Agenda of Rodney Local Board

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

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

4 Confirmation of Minutes

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting held on Wednesday 2 December 2020, as a true and correct record.

5 Leave of Absence

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

6 Acknowledgements

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

7 Petitions

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

8 Deputations

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

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

9 Public Forum – will be held at 4.30pm

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 three minutes per item is allowed, following which there may be questions from members.

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

10 Extraordinary Business

Section 46A(7) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:

“An item that is not on the agenda for a meeting may be dealt with at that meeting if-

(a) The local authority by resolution so decides; and

(b) The presiding member explains at the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public,-

(i) The reason why the item is not on the agenda; and

(ii) The reason why the discussion of the item cannot be delayed until a subsequent meeting.”

Section 46A(7A) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:

“Where an item is not on the agenda for a meeting,-

(a) That item may be discussed at that meeting if-

(i) That item is a minor matter relating to the general business of the local authority; and

(ii) the presiding member explains at the beginning of the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public, that the item will be discussed at the meeting; but

(b) no resolution, decision or recommendation may be made in respect of that item except to refer that item to a subsequent meeting of the local authority for further discussion.”

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Memorandum of Understanding	9
b ⇩	Annual report	19

Rodney Local Board

09 December 2020

Auckland Council’s Performance Report: Rodney Local Board for July to October 2020

File No.: CP2020/18128

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide the Rodney Local Board with an integrated Auckland Council Performance Report for July to October 2020.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. This report includes financial performance, progress against work programmes, key challenges the local board should be aware of and any risks to delivery against the 2020/2021 work programme.

3. The key activity updates from this period are:

· establishment of a Friday night market at the Wellsford Community Centre in collaboration with Te Hana Te Ao Marama Māori Cultural Centre

· tenders issued and submissions being evaluated for work on the Kumeū Library

· renewal works at Leigh Hall are on track for completion by late November 2020

· a steering group has been established for the indoor multi-sport facility at Huapai, and work is progressing on the detailed business case

· Ti Point Wharf will operate on a restricted basis to enable it to be kept open over summer, and physical works will commence in April, or earlier, if structural deterioration requires

· topographical surveying is being carried out on land atGreen Road Park, to inform prioritisation and planning of further works.

4. All operating departments with agreed work programmes have provided an update against their work programme delivery (Attachment A to the agenda report). Activities are reported with a status of green (on track), amber (some risk or issues, which are being managed) or grey (cancelled, deferred or merged). There are no activities with a red status.

5. The financial performance report compared to budget 2020/2021 is provided as Attachment B to the agenda report. There are some points for the local board to note: overall, the net operational financial performance of the local board is tracking below the revised year-to-date budget (88 percent).

6. Revenue is above budget for the year-to-date and is likely to be on or above the target for the full financial year. From the local board’s Locally Driven Initiatives funding, the majority of projects are underway and on track to be completed during the year, although some projects that were carried forward from 2019/20 will need to be monitored carefully to ensure completion.

7. Capital projects completed or underway include: Ti Point Wharf investigation and renewal, ongoing development of the community space by the riverbank at the rear of the Huapai Service Centre, town centre revitalisation planning at Helensville, refurbishment of Leigh Hall interior, and renewal of minor assets at Sunburst Reserve and Tamatea Esplanade.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) receive the Auckland Council’s Performance Report: Rodney Local Board for July to October 2020.

Horopaki

Context

8. The Rodney Local Board has an approved 2020/2021 work programme for the following operating departments:

· Arts, Community and Events

· Parks, Sport and Recreation

· Libraries and Information

· Community Services: Service, Strategy and Integration

· Community Facilities: Build Maintain Renew

· Community Leases

· Infrastructure and Environmental Services.

9. 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

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Local Board Work Programme Snapshot

10. Graph 2 below identifies work programme activity by RAG status (red, amber, green and grey), which measures the performance of the activity. It shows the percentage of work programme activities that are on track (green), in progress but with issues that are being managed (amber), and activities that have significant issues (red) and activities that have been cancelled/deferred/merged (grey).

Graph 2: Work programme by RAG status

11. Graph 3 shows the status of activities in each departments’ work programme. Each department has a different number of work programme activities. For example, Community Facilities (CF) has the most approved activities at more than 60.

Graph 3: Work programme by activity status and department

Key activity updates

12. Activities to note include:

· Service improvements – Rodney Halls (ID 1024 / page 3 of Attachment A): additional activation activities have started with a Friday night market at the Wellsford Community Centre in collaboration with Te Hana Te Ao Marama Māori Cultural Centre

· Kumeū Library – replace roof, interior and exterior walls, repaint and renew ceiling (ID 2444 / page 7 of Attachment A): A tender has been issued and the closing date was extended to 10 November 2020. The team is evaluating submissions to identify a preferred supplier for awarding a contract

· Leigh Hall – refurbish interior (ID 2696 / page 9 of Attachment A): Renewal works are on track for completion in late November 2020. Further asbestos has been uncovered and is being correctly managed

· Huapai Recreation Reserve – develop indoor multi-sport facility (ID 2571 / page 17 of Attachment A): a steering group consisting of staff and external stakeholders has been established, and work is progressing on the detailed business case

· Ti Point Wharf (ID: 3595 / page 20 of Attachment A): the option of getting a temporary repair done prior to summer is not achievable due to the large amount of work needed to replace the piles, therefore the wharf will be kept open over summer with restricted use in place. Physical works will commence in April to address all the concerns. If the wharf deteriorates further or requires closure prior to April, the work will be brought forward

· Green Road Park– implement site assessments (ID 3606 / page 21 of Attachment A): topographical survey is being carried out, which will inform prioritisation and planning of further works.

Activities with significant issues

13. There are no activities with identified significant issues (red RAG status activities), however the local board has been advised of the cancellation of a number of local-board funded events, due to the risks and impacts associated with COVID-19.

14. In some cases, an alternative request for the funding was put forward by the event organisers, which have been supported by the local board. This includes the Kumeu ‘Christmas at the Showgrounds’ event, which was organised as an alternative to the Kumeu Santa Parade, and Santa visits to primary schools and early childhood education centres in the Warkworth area, as an alternative to the Warkworth Santa Parade.

Changes to the local board work programme

Deferred activities

15. These activities are deferred from the 2020/2021 work programme:

· Goodall reserve – renew skate park and minor assets (ID 3575) – this project has been deferred to financial year 2022 due to work programme reprioritisation and funding constraints due to the Emergency Budget funding constraints.

Activities with changes

16. The following work programmes activities have been amended to reflect minor changes, the implications are reported in the table below. The local board was informed of these minor changes and they were made by staff under delegation.

