Microsoft Word Agenda 11 Nov 2009 non confid.pdf

21 Pitt Street
Private Bag 92 012
6 November 2009
Auckland, New Zealand
DX CP 28 008 Pitt St
Telephone +64 9 366 2000
TRANSPORT AND
D URBAN DEVELOPMEN
E T
N :
Facsimile +64 9 366 2155
www.arc.govt.nz
Chair and Members

NOTICE EOF
O  MEE
E TING

I hereby give notice that a meeting of the Transport and Urban Development Committee of
the Auckland Regional Council is to be held in the Council Chamber, Ground Floor, 21 Pitt
Street, Auckland, at:
9.3
. 0AM
A
ON
O
WEDN
D ES
E DA
D Y
Y 11
1  NOVEM
E B
M ER
R 2009
An agenda for the meeting is attached.

B L Thomas
GRO
R UP
P MAN
A AG
A E
G R, DEM
E OC
O RAC
A Y
Y SER
E V
R ICES
per:

Lorna Stewart
COM
O MITT
T E
T E
E
E SECR
C ETA
T R
A Y
R
Our agendas and minutes are available online, go to www
w .ar
a c.
c go
g v
o t.tnz
n /c
/ ou
o n
u ci
c l/a
/ ge
g n
e da
d s
a -an
a d-minu
n te
t s
e

Al  rep
e orts sin this Age
g n
e da
d  are
e not to be
b  co
c nstru
r ed
e  as sCounc
n il po
p licy until ado
d pt
p ed
e

A G E N D A

TR
T A
R NSP
S ORT
R AND URBA
B N
N DEVELOPMEN
E T COMMI
M TT
T EE
E
AGENDA FOR THE MEETING OF THE TRANSPORT AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE OF THE AUCKLAND
REGIONAL COUNCIL TO BE HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER, GROUND FLOOR, 21 PITT STREET, AUCKLAND
ON WEDNESDAY 11 NOVEMBER 2009 AT 9.30AM.
I N D E
E X
A
PROCEDURAL
2
A.1
MINUTES
2
A.2
DEPUTATION
2
B
ITEMS FOR DECISION
3
B.1
ONEHUNGA SITE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS - PROGRESS
4
B.2
REVIEW OF HELENSVILLE RAIL SERVICE
15
C
ITEMS FOR INFORMATION
21
C.1
NOVEMBER REGIONAL TRANSPORT COMMITTEE AGENDA
22
C.2
GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT
23
C.3
MONTHLY REPORT FROM THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT UNIT,
AUCKLANDPLUS
26
D
ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS
29
D.1
PROCEDURAL MOTION TO EXCLUDE THE PUBLIC
30
E
MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED WITH THE PUBLIC EXCLUDEDERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
E.1
AUCKLAND WATERFRONT LIGHT RAIL FEASIBILITY STUDYERROR! BOOKMARK NOT

IS Ref: l:\committees\- standing committees\t.u.d\2009\11 - november 2009\agenda - 11 nov 2009 - non confid.doc

i
Index

AGEN
E DA
WE
W D
E NESD
S AY
A  11 NOVEM
E B
M E
B R 2009
TRAN
A SP
S OR
O T AN
A D UR
U BA
B N DEV
E EL
E OP
O ME
M N
E T COMM
M I
M TTEE

A  PR
P OCED
E URAL
A.1  MINUTES
Committee Secretary: 5 November 2009
That the minutes of the meeting held on 14 October 2009 be confirmed.

A.2  DEPUTATION
Committee Secretary:5 November 2009
In terms of Standing Orders 2.13, the Committee Chair has agreed to a deputation
from:
•  Alexandra Macmillan, Senior Lecturer, Environmental Health Epidemiology
and Biostatistics, School of Population Health, University of Auckland.
The deputation will take place at the beginning of the meeting, after confirmation of
the minutes.
Transport choices in the trip to work and community wellbeing
Alex Macmillan will present some preliminary outcomes from her doctoral research
project exploring a group learning method (mediated modelling) for integrating
diverse understandings of transport choices and community wellbeing. The work
focuses on bringing diverse stakeholders together to develop a shared picture of the
complex links between transport and broad understandings of wellbeing. Preliminary
conceptual modelling work will be presented and the committee will be encouraged to
contribute their thoughts. The method has potential as a useful way forward for
developing effective policies about complex urban systems more generally.
RECOMMENDATION
That the deputation from Alexandra Macmillan be received.

A2

AGEN
E DA
WE
W D
E NESD
S AY
A  11 NOVEM
E B
M E
B R
E  2009
TRAN
A SP
S OR
O T AN
A D UR
U BA
B N DEV
E EL
E OP
O ME
M N
E T COMM
M I
M TTEE
B  ITE
T M
E S FO
F R DEC
E ISION
B.1
ONEHUNGA SITE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS - PROGRESS
4
B.2
REVIEW OF HELENSVILLE RAIL SERVICE
15

B3

AGEN
E DA
WE
W D
E NESD
S AY
A  11 NOVEM
E B
M E
B R 2009
TRAN
A SP
S OR
O T AN
A D UR
U BA
B N DEV
E EL
E OP
O ME
M N
E T COMM
M I
M TTEE
B.1  ONEHUNGA SITE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS -
PROGRESS
D160-004
John Smith, General Manager Transport and Urban Development; Martin White,
Group  Manager  Urban  Development  and  Brenna  Waghorn,  Project  Leader
Urban Development:  4 November 2009
The report has been prepared in accordance with the provisions of section 76 and 77 of the
Local Government Act 2002, having regard to section 79.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In September the committee received a report on work related to the preparation of a
development framework for 109-111 Onehunga Mall and other work streams. The
committee requested officers to meet with the local community to discuss the future
development options for the site.  Additionally officers were asked to further
investigate the potential relocation of the Onehunga heritage station to the site,
including discussion with the Railway Enthusiasts Society.  This report provides
feedback on these actions and progress in related work streams.
Officers have met with the Onehunga Business Association and the Maungakiekie
Community Board and are due to meet with neighbours of the site just prior to the
meeting.  Officers also attended the Onehunga Precinct Plan workshops held by
Auckland City Council and presented the proposals to a range of residents and
stakeholders.
Generally there has been wide support for the development framework and
conceptual urban design approach.  Many stakeholders support a high quality mixed
use medium density development of the site, which may be a mixture of ground floor
retail and entertainment with residential or office in upper floors.  The need for an
attractive development to provide an anchor at this end of Onehunga Mall, with good
tenants was suggested, in order to add value and raise the bar in Onehunga.  A
desire to see the site developed quickly and to showcase high quality development
was expressed.
There was clear support for the “plaza” entry from Onehunga Mall to the platform and
pedestrian access from both Princes Street and Neilson Street corner, providing easy
access from a number of directions.  There was also support for a small temporary
park and ride facility on the site.
There was an understanding that development of the site would need to be phased
with market conditions and that this would give more time for other decisions (e.g. rail
to the airport) to be advanced.
In the short term, the need for the platform station, access ways and any temporary
activities to be visible, safe, tidy, and well lit was expressed.
A meeting was held with the President of the Railway Enthusiasts Society (RES), Mr
Alan Verry, who met subsequently with his committee.  The RES Committee was
agreeable in principle to the relocation of the heritage station, subject to a range of
issues being agreed to and resolved.  These issues include RES retaining ownership
of the heritage building, physical access, funding of relocation and ongoing costs,
timing and the need for the proposals to be approved by the full body of members at
a special general meeting.
B4

