you should avoid using public transport when travelling to a medical appointment.

 

 

 

COVID 19 Level 2 in Auckland – Public Transport and School Buses

29.     Public transport will be operating normal schedules under Alert Level 2, except for the cancelled after-midnight services on Friday and Saturday nights. Cash is still not being accepted. The following measures must be followed:

·    Masks will be mandatory on public transport as will physical distancing

·    Children under the age of 12 are exempted from wearing face coverings.

·    Public transport capacity will be reduced due to physical distancing requirements

·    For the majority of buses, exit and entry will be through the rear door

·    The public are strongly advised to register their HOP cards and check that their details are up to date

30.     AT and its operators will be ensuring cleaning of vehicles is undertaken regularly and the cleaning regime has been enhanced to include antimicrobial protection fogging of facilities and our fleet. See a video of some of our cleaning here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xpAHT7gpQRI

31.     AT-contracted school bus services are operating again during Alert Level 2. Following the Government’s guidelines, face coverings and physical distancing are not required on dedicated school transport services and there are essentially no capacity restrictions due to the records being held on all passengers that use them.

32.     In order to operate this way, it is important that up-to-date records of passengers are maintained to facilitate contact tracing. For AT-contracted school transport services, schools have been asked by Government to maintain lists of students who use those services and work closely with AT.

33.     Hand sanitiser has been made available to students boarding and departing the bus, plus buses will be cleaned after each school run as per Government guidance.

 

COVID 19 Level 2- Other Services

34.     Most customer service centres remain open with physical distancing rules applying to both customers and staff with the exception of Manukau Train Station, AUT and Botany. Cash fares are still not being accepted by staff under Alert Level 2.

35.     During this time, it is recommended that customers use self-service options such as ordering an AT HOP card online. Journey planning can also be done via the AT website or AT Mobile app.

36.     Paid parking is continuing for both on and off-street parking under Alert Level 2. Enforcement of parking restrictions, bus lanes and other special vehicle lanes also continues.

37.     Parking and transport compliance staff will assist authorities by monitoring physical distancing behaviour across the network and assisting essential healthcare and community testing facilities with any transport related issues.

38.     AT’s work across construction sites continues to operate, but under strict Health and Safety protocols based on Ministry of Health Guidance and industry best practice. 

39.     These measures include physical distancing, compulsory PPE, hygiene practices, recording site entry and exit and separating teams into zones on our larger sites. 

40.     Engagement (both informing and consulting communities on upcoming projects) will continue under Alert Level 2 except for the following channels:

 

·       No drop-in sessions or public meetings;

·       No, or very limited, face-to-face meetings with members of the public, stakeholders or elected members.

 

41.     Instead of face-to-face communication, AT will engage via channels such as telephone calls, conference calls, email, Facebook live and webcasts.

 

AMETI Update

42.     The AMETI - Eastern Busway is Auckland Transport’s biggest project.  It is worth $1.4 billion and is New Zealand’s first urban busway. The busway will eventually provide congestion free ‘bus only’ lanes for commuters from Botany to Panmure.

43.     This update includes the latest construction progress as well as some of what is coming up over the next few weeks.

44.     Some of the recent highlights include the completion and reopening of Basin View Lane's intersections with Lagoon Drive and Domain Road, the opening of YMCA Lagoon Stadium's new entrance at 44 Domain Road and the first stages of the busway bridge 'launch', a New Zealand-first for this type of bridge construction. 

Traffic Layout Changes

45.     As part of ongoing works, some changes have been made to the traffic layouts of Lagoon Drive and the Pakuranga intersection.

Lagoon Drive

46.     Vehicles travelling eastbound along Lagoon Drive towards Pakuranga will move onto the completed section of busway, between the Panmure intersection and Basin View Lane.

47.     This is the first of three staged traffic switches along Lagoon Drive, which will eventually extend to Church Crescent. These will be in place until the end of 2020. More information on the next two stages will be made available in due course.

48.     There is no left turn from Queens Road onto the busway. Unfortunately, there is not enough room to make this turn safely.

https://mcusercontent.com/980256e565d26423f097accf3/images/ea06298f-b2fb-4ab6-9839-bd63356eca89.jpg

 

Panmure Intersection Trial

49.     A trial allowing direct access for drivers from Queens Road across the intersection into Ireland Road when they are on a green light is in progress.

50.     Driver behaviour will determine whether this can remain in place until it becomes permanent when it becomes a fully signalised intersection.

51.     Drivers are asked to follow the temporary traffic management in place and the road rules; this connection will significantly benefit both Panmure’s community and also the wider community.