Table 1: Minor changes to the local board work programme

ID/Ref	Work Programme Name	Activity Name	Change	Reason for change	Budget Implications
2472	Community Facilities: Build Maintain Renew	Omaha - renew walkways	Agreement sought to include this line item in the Risk Adjusted Programme (RAP) in the 2020/2021 financial year.	The forecasted budget requirement exceeds the allocated budget in the 2020/2021 financial year by $3,000. This project is a multi-year project with budget allocations as per below: Prior to FY20/21 $144,178 FY20/21 $30,000 FY21/22 $100,000 FY22/23 $100,000 FY23/24 $100,000 FY24/25 $100,000 FY25/26 $100,000 Total $674,178 It is requested that $3,000 of the funding allocation next financial year be accessed earlier than anticipated to allow for further investigation works to be completed prior to physical works recommencing next financial year.	No implication is anticipated by allowing early access of $3,000 of the 2021/2022 budget. Due to other projects experiencing minor delays in delivery, there is an expected underspend in the 2020/2021 financial year that will balance the early access of the $3,000.
2950	Community Facilities: Build Maintain Renew	William Fraser Reserve - rebuild toilet amenity block	Agreement sought to include this line item in the Risk Adjusted Programme (RAP) in the 2020/2021 financial year.	The forecasted budget requirement exceeds the allocated budget in the 2020/2021 financial year by $1,000. This project is a multi-year project with budget allocations as per below: Prior to FY20/21 $46,550 FY20/21 $30,510 FY21/22 $200,000 FY22/23 $300,000 FY23/24 $370,000 Total $947,060 It is requested that $1,000 of the funding allocation next financial year be accessed earlier than anticipated to allow for further investigation works to be completed prior to physical works recommencing next financial year.	No implication is anticipated by allowing early access of $1,000 of the 2021/2022 budget. Due to other projects experiencing minor delays in delivery, there is an expected underspend in the 2020/2021 financial year that will balance the early access of the $1,000.
3199	Community Facilities: Build Maintain Renew	Rainbows End Reserve - renew jetty and piles	Agreement sought to include this line item in the Risk Adjusted Programme (RAP) in the 2020/2021 financial year.	The forecasted budget requirement exceeds the allocated budget in the 2020/2021 financial year by $1,000. This project is a multi-year project with budget allocations as per below: Prior to FY20/21 $14,363 FY22/23 $241,276 Total $255,639 It is requested that $1,000 of the funding allocation in the 2022/2023 financial year be accessed earlier than anticipated to allow for further investigation works to be completed prior to physical works recommencing in the 2022/2023 financial year.	No implication is anticipated by allowing early access of $1,000 of the 2021/2022 budget. Due to other regional projects experiencing minor delays in delivery, there is an expected underspend in the 2020/2021 financial year that will balance the early access of the $1,000. Note: This budget is the regional coastal renewal budget and was not allocated in the Rodney Local Board’s Annual Plan. This addition to the Risk Adjusted Programme (RAP) has been approved by the delegated authority, General Manager, Community Facilities – Rod Sheridan.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

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

18. Work programmes were approved in August 2020 and delivery is underway. Should significant changes to any projects be required, climate change impacts will be assessed as part of the relevant reporting requirements. Any changes to the timing of approved projects are unlikely to result in changes to emissions.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

19. When developing work programmes, council group impacts and views are presented to local 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

20. This report informs the Rodney Local Board of financial performance for July to October 2020.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

21. Where aspects of the proposed work programme are anticipated to have a significant impact on activities of importance to Māori then appropriate engagement will be undertaken.

22. The Arts, Communities and Events team is leading a programme of work that aims to engage local iwi to identify, scope and deliver projects that will support iwi to realise their aspirations in Rodney. Delays have occurred due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Discussions are about to recommence with Ngati Manuhiri.

23. It is recognised that environmental management, water quality and land management have integral links with the mauri of the environment and concepts of kaitiakitanga, and there is focus on incorporating this in our work programmes, for example Te Uri O Hau Settlement Trust are involved in growing many of the plants for the Rodney Healthy Harbours and Waterways Fund.

24. The Community Facilities work programme ensures that all facilities and open space assets continue to be well-maintained to benefit the local community, including Māori. When developing and delivering work programmes consideration is given to how the activities can contribute to Māori well-being, values, culture and traditions.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

25. This report is provided to enable the Rodney Local Board to monitor the organisation’s progress and performance in delivering the Rodney Local Board 2020/2021 work programme. There are no financial implications associated with this report.

Financial Performance

26. Operating expenditure relating to Asset Based Services (ABS) is under budget by $620,000 for the year to date, while Locally Driven Initiatives (LDI) operational projects are currently $93,000 below budget. This is due to a variety of projects yet to draw down on financial allocations.

27. Capital spend of $331,000 represents investment in Ti Point Wharf investigation and renewal, development of community space at the Huapai Service Centre by the riverbank, town centre revitalisation planning at Helensville, refurbishment of Leigh Hall interior, and renewal of minor assets at Sunburst Reserve and Tamatea Esplanade.

28. The complete Rodney Local Board Financial Performance report can be found as Attachment B to the agenda report.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

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

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

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

31. The local board will receive the next performance update for November 2020 to February 2021.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Work programme update	31
b ⇩	Quarterly performance report	67

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author	Anwen Robinson – Senior Local Board Advisor
Authoriser	Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager

Rodney Local Board

09 December 2020

Auckland Transport update to the Rodney Local Board December 2020

File No.: CP2020/18488

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide an update to Rodney Local Board on transport-related matters in its area, including the Local Board Transport Capital Fund and Auckland Transport’s Community Safety Fund.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. This report covers:

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

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

· a summary of general information items.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) receive the Auckland Transport update to the Rodney Local Board December 2020.

Horopaki

Context

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

4. This report updates the local board on Auckland Transport projects and operations in the Rodney 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. 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.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Auckland Transport projects and operations in the local board area

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

Item	Update
Coatesville-Riverhead Highway / Barrett Rd Intersection - Right turn pocket	Public consultation underway. Feedback opens online on 26 November and closes on 10 December 2020.
Dairy Flat Highway / Coatesville-Riverhead Highway - Roundabout	Construction complete.
Mahurangi Road, Snells Beach – Pedestrian Safety Improvements	In detailed design.
Matakana Road, intersection with Anderson and Rosemont Roads - metal safety crash barriers	Detailed design is complete. Progress on this project is on hold until available budgets are confirmed.
Matakana Link Road - a 1.35km link between State Highway One and Matakana Road	Construction is underway. The project is currently in the earthworks phase with ground improvements and services being delivered. Bridge works are expected to start in early January 2021.
Rural Delineation Project – Improved delineation and signage on rural roads.	20 roads confirmed for treatment with improved signage and road markings around dangerous bends Work is expected to commence in February 2021 and be completed by late April 2021
Sandspit Road/Sharp Road/Mahurangi East Road, Sandspit - Intersection Improvements	Public consultation is complete. The majority of submitters rejected the proposal (117 of 144). The proposed design was intended as an interim solution but following public feedback Auckland Transport will investigate an improved long-term solution.