AGEN
E DA
WE
W D
E NESD
S AY
A  11 NOVEM
E B
M E
B R 2009
TRAN
A SP
S OR
O T AN
A D UR
U BA
B N DEV
E EL
E OP
O ME
M N
E T COMM
M I
M TTEE
The Railway Enthusiasts Society would like to work to further these proposals and to
address the above issues.  However in terms of timing, relocation would not be
favoured prior to the comprehensive development of the site, which property analysts
have recommended be considered in the medium term recognising the currently
unfavourable market conditions.
Salmond Reed Architects, working with Quantity Surveyor, Nigel Emmitt have
prepared a scope of works and a compressive assessment of the costs of relocating
the heritage station.  A preliminary estimate of $282,000 has been provided to include
building and site preparation, building alteration and upgrade, preliminaries, margins,
contingency and GST, building and resource consents and additional preparatory
work (including conservation plan).
ONTRACK will shortly apply to Auckland City Council for the railway designation.
Progress is being made on the designs for the platform and station.  Representatives
from ARTA will attend the meeting to take questions on progress on reinstating the
railway line and stations.
RECOMMENDATIONS
a)
That the report be received.
b)
That the committee notes the feedback from the stakeholders and neighbours
on the draft development framework and general support for a high quality
mixed use development of the site.  Together with any further comments from
the Committee, the draft development framework will be finalised.
c)
That the committee delegates the final sign-off of the development framework
to the chair of the committee, Cr Rose.
d)
That officers continue to liaise with the Railway Enthusiasts Society regarding
the feasibility of relocating the former Onehunga railway station from 38 Alfred
Street to 109-111Onehunga Mall, and the issues raised by the Railway
Enthusiasts Society and report back to the committee on progress.
e)
That the committee notes the preliminary estimates of the cost of relocating
the heritage station of $282,000 which includes building and site preparation,
building alteration and upgrade, consents and preparatory work.
f)
That officers liaise with ARTA to address the outstanding platform design
issues and specifications for the “plaza” and park and ride facility, and present
these designs and funding implications to a future meeting.
B.1.1  PURPOSE
This report provides feedback from the local community and stakeholders on the draft
development framework for the future development of 109-111 Onehunga Mall and
on the feasibility of relocating the heritage station to the site. It also provides an
update on progress of related work streams.
B.1.2  BACKGROUND
In September officers from ARC and ARTA delivered a presentation to councillors
about the Onehunga branch line, the proposed Onehunga Station and the draft
development framework, and answered questions. In September the committee
resolved:
B5

AGEN
E DA
WE
W D
E NESD
S AY
A  11 NOVEM
E B
M E
B R 2009
TRAN
A SP
S OR
O T AN
A D UR
U BA
B N DEV
E EL
E OP
O ME
M N
E T COMM
M I
M TTEE
a)
That the report be received.
b)
That the committee note that the Auckland Regional Transport
Authority and ONTRACK are planning to open the Onehunga branch
line by mid winter 2010, and provide a temporary park and ride facility
on the northern portion of 109-111 Onehunga Mall.
c)
That the committee agrees to the Auckland Regional Transport
Authority’s request to locate the Onehunga station on the southern
section of 109-111 Onehunga Mall, subject to appropriate terms, which
will be reported back to the committee. The committee notes that the
Auckland Regional Transport Authority are considering locating a park
and ride facility on the northern half of the site, which will be on a
temporary basis, on terms to be agreed, and pending the ARC’s
consideration of future options. The committee notes that the platform
location and configuration will reduce the amount of land which may be
developed for commercial purposes.
d)
That the committee notes that the Auckland Regional Transport
Authority is in discussions with Auckland City Council regarding the
railway designation on 109-111 Onehunga Mall.
e)
That the draft development framework and the preferred option,
subject to comments made by the committee, be approved for the
purposes of obtaining the views of the local community.
f)
That officers report back to the committee with the views of the local
community in November.
g)
That the committee note that the Auckland Regional Transport
Authority and ONTRACK will develop a strategy to engage with the
local community, and will form a local steering group to facilitate the
process.
h)
That officers be requested to liaise with the Railway Enthusiasts
Society Inc regarding the feasibility of relocating the former Onehunga
railway station from 38 Alfred Street to 109-111 Onehunga Mall, and
report on progress.
i)
That the committee notes that 109-111 Onehunga Mall could be
developed in the medium term for a mix of uses including retail and
residential.
j)
That committee notes that the site is leased to ONTRACK for a term of
six months from August, 2009, thereafter renewable on a monthly
basis by agreement. The site will be used to store materials and
equipment in relation to the reinstatement of the Onehunga branch
line.
This report provides the report back on a number of the resolutions and progress
made.  Representatives from ARTA will be available to take questions on progress on
reinstating the railway line and stations.
B6

AGEN
E DA
WE
W D
E NESD
S AY
A  11 NOVEM
E B
M E
B R 2009
TRAN
A SP
S OR
O T AN
A D UR
U BA
B N DEV
E EL
E OP
O ME
M N
E T COMM
M I
M TTEE
B.1.3  MAIN REPORT
Consultation with community on development options
At the last meeting the committee requested that officers obtain and report back on
the views of the local community on the draft development framework for the site.
Officers have met with the Onehunga Business Association and the Maungakiekie
Community Board. Notes of the discussion with the community board are attached
(Attachment 1). Officers also attended the Onehunga Precinct Plan workshops held
by Auckland City Council and presented the proposals to the participants.  The MP
for Maungakiekie, Pesata Sam Lotu-liga was also shown around the site on 23
October 2009 and briefed on the development options.
A meeting with both residential and business neighbours of the site has been
arranged for 10 November 2009 and officers will provide a verbal report back from
this meeting.  The meeting will be attended by Cr Morrissey.
Key elements of the design concept discussed with stakeholders included:
•
a significant building platform on the northern part of the site, fronting
Onehunga Mall and Princess Street,
•
mixed use medium density development – retail, residential, commercial,
entertainment,
•
creating a strong corner and “point of arrival” at this southern end of the mall,
•
maintaining the perimeter block and active retail frontages with verandah on
Onehunga Mall,
•
a well signalled “plaza” entry leading passengers to the railway platform, also
with some north facing active frontages,
•
vehicle access from Princes Street, for businesses/residents and initially for
temporary park and ride,
•
potential undercroft parking below the development,
•
possible relocation of the heritage station south of the railway platform on
southern part of site, which could provide a back drop and enclose the plaza.
Generally there has been wide support for this conceptual urban design approach.
Many stakeholders support a high quality mixed use development of the site which
may be a mixture of ground floor retail and entertainment with residential or office in
upper floors.  The need for an attractive development to provide an anchor at this end
of Onehunga Mall, with good tenants was suggested, in order to add value and raise
the bar in Onehunga.  A desire to see the site developed quickly and to showcase
high quality development was expressed.
Representatives of the business community recognised that the station and
development of the site will enhance and support the bottom end of town and that
people walking between the bus station and the railway will be good for the business
community during the day.
B7