52.     Unfortunately, we are unable to re-establish a direct connection in the other direction, i.e. Ireland Road into Queens Road and Jellicoe Road, because Ireland Road is not signalised and won’t be until the final stage of Panmure intersection works allowing direct access for drivers from Queens Road across the intersection into Ireland Road when they are on a green light.


https://mcusercontent.com/980256e565d26423f097accf3/images/4ec3678f-9b15-4a30-aad8-9e2d2aac929c.jpg

 

General AMETI Progress

53.     Basin View Lane's intersections with Lagoon Drive and Domain Road have been completed and re-opened.

54.     The YMCA Lagoon Stadium's new entrance at 44 Domain Road has opened, with access closed from Lagoon Drive.

55.     Two of the four bridge spans for the Busway Bridge have been launched across the Tāmaki River so far.

 

Train Services and Closure of the Eastern Rail Line

56.     Kiwirail has put in place a speed restriction across the Auckland rail network. This will reduce the frequency of services operating and make most journey times longer. The speed restriction is likely to be in place for around six months until the track maintenance and replacement is completed.

57.     Recent testing across the Auckland Metro network has indicated wear on the tracks is more widespread than originally thought, with repair work required more urgently than previously understood.

58.     KiwiRail carried a track mapping survey at various locations across the Auckland train network. As a result of these surveys, KiwiRail have decided to apply a blanket 40kph speed restriction across the Auckland network, whilst they carry out important engineering works on the train tracks.

59.     In order to carry out this work safety and efficiently, the Eastern Line has been temporarily closed.  It is expected to reopen by 21 September 2020.

 

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

60.     Auckland Transport engages closely with council on developing strategy, actions and measures to support the outcomes sought by the Auckland Plan 2050, the Auckland Climate Action Plan and council’s priorities.

61.     One of AT’s core roles is providing attractive alternatives to private vehicle travel, reducing the carbon footprint of its own operations and, to the extent feasible, that of the contracted public transport network.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

62.     The impact of information in this report is mainly confined to Auckland Transport.  Where LBTCF projects are being progressed by Auckland Council’s Community Facilities department or Panuku, engagement has taken place. Any further engagement required 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

Transport Workshops

63.     AT held a workshop with the Board in September. Matters covered included:

·     Allocation of the 2020/2021 LBTCF

·     AMETI update and the Panmure Sign

 

Auckland Transport Consultations

64.     AT provides the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board with the opportunity to comment on transport projects being delivered in its area.  No consultations were sent to the local board during August 2020 for comment.

 

Traffic Control Committee resolutions

65.     The decisions of AT’s Traffic Control Committee affecting the Maungakiekie- Tāmaki Local Board area during the August 2020 reporting period are noted below:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Street Name

 

Nature of Restriction

 

Type of Report

Decision

Rawhiti Rd/Ngatiawa St, One Tree Hill

Permanent Traffic and Parking Restrictions

No Stopping At All Times / Bus Stop / Stop Control / Removal Of Bus Stop

 

Approved with Conditions

New (unnamed) access road off Domain Rd, Panmure

Permanent Traffic and Parking Restrictions

No Stopping at All Times

Approved in Principle

 

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

66.     The proposed decision of receiving this report has no impacts on Māori.

67.     AT is committed to meeting its responsibilities under Te Tiriti o Waitangi-the Treaty of Waitangi-and its broader legal obligations in being more responsive or effective to Māori.

68.     Our Maori Responsiveness Plan outlines the commitment to Auckland’s 19 mana whenua groups in delivering effective and well-designed transport policy and solutions for Auckland. We also recognise mataawaka and their representative bodies and our desire to foster a relationship with them. This plan is available on the Auckland Transport website - https://at.govt.nz/about-us/transport-plans-strategies/maori-responsiveness-plan/#about.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

69.     The proposed decision of receiving this report has no financial implications for the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

70.     AT’s capital and operating budgets have been reduced through Auckland Council’s Emergency Budget process.  Some projects planned for 2020/2021 will not be able to be delivered. Both the Community Safety Fund and the Local Board Transport Capital Fund are impacted by these budget reductions.

71.     AT attended a workshop with the Board to discuss how to get the best value out of its LBTCF allocations under the current budget constraints.

72.     AT will workshop its forward works programme for 2020/2021 with the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board in October 2020.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

73.     AT will provide another update report to the Board in October 2020.

 

 

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.    

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Lorna Stewart – Elected Member Relationship Manager

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon – Elected Member Relationship Team Manager

Nina Siers - Relationship Manager for Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Puketāpapa

 


Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

22 September 2020

 

 

Governance Forward Work Calendar

File No.: CP2020/07543

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To present the board with the governance forward work calendar.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The governance forward work calendar for the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board is in Attachment A.

