Local Board Advocacy. LTP Workshop. 2 November PDF Free Download

Local Board Advocacy LTP Workshop 2 November 2017

Local Board Advocacy Valuing community priorities

Agenda Transport (9:15-10:15) Devonport-Takapuna: Grant Gillon Maungakiekie-Tāmaki : Josephine Bartley Ōrākei : Colin Davis Papakura : Brent Catchpole Parks, Community & Lifestyle Pools (10:15-10:45) Howick : Katrina Bungard Whau : Tracy Mulholland Break 15 minutes Sports facilities (& community) (11:00-12:00) Kaipātiki : Danielle Grant Manurewa : Angela Dalton Rodney : Phelan Pirrie Upper Harbour : Lisa Whyte Sports parks (12:00-1:00pm) Albert-Eden : Peter Haynes Franklin : Angela Fulljames Ōtara-Papatoetoe : Lotu Fuli Henderson-Massey : Shane Henderson Lunch 30 minutes Civic Spaces (1:30-2:30) Mangere-Otahuhu: Lemauga Lydia Sosene Waiheke : Paul Walden Waitākere Ranges : Greg Presland Waitematā : Pippa Coom Other (2:30-3:15) Great Barrier Island : Izzy Fordham Hibiscus & Bays : Julia Parfitt Puketāpapa : Harry Doig

Devonport-Takapuna Prioritising the budget so that AT s Lake Road improvements project (the project)can be delivered. The budget would enable roading, pubic transport, and cycling & walking improvements to be made. Devonport- Takapuna Lake Road

Devonport-Takapuna The local board: o fully support AT s Lake Road improvements project. o are willing to allocate it s entire transport capital fund towards supporting the project (approx. $3 million). o are open to discussing a potential targeted rate. Consistently the number one issue for the community: 1,200 submissions were received as part of AT s consultation in June 2017. 85% of submitters on the local board plan identified that the budget for the Lake Road should be prioritised.

Devonport-Takapuna Reason for preferred option Intent to improve people-moving capacity along corridor Achievable in the medium term Issues & Risks Issue: cycling compromise, potentially longer route Issue: requires change in driver behaviour Risk: subject to AT funding Constraints: Awaiting outcome of detailed business case to finalise scope, funding and subsidies

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Transport interchange in Onehunga that colocates the existing bus and rail stations and must not preclude the inclusion of future public transport connections such as light rail. Maungakiekie Tamaki Bus interchange Train station

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Board Case for initiative Context: Community feedback Mass transit coming through Onehunga, EWL, light rail to airport Onehunga Transform Project opportunity to address issues, funding Opportunity cost of acting later MT is a high growth area, changing Central government commitment to light rail prioritisation What needs to happen: Bring together bus and train stations - addresses current problem NOW Future-proof for light rail avoid repeating problem we are addressing Direct AT to prioritise (AT supports this, question of timing ) Direct Panuku to prioritise reinvestment (Panuku supports this, question of timing) Sharing the solution: Local board is willing to sell an underperforming local facility in the area Can contribute AT capital fund (approx 2m)

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Officer advice - do nothing in short term Awaiting outcomes of: Impact of new bus routes and stops CRL to allow increased train frequency Decision on light rail East West Link Agreement from Auckland Transport and Panuku not to prioritise but keep watch Issues & Risks Risk: Dominion road signalled as greater priority for light rail

Ōrākei Cycling & Walking Connection (~100m path) to connect our communities to the Glen Innes to Tamaki Drive Shared Path (GI2T Shared Path) Underpass under the railway line behind 92 Gowing Drive Land purchase of 1801 sq metres Sell 1534 sq metres of land after path construction. 3,000 users per week Orakei

Ōrākei widely supported Board Case for initiative Auckland Transport concluded a link to connect Gowing Drive with the Glen Innes to Tamaki Drive Shared Path and facilities and amenities north of the railway line is crucial to the full realisation of the Glen Innes to Tamaki Drive Shared Path benefits August 2017