AGEN
E DA
WE
W D
E NESD
S AY
A  11 NOVEM
E B
M E
B R 2009
TRAN
A SP
S OR
O T AN
A D UR
U BA
B N DEV
E EL
E OP
O ME
M N
E T COMM
M I
M TTEE
There was clear support for the “plaza” entry from Onehunga Mall to the platform and
pedestrian access from both Princes Street and Nielson Corner, providing easy
access from a number of directions.  There was also support for a small temporary
park and ride facility on the site, with good passive surveillance so as to reduce the
risk of vandalism and theft of vehicles.
There was understanding that development of the site would need to be phased and
that this would give more time for other decisions (e.g. rail to the airport) to be
advanced.
Common issues discussed in the meetings related to:
•
certainty of quality aspirations for the development,
•
timing of development,
•
ease of access to the station,
•
nature of the short-term development (what station would look like when it
opens),
•
future proofing for airport and east-west rail link,
•
implications of heritage station relocation to the site,
•
implications for bus services.
Concern was expressed about the impact (largely noise) on residents of Princes
Street beside the railway line. Location of residential units so close to the rail was not
considered suitable.
The need for the platform station, pedestrian access ways and any temporary
activities to be visible, safe, tidy, and well-lit, was expressed. Application of CPTED
principles was suggested.
Relocation of the heritage station
A meeting was held with the President of the Railway Enthusiasts Society (RES), Mr
Alan Verry, who met subsequently with his committee and has provided a written
response (attachment 1).
The RES Committee agreed there was considerable merit in the proposal and were
agreeable in principle to the relocation of the heritage station, subject to a range of
issues being agreed to and resolved including:
•
Retention of ownership of the building by the RES.
•
Retention of the building’s heritage style and value.
•
Identification and agreement on the occupancy of the building on the land
proposed.
•
Identification of and agreement of responsibility for all ongoing costs
associated with the relocation. i.e. rental, repairs, security etc.
B8

AGEN
E DA
WE
W D
E NESD
S AY
A  11 NOVEM
E B
M E
B R 2009
TRAN
A SP
S OR
O T AN
A D UR
U BA
B N DEV
E EL
E OP
O ME
M N
E T COMM
M I
M TTEE
•
Physical access to the clubrooms by members. this includes what type of
vehicle access, closeness of pedestrian access and ability to access at night.
•
Relocation of the building to be cost neutral to the RES.
•
Property management and any commercial or occupancy restraints.
•
Agreement to the proposal will need to be reached by the full body of RES
members by way of a Special General Meeting for Approval.
The Railway Enthusiasts Society would like to work to further these proposals and to
address the above issues.  However in terms of timing, relocation would not be
favoured prior to the comprehensive development of the site, which property analysts
have recommended be considered in the medium term recognising the currently
unfavourable market conditions.
A further consideration is the cost to relocate the building.  Salmond Reed Architects,
working closely with Quantity Surveyor, Nigel Emmitt of Emmitt Consultants have
prepared a scope of works and a compressive assessment of costs involved
including professional fees.  A preliminary estimate of $262,000 has been provided to
include building and site preparation, building alteration and upgrade, preliminaries,
margins, contingency and GST, building and resource consents and preparation.
Prior to the relocation of the building additional preparatory work (an inspection and
condition report and conservation plan) of $20,000 plus GST is suggested.
Consultation with other stakeholders has found some support for relocation of the
heritage station and its stronger presence supporting Onehunga’s character and
potential as a visitor attraction, however the proposed location with poor visibility and
lack of access was question.  Other concerns were raised as to whether it may limit
future development opportunities on the site or not be in keeping with a modern
upmarket mixed use development that some stakeholders felt was an important
outcome.
Station
Detailed designs are being prepared for the platform and pedestrian access ways.
The drawings to date show a significant gradient in the south west corner to the
platform.  Officers are in discussion with ARTA to investigate whether a gentler
gradient can be achieved to ensure ease of access for pedestrians.
The “plaza entrance” to the station and the temporary park and ride facility are
important components of the overall design however these items are currently
unfunded. ARTA are undertaking further work to assess the costs involved and will
discuss specifications with ARC.
ARTA’s consultants have prepared some concept drawings for a possible temporary
park and ride on the site, including provision for drop off, taxi and buses, although
ARTA has no funding for this.  Even a basic facility could require significant site
preparation due to the gradient and current state of the site, which could be costly.  If
this cannot be funded other temporary uses for the site may need to be considered.
The site is currently leased to ONTRACK for a term of six months from August 2009,
thereafter renewable on a monthly basis by agreement.  A key consideration will be
ensuring pedestrian and passenger safety when services commence.
ARTA is considering the integration of rail and bus services in Onehunga.  Options
include bringing some bus services through the site or alongside Onehunga Mall.
B9