Local Board Transport Capital Fund

8. Auckland Transport has updated the local board on the effect of the Auckland Council Emergency Budget allocation to the Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF) and the budget now available in 2020/2021.

9. The new allocation for the financial year 2020/2021 for the Rodney Local Board is $286,459.

10. At the November 2020 business meeting the local board resolved (RD/2020/162) that:

· $235,000 would be allocated for the delivery of the Hudson Road footpath project with the remaining balance of $398,000 to be allocated from the Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate.

· $52,000 would be allocated from the Local Board Transport Capital fund for completing the design for the Dairy Flat School footpath. With the remaining balance of $440,000 to be allocated from the Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate.

Item

Update

Hudson Road Footpath

The contract for the project has been awarded. The construction start date is being confirmed.

Diary Flat School Footpath

The project is in detail design phase. A draft version has undergone a road safety audit.

The project team are in discussions with the school.

The team are aiming to complete the works by May 2021.

Community Safety Fund

11. 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.

12. Now that Auckland Council’s Emergency Budget is confirmed, Auckland Transport is reviewing all CSF projects. It is possible that projects may be delayed or even stopped. When more detailed information is available it will be provided to the local board.

13. The below table has an update on the projects in the fund:

Priority	Project	Update
1	Motutara Road – crossing	In detailed design. As part of the design it is being recommended that additional footpath is required. This may lead to an increase in the project costs beyond the anticipated budget.
2	Motutara Road - footpath extension	Removed from CSF following consultation.
3	Coatesville – speed calming	Internal consultation has been completed. Contractor has been instructed to install electronic driver feedback sign.
4	Matakana Road – signalised mid-block	In detailed design.
5	Matua / Tapu Road – intersection improvements	Detailed design complete. Construction is dependent on budget availability.
6	Matua / Oraha Road – intersection improvements	In detailed design.
7	Rata Street - pedestrian crossing	In detailed design.
8	Kaipara College - pedestrian crossing	In detailed design.
9	Waitoki School – speed calming	Removed from CSF as per local board decision.
10	Whangateau - speed warning signs	Completed.
11	Kumeu – signalised mid-bloc crossing	Completed.
12	Woodcocks Road – crossing	Completed.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

14. 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.

15. 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

16. The impact of information (or decisions) in this report are confined to Auckland Transport and does not impact on other parts of the council group.

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

Local impacts and local board views

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

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

Item	Date sent to local board
FYI: Reseal Letter Drops	13/11/20
FYI: Coatesville-Riverhead Highway and Barrett Road - Right-turn bay	20/11/20
FYI: night work letters	20/11/20
Supporting Growth Programme - Northwest Update	23/11/20
Proposal outcome: Clegg Place, Warkworth - Parking Restrictions	23/11/20

19. Auckland Transport attended a workshop with the local board on 11 November 2020 to discuss the Unsealed Roads Improvement Framework.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

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

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

21. There are no financial implications in receiving this report.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

22. In response to Auckland Council’s Emergency Budget, Auckland Transport’s capital and operating budgets have been reduced. Some projects we had planned for 2020/2021 may not be able to be delivered and we expect this will be disappointing to communities that we have already engaged with.

23. Both the Community Safety Fund and the Local Board Capital Transport Fund are impacted by these budget reductions.

24. Auckland Transport will mitigate this risk by clearly communicating with the local board on the outcomes and new funding levels so that the local board may make the best use of their available funds.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

25. Auckland Transport will provide a further report to the Rodney Local Board at its next business meeting.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Ben Halliwell – Elected Member Relationship Manager

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon – Elected Member Relationship Team Manager

Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager

Rodney Local Board

09 December 2020

Auckland Transport - Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate Bus Services Report December 2020

File No.: CP2020/18523

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek a decision from the local board on changes to the Helensville-Silverdale (route 128) bus service, which is a service funded from the Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. This report covers:

· a summary of the Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate

· a timeline of the local board’s decision making with regard to the Helensville-Silverdale (128) bus service

· a summary of Auckland Transport’s advice on potential changes

· advice on the financial implications of these decisions.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) receive the Auckland Transport Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate Bus Services Report December 2020

b) request that Auckland Transport increase the service level for the Helensville to Silverdale (128) bus service to an hourly service, seven-days a week at an approximate additional cost of $499,933 per annum; OR

c) request that Auckland Transport increase the service level for the Helensville to Silverdale (128) bus service to an hourly weekday service and a 2-hourly weekend service, at an approximate additional cost of $313,785 per annum; OR

d) request that Auckland Transport increase the service level for the Helensville to Silverdale (128) bus service to an hourly weekday service with no service at weekends, at an approximate additional cost of $127,636 per annum; OR

e) request that Auckland Transport makes no changes to the service level for the Helensville to Silverdale (128) bus service.

Horopaki

Context

Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate

3. In May 2018, the local board recommended (resolution number RD/2018/61) that the Governing Body approve a targeted rate to accelerate investment in transport in the Rodney Local Board area. The recommendation was approved (resolution number GB/2018/91) and the Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate (RLBTTR) is currently scheduled to run for 10 years (2018 – 2028).

4. The local board are decision makers for funds raised through the rate, Auckland Council receives the rates payments, and Auckland Transport provides technical advice and administers the funds on behalf of the local board.

5. The local board has a project lead for the targeted rate funds who acts as the day to day contact for AT. This is currently the Chairperson, Phelan Pirrie.

6. The RLBTTR is ring-fenced for transport projects in Rodney Local Board area that are not included in the Regional Land Transport Plan 2018-2028. It was established on the basis that the fund is to support:

· new bus stops and bus services

· new park and ride facilities

· new footpaths

7. The local board administers the fund on the principle that each subdivision within the Rodney Local Board area receives a proportion of the benefits of the targeted rate that equated to the proportion of the revenue collected from that subdivision. As the projects develop and investigations are completed, changes are required to the projects proposed within each subdivision to ensure proportionality is maintained.

8. The Rodney Local Board monitors the performance of the projects and determines whether to re-prioritise its expenditure based on the stated purposes of the targeted rate.

Summary of Local Board Decision Making on Helensville to Silverdale (128) bus service.

9. The Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate was established with a number of projects identified for investigation, including bus services.

10. Following direction from the local board at a workshop, the November 2018 update from Auckland Transport outlined progress on delivery of a service from Helensville to Silverdale (128), this was noted by the local board (resolution number RD/2018/144).

11. In February 2019 the local board noted (resolution number RD/2019/101) the update from Auckland Transport stating that “all tasks required to implement the Wellsford-Warkworth (998) and Helensville- Silverdale (128) services have been completed to commence these services on 24 February as scheduled.”

12. In March 2020 the local board resolved (resolution number RD/2020/19) that “Auckland Transport will investigate … increased frequency for the 128 Helensville – Silverdale bus service.”