Ōrākei Preferred Option Strategically aligned - connections to the shared path envisaged Encourages walking / cycling Reduction in traffic on busy St Johns road Issues & Risks Risk: Build cost estimates have varied significantly Risk: Land cost, purchase of specific site and residual sale of land

Papakura Support for the delivery of a multi-storey Park and Ride at the Papakura Train Station Papakura

Papakura Board Case for initiative Has been on the table for some time Provision of a Park & Ride Facility aligns with: Papakura being identified as a Metropolitan Centre in the Auckland Unitary Plan Papakura Train station being the 3 rd busiest train station on the Rapid Transit Network Rapid residential growth in surrounding areas Community desperate for traffic congestion to be addressed The Mayoral Intent to Accelerate investment in our transport network, in particular public and active transport and optimising the existing network to address traffic congestion. Board committed to the project, will contribute $800,000 from its Parking Reserve Fund

Papakura Staff /Internal View Preferred Option Strategically aligned and strongly supported by Auckland Transport Encourages Public Transport usage Addresses local crime and deviant behaviour Issues & Risks Risk: Proposed revenue lower than expected Risk: Geotechnical site issues

Howick Bring forward development of the multi-use community facility and library at Flat Bush Bring forward budget and development for aquatic facility at Flat Bush Howick

Continued development of the multi-use community facility and library at Flat Bush Flat Bush has been comprehensively planned as a new community with the town centre forming the heart and soul of this rapidly expanding area. Its location next to Barry Curtis Park and the proposed town square forms a strategically critical element of the masterplan which plays a key role in the place-making of this emerging town centre The facilities are included in the Community Facilities Network Plan as a priority. Feedback from the community on the LTP shows that Howick residents see the multiuse community facility and library as a focal point for the community to come together Following recent consultation with residents: The most pressing issue for many within the community was the lack of community facilities - one comment was simply We need this now!. Budget in the Long-term Plan 2015-2025 (LTP) for the aquatic facility (at Ormiston Town Centre, Flat Bush) to be brought forward from FY2021 to FY2018 Design concept work can begin and allow for public consultation The budget is staged over three years from FY2018.

Howick Reason for preferred option Execution of existing plans Needs assessment continues to support the development (gap in the network) Risks Risk: Facilities not fit for purpose / mismatch with community need Risk: Cost escalation during design phases Dependency Development of Ormiston Town Centre by Todd Group Development of Barry Curtis Park

Whau Pool and recreation centre Supports healthier more active lifestyle Addresses network gap & reduces current and future pressure on nearby facilities Addresses equity of Council service Large land plots disappearing quickly Whau

Whau Board Case for initiative There is a robust demonstrated business need NOW to address current need and reduce pressure on neighbouring facilities The Whau desperately needs a large scale aquatic centre Don t wait, develop new civic facilities before growth occurs to encourage good developments Submissions 2013 Economic case demonstrates value for money - Partial Cost benefit ratio is already 1:5 Since 2010 every community consultation (plans and budgets) has had submissions supporting a pool for the Whau There are external funding including PPP opportunities that cannot progress until it is in the LTP "During peak times it's really difficult to get a lane. When you do, you find you're compressed with a whole lot of other swimmers. Aucklander 2010

Whau Reason for preferred option Signed off Indicative Business Case recommends gap in the network Environment and Community Committee approved Issues & Risks Issue: size and timing of costs significant near term new money cost Risk: council may review funding approach to indoor courts (recreation centre)

Kaipātiki Investment into the renewal of community and sports assets at Birkenhead War Memorial Park to make the park fit for purpose for the next 50 years Birkenhead War Memorial Park Kaipātiki

Kaipātiki Board Case for initiative Birkenhead War Memorial Park Kaipātiki is an established local board area with an estimated population of 91,800, however many assets are coming to the end of their useful life. This busy and well used park has facilities that are in poor condition, aren t fit for purpose, and are not set up to meet future needs. Opportunity to respond to changing communities, rather than just replacing like for like. Development of a master plan to guide future direction is underway. Regenerating the park and its facilities came through strongly in the local board plan feedback. There is a high level of community interest in the master plan.