AGEN
E DA
WE
W D
E NESD
S AY
A  11 NOVEM
E B
M E
B R 2009
TRAN
A SP
S OR
O T AN
A D UR
U BA
B N DEV
E EL
E OP
O ME
M N
E T COMM
M I
M TTEE
Service routes, times and frequencies will need to be addressed as well as impacts
on the existing bus hub, safety and operations.
Other stations on the Onehunga branchline
Foundation work has begun at the Te Papapa and Penrose stations.  Future options
for a Mt Smart station are also being considered.
Onehunga precinct plan
Auckland City Council has begun a process to develop a precinct plan for the
Onehunga area, identified as a principal centre in the Future Planning Framework.
Taking the Maungakiekie area plan as a starting point the intention is to more clearly
articulate the future aspirations for Onehunga Centre and the implementation steps
required.  Commencement of rail services from Onehunga, high quality development
of the ARC’s site and restoration of the Onehunga Bay foreshore are all key elements
of this.  Stakeholder workshops were held in September attended by ARC officers.  A
further meeting will be held with the Onehunga Reference Group to consider the
historic landscape assessments currently being completed, to which ARC will be
invited.  Following this there will be an open day where a draft precinct plan will be
presented for comment.  The work will not be reported to the Auckland City
Development Committee until the new year.
B.1.4  FINANCIAL AND RESOURCING IMPLICATIONS
ARTA and ONTRACK have confirmed that they have funding for the reinstatement of
the Onehunga branch line in their budgets for 2009/10.  The funding includes the
costs of providing stations at three locations, including Onehunga.
The costs associated with preparing the draft development framework and meeting
with stakeholders were met within existing budgets.
While there has been support for a “plaza entrance” to the station from Onehunga
Mall and for a temporary park and ride facility as important components of the overall
concept, these items have not been budgeted for. ARTA is undertaking further work
to assess the costs involved.
There is no budget provision for the relocation of the heritage railway station, which
may be feasible when the comprehensive development of the site occurs.
B.1.5  LEGAL AND LEGISLATIVE IMPLICATIONS
There are no legal implications to the ARC arising from this report.
B.1.6  CONSULTATION
This report provides feedback on consultation with the Onehunga Business
Association, Maungakiekie Community Board, Railway Enthusiasts Society Inc. and
other local stakeholders.  Feedback from neighbours of the site will be provided
verbally.
ATTACHMENTS
•
Attachment 1 - Maungakiekie Community Board thoughts on the ITM site for a
railway station (from meeting on 15 October 2009).
B10

AGEN
E DA
WE
W D
E NESD
S AY
A  11 NOVEM
E B
M E
B R 2009
TRAN
A SP
S OR
O T AN
A D UR
U BA
B N DEV
E EL
E OP
O ME
M N
E T COMM
M I
M TTEE
•
Attachment 2 - Letter from Alan Verry, President, Railway Enthusiasts Society.
RECOMMENDATIONS
a)
That the report be received.
b)
That the committee notes the feedback from the stakeholders and neighbours
on the draft development framework and general support for a high quality
mixed use development of the site.  Together with any further comments from
the Committee, the draft development framework will be finalised.
c)
That the committee delegates the final sign-off of the development framework
to the chair of the committee, Cr Rose.
d)
That officers continue to liaise with the Railway Enthusiasts Society regarding
the feasibility of relocating the former Onehunga railway station from 38 Alfred
Street to 109-111Onehunga Mall, and the issues raised by the Railway
Enthusiasts Society and report back to the committee on progress.
e)
That the committee notes the preliminary estimates of the cost of relocating
the heritage station of $282,000 which includes building and site preparation,
building alteration and upgrade, consents and preparatory work.
f)
That officers liaise with Auckland Regional Transport Authority to address the
outstanding platform design issues and specifications for the “plaza” and park
and ride facility, and present these designs and funding implications to a
future meeting.
B11

AGEN
E DA
WE
W D
E NESD
S AY
A  11 NOVEM
E B
M E
B R 2009
TRAN
A SP
S OR
O T AN
A D UR
U BA
B N DEV
E EL
E OP
O ME
M N
E T COMM
M I
M TTEE
ATTACHMENT 1

Maungakiekie Community Board thoughts on the ITM site for the railway station
(following discussion 15 October 2009)

There was general consensus for the site to be used for the railway station because: -

•
It was the former site of the railway station in the late nineteenth and early to middle
twentieth century.
•
It is close to The Mall.
•
It could provide good links to both Avondale and the airport
•
There is plenty of room for excellent development of the site in a way that could be of
considerable benefit to Onehunga.

We would like to see: -

•
First class development of the site that would include the long term view of linkages
to both Avondale and the airport.
•
All development to work in with the Precinct Plans currently being developed by
Auckland City for both the Onehunga and the Neilson Street area.
•
All development to conform to CYPTED standards.
•
The Onehunga Business Association and the Community Board be considered as
key stakeholders

The following resolutions were passed at our June meeting, and passed to the ACC
Transport Committee who endorsed them: -

That all development should: -
•
be built in a timeframe which would not mean that a temporary station would not be
required.
•
incorporate a strong retail anchor so as to integrate the station with the southern area
of the Mall.
•
incorporate a Park and Ride Facility with good passive surveillance so as to reduce
the risk of vandalism and theft of vehicles;
•
successfully incorporate the Bus Transit Station, located in Upper Municipal Place,
through the use of urban design features.

Some concerns: -

•
That the preferred diagonal platform could limit the permanent development of the
site
•
That because the platform will be considerably lower than the entranceway from The
Mall it may be perceived as a difficult access.
•
The planned access to the station may be difficult for pedestrians to see when
approaching down the Mall towards the station
•
The current access to the eastern side of the line is very limited, which could again
inhibit successful permanent development of the site.
•
The siting of the historic railway station on the eastern side of the line may not be the
best position for this heritage building because of both the poor visibility and the lack
of access. This could seriously diminish its use.

B12

AGEN
E DA
WE
W D
E NESD
S AY
A 11 NOVEM
E B
M E
B R 2009
TRAN
A SP
S OR
O T AN
A D UR
U BA
B N DEV
E EL
E OP
O ME
M N
E T COMM
M I
M TTEE
ATTACHMENT 2

20th October 2009

Martin White
Group Manager – Urban Development
Auckland Regional Council
Private Bag 92012
Auckland

Dear Martin,

Re: Discussions relating to the Former Onehunga Station – Now the Railway Enthusiasts
Society Headquarters

Thank you for your time recently in presenting your power point presentation to RES
Committee members relating to the possible proposed relocation of the old Onehunga
Station.

Following your presentation, the Committee met to discuss the proposals and formulate a
response to the proposals.

The Committee agreed there was good merit in the proposals and would be agreeable to
moves planned regarding the relocation of the Station, subject to the following issues
being agreed to and resolved.

The overriding issue is that once details are agreed to, the Proposal will need to be put to
the full body of members by way of a Special General Meeting for Approval. This is bound
to cause debate but is something we will need to manage in a professional manner. I am
currently reviewing our Constitution to confirm Constitutional requirements.