13. In August 2020 the local board noted (resolution number RD/2020/121) the response from Auckland Transport that “The local board has requested an increase in bus frequency for route 128, Helensville to Silverdale, to an all-day service. At this stage there are no additional buses available to increase the frequency. This route is currently operated using one bus. An hourly service would require two buses. Auckland Transport is currently investigating the cost of supplying a second bus.”

14. In September 2020 the local board noted (resolution number RD/2020/121) the response from Auckland Transport that “Unfortunately, at this stage this is not possible due to a lack of available buses. Should there be more buses available in the future Auckland Transport will revisit this.”

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

15. As noted above, the Helensville-Silverdale (128) service is a one-and-a-half-hour service. The local board and Auckland Transport have received feedback from the community that the service would be better utilised if it was an hourly service. To provide the increase in the frequency of the service an additional bus is required. Auckland Transport has determined that there is an additional bus available, therefore the local board can make a decision about increasing the service.

16. To support local board decision making Auckland Transports Senior Service Network Planner has evaluated the service to determine if any other changes should be made on the basis of the information we have accrued to this point.

17. Following discussions with the local board Programme Lead, the Senior Service Network Planner has investigated:

· whether the current route is optimal or if there are areas where the route could be optimised to provide savings

· if the current seven-days-a-week operation is providing value or if a five-days-a- week service would be better.

18. They investigated whether the bus operating between Kaukapakapa and Hibiscus Coast Station would save costs and have a significant impact on patronage. They used data from July to September 2019 as these are fairly representative months without impacts from external factors. It was determined that around 44 per cent of passengers travelling to/from Hibiscus Coast Station are travelling there to/from the section of route between Helensville and Kaukapakapa. On this basis they would recommend continuing with the route as it is.

19. Regarding weekend patronage they noted that it is somewhat lower than the weekday patronage but on a passengers per trip basis it isn’t very different. The average weekday patronage is 3.2 passengers per trip while the weekend is 2.3 passengers per trip. On this basis they developed the below service level options for the local board’s consideration.

20. The below table outlines the approximate additional cost per annum (subject to finalised timetable) on the current trip between Helensville and Hibiscus Coast Station:

Service level	Additional cost
Hourly, seven-days a week	$499,933
Hourly weekday, two-hourly weekends	$313,785
Hourly weekday, no service at weekends	$127,636

21. A resolution for the local board to give direction to Auckland Transport on which of these options to progress is included in this report.

22. For completeness, the below table outlines patronage numbers for all the bus services in the Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate:

Service	Total Boardings (Mar19-Sep20)	September 2020 Boardings
Helensville to Silverdale (128)	18,327	847
Westgate to Albany (126)	83,198	4,858
Wellsford to Warkworth (998)	39,427	2,216

23. The below table outlines the current amounts spent on all bus services in the Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate:

Service	Subdivision	Total Expenditure	September 2020 Expended
Helensville to Silverdale (128)	Kumeū	$ 1,984,450	$ 110,449
Westgate to Albany (126)	Dairy Flat	$ 402,628	$ 24,074
Wellsford to Warkworth (998)	Wellsford	$ 334,904	$ 17,579
Wellsford to Warkworth (998)	Warkworth	$ 334,904	$ 17,579
Total		$ 3,056,887	$ 169,680

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

24. The RLBTTR contributes to the Long-term Plan outcome of: “A green Auckland – By reducing our reliance on petrol, air pollution and green-house gas emissions.”

25. The RLBTTR also supports the outcomes sought by the Auckland Plan 2050, the Auckland Climate Action Plan and Council’s priorities.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

26. The appropriate council group inputs were sought by Auckland Transport in the formulation of this update report.

27. The proposed decision of receiving this update report has no impacts on the wider Council group.

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

Local impacts and local board views

28. Workshops were held to discuss the Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate on the following dates:

· 20 March 2020

· 20 September 2020

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

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

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

Budget implications

30. The costs for the Helensville to Silverdale (128) bus service is currently allocated to the Kumeū sub-division.

31. On the understanding given by the local board that they have the facility to borrow against future income from the targeted rate, the total expenditure (from October 2020) and the estimated total income is highlighted below. Please note these are high level estimates to give the local board an indication of how the actual spend of the targeted rate is tracking against estimated future income.

Subdivision

Current expended

(2018 – Oct 2020)

Estimated total subdivision income by 2028

Kumeū

$ 2,557,696

$19,759,811

32. Current programme actual spend and expected expenditure allocation by project per subdivision:

	Actuals Spent by Project				Total (Actual Expended and Allocated Fund)
Subdivision	Bus Stops	Park and Rides	Bus Route Services	Footpaths
Kumeū	$339,776	$233,312	$1,984,450	$158	$ 2,557,696
				$1,237,000 has been approved for spend in Nov 2020	$3,794,696

33. A very rough costing for the additional cost based on the per annum cost of $729,671 for running the service is outlined below. Please note this is indicative only.

Service level	Additional Cost (per annum)	New total cost (per annum)
Hourly, seven-days a week	$499,933	$1,229,604
Hourly weekday, two-hourly weekends	$313,785	$1,043,456
Hourly weekday, no service at weekends	$127,636	$857,307

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

34. Auckland Transport provides regular updates on the RLBTTR with separate decision reports on specific projects. This is to ensure that the local board is fully informed before making any decisions with regards to the fund.

35. Auckland Transport is proceeding on the understanding provided by the local board that they have the facility to borrow against future income from the targeted rate and AT can expect to receive from Auckland Council up to the full expected value of the targeted rate as projects are developed and approved by the local board.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

36. Following direction from the local board Auckland Transport will take appropriate steps to enact that direction.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Ben Halliwell, Elected Member Relationship Manager

Susan Barakat – Principle Engineer North/West

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon – Team Manager, Elected Member Relationship Manager Team

Neil Prendiville – Local Board Transport Capital Fund Manager

Richard Firth – Delivery Manager North/West

Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager

Rodney Local Board

09 December 2020

Auckland Transport - Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate Footpaths Report December 2020

File No.: CP2020/18638

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek a resolution from the local board to approve the projects they wish Auckland Transport to deliver from the Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. This report covers:

· a summary of the Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate

· a timeline of the board’s decision making with regards to the allocation of funding to footpaths

· a summary of Auckland Transports advice on projects that the local board wishes to progress