Kaipātiki Reason for preferred option Address issue of asset failure / condemned grandstand Leverage off renewal investment to future proof park Issues & Risks Risk: scope creep / masterplan goes well beyond outlined vision with an associated cost escalation and increase in community expectation

Manurewa Create Manurewa War Memorial Park as a multipurpose shared space with improved utilisation of its playing fields and provision of greater access to community facilities. War Memorial Park Manurewa

Manurewa Important park with long history 79% support from community Manurewa is changing This is a tool to activate the community Started work in June 2016 Alignment with LTP intent Recognise competing demands

Manurewa Reason for preferred option Improves condition of council building and removes derelict club building Provides multi-purpose community facility Improve utilisation of park 2017 sportsfield assessment reaffirms need Issues & Risks Risk: building cost escalation Dependencies Area sports facility review required - prioritisation in area required

Rodney Provision of local indoor court facilities in the Kumeu / Huapai area Rodney Huapai Domain likely location

Rodney Kūmeu, Huapai, Helensville and Riverhead are growth areas. There are no council owned indoor halls or sports facilities in the area. Needs Assessment and Feasibility Study completed and support the proposal Indoor sports facilities are supported by the community and are a key initiative in the local board plan Sports clubs prepared to contribute $1-2 million

Rodney Reason for preferred option Need and feasibility proven; ready to go Caters for expected growth and current shortfall Land and location identified Issues & Risks Risk: council may review funding approach to indoor courts

Upper Harbour Provide indoor multi-sport and multi-use sports and recreation facilities in the North West Upper Harbour Whenuapai possible location

Upper Harbour Upper Harbour is growing exponentially with a medium estimated population growth of up to 91,200 by 2028* 74% of submitters to the local board plan were in support of the investigation and securing of indoor multi-sport and multi-use sports and recreation facilities in Upper Harbour Key sporting codes rely on indoor facilities and many are having to turn potential members away due to lack of available space. These include netball, basketball, badminton, table tennis, hockey, trampolining, gym sports and volleyball Usage statistics show that users of facilities travel from across the subregional area to gain access. It is not uncommon for residents of Upper Harbour, Hibiscus and Bays, Rodney and Henderson Massey to use the North Shore Events centre for basketball, gym sports and trampolining Location options *taken from Statistics New Zealand 2013 census information on average of 3 people per household in Auckland

Upper Harbour Reason for preferred option Aligns with area structure plan (which includes purchase of possible land) North West triangle optimal area for sub-regional facility Caters for expected growth Issues & Risks Issue: land ownership not secured Risk: council may review funding approach to indoor courts

Albert-Eden Making the most of council assets reconfiguring Chamberlain Park to maximise community benefit. Albert Eden

Albert Eden Shortfall of sportsfields fixing the existing problem The driving range pays for itself Aligns with existing policies on golfing Support for Chamberlain Park redevelopment through Local Board Plan submissions

Albert Eden Reason for preferred option Aligned to current policy and plans 2017 sportsfields assessment identified immediate need Issues & Risks Issue: Vocal golfing lobby group wanting to retain the 18 hole golf course Risk: Impact on local traffic of a popular new facility Risk: Outcome of judicial review

The Franklin Approach Optimise council assets to provide fit for the future community facilities that cater for significant population growth. Karaka Sports Park multi-sport/community hub: - upgrade of playing surfaces - a new purpose built facility Rugby Cricket Soccer Hockey Tennis Baseball Bowls Playground Play Centre Fitness / Gym Walking Trail Franklin

The Franklin Approach Optimise council assets to provide fit for the future community facilities that cater for significant population growth. Karaka Sports Trust well established, credible, operational. Strong Community support feasibility study and recent Local Board Plan submissions. FLB Plan Outcome Growth is dealt with effectively Franklin District Council & FLB funding/grants. Plus LDI $226K FLB targeted rate - community support in principle, further detailed consultation through LTP - supplement operational costs See our video for more