3.       The calendar aims to support local boards’ governance role by:

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

·    clarifying what advice is required and when

·    clarifying the rationale for reports.

 

4.       The calendar is updated every month. Each update is reported to business meetings. It is recognised that at times items will arise that are not programmed. Board members are welcome to discuss changes to the calendar.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

a)      note the attached Governance Forward Work Calendar.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Governance Forward Work Calendar September 2020

135

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Tracey Freeman - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Nina Siers - Relationship Manager for Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Puketāpapa

 


Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

22 September 2020

 

 


Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

22 September 2020

 

 

Record of Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board Workshops

File No.: CP2020/07551

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To provide a summary of the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board workshops for 25 August, 1, 8 and 15 September 2020.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Local board workshops are held to give board members an opportunity to receive information and updates or provide direction and have discussion on issues and projects relevant to the local board area. No binding decisions are made or voted on at workshop sessions.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

a)      note the local board record of workshops held on 25 August, 1, 8 and 15 September 2020.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Record of Workshops September 2020

139

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Tracey Freeman - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Nina Siers - Relationship Manager for Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Puketāpapa

 


Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

22 September 2020

 

 


 


 


 


Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

22 September 2020

 

 

Auckland Council’s Year End and Quarterly Performance Report: Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board for quarter four 2019/2020

File No.: CP2020/13582

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To provide the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board with an integrated quarterly performance report for quarter four, 1 April – 30 June 2020, and the overall performance for the financial year, against the agreed 2019/2020 local board work programme.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       This report provides an integrated view of performance for the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board and includes financial performance and delivery against work programmes for the 2019/2020 financial year.

3.       The COVID19 pandemic has resulted in significant pressure on council’s financial position. In response to the Ministry of Health’s orders and to ensure prudent financial management council’s focus and expenditure shifted to essential services. A pause on spending on non-essential services has had a significant impact on the delivery of work programme activities.

4.       Sixty-two activities within the agreed work programmes were delivered including multi-year projects that have progressed as expected. Sixty-four activities were not delivered, cancelled, put on hold or deferred.

5.       Key activity achievements from the 2019/2020 work programme include:

·    Ruapotaka Marae have initiated their first working group meeting alongside council staff, Tāmaki Regeneration Company and Te Waipuna Puawai

·    The local board allocated $39,745.08 for its second local grants round and $20,502.50 for its first quick response round, leaving no remaining funds for FY19/20

·    The Tāmaki Estuary Environmental Forum has helped develop a pollution mitigation project targeting plastic pellet pollution around the estuary.

·    the local board approved Strategic Partnership funding for five applicants up to $40,000 over two years. Staff also held an online webinar providing general and council specific funding advice and information in the post COVID-19 recovery environment.

6.       Key activities not delivered / not progressed as expected include:

·    Twenty-four activities in the local boards 2019/2020 work programme, have been deferred to the 2020/2021 work programme due to impacts from COVID-19

·    Tamaki Greenways - develop a shared path has been deferred to FY20/21 and is on hold until a name has been gifted by mana whenua

·    The activity, Youth Connections is in progress but delayed with the expected completion by December 2020

·    The activity, Onehunga Sustainability Development Programme was cancelled due to COVID-19 lockdown.

7.       Budgets of unfinished activities have been carried forward into 2020/2021 work programmes.

8.       The 2019/2020 financial performance report is attached but is excluded from the public. This is due to restrictions on releasing annual financial reports and results until the Auckland Council Group results are released to the NZX – on or about 30 September.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

a)      receive the performance report for the financial quarter four and year ending 30 June 2020.

b)      note the financial performance report in Attachment B of the report will remain confidential until after the Auckland Council Group results for 2019/2020 are released to the New Zealand’s Exchange (NZX) which are expected to be made public 30 September 2020.

c)      note that COVID19 has resulted in significant pressure on council’s financial position and ability to deliver agreed 2019/2020 work programme activities because:

i)        asset based services were significantly impacted. Regional and community facilities were either fully or partially closed.

ii)       spending on contracts was restricted to essential services only.

d)      note that quarter three reporting was not supplied to the local board as there was limited capacity to access information.

 

 

Horopaki

Context

9.       The Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board has an approved 2019/2020 work programme for the following operating departments:

·        Arts, Community and Events;

·        Parks, Sport and Recreation;

·        Libraries;

·        Community Services: Service, Strategy and Integration;

·        Community Facilities: Build Maintain Renew;

·        Community Leases;

·        Infrastructure and Environmental Services;

·        Plans and Places;

·        ATEED.

·        The Southern Initiative;

10.     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, are not captured in this graph.

