Kaipātiki Local Board Workshop
OPEN NOTES
|
Notes of a workshop of the Kaipātiki Local Board held in the Kaipātiki Local Board Office, 90 Bentley Avenue, Glenfield on Wednesday, 5 March 2025 at 10.02am.
Te Hunga kua Tae mai | present
Chairperson |
John Gillon |
|
Deputy Chairperson |
Danielle Grant, JP |
|
Members |
Paula Gillon |
|
|
Erica Hannam |
Via electronic attendance |
|
Melanie Kenrick |
|
|
Tim Spring |
|
|
Dr Janet Tupou |
Via electronic attendance |
Kaipātiki Local Board Workshop 05 March 2025 |
|
3 |
Session 1 – 10.00am – 1.00pm |
Customer and Community Services – Parks and Community Facilities • Birkenhead Gateway Signage Project • Beach Haven Coastal Connections – Stage 3 • Parks and Community Facilities Performance • Te Ara Hura 2027 Parks and Community Facilities maintenance contracts optimisation programme Presenters: Neil Atkinson Leigh
Radovan Andrew
Mackenzie Jennifer
Rose Julie
Pickering Shane
McInnes Matthew
Scott Judy Waugh Sarah Jones Eloi Fonseca
Governance role: Setting direction. Summary of Discussions: The local board was provided with an update on the Birkenhead Gateway Signage Project, Beach Haven Coastal Connections – Stage 3, Parks and Community Facilities Performance, and Te Ara Hura 2027 Parks and Community Facilities maintenance contracts optimisation programme. Birkenhead Gateway Signage Project The local board raised the following points and questions in response to the presentation: · Advocated for signage at Birkenhead Wharf, near ferry dock, due to high tourist foot traffic. · Requested brochure holders as part of signage to provide alternative access to map information. · Advocated for including QR codes on all signs, linking to a reliable website. · Emphasised the need for further stakeholder negotiations regarding sign placement and structural considerations.
Next Steps: · Staff to provide follow up to feedback and questions raised.
Beach Haven Coastal Connections – Stage 3 The local board raised the following points and questions in response to the presentation: · Concerns raised over project budget and scope, with discussion on ensuring both options remain on the table. · Advocated to ensure the project integrates well with existing networks, such as Tui Park and Shepherds Park. · Requested for a cost-effective approach, leveraging existing infrastructure. · Concerns raised over environmental impact, particularly near cliffs and mangroves, with a focus on minimising ecological disturbance. · Advocated for proceeding with consultation for both options, while clarifying budget limitations and realistic project scope.
Next Steps: · Public consultation to follow and staff to provide follow up to questions raised. · Report to come to a business meeting (estimated for before the 2025 elections).
Parks and Community Facilities Performance The local board raised the following points and questions in response to the presentation: · Advocated for increased access to sports fields, ensuring efficient code changeovers, timely restoration, and improved irrigation systems. · Requested for detailed reporting on sprinkler system blockages and field maintenance issues impacting community use. · Emphasised the importance of local employment in service contracts. · Raised concerns about budget overruns and requested greater financial oversight at the local board level. · Concerns raised over analysis on the effectiveness of Ventia’s maintenance services, including proactive upkeep and compliance with service agreements. · Discussed potential use of drones for maintenance inspections to enhance efficiency and prevent structural issues.
Next Steps: · Staff to provide follow up to feedback and questions raised.
Te Ara Hura 2027 Parks and Community Facilities maintenance contracts optimisation programme · Requested clarification on whether each local board would have visibility over contracts with Ventia and sought involvement in setting local priorities. · Requested flexibility in maintenance contracts, allowing local boards to opt in and out of certain service provisions. · Sought clarity on the coordination of overlapping responsibilities between Ventia and local board stakeholders to avoid duplication or gaps in service. · Advocated for contracts that prioritise New Zealand-based suppliers to support local economic development. · Questioned the financial implications of choosing chemical-free maintenance and its impact on long-term budgets. · Sought clarification on the allocation of consequential operational expenditure (Opex) for new community assets.
Next Steps: · Staff to consider questions raised.
|
Lunch Break |
Session 2 – 1.45pm – 2.45pm |
Group Finance - Financial Advisory – • Kaipātiki Local Board budget update and cost pressures Presenters: Sugenthy Thomson
Governance role: Receive update. Summary of Discussions: The local board was provided with a presentation on the Kaipātiki Local Board budget update and cost pressures. The local board raised the following points and questions in response to the presentation: · Sought clarification on details of financial impact per option, particularly discrepancies in expected versus actual allocations. · Concerns raised over decision-making authority and financial oversight, particularly regarding cost pressures, contractual variations, and Opex. · Concerns raised over oversight of full facilities contract, identifying unbudgeted overspending and inconsistencies in financial reporting. · Requested improved forecasting for cost pressures.
Next Steps: · Staff to provide follow up to questions raised.
|
Break |
Session 3 – 3.00pm – 4.00pm |
Resilience and Infrastructure – Engineering, Assets & Technical Advisory • Shoreline Adaptation Plan Presenters: Sage Vernall Yasmin Hall
Governance role: Setting direction. Summary of Discussions: The local board was provided with an update on the Shoreline Adaptation Plan. The local board raised the following points and questions in response to the presentation: · Requested amendments to draft document. · Requested splitting Onepoto Domain for clearer delineation. · Emphasised the need for public education and promotion, particularly targeting homeowners and prospective buyers. · Highlighted concerns over terminology (e.g. “maintenance” vs. “limited intervention”) and the potential for misalignment with community expectations. · Raised concerns about the management of tidal flaps and the need for technological enhancements. · Questioned high consultation response percentages and advocated for broader demographic engagement, particularly younger audiences.
Next Steps: · Staff to provide follow up to questions raised.
|
The workshop finished at 4.23pm.