· advice on the financial implications of these decisions.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) receive the Auckland Transport Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate Footpaths December Report

b) request that Auckland Transport deliver the following footpath projects through the Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate:

i) Dairy Flat Highway Footpath (Dairy Flat) - allocate $1,007,000

ii) Goodall Road Footpath (Warkworth) – allocate $458,000

iii) Hill Street Footpath (Warkworth) - allocate $185,000

iv) Leigh Road Footpath (Warkworth) – allocate $363,000

v) Puhoi Road Footpath (Warkworth) – allocate $757,000

vi) Rodney Street (Wellsford) – allocate $1,426,000

c) request that Auckland Transport undertakes site assessment and cost estimation for the following footpath projects through the Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate:

i) Albert St Footpath (Warkworth)

ii) Cambridge Road Footpath (Kumeu)

iii) Duke Street Footpath (Kumeu)

iv) King Street Footpath (Kumeu)

v) Mahurangi East Road Footpath (Warkworth)

vi) Matua Road Footpath (Kumeu)

vii) Pakiri Road Footpath (Warkworth)

viii) Princes Street Footpath (Kumeu)

ix) Queen Street Footpath (Kumeu)

d) request that Auckland Transport complete footpath investigation, including refining footpath design scope requirement and provision of engineer’s estimate, for the following footpath projects through the Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate:

i) Kaipara Coast HW Footpath (Kumeu)

ii) Ahuroa Road Footpath (Warkworth)

iii) Point Wells Road Footpath (Warkworth)

iv) Kahikatea Flat Road Footpath (Kumeu)

v) Kaipara Coast Highway Footpath (Kumeu)

vi) Motutara Road Footpath (Kumeu)

vii) Princes Street (Kumeu)

Horopaki

Context

Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate

3. In May 2018, the local board recommended (resolution number RD/2018/61) that the Governing Body approve a targeted rate to accelerate investment in transport in the Rodney Local Board area. The recommendation was accepted and the Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate (RLBTTR) is currently scheduled to run for 10 years (2018 – 2028).

4. The local board are decision makers for funds raised through the rate, Auckland Council receives the rates payments, and Auckland Transport (AT) provides technical advice and administers the funds on behalf of the local board.

5. The local board has a project lead for the targeted rate funds, who acts as the day to day contact for AT. This is currently the Chairperson, Phelan Pirrie.

· new bus stops and bus services

· new park and ride community hub facilities

· new footpaths.

7. The rate was established on the principle that each subdivision within the Rodney Local Board area received a proportion of the benefits of the targeted rate that equated to the proportion of the revenue collected from that subdivision.

8. As the projects develop and firmer cost estimations are prepared, changes are required to the projects proposed within each subdivision to ensure proportionality is maintained. The Rodney Local Board monitors the performance of the projects and determines whether to re-prioritise its expenditure based on the stated purposes of the funds raised.

Summary of Local Board Decision Making on the Transport Targeted Rate

9. The RLBTTR was established with a number of projects identified for delivery. This included a list of potential footpath projects for investigation.

10. Following establishment of the rate a process was begun to create a delivery programme for the unprioritised list of footpaths. This process was also to determine that these footpaths were not already being delivered by AT or proposed to be delivered through other funding sources.

11. On 15 August 2019 the local board requested (resolution number RD/2019/101) that Auckland Transport:

· Use transport targeted rate funding to obtain rough order costings for the footpath segments identified to be delivered by the targeted rate.

· Request that Auckland Transport prepare a draft programme of works for the delivery of the footpath segments identified to be delivered by the targeted rate for discussion by the local board at a workshop after February 2020.

12. In March 2020 AT updated the local board that: “The footpath programme is currently 26 segments that are to be presented to the Rodney Local Board for their prioritisation and endorsement in March 2020. Preliminary costs have been prepared by AT staff of 19 segments and it is estimated at $19 million including staff costs. The local board is currently considering funding some of these segments through its Local Board Transport Capital Fund. Research on further details regarding adjacent or near-by works for advice back to the Rodney Local Board has yet to be completed.”

13. In November 2020 the local board resolved (resolution number RD/2020/162) that AT was to allocate RLBTTR and Local Board Transport Capital funding to Hudson Road and Dairy Flat School footpaths. Also that AT was to allocate RLBTTR funding to:

· Alice Street (Riverhead) foothpath

· Coatesville Riverhead Hwy (Dairy Flat) foothpath

· Dairy Flat Highway (Dairy Flat) footpath

· Hudson Rd (Warkworth) footpath

· Newton Road (Riverhead) footpath

· Omaha Drive (Omaha) footpath

· School Road (Wellsford) footpath.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

14. In the November 2020 report on the footpaths project for the RLBTTR it was noted that “footpath projects in priority 2 will be brought to the local board for approval at a future date once AT has completed the necessary investigative work.”

15. Following direction from the programme lead, the remaining footpaths in the local board’s list have been split into further lists with one group ready for design and construction to be approved and with the remaining projects requiring further investigation.

16. The following table outlines the footpath projects that are ready for the local board to approve for design and construction:

Footpath	Subdivision	Rough order of cost
Dairy Flat Highway	Dairy Flat	$ 1,007,000.00
Goodall Road	Warkworth	$ 458,000.00
Hill Street	Warkworth	$ 185,000.00
Leigh Road	Warkworth	$ 363,000.00
Puhoi Road	Warkworth	$ 757,000.00
Rodney Street	Wellsford	$ 1,426,000.00

17. The following table outlines the footpath projects for the local board to approve for Auckland Transport to undertake site assessment and cost estimation:

Footpath	Subdivision
Albert St	Warkworth
Cambridge Road	Kumeū
Duke Street	Kumeū
King Street	Kumeū
Mahurangi East Road	Warkworth
Matua Road	Kumeū
Pakiri Road	Warkworth
Princes Street	Kumeū
Queen Street	Kumeū
Kaipara Coast Highway	Kumeū
Waimauku Station Road	Kumeū
Wech Drive	Warkworth

18. The following table outlines the footpath projects that for the local board to approve for Auckland Transport to complete footpath investigation, including refining footpath design scope requirement and provision of engineer’s estimate:

Footpath	Subdivision
Kaipara Coast Highway		Kumeū
Ahuroa Road		Warkworth
Point Wells Road		Warkworth
Kahikatea Flat Road		Kumeū
Kaipara Coast Highway		Kumeū
Motutara Road		Kumeū
Princes Street		Kumeū

19. Resolutions to this effect are included in the recommendations of this report.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

20. The RLBTTR contributes to the Long-term Plan outcome of: “A green Auckland – By reducing our reliance on petrol, air pollution and green-house gas emissions.”

21. The RLBTTR also supports the outcomes sought by the Auckland Plan 2050, the Auckland Climate Action Plan and council’s priorities.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

22. The appropriate council group inputs were sought by Auckland Transport in the formulation of this update report.

23. The proposed decision of receiving this update report has no impacts on the wider council group.

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

Local impacts and local board views

24. The local board are the decision makers for funds raised through the rate, Auckland Council receives the rates payments, and Auckland Transport provides technical advice and administers the funds on behalf of the local board.

25. Workshops were held so the local board could give AT direction on the RLBTTR on the following dates:

· 20 March 2020

· 20 September 2020.