Graph 1: work programme activities by outcome

 

11.     The COVID19 pandemic has resulted in significant pressure on council’s financial position and ability to deliver agreed 2019/2020 work programme activities. In response to the orders made by the Director General of Health on 25 March 2020 under s 70 of the Health Act 1956 council’s focus and expenditure shifted to essential services only. Physical distancing requirements and measures to ensure prudent financial management meant that only essential activities and services could continue.

12.     Asset based services were significantly impacted as all regional and community facilities were either fully or partially closed depending on the Ministry of Health’s guidelines for each COVID19 alert level.

13.     Spending on contracts was restricted to essential services while in Alert Level 4.  These restrictions were reviewed as alert levels changed.  There are currently no restrictions, however, there continues to be extra spending approvals in place to ensure prudent spending and delivery of value for money for ratepayers.

14.     Reporting on quarter three reporting was not supplied to the local board as council staff working from home during the lockdown had limited capacity to access information and systems which affected their ability to deliver reports in a robust and meaningful way.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Local Board Work Programme Snapshot

15.     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 have been delivered as expected (completed by the end of July 2020) or multi-year activities which have progressed as planned (green), in progress but with issues that are being managed (amber), and activities that are undelivered or have significant issues (red) and activities that have been cancelled/deferred/merged (grey).

Graph 2: Work Programme by RAG status

16.     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 activity by activity status and department

Key activity achievements from the 2019/2020 work programme

17.     The key achievements in the delivery of the local board work programmes for 2019/2020 include:

·    Ruapotaka Marae support: Ruapotaka Marae alongside council staff, Tāmaki Regeneration Company and Te Waipuna Puawai have completed their first working group meeting, which is aimed at supporting the marae to develop their future service offering

·    Local Events Programme (Externally Delivered Events): despite COIVD-19 restrictions, an adapted Matariki festival was able to be delivered by the Glen Innes Business Association and supporting community groups.

·    Local community grants: $39,745.08 was allocated for Local Grants Round Two and $20,502.50 for Quick Response Round One, leaving no remaining funds.

·    Low carbon lifestyles: 223 households were engaged in this project, reaching 665 occupants. On average, each participating household saved $314 in energy costs. Total savings were estimated at $59,106 in energy costs and 31,970 kg carbon emissions.

·    Te Oro (Council Facility) – Operational Expenditure: Staff made venues across the network available for the provision of essential services during alert levels 4 and 3. Examples of these services were New Zealand Blood Service, Food Banks, COVID-19 testing stations.

·    Tāmaki Estuary Environmental Forum: the forum has made positive gains across plastics, biodiversity and water quality focus areas, helping to develop a pollution mitigation project targeting plastic pellet pollution around the estuary.

·    Strategic Partnerships: the local board approved Strategic Partnership funding for five applicants up to $40,000 over two years. The recipients will be able to access support to build organisational capacity and capability to improve performance and good practice standards. This will enable them to build on existing support from other funders and to attract diverse funding opportunities and unlock access to other resources. An online webinar was delivered for 20 community groups based and/or working in Maungakiekie-Tāmaki providing general and council specific advice and information relating to what funds are available in the post COVID-19 recovery environment.

·    Engaged communities: Rākau Tautoko is developing and coordinating a digital capability programme, that will include a series of online workshops, mentoring sessions, and personal planning through this time. Synergy alongside To Wahi have supported families throughout the lockdown period. Staff are working with Tāmaki Budgeting and GeneNow Financial Literacy Trust to develop and deliver a Rent Smart workshop to respond to needs within the community as a result of COVID-19. Tāmaki Budgeting will also provide support to the other community groups delivering Rent Smart workshops. Staff have also completed a funding agreement with Habitat for Humanity to support the delivery of Essential Winter items to those impacted by COVID-19.

·    The following Community Facilities – Build, Maintain, Renew work programme activities are now completed:

·      Panmure Basin - implement masterplan priorities

·      Mt Wellington War Memorial Reserve - renew coastal wall

·      Glen Innes Pool - Comprehensive renewal

·      Lagoon Pool - comprehensive renewal

·      Onehunga Library - renew furniture fixtures and equipment

·      139 Mt Wellington Highway, Mount Wellington - renew facility

·      Glen Innes Community Hall - Citizens Advice Bureau - refurbish interior

·      Glen Innes Community Hall - renew community places facility.

Overview of work programme performance by department

Arts, Community and Events work programme

18.     In the Arts, Community and Events work programme, there are 16 activities that were completed by the end of the year or will be by end of July 2020 (green), one activity that is in progress but is delayed (amber), and four activities that have been cancelled and deferred in quarter four (grey). There were no activities with significant impact other than COVID-19.

Parks, Sport and Recreation work programme

19.     In the Parks, Sport and Recreation work programme, there are two activities that were completed (green), and seven activities that are in progress but are delayed (amber). Activities with significant impact other than COVID-19 are discussed below:

Table 2: Parks, Sport and Recreation activity with significant impact other than COVID-19

Activity name

RAG status

Activity status

Explanation and mitigation

Point England Reserve Service Assessment

Amber

On Hold

The service assessment is on hold until the treaty settlement claim over Point England has been completed.

 

Libraries work programme

20.     In the Libraries work programme, all six activities were completed by the end of the year (green). All three libraries were closed on 20 March 2020 due to COVID-19. Panmure Library re-opened on 20 May 2020 followed by Glen Innes and Onehunga Library on 5 June 2020.

 

Service Strategy and Integration work programme

21.     In the Service Strategy and Integration work programme, there is one activity that will be completed by end of July 2020 (green). The remaining three activities are in progress but are delayed (amber), due to COVID-19.

 

Community Facilities: Build Maintain Renew work programme

22.     In the Community Facilities: Build Maintain Renew work programme, there are 19 activities that were completed by the end of the year or will be by end of July 2020 (green), three activities that are in progress but are delayed (amber), two activities that are significantly delayed, on hold or not delivered (red) and 27 activities that have been cancelled and deferred in quarter four (grey).  Activities with significant impact other than COVID-19 are discussed below:

Table 5: Community Facilities activities with significant impact other than COVID-19

Activity name

RAG status

Activity status



Panmure Basin - renew play space

Red

In progress

This activity is in progress with Peterson Reserve playground being completed in December. There is uncertainty whether there will be sufficient resource following the Emergency Budget to complete the other two playgrounds in Panmure Basin. Staff will provide advice to the local board following the Emergency Budget.

Tamaki Greenways - develop a shared path

Grey

Deferred

This activity has been deferred as it is on hold until a name for the path has been determined and will continue to be progressed in FY20/21.

Mt Wellington War Memorial Park - provide new dual toilet facility

Grey

Deferred

This activity has been deferred as it is on hold whilst staff continue to reach an agreement with the club. This activity will continue in FY20/21.

Stone Cottage - renew heritage facility

Grey

Cancelled

This activity has been cancelled as it is a duplicate of an activity already in the work programme, Stone Cottage - renew roof and joinery

Community Leases work programme

23.     In the Community Leases work programme, there are nine activities that were completed by the end of the year and two activities that have been approved as part of the 2019/2020 work programme but will not be progressed until future financial years (green), and 13 activities that have been deferred in quarter four (grey).  Activities with significant impact other than COVID-19 are discussed below:

Table 6: Community Leases activities with significant impact other than COVID-19

Activity name

RAG status

Activity status

Explanation and mitigation

7-13 Pilkington Road Panmure Auckland: Tamaki Redevelopment Company Limited

Grey

Deferred

This activity is deferred whilst staff work with the group to resolve arrears. 

175-243 Neilson St, Onehunga: Auckland Stock and Saloon Car Club Incorporated

Grey

Deferred

These activities are deferred until the Waikaraka Park Reserve Management Plan is completed at the end of 2020.

Waikaraka Park, 246 Nielson Street, Onehunga: Lease to Auckland Canine Agility Club Incorporated

Grey

Deferred

Waikaraka Park, 175-243 Neilson Street, Te Papapa: Lease to Onehunga Combined Sports Trust

Grey

Deferred

Panmure Stone Cottage, 1 Kings Road, Panmure: Lease to Panmure Historical Society Incorporated

Grey

Deferred

This activity has been deferred to allow for investigation and consideration of options for the future of this site while the Unlock Panmure Project is underway. The current lease will continue to roll over on a monthly basis under the same terms and conditions.

Savage Park, 10 Hamlin Road, Mount Wellington: Lease to Scout Association of New Zealand - Maungerei Scout Group

Grey

Deferred

Further information required from the group to progress the lease. Staff will continue to progress this in FY20/21.

Elstree North Reserve, 38A Elstree Avenue Glen Innes: Renewal lease to Tamaki Model Aero Club Incorporated

Grey

Deferred

Staff are investigating options for the board to consider. Will workshop options with the board in FY 20/21.

Accounts is investigating the write off of arrears. Once this has been finalised, options will be workshopped with the local board and a report for the variation will be drafted for approval. This item to be moved to the 2020/2021 work programme

Pt England Reserve, 122 Elstress Avenue Glen Innes: Renewal airspace lease to Tāmaki Model Aero Club Incorporated

Grey

Deferred

92-106 Line Road Glen Innes: Lease to Citizens Advice Bureau - Glen Innes

Grey

Deferred

These leases are waiting for the completion of the lease deeds by CAB.