The issues to be considered and confirmed are outlined below:

•
Retention of Ownership of the Building by the RES.
•
Retention of the Building’s Heritage Style and Value
•
Identification and Agreement on the Occupancy of the Building on the Land
proposed.
•
Identification of and agreement of responsibility for all ongoing costs associated
with the relocation. I.E. Rental, Repairs, Security etc.
B13

AGEN
E DA
WE
W D
E NESD
S AY
A 11 NOVEM
E B
M E
B R 2009
TRAN
A SP
S OR
O T AN
A D UR
U BA
B N DEV
E EL
E OP
O ME
M N
E T COMM
M I
M TTEE
•
Physical Access to the Clubrooms by Members. This includes what type of vehicle
access, closeness of pedestrian access and ability to access at night. (This is
probably the major one in resolving suitable access)
•
Relocation of the Building to be Cost Neutral to the RES.
•
What type of Property Management Clause will the Building be under as part of
the wider redevelopment.
•
Any Commercial or Occupancy restraints.
•
Timeframe of Proposed relocation

Martin, I think that outlines in a general manner the issues that Committee Members
considered on an initial basis. Obviously should matters firm up and formal proposals are
received we would need to have a Legal appreciation on terms of Relocation, however
that is for the future and we are keen to work in a spirit of co-operation in the furthering
of these proposals.

Yours sincerely

Alan Verry
President
Railway Enthusiasts Society Incorporated

P.O. Box 13684
Onehunga
Auckland 1643

O27 270 1385

B14

AGEN
E DA
WE
W D
E NESD
S AY
A  11 NOVEM
E B
M E
B R 2009
TRAN
A SP
S OR
O T AN
A D UR
U BA
B N DEV
E EL
E OP
O ME
M N
E T COMM
M I
M TTEE
B.2  REVIEW OF HELENSVILLE RAIL SERVICE
A391/00
Christine Perrins, Executive Manager CE's Office; Cathy Bean, Strategic Policy
Advisor:  30 October 2009
The report has been prepared in accordance with the provisions of section 76 and 77 of the
Local Government Act 2002, having regard to section 79.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Since July 2008, the Auckland Regional Transport Authority (ARTA) has provided a
trial rail service linking Helensville, Waimauku and Huapai with Auckland’s suburban
rail network.  This report presents information from ARTA’s review of the trial,
including information about patronage, capital and operating costs, and public
feedback during the trial.  Patronage on the service has not met expectations, and
feedback has suggested that key factors in the result have been the low frequency of
the service and long journey times.
In October 2009, the ARTA board approved a revised 2009/10 operating budget for
ARTA that did not include funding for the Helensville rail service from 1 January 2010.
ARTA’s review of the Helensville rail service recommends that another option,
involving the provision of rail services to Huapai but ceasing services to Helensville,
could instead be explored. This report recommends that the committee note ARTA’s
decision to cease the Helensville rail service, and that further analysis of the costs of
providing rail services to Huapai be reported to the Finance Committee.
B.2.1  PURPOSE
This report provides information from ARTA about the trial Helensville rail service,
including patronage, costs and subsidies, as well as future options, for the
committee’s consideration.  ARTA’s review of the service recommends that an
alternative option for the future, involving the provision of additional rail services to
Huapai (but ceasing Helensville services) could be explored.

B.2.2  BACKGROUND
As part of the 2008/09 annual plan, the ARC agreed to fund (together with the New
Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA)) a trial passenger rail service linking Helensville,
Waimauku and Huapai with the Auckland suburban passenger rail network.
The trial rail service commenced on 14 July 2008, and has operated for over one
year. It involves one morning and one evening service from Helensville to Britomart,
and a single evening service from Britomart to Helensville. The journey time between
Helensville and Britomart was between 93 and 98 minutes. The timetable is shown
below:
B15

AGEN
E DA
WE
W D
E NESD
S AY
A  11 NOVEM
E B
M E
B R 2009
TRAN
A SP
S OR
O T AN
A D UR
U BA
B N DEV
E EL
E OP
O ME
M N
E T COMM
M I
M TTEE

Capital expenditure to establish the service involved a total of $1.25m to upgrade
station infrastructure to provide a basic level of amenity.  Before the service
commenced, ONTRACK also carried out work to reduce the amount of track that was
subject to temporary speed restrictions.
B.2.3  MAIN REPORT
Patronage on the Helensville rail service trial
A total of 8,028 passenger trips were taken over the 12-month trial, an average of 43
passengers per day across the three services combined, as shown in Figure 1 below.
Figure 1: Average number of passengers per day

The level of patronage achieved falls below the stated ARTA success factor of 80
passenger trips per day.
ARTA’s analysis shows that the most popular station on the Helensville route was
Huapai, with an average of 8 boardings on the morning service.
B16

AGEN
E DA
WE
W D
E NESD
S AY
A  11 NOVEM
E B
M E
B R 2009
TRAN
A SP
S OR
O T AN
A D UR
U BA
B N DEV
E EL
E OP
O ME
M N
E T COMM
M I
M TTEE
Operating costs and revenue
ARTA’s operating costs and revenue of the Helensville rail service are shown in
Table 1 below.  The ARC has funded 40 percent of the service, and NZTA has
funded 60 percent.
Table 1: Helensville rail service operating costs and revenue
Annual Actual to 30 June 2009

Opex*
$419,202
Revenue
$52,175
Subsidy
$367,027
* Including marketing costs.
The subsidy cost per passenger km is $0.99, as shown in Table 2 below.  This
excludes the capital investment of $1.25m for station infrastructure.
Table 2: Costs per passenger km for the Helensville rail service

ARTA’s analysis shows that the level of subsidy per passenger km for the Helensville
service is higher than other comparable services. The average subsidy across the
suburban rail network is $0.29 per passenger km.
Feedback relating to the Helensville rail service
In December 2008, a customer feedback survey was issued in the local community,
seeking feedback on the Helensville rail service. Only 4 percent of respondents used
the rail service on a daily basis.  The most significant reasons why respondents did
B17

AGEN
E DA
WE
W D
E NESD
S AY
A  11 NOVEM
E B
M E
B R 2009
TRAN
A SP
S OR
O T AN
A D UR
U BA
B N DEV
E EL
E OP
O ME
M N
E T COMM
M I
M TTEE
not use the service were cited as ‘departure times’ (48%), ‘journey time’ (26%).
‘location of station’ (12%) and ‘train service is unreliable’ (7%).
When asked about what may influence respondents to use the service, the main
response was ‘if regular services or additional departure times were on offer’ (56%).
‘Reduced journey time’ (11%) and ‘increased reliability’ (11%) were also ranked
highly.
Bus journeys between Helensville and Britomart are faster than the rail service.  For
instance, the 6.34am bus arrives at Britomart at 7.50am, 17 minutes before the
6.32am rail service.
The Chair of this committee has provided an overview of her experiences of using the
Helensville rail service, which will be circulated separately.
Public transport service success factors
Past research suggests that there are a number of factors that contribute to demand
for passenger transport services.  Some of the most significant factors include:
•
Service frequency
•
Service reliability
•
Travel time
•
Service coverage
•
Service integration (of modes, services and timetables).
In other words, services must be fast, reliable and frequent if they are to be
successful.
It is likely that, in order for the service to be successful in attracting additional
patronage, the frequency, speed and reliability of services would need to be
increased significantly.  In the Passenger Transport Network Plan, ARTA’s minimum
service guidelines state that, even for the local connector network, services should be
provided every 20-30 minutes during the peak period, and every 60 minutes during
the off-peak period and on evenings and weekends.  The provision of one inbound
service and two outbound services per day falls well short of this target, but this is the
maximum that can be provided with current infrastructure and rolling stock.
This means that ARTA is unable to provide a service that meets the service
guidelines, and therefore it is unsurprising that the trial has not been successful.
ARTA Board decision
At its meeting on 28 October 2009, the ARTA board considered a new ARTA
operating budget for 2009/10 with reduced expenditure, due to a considerable
shortfall in NZTA funding for ARTA that became apparent when NZTA released its
National Land Transport Programme on 26 August 2009.
ARTA has advised that, at the meeting, the board approved a revised 2009/10 ARTA
operating budget (for submission to the ARC) that involved ceasing the Helensville
rail service from 1 January 2010.
ARTA’s revised operating budget will be reported to the Finance Committee in
November.
B18

AGEN
E DA
WE
W D
E NESD
S AY
A  11 NOVEM
E B
M E
B R 2009
TRAN
A SP
S OR
O T AN
A D UR
U BA
B N DEV
E EL
E OP
O ME
M N
E T COMM
M I
M TTEE
Options for the future
ARTA’s review of the Helensville trial considered a range of options, including
changes to departure times, provision of additional services during peak and inter-
peak periods, provision of weekend services, provision of shuttle services, and
additional services terminating at Huapai.  Most of these options were rejected
because they would not be cost effective, or would disrupt other Western line
services unacceptably.
However, the review identified an option that could be considered for a limited trial,
that may result in some patronage gains.  This option involves the provision of
additional services terminating at Huapai, with the additional costs to be offset by
discontinuing rail services to Waimauku and Helensville.
The ARTA review found that Huapai has been the most popular station during the
Helensville rail trial.  In the Rail Development Plan, Huapai is a terminus station on
the western line, with a regular hourly service planned for introduction after the
electrification of the core Auckland network.
Rail offers a more direct route between Waitakere City and Huapai than road travel,
and is likely to be quicker than road travel during peak periods.  In contrast, rail travel
between Huapai and Helensville is less direct than the highway.
The journey time from Waitakere to Huapai is approximately 13 minutes. The journey
between Huapai and Helensville is a further 26-28 minutes.  Therefore journey times
to Huapai are likely to be more acceptable.
It is recommended that the costs, and the cost-effectiveness of a trial rail service to
Huapai be reported to the November Finance Committee meeting, for its
consideration.
Timing and implications for passengers
The revised 2009/10 operating budget approved by the ARTA board allowed for the
Helensville rail service to continue until 1 January 2010.  In practice the service would
most likely cease on 24 December 2009 due to the shutdown over the Christmas
period.
Further investigation of a trial service to Huapai would need to commence
immediately, if a trial service to Huapai is to be provided in early 2010 and the time
between the end of the Helensville service and the commencement of the Huapai
service is to be minimised.
The effects on the passengers who currently use the service will need to be
considered (on average, 43 people per day to or from Huapai, Waimauku and
Helensville).  ARTA will need to work through a public communications exercise to
minimise disruption to these passengers.
B.2.4  FINANCIAL AND RESOURCING IMPLICATIONS
ARTA’s funding  from NZTA under the National Land Transport Programme is fully
allocated, and ARTA advises that there is no NZTA funding available for the
Helensville rail service or a trial service to Huapai.  Therefore if a trial was to be
provided, it would need to be fully funded by the ARC.  Such costs would be
considered as part of any consideration of a trial service.
B19

AGEN
E DA
WE
W D
E NESD
S AY
A  11 NOVEM
E B
M E
B R 2009
TRAN
A SP
S OR
O T AN
A D UR
U BA
B N DEV
E EL
E OP
O ME
M N
E T COMM
M I
M TTEE
B.2.5  LEGAL AND LEGISLATIVE IMPLICATIONS
There are no legal implications arising from this report.
B.2.6  CONSULTATION
ARTA undertook a customer feedback survey in December 2008, seeking feedback
on the Helensville rail service.  Some of the results of this survey are discussed in the
main body of the report.
RECOMMENDATIONS
a)
That the report be received.
b)
That the committee notes Auckland Regional Transport Authority’s decision to
cease the trial Helensville rail service from 1 January 2010.
c)
That further analysis of the option to provide rail services to Huapai, including
the cost-effectiveness of the service, be reported to the Finance Committee.

B20

AGEN
E DA
WE
W D
E NESD
S AY
A 11 NOVEM
E B
M E
B R 2009
TRAN
A SP
S OR
O T AN
A D UR
U BA
B N DEV
E EL
E OP
O ME
M N
E T COMM
M I
M TTEE

C ITE
T M
E S FO
F R INF
IN ORMA
M T
A I
T ON
C.1
NOVEMBER REGIONAL TRANSPORT COMMITTEE AGENDA
22
C.2
GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT
23
C.3
MONTHLY REPORT FROM THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT UNIT,
AUCKLANDPLUS
26

C21

AGEN
E DA
WE
W D
E NESD
S AY
A  11 NOVEM
E B
M E
B R 2009
TRAN
A SP
S OR
O T AN
A D UR
U BA
B N DEV
E EL
E OP
O ME
M N
E T COMM
M I
M TTEE
C.1  NOVEMBER REGIONAL TRANSPORT COMMITTEE AGENDA
L128 - 01
John  Smith,  General  Manager  Transport  and  Urban  Development  and  Don
Houghton, Group Manager Transport:  27 October 2009
This is a routine report updating the Committee on aspects of the Committee’s function.
C.1.1  PURPOSE
This report describes the items to be considered by the Regional Transport
Committee (RTC) at its meeting on 18 November 2009, so that the committee can
give guidance to the Auckland Regional Council (ARC) members of the RTC on
issues of interest to the ARC.
At the time of writing this report, the RTC agenda had not closed.  It is expected that
the following items will be considered by the RTC.
October progress on report backs
This item from the October RTC meeting was not considered because of lack of time
and has been carried over to the November meeting.
Regional Land Transport Strategy 2010 - 2040 progress report
The Regional Land Transport Strategy (RLTS) 2010 – 2040 progress report will
provide the RTC with an update on the status of consultation on the RLTS 2010 -
2040.
RLTS consultation hearings sub committee
The RTC will appoint a hearings sub committee to consider submissions on the draft
RLTS 2010 – 2040, and make recommendations back to the RTC.
Monitoring progress of key projects
The RTC will be updated on progress in implementing key transport projects around
the region.
November progress on report backs
Progress on report backs since the October RTC meeting.
RECOMMENDATION
That the report be received.
C22

AGEN
E DA
WE
W D
E NESD
S AY
A  11 NOVEM
E B
M E
B R 2009
TRAN
A SP
S OR
O T AN
A D UR
U BA
B N DEV
E EL
E OP
O ME
M N
E T COMM
M I
M TTEE
C.2  GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT
C736
John  Smith,  General  Manager  Transport and  Urban  Development:   27  October
2009
The report has been prepared in accordance with the provisions of section 76 and 77 of the
Local Government Act 2002, having regard to section 79.
C.2.1  RUGBY WORLD CUP UPDATE
ARTA officers will update the committee on transport preparations for the Rugby
World Cup.
C.2.2  QUEENS WHARF DESIGN COMPETITION
A two-stage design competition is being undertaken to find the best concept design
for Queens Wharf.  Stage 1 of the Queens Wharf design competition has been
completed, with 237 concepts and 25 team expressions of interest received.  As well,
268 ideas were submitted.
The Stage 1 Design Competition Brief set out the objectives for Queens Wharf as
follows:
•
Provide a purpose-built cruise facility to capture regional and national benefits
of the cruise industry for New Zealand.
•
Provide a public open space and access to the Waitemata Harbour and
Hauraki Gulf for all New Zealanders and international visitors that reflects our
maritime and Pacific culture and heritage.
•
Present an impressive image to the world of Auckland and New Zealand
during RWC 2011 and beyond, and to support New Zealand’s hosting of RWC
2011, using Queens Wharf as a live site.
•
Be a catalyst as part of a coherent, distinctive and ambitious waterfront
redevelopment.
Five designs were shortlisted and these were approved by Ministers Murray McCully
and Gerry Brownlee, ARC Chairman Mike Lee and Auckland City Council Mayor
John Banks, on the recommendation of the chief executives.  The final five designs
were eventually chosen for their ability to strike the right balance between meeting
the need for a great space for the public to enjoy, the ability to act as a major
celebration venue during the 2011 Rugby World Cup (and other future events), and
the need for a world class cruise-ship terminal.  In the view of the selection team,
these five designs have the best potential to be further developed in Stage 2.
The competition also invited organisations to submit expressions of interest (EOI) for
design consultation services, as an alternative to presenting a particular design
proposal.  Of the 25 EOIs received and reviewed, three submissions were selected
as finalists.  It was agreed, that their submissions provided clear evidence of design
capability and had carefully considered the particular challenges in delivering the
Queens Wharf project when assembling their teams.

C23

AGEN
E DA
WE
W D
E NESD
S AY
A  11 NOVEM
E B
M E
B R 2009
TRAN
A SP
S OR
O T AN
A D UR
U BA
B N DEV
E EL
E OP
O ME
M N
E T COMM
M I
M TTEE
Stage 2 of the competition closed on the 23 October 2009.  Eight designs were
received from the following individuals and teams:
•
Andrius Gedgaudas, Architect, Shanghai China.
•
Den Aitken, Pete Griffins and Hamish Foote, Field Landscape Architecture,
Auckland.
•
David Gibbs and Aaron Sills, Construkt/SVB, Auckland .
•
John Coop, Tasman Studio, Auckland.
•
Simon Williams, Williams Architects Ltd, Auckland.
•
Tasman Studios.
•
Jasmax and Architectus .
•
The water-shed team.
These eight designs are being evaluated by two teams:
•
The advisory team who provided advice on the proposals relating to the brief
from an amenity and design perspective and, taking into account the advice
from the technical advisors, are evaluating the entries and team proposals.
The advisory team is Professor John Hunt, Ian Athfield, Graeme McIndoe,
Jillian de Beer, and Rebecca Skidmore.
•
The technical advisors from the cruise industry, events industry, ferry
operations and a quantity surveyor who were asked to comment on the
shortlisted concepts in their areas of expertise.  This included functionality,
build-ability, commercial opportunities and the financial sustainability of the
proposals.
At the time of writing this report the evaluation process had not been finalised.
C.2.3  PROGRESS ON REPORT-BACKS TO COMMITTEE

Resolution  Item
Resolution
Status
Date
10 Sep 08
Sealink
Considered in confidential session.  To be reported to
Feb 2010 T&UD.
10 Sep 08
Sealink
Considered in Confidential session
To be reported to
Feb 2010 T&UD.
15 Jul 09
GM Report
ARTA be requested to present on
To be reported to
the Auckland Regional Public
Dec 2009 T&UD.
Transport Plan at the next
meeting.
14 Oct 09
Deputation
That a report be brought back to
To be reported to
the Transport and Urban
Dec 09 T&UD.
Development Committee to enable
the council to establish a position
on the proposed Parnell Train
Station at Cheshire Street.

That the committee notes the
To be reported to
points raised in the Parnell
Dec 09 T&UD.
C24

AGEN
E DA
WE
W D
E NESD
S AY
A  11 NOVEM
E B
M E
B R 2009
TRAN
A SP
S OR
O T AN
A D UR
U BA
B N DEV
E EL
E OP
O ME
M N
E T COMM
M I
M TTEE
community’s presentation and
refers them to officers to report
back to the committee in
December.
14 Oct 09
Western Ring
That officers report back to the
To be reported to
Route Update
Transport and Urban Development
Feb 2010 T&UD.
Committee on the environmental
impacts of widening and raising
the causeway between Rosebank
and Great North Roads, in
particular the impacts on the
Department of Conservation
reserves.
C.2.4  FINANCIAL AND RESOURCING IMPLICATIONS
There are no financial implications to the ARC arising from this report.
C.2.5  LEGAL AND LEGISLATIVE IMPLICATIONS

There are no legal implications to the ARC arising from this report.
RECOMMENDATION
That the report be received.
C25

AGEN
E DA
WE
W D
E NESD
S AY
A  11 NOVEM
E B
M E
B R 2009
TRAN
A SP
S OR
O T AN
A D UR
U BA
B N DEV
E EL
E OP
O ME
M N
E T COMM
M I
M TTEE
C.3  MONTHLY REPORT FROM THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
UNIT, AUCKLANDPLUS
E032
Louise  Mason,  General  Manager  Programmes  and  Partnerships  and  Clyde
Rogers, Group Manager AucklandPlus:  27 October 2009
The report has been prepared in accordance with the provisions of section 76 and 77 of the
Local Government Act 2002, having regard to section 79.
C.3.1  PURPOSE
This report provides the committee with an update on the economic development
unit’s (AucklandPlus) activities since the last report to the Transport and Urban
Development Committee in October 2009.
C.3.2  BACKGROUND
AucklandPlus is a stand alone business unit of the Auckland Regional Council.  The
Transport and Urban Development Committee approved the unit’s current statement
of intent in August 2009.  As part of that decision it was agreed the unit would report
progress and performance to the committee on a regular basis.
C.3.3  MAIN REPORT
AucklandPlus’s core activities focus on regional promotion, dealing with investment
enquiries and principal regional projects that have been progressed over the past
month.
Regional promotion
AucklandPlus’s next e-newsletter will be circulated this month.  Topics covered will
include information on the recent economic impact analysis of Auckland’s port,
research findings on Auckland’s role in attracting foreign direct investment to New
Zealand, industry updates for the marine sector and the food and beverage sector
and a story about the University of Auckland’s top 100 world ranking and what that
means for Auckland as a research and development hub.
Single point of contact
AucklandPlus has been asked to provide support to the regional group addressing
broadband investment by identifying potential international partners for the delivery of
faster broadband services in the region.
AucklandPlus referred one international enquiry to Enterprising Manukau and is
assisting another New Zealand based company raise capital off shore.  In early
November, AucklandPlus will also host an American infrastructure investor.
Regional projects
Auckland’s role in attracting foreign direct investment (FDI) into New Zealand
The most significant piece of work over the last month has been the research
commissioned into Auckland’s role in attracting FDI to New Zealand.
C26

AGEN
E DA
WE
W D
E NESD
S AY
A  11 NOVEM
E B
M E
B R 2009
TRAN
A SP
S OR
O T AN
A D UR
U BA
B N DEV
E EL
E OP
O ME
M N
E T COMM
M I
M TTEE
The research was managed by the regional Strategy team with input from
AucklandPlus’ Investment Manager.  FDI is important for regional economic
development as it stimulates productivity growth, develops local capability and
management skills, and facilitates knowledge and technology transfer in key
industries.
The research has demonstrated Auckland receives the lion’s share of the foreign
direct investment (over 41 per cent) that flows into New Zealand.  FDI is important to
the regional economy, and is particularly important for employment generation with
24 per cent of Aucklanders working for foreign-owned companies. The region’s four
largest industries (by employment); property and business services, manufacturing,
retail, and wholesale, have significant foreign ownership.  Finance and insurance is
dominated by foreign-owned banks and insurance companies and foreign-owned
companies tend to be far larger than NZ-owned firms.
The overall amount of inward investment in the Auckland region is broadly
comparable with that of other small regional economies. The largest source of
investment is the USA, followed closely by Australia, with significant investment also
from the UK. Auckland is considered to be a reasonably attractive investment
destination within Australasia.
International benchmarking data on investment attractiveness shows that Auckland is
well ranked in biotechnology and pharmaceuticals R&D, software and information
technology, financial and banking services, and multimedia and 3D visualisation and
in terms of the observed deal flow, Auckland ranks well, placed fourth to sixth out of
eight comparator cities (Sydney, Melbourne, Adelaide, Brisbane, Vancouver, Seattle,
Copenhagen) in biotechnology, ICT, business services, food and beverage, and
manufacturing.
While much of the inward investment has been predatory acquisition by Australian
companies seeking market penetration in New Zealand, there has also been some
productive investment. Multinational corporations are important investors in the
region. Rather than seeking to attract new investors, the report suggests a better
strategy is building strategic relationships with the multinationals already present in
the region to leverage regional capabilities.
As reported previously to the committee, the global financial crisis has had a flow-on
effect to foreign direct investment and this will continue for some time to come.
Greenfield investment has been cut back and mergers and acquisitions greatly
reduced. Investors seek to manage risks: stability, predictability, and quality of
investment are top priorities and given the tough global market conditions for FDI, the
report recommends the targeting of multinationals, joint ventures, and corporate
venture investment as the best option for attracting investment into the region in the
short term.
The report goes on to identify the best prospects for future investment and most of
these already feature in the AucklandPlus work programme.  Areas of specific
interest include food and beverage processing, and the proposed Manukau Food
Innovation Centre which will stimulate growth in the fast-moving consumer goods
sector, film, software development, and 3D visualisation are all attractive investment
prospects, although slow broadband has been identified as a barrier, and the future
prospects of biotechnology research and development are considered strong.
Materials-based manufacturing is strong also and offers potential for inward
investment based on the region’s materials research and development strength.
Lastly the opportunities for public-private partnerships for infrastructure in the marine
sector were highlighted.
C27

AGEN
E DA
WE
W D
E NESD
S AY
A  11 NOVEM
E B
M E
B R 2009
TRAN
A SP
S OR
O T AN
A D UR
U BA
B N DEV
E EL
E OP
O ME
M N
E T COMM
M I
M TTEE

C.3.4  FINANCIAL AND RESOURCING IMPLICATIONS
As a stand alone business unit of the Auckland Regional Council, AucklandPlus’s
performance against budget is reported regularly to the Finance Committee as part of
the monthly Financial Management Report.
C.3.5  LEGAL AND LEGISLATIVE IMPLICATIONS
There are no legal implications to the ARC arising from this report.
C.3.6  CONSULTATION
AucklandPlus consults extensively on all projects through regional leadership groups.
ATTACHMENT
•
Economic Monitor (to be tabled at the meeting).
RECOMMENDATION
That the report be received.

C28

AGEN
E DA
WE
W D
E NESD
S AY
A 11 NOVEM
E B
M E
B R 2009
TRAN
A SP
S OR
O T AN
A D UR
U BA
B N DEV
E EL
E OP
O ME
M N
E T COMM
M I
M TTEE

D ADM
D INISTR
T AT
A IV
T E
E ITEM
E S
D.1
PROCEDURAL MOTION TO EXCLUDE THE PUBLIC
30

D29

AGEN
E DA
WE
W D
E NESD
S AY
A 11 NOVEM
E B
M E
B R 2009
TRAN
A SP
S OR
O T AN
A D UR
U BA
B N DEV
E EL
E OP
O ME
M N
E T COMM
M I
M TTEE
D.1 PROCEDURAL MOTION TO EXCLUDE THE PUBLIC
RECOMMENDATION
That, pursuant to the provisions of Section 48(1)(a) of the Local Government Official
Information & Meetings Act 1987, the public be excluded from the following
proceedings of this meeting; the subject matter, the reasons and specific grounds for
exclusions are set below:

E.1:
Auckland Waterfront Light Rail Feasibility Study
Reason:
Commercial Negotiations
Grounds:
Withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local
authority holding the information to carry out, without prejudice or
disadvantage, commercial activities - Section 7(2)(i) of the Act

Specifics:
The report contains information about preliminary negotiations
between the council and other parties in regard to light rail options.

D30

CONFIDEN
E TIAL AGEN
E D
N A
WE
W D
E NESD
S AY
A 11 NOVEM
E B
M E
B R 2009
TRANSP
S OR
O T AN
A D UR
U BA
B N DEV
E EL
E OP
O ME
M N
E T COMM
M I
M TTEE

E31