26. Auckland Transport also receives regular guidance from the local board’s project lead.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

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

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

Overall RLBTTR budget implications

28. The proposed footpaths for delivery are as follows:

Footpath	Subdivision	Rough order of cost	Cost per subdivision
Dairy Flat Highway	Dairy Flat	$1,007,000	$1,007,000
Goodall Road	Warkworth	$458,000	$1,763,000
Hill Street		$185,000
Leigh Road		$363,000
Puhoi Road		$757,000
Rodney Street	Wellsford	$1,426,000	$1,426,000

29. The total cost of these footpaths proposed for delivery is $4,196,000.

30. Given the local board has the facility to borrow against future income from the targeted rate it is also important to understand a high-level estimate of future income per subdivision.

Subdivision	Currently expended and allocated (up to Oct 2020)	Footpath spend approved in November 2020	Proposed additional footpath spend December 2020	Expected total spend	Estimated total subdivision income by 2028
Wellsford	$355,022	$1,043,000	$1,426,000	$2,824,022	$4,686,323
Warkworth	$5,879,510	$257,000	$1,763,000	$7,899,510	$19,294,190
Kumeū	$2,557,696	$1,237,000	$0	$3,794,696	$19,759,811
Dairy Flat	$442,629	$780,000	$1,007,000	$2,229,629	$4,155,274

31. To conform with the principle that each subdivision within the Rodney Local Board area receives a proportion of the benefits of the targeted rate that equated to the proportion of the revenue collected from that subdivision, AT and the local board will have to actively monitor the spend in all project areas to ensure that spend is equitably distributed.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

32. Auckland Transport provides regular updates on the RLBTTR with separate decision reports on specific projects. This is to ensure that the local board is fully informed before making any decisions with regard to the fund.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

33. Following direction from the local board Auckland Transport will take appropriate steps to enact that direction.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Ben Halliwell, Elected Member Relationship Manager

Susan Barakat – Principle Engineer North/West

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon – Elected Member Relationship Team Manager

Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager

Rodney Local Board

09 December 2020

Auckland Transport update on the Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate - Bus Infrastructure December 2020

File No.: CP2020/18664

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek a resolution from the Rodney Local Board to approve bus stop projects they wish Auckland Transport to deliver from the Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. This report covers:

· a summary of the Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate

· a timeline of the local board’s decision making with regards to bus stops

· Auckland Transports advice on projects that the local board wishes to progress

· advice on the financial implications of these decisions.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) receive the Auckland Transport update on the Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate - Bus Infrastructure December 2020

b) request that Auckland Transport allocate up to $300,000 from the Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate for the delivery of bus stops at 564/571 Coatesville-Riverhead Highway

c) request that Auckland Transport allocate up to $10,000 from the Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate for the delivery of a south-bound-only bus stops at Route 995 – Wech Dr, Warkworth.

Horopaki

Context

3. In May 2018, the Rodney Local Board recommended (Resolution number RD/2018/61) that the Governing Body approves a targeted rate to accelerate investment in transport in the Rodney Local Board area. The recommendation was accepted and the Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate (RLBTTR) is currently scheduled to run for 10 years (2018 – 2028).

4. Auckland Council receives the rates payments and Auckland Transport administers the fund on behalf of the local board.

5. The RLBTTR is ring-fenced for transport projects in the Rodney Local Board area that are not included in the Regional Land Transport Plan 2018-2028. It was established on the basis that the fund is to support:

· new bus stops and bus services

· new park and ride community transport hub facilities

· new footpaths.

6. The targeted rate must be spent on these items and a material change to spending priorities may require further public consultation.

7. The rate was also established on the principle that each subdivision within the Rodney Local Board area received a proportion of the benefits of the targeted rate that equated to the proportion of the revenue collected from that subdivision.

8. The Rodney Local Board monitors the performance of the projects and as the projects develop and firmer cost estimates are prepared it is expected that ongoing decision making is required to ensure that the projects proposed are delivering the best outcomes for the community and that proportionality is maintained between each subdivision.

Expenditure on Bus Stops

9. Following the initiation of bus services through the targeted rate a number of bus stops were installed along these routes. In March 2020 Auckland Transport reported to the local board that bus stops had been delivered at the locations in the below table:

Bus stop #	Address	Location	Project Status
1158	Coatesville-Riverhead Hwy	Riverhead	Delivered
opp 1170	Coatesville-Riverhead Hwy	Riverhead	Delivered
1135	Coatesville-Riverhead Hwy	Riverhead	Delivered
opp 1093	Coatesville-Riverhead Hwy	Riverhead	Delivered
1074 opp	Coatesville-Riverhead Hwy	Riverhead	Delivered
1068	Coatesville-Riverhead Hwy	Riverhead	Delivered
1010	Coatesville-Riverhead Hwy	Riverhead	Delivered
1011	Coatesville-Riverhead Hwy	Riverhead	Delivered
1047	Coatesville-Riverhead Hwy	Riverhead	Delivered
1049 opp	Coatesville-Riverhead Hwy	Riverhead	Delivered
312	Coatesville-Riverhead Hwy	Coatesville	Delivered
311	Coatesville-Riverhead Hwy	Coatesville	Delivered
Exit lane	Opoto Place	Kaukapakapa	Delivered
37 opp	Station Road	Wellsford	Delivered
1578	Kahikatea Flat Road	Kaukapakapa	Delivered
1591 East	Kahikatea Flat Road	Kaukapakapa	Delivered
1091	Kahikatea Flat Road	Waitoki	Delivered
1091 opp	Kahikatea Flat Road	Waitoki	Delivered

10. The below table outlines historical amounts spent on new bus stops:

Item	Spend
Detailed Design and Project Delivery	$18,000
Construction	$381,736.58
Total	$399,737

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

11. Following direction from the project lead, Auckland Transport’s Metro Team have been reviewing customer requests for bus stops that have been made over the past year to develop an assessment of the deliverability of these requests.

Route 128 – SH16 Kaukapakapa

12. Requests to complete the missing southbound bus stop adjacent to All Saints Church.

13. This location is also referenced as “Peak Rd” and has been the source of multiple requests. AT agrees that this project would be a strong candidate, but the deliverability of this is tied to the speed environment on the State Highway as it passes through the village. Until the speed limit is reduced to 60km per hour or less, is unlikely that the missing stop can be delivered with appropriate pedestrian crossing facilities to support it. The bend of the road to the east of the location limits sightlines with current vehicle speeds.

14. As this is a state highway, AT is not the road controlling authority in this location. This is therefore seen as a longer-term project. The recommendation to the local board is to defer further investigation at this location until the speed limit can be lowered.

Route 126 – 564/571 Coatesville-Riverhead Highway

15. There have been multiple requests to deliver a pair of bus stops in this location to support access to the service for customers living in the Lewis Lane / Goldflats Lane area.