Panmure Community Centre, 7-13 Pilkington Road Panmure: Lease to Citizens Advice Bureau – Panmure

Grey

Deferred

Onehunga Community Centre, 101 Church Street Onehunga: Lease to Citizens Advice Bureau - Onehunga

Grey

Deferred

Allenby Reserve, 50-52 Allenby Road Panmure: Lease to The Scout Association of NZ - Wainui Sea Scout Group

Grey

Deferred

A business report is being drafted and will be presented at the August business meeting. This item will be moved to the 2020/2021 work programme.

 

Infrastructure and Environment Services work programme

24.     In the Infrastructure and Environment Services work programme, there are five activities that were completed by the end of the year (green), and two activities that are in progress but are delayed (amber).

 

Plans and Places work programme

25.     In the Plans and Places work programme, the activity Local History of Maungakiekie-Tāmaki is in progress and will be completed by end of July 2020 (green). The activity Mt Wellington planning investigation has been deferred in quarter four (grey) to a future financial year as the Plans and Places currently do not have capacity to deliver this activity. The deferral of this activity is likely to be longer than first anticipated due to the impacts of COVID-19.

 

ATEED work programme

26.     In the ATEED work programme, the activity ‘Pop-up Business School (MT)’ is in progress, but has been rescheduled to 17 August (green). The activity, Onehunga Sustainability Development Programme was cancelled in quarter four due to COVID-19 lockdown (grey).

 

The Southern Initiative work programme

27.     In the The Southern Initiative work programme, the activity Youth Connections is in progress but delayed (amber). Delivery of this activity is expected to be completed by December 2020.

Deferred activities

28.     The Corporate and Local Board Performance team have identified projects from the local boards locally driven initiatives (LDI) operational budget 2019/2020 where there was an agreed scope and cost which were not been delivered. These have been added to the work programme to be delivered in 2020/2021.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

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

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. As this is an information only report there are no further impacts identified.

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

Local impacts and local board views

31.     This report informs the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board of the performance for quarter ending 30 June 2019 and the performance for the 2019/2020 financial year.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

32.     The Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board remains committed to integrating and supporting work that contributes to outcomes for Māori. This includes enhancing partnerships and collaborative ways of working with mana whenua and mataawaka.

33.     Some of the activities in the local board’s 2019/2020 work programme (Attachment A) have specific impact on the wider community, this includes:

·        the local board’s Strategic Broker and Community Places Advisors have been working with our Māori and Pacific communities that have been impacted due to COVID-19

·        the local board’s youth partner, The 312 Hub has been continuing to deliver their Rangatahi tū Rangatahi programme, and Te Amiorangi have shifted to supporting rangatahi through weekly zoom meetings

·        continued collaboration with Ruapotaka Marae and their marae redevelopment. The marae alongside staff have initiated a working group which will be supporting the marae to develop their future service offering.

·        the local board is supporting the programme, Te Kete Rukuruku (Māori naming of parks and places). Due to COVID-19 there have been delays in the naming process, which is now anticipated to be received in October 2020.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

34.     This report is provided to enable the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board to monitor the organisation’s progress and performance in delivering the 2019/2020 work programmes. There are no financial implications associated with this report.

Financial performance

35.     Auckland Council (Council) currently has a number of bonds quoted on the NZ Stock Exchange (NZX). As a result, the Council is subject to obligations under the NZX Main Board & Debt Market Listing Rules and the Financial Markets Conduct Act 2013 sections 97 and 461H. These obligations restrict the release of annual financial reports and results until the Auckland Council Group results are released to the NZX – on or about 30 September. Due to these obligations the financial performance attached to the quarterly report is excluded from the public. 

 

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

36.     Information about any significant risks and how they are being managed and/or mitigated is addressed in the ‘Overview of work programme performance by department’ section.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

37.     The Emergency Budget was adopted on 30 July. Work programmes for 2020/2021 were approved at the board’s business meeting in August.

38.     Delivery of the activities in the 2020/2021 work programme has commenced. There is a reduced timeframe to deliver these work programmes (10 months).

39.     As the delivery timeframe for the 2020/2021 work programmes is reduced, the reporting timeframe is likely to change.

40.     Resourcing of the 2020/2021 work programmes was based on the current staff capacity within departments. If changes to staff capacity have an impact on work programme delivery, this will be signalled to the local board at the earliest opportunity.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board Work Programme Update

153

b

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board Quarterly Report - Financial Appendix (Under Separate Cover) - Confidential

 

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Mal Ahmu - Local Board Advisor - Mngke-Tmk

Authorisers

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Nina Siers - Relationship Manager for Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Puketāpapa

 


Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

22 September 2020

 

 


Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

22 September 2020

 

 


Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

22 September 2020

 

 


Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

22 September 2020

 

 


Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

22 September 2020

 

 


Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

22 September 2020

 

 


Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

22 September 2020

 

 


Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

22 September 2020

 

 


Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

22 September 2020

 

 


Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

22 September 2020

 

 


Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

22 September 2020

 

 


Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

22 September 2020

 

 


Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

22 September 2020

 

 


Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

22 September 2020

 

 


Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

22 September 2020

 

 


Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

22 September 2020

 

 


Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

22 September 2020

 

 


Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

22 September 2020

 

 


Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

22 September 2020

 

 

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board Annual Report 2019/2020

File No.: CP2020/12816

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek local board adoption of the 2019/2020 Annual Report for the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board, prior to it being adopted by the Governing Body on 29 October 2020.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The Auckland Council Annual Report 2019/2020 is being prepared and needs to be adopted by the Governing Body by 29 October 2020. As part of the overall report package, individual reports for each local board are prepared.

3.       Auckland Council currently has a series of bonds quoted on the New Zealand Stock Exchange (NZX) Debt Market maintained by NZX Limited. As council is subject to obligations under the NZX Main Board and Debt Market Listing Rules and the Financial Markets Conduct Act 2013 (FMCA), local boards may not release annual financial results in any form. Therefore, the attached annual report is being presented as confidential.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

a)      adopt the 2019/2020 Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board Annual Report as set out in Attachment A.

b)      note that any proposed changes after the adoption will be clearly communicated and agreed with the chairperson before the report is submitted for adoption by the Governing Body by 29 October 2020.

c)      note that the draft 2019/2020 Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board Annual Report (refer to Attachment A to the agenda report) will remain confidential until after the Auckland Council group results for 2019/2020 are released to the New Zealand Stock Exchange which are expected to be made public by 30 October 2020.

 

Horopaki

Context

4.       In accordance with the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 and the Local Government Act 2002, each local board is required to monitor and report on the implementation of its Local Board Agreement. This includes reporting on the performance measures for local activities, and the overall Financial Impact Statement for the local board.

5.       In addition to the compliance purpose, local board annual reports are an opportunity to tell the wider performance story with a strong local flavour, including how the local board is working towards the outcomes of their local board plan.

6.       This story is particularly important this year in light of the impacts Covid-19 had on communities and the council in the third quarter of 2019/2020.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

7.       The annual report contains the following sections:

Section

Description

Mihi

The mihi relates to the local board area.

Message from the chairperson

An overall message introducing the report, highlighting achievements and challenges, including both financial and non-financial performance.

Local board members

A group photo of the local board members.

Our area

A visual layout of the local board area, summarising key demographic information and showing key projects and facilities in the area.

Performance report

Provides performance measure results for each activity, providing explanations where targeted service levels have not been achieved.

Funding information

Financial performance results compared to long-term plan and annual plan budgets, together with explanations about variances.

Local flavour

A profile of either an outstanding resident, grant, project or facility that benefits the local community.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

8.       The Council’s Climate Change disclosures are covered in Volume four of the Annual Report and sections within the Summary Annual Report.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

9.       Council departments and council-controlled organisations comments and views have been considered and included in the annual report in relation to activities they are responsible for delivering on behalf of local boards.

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

Local impacts and local board views

10.     Local board feedback will be included where possible. Any changes to the content of the final annual report will be discussed with the chairperson.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

11.     The annual report provides information on how Auckland Council has progressed its agreed priorities in the Long-term Plan 2018-2028 over the past 12 months. This includes engagement with Māori, as well as projects that benefit various population groups, including Māori.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

12.     The annual report reports on both the financial and service performance in each local board area.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

13.     The annual report is a legislatively required document. It is audited by Audit New Zealand who assess if the report represents information fairly and consistently, and that the financial statements comply with accounting standard PBE FRS-43: Summary Financial Statements. Failure to demonstrate this could result in a qualified audit opinion.

14.     The annual report is a key communication to residents. It is important to tell a clear and balanced performance story, in plain English, and in a form that is accessible, to ensure that council meets its obligations to be open with the public it serves.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

15.     The next steps for the draft 2019/2020 Annual Report for the local board are:

·     Audit NZ review during August and September 2020

·     report to the Governing Body for adoption on 29 October 2020

·     release to stock exchanges and publication online on 30 October 2020

·     physical copies provided to local board offices, council service centres and libraries by the end of October 2020.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Draft 2019/2020 Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board Annual Report  (Under Separate Cover) - Confidential

 

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Audrey Gan - Lead Financial Advisor Local Boards

David Gurney – Manager Corporate Leade Performance, Financial Strategy and Planning

Authorisers

Kevin Ramsay - Acting Group Chief Financial Officer

Nina Siers - Relationship Manager for Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Puketāpapa

      

 


Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

22 September 2020

 

 

Exclusion of the Public: Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987

That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

a)      exclude the public from the following part(s) of the proceedings of this meeting.

The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter, and the specific grounds under section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution follows.

This resolution is made in reliance on section 48(1)(a) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 and the particular interest or interests protected by section 6 or section 7 of that Act which would be prejudiced by the holding of the whole or relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting in public, as follows:

 

21        Auckland Council’s Year End and Quarterly Performance Report: Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board for quarter four 2019/2020 - Attachment b - Maungakiekie-Tamaki Local Board Quarterly Report - Financial Appendix

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Particular interest(s) protected (where applicable)

Ground(s) under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

s7(2)(j) - The withholding of the information is necessary to prevent the disclosure or use of official information for improper gain or improper advantage.

In particular, the report contains detailed financial information that have an impact on the financial results of the Auckland Council group as at 31 July 2020 that require release to the New Zealand Stock Exchange..

s48(1)(a)

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

 

22        Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board Annual Report 2019/2020 - Attachment a - Draft 2019/2020 Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board Annual Report

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Particular interest(s) protected (where applicable)

Ground(s) under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

s7(2)(i) - The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations).

Reason: In particular, the report contains detailed financial adjustments, assumptions and judgements that have impact on the financial results of the Auckland Council group as at 30 June 2020 that require final Audit New Zealand sign-off and release to the New Zealand Stock Exchange..
Review Date: 30/10/2020.

s48(1)(a)

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

 

C1       Statement of proposal for a new Navigation Safety Bylaw

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Particular interest(s) protected (where applicable)

Ground(s) under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

s7(2)(c)(i) - The withholding of the information is necessary to protect information which is subject to an obligation of confidence or which any person has been or could be compelled to provide under the authority of any enactment, where the making available of the information would be likely to prejudice the supply of similar information or information from the same source and it is in the public interest that such information should continue to be supplied.

In particular, the report contains a working draft of a bylaw yet to be approved for public consultation.

s7(2)(f)(ii) - The withholding of the information is necessary to maintain the effective conduct of public affairs through the protection of such members, officers, employees and persons from improper pressure or harassment.

In particular, the report contains a working draft of a bylaw yet to be approved for public consultation.

s48(1)(a)

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

 

   



[1] Waitākere Ranges Strategic Weed Management Plan 2015

[2] Auckland Council Weed Management Policy

[3] E34 Agrichemicals and vertebrate toxic agents - Unitary Plan

[4] Streetscapes Specifications - 19 March 2019_

[5] Transport Authorities - Glyphosate use

[6] Novachem Manual - Glyphosate 510

[7] https://www.epa.govt.nz/news-and-alerts/latest-news/use-of-glyphosate-in-new-zealand/

[8] Novachem Manual - Glyphosate 510

[9] Product Label Green Glyphosate 510

[10] Supplementary material glyphosate

[11] http://resistance.nzpps.org/index.php?p=herbicides/glyphosate

[12] Vegetation management Trial 2002

[13] Review PwC Weed Management Cost

[14] Novachem – Bio Safe

[15] Information provided by Kiwicare

[16] Back to the future - electrothermal, systemic, weedkiller

[17] Water use from Weedtechnics A4-SW900-Product-Specifications and Foamstream M1200 – Weedingtech spec sheet.

[18] Watercare - Drought response

[19] Weedtechnics A4-SW900-Product-Specifications

[20] Measuring Emissions: a guide for organisations – Emission factors for stationary combustion fuels Diesel 1 litre = 2.66 kg CO2/unit

[21] Linear km covers both side of the road e.g 2.2km. (average walking speed of between 2.9 kilometres per hour (km/h) and 6.5 km/h).

[22] Review PwC Weed Management Cost 15092015

[23] Best Practice Guidance - Notes for Integrated and Non-chemical Amenity Hard Surface Weed

[24] http://resistance.nzpps.org/index.php?p=herbicides/glyphosate

[25] https://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/environment/Pages/auckland-climate-action-plan.aspx

[26] Emissions from direct/production and electricity use, but not including “embodied” or “life cycle emissions”. These emissions do not include fuel for the boiler pump or motorized sprayer.

[27] Water use -Bio Blast

[28] https://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/environment/plants-animals/pests-weeds/Documents/weedcontrolmethods.pdf

[29] People Survey - 2019

[30] 264 kg x 5,055km road corridor. This could be mitigated by the use of battery power, there are no options currently available in New Zealand

 

 

[31] Costings should not be treated a final pricing but as an indication of pricing differences between methodology.