Franklin Reason for preferred option 2017 Sportsfield assessment identifies need Existing facilities are in need of renewal Issues & Risks Risk: community partnership does not come to fruition * Close to recent central government proposed new satellite town

Ōtara-Papatoetoe Colin Dale Motor Sports Park Make it a regional park Repay debt taken on for development Funding of ongoing depreciation & maintenance. Ōtara-Papatoetoe

Ōtara-Papatoetoe Board Case for initiative Regional Park & Debt Removed It is a significant financial burden Lost opportunities for Community projects and initiatives (especially youth) The liability is in perpetuity The park serves a regional demand

Ōtara-Papatoetoe Reason for preferred option Rectify historic capital review previous LTP Releases funding for community needs (refer deprivation index) Issues & Risks Risk: other boards that converted LDI opex to Capex may revisit decision. Risk: long term viability of park, tenants allegedly struggling to survive financially. * Note: Option to re-designate as a regional park will create precedent for other local assets

Henderson Massey Strategic land purchase for recreation purposes To ensure provision of a swimming pool, sports fields and local community facilities to service the rapidly expanding Northwest area including Red Hills Redhills - potential area Henderson Massey

Henderson-Massey Need enough land for sporting and recreational facilities for 40,000+ people Secure land now for staged development to secure large lots and to save on costs. Need a swimming pool to complement the West Wave aquatic facility, AUT millennium in Albany and proposed pool in Whau - West Wave already operating over capacity. Community Facilities Network Action Plan network priority Investigate the need for pool and leisure space in the north-western area to address potential gap in provision and projected population growth recognising opportunities for co-location with other community and sport facilities. Gap Growth Strong community support for pool component of local board plan advocacy

Henderson-Massey Reason for preferred option Secure maximum land minimum costs whilst not land banking. Supported by 2017 sportsfield assessment Issues & Risks Issue: significant dependencies and timing constraints: New roading and Northern inceptor infrastructure If and when the developers invest Risk: growth is slower than expected. * Note: Needs assessment for North/West pool not completed

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Mangere East town centre: Buy land, unlock potential of the precinct. Utilise existing assets to shape a high quality, vibrant community and business hub 374 Massey Road Māngere-Ōtāhuhu

We want a vibrant and connected community! Its about multifunctional and connectedness The Plan - going forward To benefit all! Its about multifunctional and connectedness. The Plan - going forward. We will all benefit!

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Reason for preferred option Unlocks access to the park Secures potential future for a community precinct Issues & Risks Issue: cost escalation if proposal leaked to property owner and or council forced to compulsorily acquire Risk: displacement of valued community businesses (in the long term) Dependencies Update of park concept plan to include area

Waiheke Local governance and staged implementation of the Matiatia masterplan to provide an efficient and attractive gateway for residents and visitors Matiatia Waiheke

Waiheke Board Case for initiative Option 3 preferred Staged implementation: local governance, strategic not ad-hoc development Role in region: 1.6 million foot traffic, visitor growth increasing Gateway: Hauraki Gulf marine park, conservation, education Investment: 20yr directional plan, existing budget, future provision Valuation: book value, service function, income

Waiheke Staff view Reason for preferred option Addresses 4 out of 5 of the issues raised by the board in May with the GB: stormwater, traffic congestion, parking & pedestrian safety. Note Carpark over Urupa (5 th Issue) not directly addressed as cultural significance survey not complete. Allows for governance framework pilot / no decision on return on land Issues & Risks Issue: significant cost Even without land cost it is the most expensive initiative on a per resident basis. Risk: may remove ability for land to be developed or sold for housing Risk: may not align with community parking preferences: commuters not wanting to park further away and probably at a higher cost Risk: may not deliver environmental, cultural or visitor aspirations

Waitakere Ranges Implementing the Glen Eden Town Centre plan to create a compact centre around a new town square and laneway with better pedestrian links to the train station Main street and rail line relationship Waitakere Ranges