16. Despite the 80km per hour speed environment the highway is straight through this section, so a pair of stops may be deliverable. AT has produced a costed concept design for this location as below.

17. The cost estimate for this project is up to $300,000 due largely to the footpath and drainage works associated with the project, but we believe that it can be delivered safely.

18. This pair of stops would be relatively close to Wake Rd (see below) which could provide additional “kiss & ride” patronage onto the 126 service.

19. The recommendation to the local board is to progress this project and a resolution to this effect is included in this report.

Route 126 – Coatesville-Riverhead Highway / Wake Rd

20. The local board has been in receipt of multiple petitions for a pair of stops in this location and AT has received several requests for the same. This location is about 800m from the intersection of the highway and Goldflats / Lewis noted above.

21. The costs of establishing stops here would be similar to the Goldflats / Lewis intersection, but the northbound stop would be challenging with a high-speed sweeping bend over a crest, with a steep fall away to the property boundary.

22. The recommendation to the local board is to proceed with the Goldflats / Lewis project.

Route 995 – Wech Dr, Warkworth

23. It is understood that this location has been brought to the attention of the local board and could be tied to a footpath project that is likely to proceed through here.

24. Establishing a southbound bus stop here is a simple project, estimated to be around $10,000 for the planning process, pole / flag and line markings.

25. It is not possible unfortunately to establish a northbound bus stop on SH1 to pair with the southbound stop. The presence of a crash barrier (further down the hill), traffic volumes, and insufficient shoulder width would dictate a requirement for a signalised pedestrian crossing. Further design work would be required to produce an estimated cost for this, however it is expected to be very high for the delivery of a single bus stop.

26. The closest northbound stop is the existing bus stop at 44 Whitaker Rd.

27. The recommendation to the local board is to progress a southbound only stop and a resolution to this effect is included in this report.

Route 128 – between Kaukapakapa and Helensville

28. Auckland Transport have received a request (specific location unclear) for more stops on the rural section of the route between Kaukapakapa and Helensville. As this is State Highway 16, the general view is that establishing rural bus stops with limited walk up catchment will be expensive and would involve negotiation with Waka Kotahi New Zealand Transport Agency regarding the appropriate safety treatment for them in terms of pedestrian crossing movements and/or footpath provision.

29. The recommendation to the local board is to not proceed with further investigations in these locations and focus on locations that either have clearer walk up catchment and/or the opportunity for the provision of ‘kiss and ride’ parking spaces on side roads.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

30. The RLBTTR contributes to the Long-term Plan 2015-2025 outcome of: “A green Auckland – By reducing our reliance on petrol, air pollution and green-house gas emissions.”

31. The RLBTTR also supports the outcomes sought by the Auckland Plan 2050, the Auckland Climate Action Plan and council’s priorities.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

32. The appropriate council group inputs were sought by Auckland Transport in the formulation of this update report.

33. The proposed decision of receiving this update report has no impacts on the wider council group.

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

Local impacts and local board views

34. The local board are decision makers for the targeted rate, Auckland Council receives the rates payments, and Auckland Transport provides technical advice and administers the funds on behalf of the local board.

35. Workshops were held so the local board could give AT direction on the Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate on the following dates:

· 20 March 2020

· 20 September 2020

36. Auckland Transport also receives regular guidance from the project lead.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

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

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

Overall RLBTTR budget implications

38. The proposed bus stops for delivery are as follows:

Bus Stop	Subdivision	Cost
564/571 Coatesville-Riverhead Highway	Dairy Flat	$300,000
Route 995 – Wech Dr, Warkworth	Warkworth	$10,000

39. Given the local board has the facility to borrow against future income from the targeted rate it is also important to understand a high-level estimate of future income per subdivision:

Subdivision

Currently expended and allocated

(up to Oct 2020)

Footpath spend approved in November 2020

Proposed additional footpath spend December 2020

Proposed Additional bus stop spend

Expected total spend

Estimated total subdivision income by 2028

Warkworth

$5,879,510

$257,000

$1,763,000

$10,000

$7,899,520

$19,294,190

Dairy Flat

$442,629

$780,000

$1,007,000

$300,000

$2,529,629

$4,155,274

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

40. Auckland Transport providing regular updates on the RLBTTR, and separate decision reports on specific projects, is a mitigation to ensure the local board is fully informed before making any decisions with regard to the fund.

41. To conform with the principle that each subdivision within the Rodney Local Board area receives a proportion of the benefits of the targeted rate that equates to the proportion of the revenue collected from that subdivision, AT and the local board will have to actively monitor the spend to ensure that spend is equitably distributed.

42. Auckland Transport is proceeding on the understanding provided by the local board that they have the facility to borrow against future income from the targeted rate and AT can expect to receive from Auckland Council up to the full expected value of the targeted rate as projects are developed and approved by the local board.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

43. Auckland Transport will provide a further report to the Rodney Local Board at its February business meeting.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Ben Halliwell, Elected Member Relationship Manager

Susan Barakat – Principle Engineer North/West

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon –Elected Member Relationship Team Manager

Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager

Rodney Local Board

09 December 2020

New road name in the Fulton Hogan Land Development Limited subdivision at 17 Old Pine Valley Road, Pine Valley

File No.: CP2020/17229

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To approve names for three new private roads in the Fulton Hogan Land Development Limited subdivision at 17 Old Pine Valley Road, Pine Valley.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

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

3. The applicant, Fulton Hogan Land Development Limited, has submitted the following names for consideration.

Preferred Names	Alternative Names
Hao Lane Private Road No. 1	Kueo Lane
Koura Lane Private Road No. 2	Whurutu Lane
Kakahi Lane Private Road No. 3

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) approve three new road names as follows in the Fulton Hogan Land Development Limited subdivision at 17 Old Pine Valley Road, Pine Valley, in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974 and as referenced in Attachments A, B and C to the agenda report.

i) ‘Hao Lane’ (Private Road No. 1)

ii) ‘Koura Lane’ (Private Road No. 2)

iii) ‘Kakahi Lane’ (Private Road No. 3

Horopaki

Context

4. The staged subdivision at Silverdale has been approved and the council reference is BUN60313354.

5. A condition of the subdivision consent was to suggest to council names for the new roads.

6. In accordance with the national addressing standards the private roads require a name as they each serve more than five lots.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

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

8. Auckland Council’s road naming criteria typically require that road names reflect:

· A historical or ancestral linkage to an area

· A particular landscape, environment or biodiversity theme or feature

· An existing (or introduced) thematic identity in the area

· The use of Māori names is actively encouraged.

9. The applicant has submitted the following names and their meaning for consideration.

Proposed Names	Meaning
Hao	Māori name for short – fin eels
Koura	Māori name for freshwater crayfish
Kakahi	Māori name for freshwater mussels
Alternative Names	Meaning
Kueo	Māori name for common berry used in food and medicine
Whurutu	Māori name for fruits of all types

10. Further detail about the applicant’s strategy for road naming in the Milldale development can be found in Attachment C, ‘Milldale Road Naming – Stage 3 – Milldale Additional JOALS.’