Waitakere Ranges Laneway initiative

Waitākere Ranges Reason for preferred option Delivers on community desire for a town square Creates an opportunity to enable Panuku to invest & unlock town square (reducing cost to council) A catalyst for the regeneration and growth of the Glen Eden town Issues & Risks Risk: Detailed Panuku assessment rejects investment proposition Risk: Failure to meet high public expectation for regeneration of Glen Eden

Waitematā Ponsonby Park Deliver the community s agreed vision and chosen design for Ponsonby Park at 254 Ponsonby Road. This involves a whole of site development to create a much needed civic space. Waitematā The Community s Vision of Ponsonby Park Option 1

Current site Community s Vision Option 1 View from Ponsonby Rd Option 1A View from Ponsonby Rd

Waitematā Reason for preferred option Consistent with existing resolution (from legacy council) Funds from the development of rear portion will offset development of park Consistent with Open Space Provision policy (full site option is an over provision of space) Issues & Risks Fails to meet community and local board expectations generated from an extensive community led design project. Loss of an opportunity to repurpose existing buildings as community facilities Site does not activate and is poorly frequented Constraints & Dependencies There is no funding from the board for the initial stage of this project

Promoting a sustainable future: Great Barrier Start by switching council facilities from 100% diesel to 100% solar & battery (with diesel retained as back-up), add an electric vehicle charging station, replace council diesel vehicles with electric/hybrid over time, and move to a solar micro-grid. Great Barrier Island Claris Council Service Centre (top) & Local Board Office (bottom)

Great Barrier OLI Council operations which are off the grid! We aspire to be Fossil Free, Pest Free and Off the Grid and we want to lead on achieving these We support Option 3 and ask for it to be funded in 18/19 This is essential & urgent to remove the embarrassment of Council operations being almost the only place on the island without alternative power This isn t a new project, we have been waiting for officers to deliver for 3 years and the proposed OLI $ to make it happen now OLI $ is just the beginning and we ask for your support to help achieve our aspirations Photo of board members and Cr Cashmore in front of the Claris shops alternative power system the panels running an entire small shopping centre and in its first few weeks the back-up generator never ran -if they can we can!

Great Barrier Island Reasons for preferred option Long term pays for itself Supports island s and council sustainability image Potential sponsorship for new technology Issues & Risks Risk: implementation delays due to isolation Risk: limited public exposure / benefit to council image

Hibiscus & Bays Orewa Beach Esplanade Enhancement Project (OBEEP) to address coastal erosion. Priority work is required for specified zones to protect remaining reserve. Hibiscus & Bays Orewa Beach

Hibiscus & Bays Orewa Beach is a recreational priority for Auckland Identified as No. 1 priority by council standing committee (Regional Strategy and Policy Committee) Long-standing legacy project (began 2002) attracts extensive support from the community Just get it done Long overdue OBEEP has featured as a priority in all of our local board plans to date and remains a high priority to protect and maintain access along the esplanade for all to enjoy

Hibiscus & Bays Reason for preferred option Study identified area north of Whangaparaoa Peninsular prone to erosion, relative to southern coastal area which is protected by islands Issues & Risks Consultation is underway as part of the environment court process Constraints & Dependencies There is no funding from the board for this project given the regional nature of the initiative

Puketāpapa A compelling need for seniors housing 1,500 local seniors live in areas with the highest levels of deprivation Based on Auckland City decision, current plan is to demolish the 25 unit Liston retirement village, for park extension Puketapapa

Puketāpapa Board Case for initiative WHAT DO WE NEED? Short term 1. Save the residents homes HOW DO WE GET THERE? Short term Agree to not demolish houses! Change future land use to housing Medium term 2. Enhance the park entrance Medium term Replace houses removed for enhanced entrance by investing in LTP outer years Long term 3. Intensify Liston housing Long term Invest in further development in LTP outer years

Puketāpapa Reasons for preferred option Consistent with the need for green space in area Consistent with current policy on social housing maximum debt exposure of $20m (currently fully utilised) and neutral impact on balance sheet. Issues & Risks Risk: Council Reputation Letting down a vulnerable sector of the community Reducing housing stock during housing crisis

Local Board Advocacy. LTP Workshop. 2 November 2017