11. The area is in an undulating valley between the Orewa and Weiti Rivers that was once covered in dense forest, milled extensively, then cleared for orchards and dairy farming.

12. All communication with iwi has been with the Manuhiri Kaitiaki Charitable Trust, see attached notes in the above ‘Milldale Road Naming – -Stage 3 – Milldale - Additional JOALS’.

13. This communication is in combination with extensive research and reference to Robin Grover’s books: “The Story of Silverdale “Alias the Wade” and “Why the Hibiscus”.

14. Staff acknowledge that where possible the use of Māori names is encouraged in the Auckland Plan.

15. Land Information New Zealand has confirmed that the proposed road names are unique and acceptable and not duplicated elsewhere in the region.

16. The proposed names are deemed to meet the council’s road naming guidelines and the officer’s recommendation is to approve the applicant’s choice

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

17. The naming of roads has no effect on climate change. Relevant environmental issues have been considered under the provisions of the Resource Management Act 1991 and the associated approved resource consent for the development.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

18. The decision sought for this report does not trigger any significant policy and is not considered to have any immediate impacts on any council groups.

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

Local impacts and local board views

19. The decision sought for this report does not trigger any significant policy and is not considered to have any immediate impacts on the community.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

20. The naming of roads is linked to the Auckland Plan Outcome ‘A Maori identity that is Auckland’s point of difference in the world’. The use of Maori names for roads, buildings and other public places is an opportunity to publicly demonstrate Maori identity. To aid local board decision making, the ‘Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines’ includes:

· the objective of recognizing ancestral linkages to areas of land by engagement with mana whenua and the allocation of road names as appropriate and a Principle that Maori road names are actively encouraged

· an agreed process to enable mana whenua to provide timely feedback on all proposed road names in a manner they consider appropriate. The road names proposed in this report have also been provided to all mana whenua for consideration through council’s central facilitator. Feedback has been received from Nga Maunga Whakahii o Kaipara Development Trust who agreed with the proposed names. No other feedback was received.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

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

22. The road naming process does not raise any other financial implications for the council.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

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

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

24. Approved road names are notified to Land Information New Zealand which records them on its New Zealand wide land information database which includes street addresses issued by councils.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Milldale Stage 3 Locality Map	99
b ⇩	Milldale Scheme Plan Private Roads	101
c ⇩	Milldale Stg 3 Additional JOALS	103

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Bruce Angrove – Subdivision Advisor

Authorisers

Trevor Cullen - Team Leader Subdivision

Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager

Rodney Local Board

09 December 2020

Adoption of a business meeting schedule

File No.: CP2020/13812

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To adopt the Rodney Local Board business meeting schedule for 2021 and 2022.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) and the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (LGOIMA) have requirements regarding local board meeting schedules. In particular, clause 19, Schedule 7 of the LGA on general provisions for meetings requires the chief executive to give notice in writing to each local board member of the time and place of meetings. Sections 46, 46(A) and 47 in Part 7 of LGOIMA require that meetings are publicly notified, agendas and reports are available at least two working days before a meeting, and that local board meetings are open to the public.

3. Adopting a meeting schedule helps with meeting these requirements. Adopting a business meeting schedule also allows for a planned approach to workloads and ensures that local board members have clarity about their commitments.

4. Commencing the business meeting during business hours will enable meetings to be productive and ensures best use of resources.

5. One business meeting per month is sufficient for formal business to be considered. There are some instances for which the local board may need to have meetings in addition to this schedule. The specific times and dates for meetings for matters such as local board agreements are yet to be finalised. Local board meeting schedules may need to be updated once these details are confirmed.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) adopt the business meeting schedule outlined below for the period February 2021 to September 2022.

Year	Date	Time	Venue (subject to change)
2021	Wednesday 17 February	3.00pm	Te Whare o Oranga Parakai 5 Rere Place, Parakai
	Wednesday 17 March	3.00pm	Warkworth Town Hall 21 Neville Street, Warkworth
	Wednesday 21 April	3.00pm	Te Whare o Oranga Parakai
	Wednesday 19 May	3.00pm	Warkworth Town Hall
	Wednesday 16 June	3.00pm	Te Whare o Oranga Parakai
	Wednesday 21 July	3.00pm	Warkworth Town Hall
	Wednesday 18 August	3.00pm	Te Whare o Oranga Parakai
	Wednesday 15 September	3.00pm	Warkworth Town Hall
	Wednesday 20 October	3.00pm	Te Whare o Oranga Parakai
	Wednesday 17 November	3.00pm	Warkworth Town Hall
	Wednesday 8 December ??	3.00pm	Te Whare o Oranga Parakai
2022	Wednesday 16 February	3.00pm	Venue to be confirmed
	Wednesday 16 March	3.00pm	Venue to be confirmed
	Wednesday 20 April	3.00pm	Venue to be confirmed
	Wednesday 18 May	3.00pm	Venue to be confirmed
	Wednesday 15 June	3.00pm	Venue to be confirmed
	Wednesday 20 July	3.00pm	Venue to be confirmed
	Wednesday 17 August	3.00pm	Venue to be confirmed
	Wednesday 21 September	3.00pm	Venue to be confirmed

b) note the meeting dates and times for matters such as local board agreements are yet to be finalised.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author	Robyn Joynes - Democracy Advisor
Authoriser	Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager

Chairperson	Phelan Pirrie
Deputy Chairperson	Beth Houlbrooke
Members	Brent Bailey
	Steve Garner
	Danielle Hancock
	Tim Holdgate
	Louise Johnston
	Vicki Kenny
	Colin Smith

Board Member	Organisation	Position
Brent Bailey	Royal NZ Yacht Squadron	Member
Steven Garner	Warkworth Tennis and Squash Club Sandspit Yacht Club Warkworth Gamefish Club	President Member Member
Louise Johnston	Blackbridge Environmental Protection Society	Treasurer
Vicki Kenny	International Working Holidays Ltd Nannies Abroad Ltd Waitemata Riding Club National Party Helensville Electorate	Director/Owner/CEO Director/Owner/CEO Member Treasurer
Danielle Hancock	Kaukapakapa Residents and Ratepayers Association Pest Free Kaukapakapa New Zealand Biosecurity Services Limited	Member Pest Free Coordinator Operations Manager
Tim Holdgate	Landowners Contractors Protection Association	Vice Chairman
Beth Houlbrooke	Kawau Island Boat Club ACT New Zealand	Member Contractor
Phelan Pirrie	Muriwai Volunteer Fire Brigade Grow West Ltd North West Country Incorporated	Officer in Charge Director Manager
Colin Smith

Author	Robyn Joynes - Democracy Advisor - Rodney
Authoriser	Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager