Agenda of Sport and Recreation Committee

PALMERSTON NORTH CITY COUNCIL

Sport and Recreation Committee MEETING

12 March 2018

Order of Business

NOTE: The Sport and Recreation Committee meeting coincides with the ordinary meeting of Economic Development Committee meeting. The format for the meeting will be as follows:

- Sport and Recreation Committee will open and adjourn immediately to Economic Development Committee

- Economic Development Committee will open, conduct its business and then close.

1. Apologies

2. Notification of Additional Items

Pursuant to Sections 46A(7) and 46A(7A) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987, to receive the Chairperson’s explanation that specified item(s), which do not appear on the Agenda of this meeting and/or the meeting to be held with the public excluded, will be discussed.

Any additions in accordance with Section 46A(7) must be approved by resolution with an explanation as to why they cannot be delayed until a future meeting.

Any additions in accordance with Section 46A(7A) may be received or referred to a subsequent meeting for further discussion. No resolution, decision or recommendation can be made in respect of a minor item.

3. Public Comment

To receive comments from members of the public on matters specified on this Agenda or, if time permits, on other Committee matters.

(NOTE: If the Committee wishes to consider or discuss any issue raised that is not specified on the Agenda, other than to receive the comment made or refer it to the Chief Executive, then a resolution will need to be made in accordance with clause 2 above.)

4. Presentation - Manawatū kids triathlon Page 7

5. Confirmation of Minutes Page 9

“That the minutes of the Sport and Recreation Committee meeting of 4 December 2017 Part I Public be confirmed as a true and correct record.”

6. Sport Manawatū 6 month report for the period ended 31 December 2017 Page 19

Report, dated 20 February 2018 from the Senior Property & Parks Planner, Aaron Phillips.

7. Submissions - Crewe Park Proposed Lease to Pascal Street Community Trust Page 57

8. Proposal to Lease a Section of Crewe Park to Pascal Street Community Trst Page 63

Report, dated 14 February 2018 from the Leisure Assets Planner, Jason Pilkington.

9. Proposal to Licence Pascal Street Community Trust to occupy part of Awapuni Park or Alexander Park for Community Gardens Page 81

Report, dated 13 February 2018 from the Senior Property & Parks Planner, Aaron Phillips.

10. Committee Work Schedule Page 105

11. Exclusion of Public

To be moved:

“That the public be excluded from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting listed in the table below.

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

General subject of each matter to be considered		Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter	Ground(s) under Section 48(1) for passing this resolution
12.	Minutes of the Sport and Recreation Committee meeting - Part II Confidential - 4 December 2017	For the reasons setout in the Sport and Recreation Committee minutes of 4 December 2017, held in public present.
13.	Artificial Football Turf - Process for Location Selection	Negotiations	s7(2)(i)
14.	Presentation - Ashhurst Pool update	Negotiations	s7(2)(i)

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

Also that the persons listed below be permitted to remain after the public has been excluded for the reasons stated.

Chief Executive (Heather Shotter), Chief Financial Officer (Grant Elliott), General Manager, City Enterprises (Ray McIndoe), General Manager, City Future (Sheryl Bryant), General Manager, City Networks (Ray Swadel), General Manager, Customer Services (Peter Eathorne), General Manager, Libraries and Community Services (Debbie Duncan), Human Resources Manager (Wayne Wilson) and Communications and Marketing Manager (or their representative (name)) because of their knowledge and ability to provide the meeting with advice on matters both from an organisation-wide context (being members of the Council’s Management Team) and also from their specific role within the Council.

Legal Counsel (John Annabell), because of his knowledge and ability to provide the meeting with legal and procedural advice.

Governance and Support Team Leader (Kyle Whitfield) and Committee Administrators (Penny Odell, Carly Chang and Rachel Corser), because of their knowledge and ability to provide the meeting with procedural advice and record the proceedings of the meeting.

Senior Property and Parks Officer (Aaron Phillips), Policy Analyst (Ann-Marie Mori), Parks and Property Manager (John Brenkley), Strategy and Policy Manager (Julie Macdonald) and Property Officer (Bryce Hosking) because of their knowledge and ability to assist the meeting in speaking to their report and answering questions, noting that such officer will be present at the meeting only for the item that relate to their respective report.

[Add Third Parties], because of their knowledge and ability to assist the meeting in speaking to their report/s [or other matters as specified] and answering questions, noting that such person/s will be present at the meeting only for the items that relate to their respective report/s [or matters as specified].

PALMERSTON NORTH CITY COUNCIL

Palmerston North City Council

Minutes of the Sport and Recreation Committee Meeting Part I Public, held in the Council Chamber, First Floor, Civic Administration Building, 32 The Square, Palmerston North on 04 December 2017, commencing at 9.00am

Members

Present:

Councillors Leonie Hapeta (in the Chair), Brent Barrett, Susan Baty, Rachel Bowen, Adrian Broad, Gabrielle Bundy-Cooke, Lew Findlay QSM, Lorna Johnson, Karen Naylor, Duncan McCann, Bruno Petrenas, Aleisha Rutherford and Tangi Utikere.

Apologies:

The Mayor (Grant Smith) and Councillors Jim Jefferies and Aleisha Rutherford (for early departure).

Councillor Vaughan Dennison was present when the meeting resumed at 10.30am He was not present for clause 34.

Councillor Tangi Utikere was not present when the meeting resumed at 10.30am and entered the meeting again at 11.07am during consideration of clause 37. He was not present for clause 35 and 36.

Councillor Aleisha Rutherford left the meeting at 11.08am during consideration of clause 37. She was present for clauses 34 to 36 inclusive.

Councillor Rachel Bowen left the meeting at 2.45pm at the conclusion of clause 43. She was not present for clauses 44 to 48 inclusive.

34-17

Apologies

Moved Leonie Hapeta, seconded Gabrielle Bundy-Cooke.

The COMMITTEE RESOLVED

1. That the Committee receive the apologies.

Clause 34-17 above was carried 13 votes to 0, the voting being as follows:

For:

Councillors Brent Barrett, Susan Baty, Rachel Bowen, Adrian Broad, Gabrielle Bundy-Cooke, Lew Findlay QSM, Leonie Hapeta, Lorna Johnson, Duncan McCann, Karen Naylor, Bruno Petrenas, Aleisha Rutherford and Tangi Utikere.

The meeting adjourned at 9.01am

The meeting resumed at 10.30am

When the meeting resumed Councillor Vaughan Dennison was present and Councillor Tangi Utikere was not present.

35-17

Confirmation of Minutes

Moved Aleisha Rutherford, Rachel Bowen.

The COMMITTEE RESOLVED

1. That the minutes of the Sport and Recreation Committee meeting of 4 September 2017 Part I Public and the extraordinary Sport and Recreation Committee meeting of 13 November 2017 Part I Public be confirmed as a true and correct record.

Clause 35-17 above was carried 12 votes to 0, with 1 abstention, the voting being as follows:

For:

Abstained:

Councillor Vaughan Dennison.

36-17

2017 Winter Festival Review

Memorandum, dated 17 November 2017 from the Manager - Community Engagement, Ian Littleworth and the Events Coordinator, Renee Barbour.

Moved Leonie Hapeta, seconded Aleisha Rutherford.

The COMMITTEE RESOLVED

1. That the memorandum 2017 Winter Festival Review be received

Clause 36-17 above was carried 12 votes to 0, with 1 abstention, the voting being as follows:

For:

Councillors Brent Barrett, Susan Baty, Rachel Bowen, Adrian Broad, Gabrielle Bundy-Cooke, Vaughan Dennison, Lew Findlay QSM, Leonie Hapeta, Lorna Johnson, Karen Naylor, Bruno Petrenas and Aleisha Rutherford.

Abstained:

Councillor Duncan McCann.

37-17

Arena Master Plan

Memorandum, dated 17 November 2017 from the Manager - Venues PN, John Lynch.

Councillor Tangi Utikere entered the meeting at 11.05am

Councillor Aleisha Rutherford left the meeting at 11.07am

Moved Susan Baty, seconded Tangi Utikere.

The COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS

1. That the updated Arena Master Plan and estimates dated November 2017, noting the endorsement of option three, be received and formally adopted to inform the implementation and to direct the development of Central Energy Trust Arena through the 2018/28 Long Term Plan.

Clause 37-17 above was carried 12 votes to 0, with 1 abstention, the voting being as follows:

For:

Councillors Brent Barrett, Susan Baty, Rachel Bowen, Adrian Broad, Gabrielle Bundy-Cooke, Vaughan Dennison, Lew Findlay QSM, Leonie Hapeta, Lorna Johnson, Duncan McCann, Bruno Petrenas and Tangi Utikere.

Abstained:

Councillor Karen Naylor.

38-17

Renaming Waitoetoe Park to Ahimate Reserve

Report, dated 11 September 2017 from the Leisure Assets Planner, Jason Pilkington.

Moved Vaughan Dennison, seconded Gabrielle Bundy-Cooke.

The COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS

1. That Council adopts the name Ahimate Reserve for the piece of reserve land held as reserve under the Reserves Act 1977 (identified as Lot 2 DP 53320 & Lot 3 DP 53320) described in Figure I of this report, formerly the site of the Old Allied Concrete Works.

2. That Council adopts the name Ahimate Reserve for the piece of reserve land held as reserve under the Reserves Act 1977 described as Lots 34 35 DP 27175 Lot 28 DP 31520 Lots 1 2 DP 31523 Lot 25 DP 32556 Lot 22 DP 41999 Lots 1 2 DP 13350 PT Lot 5 DP 40397 -Lot 22 REC RES; formerly known as Waitoetoe Park described in Figure II of this report.

3. That Council continues to recognise the sports field adjacent to Ahimate Reserve legally described as Lot 1 DP 53374 (known as Paneiri Park) as Paneiri Park.

Clause 38-17 above was carried 12 votes to 0, with 1 abstention, the voting being as follows:

For:

Councillors Brent Barrett, Susan Baty, Rachel Bowen, Adrian Broad, Gabrielle Bundy-Cooke, Vaughan Dennison, Leonie Hapeta, Lorna Johnson, Duncan McCann, Karen Naylor, Bruno Petrenas and Tangi Utikere.

Abstained:

Councillor Lew Findlay QSM.

39-17

Memorial Park Reserve Development Plan

Report, dated 10 November 2017 from the Leisure Assets Planner, Jason Pilkington.

During discussion Elected Members requested that the programme of work for Memorial Park Reserve be prioritised, as it was important to understand and for the community to know what the priorities for the development were.

Moved Susan Baty, Leonie Hapeta.

The COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS

1. That Council adopts the “Memorial Park Reserve Development Plan”, attached to the 4 December 2017 Report titled “Memorial Park Reserve Development Plan” as a final.

2. That the Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson of the Committee be authorised to make minor amendments to the Memorial Park Reserve Development Plan.

3. That the budgets for the Memorial Park Reserve Development Plan be referred to the 2018-28 10 Year Plan process for consideration by Council.

4. That the programmes of work for Memorial Park be prioritised by date and reported back to the Committee on 12 March 2018.

Clause 39-17 above was carried 13 votes to 0, the voting being as follows:

For:

Councillors Brent Barrett, Susan Baty, Rachel Bowen, Adrian Broad, Gabrielle Bundy-Cooke, Vaughan Dennison, Lew Findlay QSM, Leonie Hapeta, Lorna Johnson, Duncan McCann, Karen Naylor, Bruno Petrenas and Tangi Utikere.

The meeting adjourned at 12.08pm

The meeting resumed at 1.00pm

40-17	Presentation - Rose Gardens Croquet Club Presentation from Vince Neal, Tournament Referee and Michael Hardman, Tournament Manager, World Championship Qualifying Event. The World Croquet Federation (WCF) Association Croquet World Championship Qualifying Event is to be held at the Rose Gardens Croquet Club from 30 January to 1 February 2018, with the WCF 2018 World Association Croquet Championship to be held in the Wellington region from 3-11 February 2018. With a maximum of 24 entries and their supporter base, there was concern that the toilet facilities, that consisted of one women’s and one men’s toilet, were not sufficient for the expected numbers. The remaining toilets that were in cubicles were too small for most adults to enter and therefore the Croquet Club were requesting that these be enlarged. In discussion Elected Members requested that a report be brought back to the Committee outlining the condition of the toilets at Manawaroa Park.
	Moved Leonie Hapeta, seconded Vaughan Dennison. The COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS 1. That the Sport and Recreation Committee receive the presentation for information.
	Moved Susan Baty, seconded Bruno Petrenas. 2. That a report be brought back to the Sport and Recreation Committee meeting on the condition of the Toilets at Manawaroa Park in March 2018.
	Clause 40-17 above was carried 13 votes to 0, the voting being as follows: For: Councillors Brent Barrett, Susan Baty, Rachel Bowen, Adrian Broad, Gabrielle Bundy-Cooke, Vaughan Dennison, Lew Findlay QSM, Leonie Hapeta, Lorna Johnson, Duncan McCann, Karen Naylor, Bruno Petrenas and Tangi Utikere.

41-17

Presentation - Manfeild

Presentation from Clint Dunstan, Project Investment Co-ordinator, PNCC and Julie Keane, Chief Executive, Manfeild.

The free ticket promotion for ratepayers to the NZ Grand Prix had received a positive response with approximately 2,500 residents taking up the offer so far. Further promotion would hopefully see that number double.

As the code to redeem the offer was specific to the rates bill it was confirmed that if residents had missed the code they would still be able to receive the offer.

The promotion had a regional approach with the aim to increase awareness of the Grand Prix and to bring it back to its former glory. There were a number of planned marketing and activations planned, with further announcements still to come.

Moved Leonie Hapeta, seconded Duncan McCann.

The COMMITTEE RESOLVED

1. That the Sport and Recreation Committee receive the presentation for information.

Clause 41-17 above was carried 13 votes to 0, the voting being as follows:

For:

42-17

Proposal to Lease a Section of Crewe Park to Pascal Street Community Trust

Report, dated 10 November 2017 from the Leisure Assets Planner, Jason Pilkington.

Moved Leonie Hapeta, seconded Gabrielle Bundy-Cooke.

The COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS

1. That Council adopts the proposal to lease a section of Crewe Park (as described in Appendix I of the report titled Proposal to Lease a Section of Crewe Park to Pascal Street Community Trust) to go out for public notice in the manner required under Section 54 (1) - (2A) of the Reserves Act 1977.

Clause 42-17 above was carried 9 votes to 1, the voting being as follows:

For:

Councillors Susan Baty, Rachel Bowen, Gabrielle Bundy-Cooke, Vaughan Dennison, Lew Findlay QSM, Leonie Hapeta, Lorna Johnson Duncan McCann, and Tangi Utikere.

Against:

Councillor Bruno Petrenas.

Did not vote:

Councillors Brent Barrett and Adrian Broad.

Note:

Councillor Karen Naylor declared a conflict of interest and withdrew from voting and discussion on clause 38 above.

43-17

Victoria Esplanade Masterplan Documentation

Report, dated 20 November 2017 from the Senior Planner, Jeff Baker and the Urban Designer, Dave Charnley.

Moved Lorna Johnson, seconded Brent Barrett.

The COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS

1. That the Draft Victoria Esplanade Masterplan Documentation be adopted for public consultation.

2. That the formal public engagement associated with the Victoria Esplanade Masterplan Documentation is undertaken alongside the 2018/28 Long Term Plan consultation process.

3. That the Draft Esplanade Masterplan Documentation identify the Park Road / Cook Street intersection and new access alignment (including pedestrian, cycle and car parking facilities) and pedestrianisation works (including the effects on vehicle circulation and parking) as the initial priority, noting that the final decisions will be subject to the 2018/28 Long Term Plan process and confirmation of the Masterplan.

4. That the final Esplanade Masterplan be confirmed by Council following the adoption of the 2018/28 Long Term Plan.

5. That the Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson of the Sport and Recreation Committee be authorised to make minor amendments and additions to the Victoria Esplanade Character Study prior to public consultation once feedback is received from Rangitāne.

Clause 43-17 above was carried 13 votes to 0, the voting being as follows:

For:

Councillor Rachel Bowen left the meeting at 2.45pm

44-17

Committee Work Schedule

Moved Duncan McCann, seconded Vaughan Dennison.

The COMMITTEE RESOLVED

1. That the Sport and Recreation Committee receive its Work Schedule dated December 2017.

Clause 44-17 above was carried 12 votes to 0, the voting being as follows:

For:

Councillors Brent Barrett, Susan Baty, Adrian Broad, Gabrielle Bundy-Cooke, Vaughan Dennison, Lew Findlay QSM, Leonie Hapeta, Lorna Johnson, Duncan McCann, Karen Naylor, Bruno Petrenas and Tangi Utikere.

Exclusion of Public

45-17

Recommendation to Exclude Public

Moved Leonie Hapeta, seconded Vaughan Dennison.

The COMMITTEE RESOLVED

“That the public be excluded from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting listed in the table below.

General subject of each matter to be considered		Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter	Ground(s) under Section 48(1) for passing this resolution
15.	Minutes of the Sport and Recreation Committee meeting - Part II Confidential - 4 September 2017	For the reasons setout in the Sport and Recreation Committee minutes of 4 September 2017, held in public present.
16.	Artificial Football Turf - Update	Negotiations	s7(2)(i)
17.	Massey University Hockey Turf MoU	Negotiations	s7(2)(i)

Also that the persons listed below be permitted to remain after the public has been excluded for the reasons stated.

Chief Executive (Heather Shotter), Chief Financial Officer (Grant Elliott), General Manager, City Enterprises (Ray McIndoe), General Manager, City Future (Sheryl Bryant), General Manager, City Networks (Ray Swadel), General Manager, Customer Services (Peter Eathorne), General Manager, Libraries and Community Services (Debbie Duncan), Human Resources Manager (Wayne Wilson) and Senior Communications Advisor (Sandra Crosbie) because of their knowledge and ability to provide the meeting with advice on matters both from an organisation-wide context (being members of the Council’s Management Team) and also from their specific role within the Council.

Legal Counsel (John Annabell), because of his knowledge and ability to provide the meeting with legal and procedural advice.

Policy Analyst (Ann-Marie Mori), Senior Parks and Property Manager (Aaron Phillips), Parks and Property Manager (John Brenkley) and Strategy and Policy Manager (Julie Macdonald) because of their knowledge and ability to assist the meeting in speaking to their report and answering questions, noting that such officer will be present at the meeting only for the item that relate to their respective report.

Clause 45-17 above was carried 12 votes to 0, the voting being as follows:

For:

The public part of the meeting finished at 2.48pm

Confirmed 12 March 2018

Chairperson

PALMERSTON NORTH CITY COUNCIL

Report

TO: Sport and Recreation Committee

MEETING DATE: 12 March 2018

TITLE: Sport Manawatū 6 month report for the period ended 31 December 2017

DATE: 20 February 2018

AUTHOR/S: Aaron Phillips, Senior Property & Parks Planner, City Networks

RECOMMENDATION(S) TO Sport and Recreation Committee

1. That the Committee receives Sport Manawatū’s 6 month report for the period ended 31 December 2017.

Summary of options analysis for

Problem or Opportunity	As part of their contract Sport Manawatū are required to provide a 6 and 12 month reports on their activities.
OPTION 1:	Council receives Sport Manawatū’s 6 month report for the period ended 31 December 2017.
Community Views	Community views have not been sought on Sport Manawatū’s 6 month report. Sport Manawatū provide examples of community feedback within their report.
Benefits	Sport Manawatū’s activities support Councils outcomes.
Risks	No risks are identified.
Financial	There are no financial implications for accepting Sport Manawatū’s 6 month report.
OPTION 2:	Council requests additional information from Sport Manawatū.
Community Views	Community views have not been sought on Sport Manawatū’s 6 month report. Sport Manawatū provide examples of community feedback within their report.
Benefits	Greater clarity for Council on the activities further information is requested on.
Risks	No risks are identified for this option.
Financial	There are no financial implications in requesting further information other than additional Council officer time preparing a further report.
Contribution of Recommended Option to Council’s Strategic Direction	Sport Manawatū’s contract outcomes were set through the Community Funding Policy 2012 and its 2015 outcomes review. The outcomes were derived from the various Council strategies written to define how the vision of “Palmerston North is recognised as a vibrant, caring, innovative, sustainable and prosperous city” and the goals of “Palmerston North is a socially sustainable city where people want to live because of its safe and easy lifestyle and its many social, cultural and recreational opportunities” and Palmerston North is an economically sustainable city which attracts, fosters and retains businesses and jobs” would be achieved through external community agencies. The outcomes, derived from the Active Recreation and Events Strategies, that Sport Manawatū are contracted to deliver are: · People are more active, more often. · The Councils (PNCC and MDC) are able to work collaboratively with Sport Manawatū to help achieve the Council’s strategic aspirations. · The sport sector is able to build its capacity and capability whilst becoming more self-sustaining. · The sport sector has access to up-to-date, specialist, relevant, information and advice. · Arena Manawatū is the City hub for indoor community sport. · Manawatū is the best place in New Zealand to ride a bike. · Palmerston North has an excellent reputation for hosting national sports events. · There is a joined-up programme of community and high-performance cycling events in the Manawatū.

Rationale for the recommendations

1. Overview of the problem or opportunity

1.1 Sport Manawatū’s contract is worth $461,500 (excl GST) per year of which $200,000 per year is distributed to sports events providers under the Sports Events Partnership Fund.

1.2 The contract is to deliver the following outcomes:

1. People are more active, more often.

2. The Councils (PNCC and MDC) are able to work collaboratively with Sport Manawatū to help achieve the Council’s strategic aspirations.

3. The sport sector is able to build its capacity and capability whilst becoming more self-sustaining.

4. The sport sector has access to up-to-date, specialist, relevant, information and advice.

5. CET Arena Manawatū is the City hub for indoor community sport.

6. Manawatū is the best place in New Zealand to ride a bike.

7. Palmerston North has an excellent reputation for hosting national sports events.

8. There is a joined-up programme of community and high-performance cycling events in the Manawatū.

1.3 This report covers their activities for the twelve months from 1 July 2017 to 31 December 2017.

2. Background and previous council decisions

2.1 Sport Manawatū provided local public services as sought by Council under the 2012 Outcomes for Community Funding which were reviewed in 2015.

2.2 The services contracted to Sport Manawatū were advertised and proposals received for a three year funding agreement based on outcomes for 2016 to 2019. The funding process took place in late 2015. Sport Manawatū were successful in securing funding for $461,500, up $16,680 or 3.7% from the $444,820 in funding awarded under the previous contract in 2012.

2.3 The contract is bulk funded, and while a general outline of example activities is agreed in the contract it is up to Sport Manawatū to allocate the resources to achieve the outcomes.

3. Description of options

3.1 Option One: Council receives Sport Manawatū’s 6 month report for the period ended 31 December 2017.

3.2 Option Two: Council requests additional information from Sport Manawatū.

4. Analysis of options

4.1 The following table considers the outcomes, and indicators of success from the Sport Manawatū Contract.

1. Outcome: People are more active, more often
Example Outputs (key tasks)	Indicators of success	Officer Comment on results
Sports starting or increased activity campaigns.	Sport Manawatū baseline data on priority sports increases. Greater use of Council facilities – hours of community use of Arena, sports field bookings.	· Participation numbers are reported at the 12 month report. · Arena Manawatū Community hours of use are reported annually. · The Green Prescriptions continues to deliver success. · Replay Recycled Sports Gear project launched after an community developed idea.
2. Outcome: The Councils are able to work collaboratively with Sport Manawatū to help achieve the Council’s strategic aspirations.
Example Outputs (key tasks)	Indicators of success	Officer Comment on results
Presentations to committees of Council as required. Prompt responses to consultation and advice requests. Regular communication of their work and issues encountered.	Council staff report proactive partnership with Sport Manawatū staff. Council staff report they are well informed of Sport Manawatū activities and issues.	· Sport Manawatū are proactively engaging with the City Future Unit on the effects of the Strategy Plans on future contracts and expectations on focus areas. · Sport Manawatū note good engagement with the Community Services Council. · The Regional Sports Facilities Plan work is nearing completion. · Sport Manawatū are working with Arena Manawatū on Sports House.
3. Outcome: The sport sector is able to build its capacity and capability whilst becoming more self-sustaining
Example Outputs (key tasks)	Indicators of success	Officer Comment on results
Training and information seminars. Databases and directories. Programmes and/or work with clubs and groups to improve their sustainability.	Evidence of up-skilling in the sector. The proportion of Sport Manawatū total funding coming from Council decreases. Sport Manawatū work with clubs and groups to improve sustainability where required	· Grass-roots coaching sessions held. · Child protection training to junior rugby conveners. · The development and handover of the Kelvin Grove Touch Module and Cornerstone Christian Schools support of it. · Basketball development work features.
4. Outcome: The sport sector has access to up-to-date, specialist, relevant, information and advice
Example Outputs (key tasks)	Indicators of success	Officer Comment on results
· Database of clubs · Database of Facilities · Website · Experienced and skilled staff available. · Pushing out SportNZ Knowledge Library	Public can access information # hits on website. # hits on facilities database # of trainings completed. Description of staff work with clubs on information provision and advice.	· Sport Manawatū office hours are 8 am to 5 pm week days. · Sport Manawatū Social media presence is acknowledged by Sport New Zealand as successful.
5. Outcome: CET Arena Manawatū is the City hub for indoor community sport.
Example Outputs (key tasks)	Indicators of success	Officer Comment on results
Developing and supporting increased use of Central Energy Trust Arena Manawatū^{^[1]}	CET Arena community hours of use increase.	· 6 events at CET Arena received funding over the year (Funding is from Council via Sport Manawatū administering Sports Event Partnership Fund). · The return of the National Youth Futsal Championship was pleasing to see. · The “Give Sport A Go” sessions open to the general public appear to be cementing themselves.
6. Outcome: Palmerston North is the best place in New Zealand to ride a bike
Example Outputs (key tasks)	Indicators of success	Officer Comment on results
Learn to cycle initiatives Cycling promotion campaigns Cycle routes are promoted Active Transport promotion Bikes in Schools	Participation in organised events or activities. Counts of cyclists through roading cyclist monitoring programme No of Schools that have cycle initiatives.	· 665 students received grade two cycle skills, and 120 in grade one across 9 schools as well as other specific communities.
7. Outcome: Palmerston North has an excellent reputation for hosting national sports events.
Example Outputs (key tasks)	Indicators of success	Officer Comment on results
Events are secured and retained. Event support activities provide added value experiences.	Arena hosts 50% of the events. Participants report having a good time in Manawatū in post-event surveys. Number of North Island and national school events. Maintain or increase the economic benefits from events both: · Directly supported by Sport Manawatū (SPF) and · North Island or national events not supported by Sport Manawatū. · Evidence of Tikanga and Te Reo Māori are incorporated into national secondary school events.	· 10 events were supported through the Sports Events Partnership Fund with 8 being of national level and 6 held at CET Arena. · The economic impact calculated for the year to date was $2.8 million.

8. Outcome: There is a joined-up programme of community and high-performance cycling events in the Manawatū

Example Outputs (key tasks)

Indicators of success

Officer Comment on results

High performance cycling event supported.

Community cycling events occur.

National media coverage.

Community cycling event and activity participation numbers.

· Tour de Manawatū, NZ National Schools Cycling Championships and Gravel and Tar Events are noted.

5. Financial Review:

5.1 Sport Manawatū audited financial accounts are presented annually at the 12 month report.

6. OTHER:

6.1 Sport Manawatū note the success of the Secondary School Sports Awards and the number of nominations and pins awarded.

6.2 Council has reviewed its Strategy Plans which are due for finalisation in June 2018. Sport Manawatū are well abreast of how directions in the draft Plan’s may affect their contract.

7. Conclusion

7.1 Sport Manawatū continue to work well in delivering on work that supports the outcomes Council seeks. Their reporting and engagement with Council remains of a high quality. They appear on track in delivering on their contract for this year.

8. Next actions

8.1 Thank Sport Manawatū for their 6 month report.

9. Outline of community engagement process

9.1 This report is publically available for community comment.

Compliance and administration

Does the Committee have delegated authority to decide?	No
Are the decisions significant?	No
If they are significant do they affect land or a body of water?	No
Can this decision only be made through a 10 Year Plan?	No
Does this decision require consultation through the Special Consultative procedure?	No
Is there funding in the current Annual Plan for these actions?	Yes
Are the recommendations inconsistent with any of Council’s policies or plans?	No

Attachments

Sport Manawatu 6 month report for the period ending 31 December 2017 ⇩

Aaron Phillips

Senior Property & Parks Planner

PALMERSTON NORTH CITY COUNCIL

Report

TO: Sport and Recreation Committee

MEETING DATE: 12 March 2018

TITLE: Proposal to Lease a Section of Crewe Park to Pascal Street Community Trst

DATE: 14 February 2018

AUTHOR/S: Jason Pilkington, Leisure Assets Planner, City Networks

RECOMMENDATION(S) TO Council

1. That Palmerston North City Council, in the report Proposal to Lease a Section of Crewe Park to Pascal Street Community Trust, dated 14 February 2018 by Jason Pilkington, and as the administering body of Crewe Park, authorises the lease of approximately 85 square metres of Crewe Park as described in Appendix I (as part of Lot 11 DP20721) to Pascal Street Community Trust.

2. That Palmerston North City Council, in the report Proposal to Lease a Section of Crewe Park to Pascal Street Community Trust, dated 14 February 2018 by Jason Pilkington and in exercise of the powers conferred on it by delegation under the Reserves Act 1977, authorises the lease of approximately 85 square metres of Crewe Park as described in Appendix I (as part of Lot 11 DP20721) to Pascal Street Community Trust.

3. That Council note that the requirements of Section 4 of the Conservation Act 1987 have been satisfied in relation to consultation with Iwi over granting a lease at Crewe Park.

4. That Council note that the requirements of Sections 119 and 120 of the Reserves Act 1977 have been satisfied in relation to public notification prior to the resolution to enter into a lease at Crewe Park.

Summary of options analysis for

Problem or Opportunity	Pascal Street Community Trust (The Trust) currently works in a social and educational voluntary capacity to improve the lives of those living in the Crewe Crescent neighbourhood. The Trust would like to expand their current social and educational projects. In order to achieve this The Trust would like to lease a portion of Crewe Park, and propose to set up a container at the park on the leased area for the purposes of community reading and education programmes.
OPTION 1:	Lease a section of Crewe Park to the Pascal Street Community Trust
Community Views	Community views have been tested and the bulk of responses to the proposal are in support.
Benefits	Promotion of community responsibility and ownership of public space has a proven, positive track record in Palmerston North and elsewhere.
Risks	Requirements of the lease (to ensure the area and container are kept clean and tidy) are not adhered to.
Financial	Council will receive a small annual lease fee ($150 per annum) as stipulated by the Recreation and Community Assets Rental Policy.
OPTION 2:	Lease a section of Crewe Park to the Pascal Street Community Trust, with amendments as determined by Council
Community Views	Community views have been tested and the bulk of responses to the proposal are in support.
Benefits	Promotion of the community responsibility and ownership of public space has a proven, positive track record in Palmerston North and elsewhere. This option allows Council to add any further requirements.
Risks	Requirements of the lease (to ensure the area and container are kept clean and tidy) are not adhered to. Further risks would be dependent upon the nature and scale of changes required by Council.
Financial	Council will receive a small annual lease fee ($150 per annum) as stipulated by the Recreation and Community Assets Rental Policy. Any further financial implications would be dependent upon the nature and scale of the changes required by Council.
OPTION 3:	Do not lease a section of Crewe Park to the Pascal Street Community Trust
Community Views	Community views have been tested and the bulk of responses to the proposal are in support, and this option would tend to diminish the consultation process.
Benefits	Easier for staff not to have to monitor the container and how things are working.
Risks	Potentially diminishing what has been a successful programme for new migrants to the City.
Financial	There would be no additional financial implications to this option.
Contribution of Recommended Option to Council’s Strategic Direction	The proposal contributes positively to both the Active Recreation Strategy and the Social Strategy.

Rationale for the recommendations

1. Overview of the problem or opportunity

1.1 Pascal Street Community Trust (PSCT) has been working in the Crewe Crescent area for over six years with the community.

1.2 Amongst their community work and programmes, a newly formed literacy programme has emerged and proven popular with locals in the area.

1.3 The Cornerstone Christian School, as part of a Business Studies Class, has proposed to expand the literacy programme into an on-site project called “Can’t Contain it”.

1.4 In order to achieve this, they propose to fund a container (Can’t Contain It”) at the Crewe Park where they can store books and equipment, work with local residents and that they can use as a general base for their ongoing work.

1.5 Council recently consulted with the local community on the proposal as per Sections 119 and 120 of the Reserves Act 1977. Consultation produced a predominantly positive result with the bulk of respondents supporting the initiative.

2. Background and previous council decisions

2.1 Crewe Park is described as LOTS 1 2 DP 21369 & LOT 11 DP 20721. The park is situated on Crewe Crescent in the centre of Hokowhitu. The neighbouring area and park users are predominantly made up of Housing New Zealand Corporation tenants; and this particular HNZC housing area has a high proportion of refugees to the City.

2.2 The PSCT has been working in the Crewe Crescent area for over 6 years. They have worked in this area to facilitate and provide:

· Community gardens

· Street parties (Neighbour’s Day)

· Meals for local families

· Christmas craft packs

· Wednesday afterschool programme (games, food/meals and literacy programmes)

2.3 The literacy programmes in particular have proven to be a popular hit with the local community.

2.4 Cornerstone Christian School has a Year 12 Business Studies Class, where small groups of students develop a business proposal and see it through to implementation. One of the groups has put forward a social-based business programme named “Can’t Contain It”, whereby the group sets up a container (as an operations base) in Crewe Park with the local community and works to improve literacy in the area.

2.5 The PSCT would like to support them in this, and given the popularity of their literacy programme in the area, would continue the programme once the students move on. In addition, the Cornerstone Christian School is impressed with the concept, and would be eager to continue having Year 12 business studies students involved in the project in ongoing manner.

2.6 On 12 November 2017 the PSCT and Cornerstone Christian School approached Council regarding the opportunity, particularly with regards the process of having a container placed in Crewe Park. Officers and representatives of PSCT and Cornerstone Christian School met on site to discuss.

2.7 Officers and management were open to the concept, recognising that a lease would be required on reserve land – which triggers legal requirements under the Reserves Act 1977.

2.8 A report titled Proposal to Lease a Section of Crewe Park to Pascal Street Community Trust went to the December 4 2017 Sport and Recreation Committee. The report recommended that Council adopt the proposal to go out to the public for consultation. Council adopted the recommendation and consultation on the proposal began on January 10 2018, and finished on February 12 2018.

3. Description of options

3.1 Option 1: Lease a section of Crewe Park to the Pascal Street Community Trust.

3.2 Option 2: Lease a section of Crewe Park to the Pascal Street Community Trust, with amendments as determined by Council.

3.3 Option 3: Do not lease a section of Crewe Park to the Pascal Street Community Trust.

4. Analysis of options

4.1 Option 1: Lease a section of Crewe Park to the Pascal Street Community Trust.

4.2 There are a number of aspects to consider when weighing this option:

· The visual amenity of a container in a park.

· The loss of reserve space in a small neighbourhood reserve.

· Effects on the neighbouring community and neighbours at the park.

· Responsibility regarding the purchase of the container, maintenance of the container, removal, services and liability, etc.

4.3 While a container in a park is not ideal, containers do not have to look bad. They can not only serve a purpose, but tell a story. For example the image below.

4.4 Visual Amenity: The proposed container would be a purpose built office-styled container complete with doorway for entrance and services, similar to the photo below.

4.5 Loss of Reserve Space: The proposed site on Crewe Park would not see any significant useful space taken up by the container. The existing concrete pad that was an old ramp could be used for the entrance/exit, so that the grass does not become muddy in winter with people using a grassed entry point. The ramp is now redundant and in a poor state of repair and will be removed.

4.6 Effects on Neighbours: The container is proposed to straddle the fence line along the northern park border. The entirety of this border has a driveway on the neighbouring property. The container therefore will not impinging upon the view of neighbours, as indicated in the photo below.

4.7 Housing New Zealand Corporation is the only neighbour in terms of ownership in and around the Crewe Park area. HNZC were approached and have provided written support to Council for the proposal.

4.8 In addition to ownership of the properties, the majority of people living in the area are in support of the initiatives that the PSCT have been involved in around this area. This was further tested through local consultation (see the Outline of Community Engagement Process and Appendix II of this report for further information).

4.9 There were some issues/potential issues raised by submitters. They were:

· The back of the container could act as a place to hide (One submitter).

· The back of the container might have rubbish piled up behind it (One submitter – same as above).

· The existing noise and poor behaviour from some in the park will be exacerbated by the proposal (One door-to-door comment and one submitter).

4.10 With regards the first two concerns, Council would ensure that the lease document contains a clause that places responsibility on PSCT to ensure the container and the immediate surrounding area is well kept and maintained. Council will also ensure that all CPTED requirements are met and that there are no accessible dark hiding places in behind the container.

4.11 With regards the last concern, it is highly unlikely that the proposal will cause additional noise late at night and poor behaviour. This behaviour is unlikely to stem from the PSCT at work and play with students in the park. If anything, an increased presence in the park should lower negative behaviour. Officers recognise that late night drinking/playing up in the park, while not ideal behaviour and is unfortunate for the neighbour concerned, is not related to the proposal or those involved in it.

4.12 Responsibility for Container: PSCT combined with Cornerstone Christian School have significant and reliable resourcing for this project to ensure high-quality outcomes with regards visual amenity, services and adequate social provision with regards the literacy programme.

4.13 Purchase, maintenance and responsibility for all aspects of the container (including connection to electricity) will be the responsibility of the lease holder. A lease would be developed that reflects this; including ensuring all responsibility for removal costs lie with the lease holder should Council require the container to be removed.

4.14 Option 2: Lease a section of Crewe Park to the Pascal Street Community Trust, with amendments as determined by Council.

4.15 The analysis for Option 1 holds for this option. Any additional requirements and analysis of options will be dependent upon any further stipulations the Committee wishes to introduce.

4.16 Option 3: Do not lease a section of Crewe Park to the Pascal Street Community Trust.

4.17 There would be no change to the status quo under this option.

5. Conclusion

5.1 The consultation process revealed that the majority of those submitting, or spoken to regarding the project are in favour of the project.

5.2 Concerns that were raised through the consultation process may be dealt with through the formation of a lease agreement or are not related to the proposal itself.

5.3 It therefore appears that the generally supportive neighbours/stakeholders and submitters coupled with the positive aspects of the proposal and the relatively low risk to Council tend to outweigh the concerns.

6. Next actions

6.1 Enter into negotiations with regards a lease agreement with Pascal Street Community Trust.

6.2 Develop a lease document.

7. Outline of community engagement process

Consultation Method	Households/People Reached	Results
Public Notice.	City Wide.	No responses.
Household Flier Drops	500m Walking distance to Crewe Park – approx. 700 households.	4 responses.
Door-to-Door – immediate effected neighbours.	13 Houses.	11 responses.
Stakeholder Contact.	Free Church of Tonga and Toy Library.	2 responses.
Council Hearings process.	As above.	No responses.
Other.	Discussion with local resident.	1 response.

7.1 January 10 2018 – flyers describing the proposal, the means to make a submission and the opportunity to be heard by elected members, were delivered to houses within a 500m walking distance of the Crewe Park. This equates to approximately 700 houses around the reserve area.

7.2 January 10 2018 – notice in the Manawatu Standard describing the proposal and how to make a submission.

7.3 January 26 2018 – door-to-door neighbourhood engagement with those immediately surrounding the park.

7.4 January 2018 - Contact (attempted) stakeholders – the Free Church of Tonga.

Compliance and administration

Palmerston North City Council has complied with all relevant sections of the Reserves Act 1977, including Section 45 Conservation Act, Sections 119 and 120 Reserves Act 1977 and Section 54 of the Reserves Act 1977.

Palmerston North City Council has exercised its delegated authority under the instrument of delegation issued by the Minister of Conservation.

Does the Committee have delegated authority to decide? If Yes quote relevant clause(s) from Delegations Manual <Enter clause>	No
Are the decisions significant?	No
If they are significant do they affect land or a body of water?	No
Can this decision only be made through a 10 Year Plan?	No
Does this decision require consultation through the Special Consultative procedure?	No
Is there funding in the current Annual Plan for these actions?	Yes
Are the recommendations inconsistent with any of Council’s policies or plans?	No

Attachments

1.	Appendix I: Proposed Lease Area ⇩
2.	Appendix II: Consultation Report - Crewe Park ⇩

Jason Pilkington

Leisure Assets Planner

PALMERSTON NORTH CITY COUNCIL

Report

TO: Sport and Recreation Committee

MEETING DATE: 12 March 2018

TITLE: Proposal to Licence Pascal Street Community Trust to occupy part of Awapuni Park or Alexander Park for Community Gardens

DATE: 13 February 2018

AUTHOR/S: Aaron Phillips, Senior Property & Parks Planner, City Networks

RECOMMENDATION(S) TO Council

1. That Council adopts the proposal to licence a section of Awapuni Park or Alexander Park (as described in Appendix One of the report titled Proposal to Licence Pascal Street Community Trust to occupy a section of Awapuni Park or Alexander Park for Community Gardens) to go out for public notice in the manner required under Section 54 (1) - (2A) of the Reserves Act 1977.

Summary of options analysis for

Problem or Opportunity	Pascal Street Community Trust (The Trust) currently works in a social and educational voluntary capacity to improve the lives of those living in a number of neighbourhoods across the city including the Crewe Crescent neighbourhood. The Trust has 5,000 sq m of community garden in Hokowhitu. The owner of the land has advised the Community Garden needs to vacate the site. The Trust has considered a number of relocation options and concluded that Awapuni Park or Alexander Park presents the most attractive options. This report seeks permission to consult the community on the licence proposal for either Awapuni Park or Alexander Park and bring that information back to Council for a decision.
OPTION 1:	Adopt both the proposed licence options, Awapuni Park and Alexander Park, to go out for public consultation under the relevant sections of the Reserves Act 1977.
Community Views	This option would allow Council to test community views under the Reserves Act 1977 (The Act) processes for both options before making a decision.
Benefits	Council will better understand if there are any opposing or supporting views to the licence at either option. Council meets all requirements under The Act.
Risks	Members of the community are not supportive of the proposal.
Financial	There are limited financial implications: $2,000 signage and newspaper, advertising plus officer time preparing and managing the process.
OPTION 2:	Council chooses only one of the two options, either Awapuni Park or Alexander Park, to go out for public consultation under the relevant sections of the Reserves Act 1977.
Community Views	Community views would only be tested on one of the options.
Benefits	A simple consultation process with only one option.
Risks	Views about the alternative option are not known.
Financial
OPTION 3:	Council declines the proposal and does not adopt either of the options for the proposed licence to go out for public consultation under the relevant sections of the Reserves Act 1977.
Community Views	These will not be tested under this option. There may be opposition from the local community that seeks to benefit from the proposal.
Benefits	No need to fund a consultation process.
Risks	The loss of a popular community run project may occur. Undermine the desire to grow community capacity to provide cost-effective and volunteer-based social programmes.
Financial	There are no financial implications associated with this option.
Contribution of Recommended Option to Council’s Strategic Direction	The proposal contributes positively to: · Active Recreation Strategy: 2013 o “Community initiated place-making initiatives are encouraged in reserves.” The community garden proposal will see a special character developing Awapuni Park – different to other neighbourhood reserves. o “Enter into … partnerships to reduce operating costs.” The community garden proposal will make a minor reduction Council’s operating costs for the area of the part occupied. · Social Strategy 2012: o “Council works proactivity to increase connectedness in neighbourhoods facing greatest disadvantage to establish partnership aimed at reducing disadvantage.” The community garden Proposal is in Awapuni North – scoring a 9 in the deprivation index (Scores range 1 – 10 with 10 being the highest degree of deprivation. · Vegetation Framework 2016: o Encourages provision of vegetation. The proposed licence would see the removal of up to 7 trees of significant stature.

Rationale for the recommendations

1. Overview of the problem or opportunity

1.1 Pascal Street Community Trust (PSCT) has been working in the Crewe Crescent area for over six years with the community.

1.2 Amongst their community work and programmes, they have had a successful community garden operating.

1.3 PSCT have been advised they are likely to need to find another venue in the very near future as the land is being sold.

1.4 In order to achieve this, they have considered 14 alternatives around the city, concluding that Awapuni Park or Alexander Park will best fit their needs the best.

2. Background and previous council decisions

2.1 The PSCT has been working in the Crewe Crescent area for over 6 years. They have worked in this area to facilitate and provide:

· Community gardens

· Street parties (Neighbour’s Day)

· Meals for local families

· Christmas craft packs

· Wednesday afterschool programme (games, food/meals and literacy programmes)

2.2 The community garden needs to move as the land will no longer be available.

3. TRUST COMMUNITY GARDEN INFROMATION

3.1 PSCT provide the following summary of the current gardens:

· The Crewe Community Gardens has been operating successfully for 7 years at its location at the end of Ashford Avenue and is the largest community Garden in the Manawatu.

· The Gardens were founded by local resident Graham Black and a group of his friends. Graham saw the gardens as a way to build community values in a very poor part of the city.

· The Gardens currently serve 90 families from many different ethnicities by providing a place where people can meet, share and create while growing food for themselves and the community. The largest ethnicity represented at the Gardens is Nepali/Bhutanese people but we also have a large group of Tongans as well as Indians, Chinese, Greek, Pakeha and Cook Islanders.

· While initially all of the users of the garden were from the Crewe Crescent area, some of these families have moved over the years and a significant number of the gardens users travel from all over the city to participate. A good number of these users are located in the Awapuni area.

· For most of our members the gardens are visited several times a week and are a vital part of their weekly budget. Many are refugees who have struggled to integrate into NZ community due to language, cultural, health and skills barriers. These people share one thing in common that connects them to other people in our community, their love and skill at gardening. Tongans will share tips for growing watermelon and corn, this will be reciprocated by Nepali people who are skilled at growing spinach, herbs and beans. Our Greek members are great at growing tomato’s and pumpkin which they share with others. For many this is the only chance they get to mix with people of a different culture in a social setting.

· Crewe Community Gardens has a mix of 80% individual family plots and 20% community plots as well as an extensive orchard. The community plots and orchard are the responsibility of the whole community and people are expected to tend to them and only harvest enough for one meal. Any remaining food is distributed to local community groups.

· The community gardens hold annual events to encourage and celebrate together.

· The ongoing success of the community gardens is due primarily to the support of the Pascal Street Community Trust which oversees and finances the Gardens. The PSCT not only provides a monthly budget for ongoing expenses, but they supply the wages of the Garden Coordinator, Dave Mollard. Having a part time paid Garden Coordinator who is supported by both the PSCT and a passionate Gardens Committee is this single biggest reason for the Gardens ongoing success. The Coordinator provides consistency, accountability and communications in the garden as well as overseeing the communal parts of the garden. The coordinator is also in charge of Health and Safety and community engagement. The coordinator organises supplies of donated materials such as compost and manure as well as timber for plot construction.

· The Community Gardens has experienced some negative issues, such as vandalism (very minor), theft (of machinery as well as plants) and fly tipping, but the members deal with this in a positive and graceful way.

· Crew Community Garden provides a valuable service to its members as well as the local and wider community. It is a place to socialise, to learn and to grow. It is a good neighbour and always respects the privacy and needs of those living close by.

Naku te rourou nau te rourou ka ora ai te iwi

3.2 The garden currently occupies around 5,000 sqm and is accessed off Ashford Street.

Figure One: Current Crew Community Garden

– approximately 5,000 sqm

4. Sites Considered

4.1 PSCT have been looking at possible alternative venues. After an desktop search with Council Officers they did physical checks on 14 sites:

· Alexander Park

· Andrew Ave Reserve

· Arena Manawatu - Oakley St vacant section

· Awapuni Park

· Bill Brown Park – south western corner

· Cloverlea Park

· Colquhoun Park

· Coronation Park by Railway Station

· Fredrick Krull Reserve/Celaeno Park (walkway)

· Linklater Reserve (Roberts Line end)

· Ruamahunga Wilderness area

· Summerhill Reserve

· Takaro Sports Club – vacated croquet lawns

· Vacant school site on Ruapehu Drive

4.2 Variously the above options were discounted by PSCT and they concluded Awapuni Park met their needs the best because it:

· Has sufficient space (assuming removal of mature gum and willow trees is considered acceptable – covered later in this report) to grow to the same size as their existing garden.

· Is in the heart of a community making it accessible to more people.

· Has a playground supporting family gardening.

· Has a public toilet due for renewal, which could be prioritised for 2019, and allow the existing toilets to be converted to tool storage.

· Has a community centre that can be used for events and activities.

4.3 Consideration by the Community Liaison Team in Council suggested Alexander Park may have more potential than first considered as it has:

· Has ample space and the potential to grow beyond 5,000 sqm

· Awapuni School, Te Reo Tupua O Awapuni Kohanga Reo and Awapuni Kindergarten provide opportunities for integration and shared working on the community garden. Best Care Whakapai Hauora may be interested.

· Work in the community and with the Community Liaison Team mean a growing network of community engagement and activities that could support the garden.

· The deficiencies or the access to storage, toileting and playground might be able to be meet if conversations with Awapuni School are opened.

5. AWAPUNI PARK

5.1 Awapuni Park is described as Lot 1 DP 23704, Lot 6 DP 24655, Lot 97 DP 20548 and Lot 19 DP 29836. The proposed community garden is located entirely on Lot 6 DP 24655.

5.2 Awapuni Park is a reserve under the Reserves Act 1977 and as such any decision to grant rights of occupation either through a lease or licence needs to either be contemplated in an approved Reserve Management Plan or go through a process of consideration including public notification.

5.3 The main entrance to Awapuni Park is situated on Newbury Street. The park is in the middle of Awapuni, situated in the Awapuni North Statistics New Zealand area unit. The deprivation index for the area is 9 meaning high levels of disadvantage.

Figure Two: Awapuni Park

5.4 The neighbouring area is predominately private residences with 6 housing New Zealand houses and a Plunket among the 34 properties immediately boarding the park.

5.5 The park includes a community centre, a pre-school children’s group, Plunket and tennis club using the 4 artificial grass tennis courts.

5.6 Council’s Parks and Property Division had been scoping provision of some path connections cross the park after feedback that the ground can be very water logged in the winter. That work is planned for 2018/19 as this year’s budget walkway development budget was already committed.

6. ALEXANDER PARK

6.1 Alexander Park is described as Lot 1 DP 78903.

6.2 Alexander Park is not Reserve under the Reserves Act 1977 and as such Council is not required to go through a public notification process for granting rights of occupation as it would under the reserve. However for the purposes of consistency and in order to make informed decisions this report proposes running a consultation process as if it were a reserve.

6.3 The main entrance to Alexander Park is situated on Alexander Street. The park is in the middle of Awapuni, situated in the Awapuni North Statistics New Zealand area unit. The deprivation index for the area is 9 meaning high levels of disadvantage.

Figure Three: Alexander Park

6.4 The neighbouring area includes Awapuni School to the northwest, Te Reo Tupua O Awapuni Kohanga Reo occupies part of the park (on Council land) and Awapuni Kindergarten (on Ministry of Education land) is situated to the south. IHC NZ Incorporated own one neighbouring property and there are 3 Housing New Zealand properties among the 18 other residential properties adjoining Alexander Park.

6.5 Alexander Park is currently held as a sportsfield by Council. However it is underused, having been used for one season by Rugby League in the last 10 years approximately 5 years ago. It is regularly offered to field sporting codes but declined in favour of other sportsfields.

6.6 Accordingly Council’s Officer who manages the sportsfield is in support of a reallocation to a neighbourhood reserve function and potential permanent loss from the sportsfield portfolio if the garden is successful.

6.7 There are no plans for any facility development at Alexander Park.

7. Description of options

7.1 Option 1: Adopt both the proposed licence options, Awapuni Park and Alexander Park, to go out for public consultation under the relevant sections of the Reserves Act 1977.

7.2 Option 2: Council chooses only one of the two options, either Awapuni Park or Alexander Park, to go out for public consultation under the relevant sections of the Reserves Act 1977.

7.3 Option 3: Council declines the proposal and does not adopt either of the options for the proposed licence to go out for public consultation under the relevant sections of the Reserves Act 1977.

8. Analysis of options

8.1 Option 1: Adopt both the proposed licence options, Awapuni Park and Alexander Park, to go out for public consultation under the relevant sections of the Reserves Act 1977.

8.1.1 Awapuni Park:

8.1.1.1 The proposed garden location for Awapuni Park would be to north in the western area of Awapuni Park to the north west of the tennis courts. As shown in Figure Four.

Figure Four: Proposed Awapuni Park Community Garden Location

8.1.1.2 The desired 5,000 sqm cannot be achieved without either reducing the open space that has been suggested as needing to be retained on the eastern side of the park as shown in the green measured area in Figure Four, or removing of 6 trees, 1 willow, 4 gum trees and 1 boxed elder as shown in Figure Five and Appendix One

Figure Five: Trees that would be required to be removed for a 5,000 sq m garden

8.1.1.3 At this stage the PSCT do not know what the impact of the move will have on current usage. It is plausible that due to a decline in use through greater efficiencies they will not require the full 5,000 sq m. It is proposed that the development of the new garden would be staged and that any tree felling would only occur if and when the space was required.

8.1.1.4 The PSCT would be responsible for the cost of removing the trees should the proposal proceed. It is assumed this could be cost neutral to them if the trees were offered for removal for firewood or similar. Council would be suggesting the carving of the stumps as placemaking features.

8.1.1.5 Possible effects on the park and its users:

Positive:

· The existing community garden in Hokowhitu is well used and supported. Assuming similar levels of use there would be more activity in the park with more passive surveillance of the park.

· Gardening is the popular recreational activity for adults ranking second, only behind walking in popularity (Sport NZ Survey 2013/14). The proposal would support a gardening activity.

· The garden supports social interaction and is supported by Community Liaison Division of Council.

· The Awapuni Community Centre may see increased use for garden related hires and uses.

· There may be some small saving in maintenance in the park with a reduction of 5,000 sq m of mowing. The proposal assumes all maintenance, other than the across park access paths, within the licence area would be the responsibility of PSCT/the garden users.

Negative:

· The garden will reduce the level of open space available for casual use. Officers believe there are low levels of use in the area proposed to be occupied by the garden but this needs to be tested with the community as no formal surveys or planned observations have been made. It is possible to preserve an open space, in addition to the “hills” on the eastern end of the park measuring 30 m x 50m so that there is still space for games and activities if trees are removed instead.

· The proposal includes the removal of 6 mature trees, 4 gum trees, 1 willow and 1 boxed elder. The trees are shown in Appendix One. Council could assist in off-setting this with effect by using its edible tree planting programme to plant replacements that support the community garden however the existing trees are largely mature and provide considerable presence and shade in the park. This could not be replicated by fruit trees.

Neighbours:

8.1.1.6 The proposed layout keeps the garden licence area away from boundaries and preserve a buffer which will also serve to allow mower access around the perimeter of the park. Any issues neighbours may have would be identified during the consultation period.

Other:

8.1.1.7 Several years ago a smaller community garden was mooted for the site. Some initial conversations with some neighbours was conducted by the then proposers. Anecdotal feedback was for some support from those neighbours for a garden. The proposal was much smaller in scale though.

8.1.1.8 Council Officers developed plans for path linkages across the park in 2017. These are planned to be implemented in 2018/19 as the 2017/18 budget is already committed. If the proposal is approved the path layout could be modified to coordinate with the community garden improving across for gardeners to the garden and for the public walking through them.

8.1.1.9 Officers and management were open to the concept, recognising that a lease or licence would be required on reserve land – which triggers legal requirements under the Reserves Act 1977.

8.1.1.10 Construction, maintenance and responsibility for all aspects of the Community Garden (including water supply) would be the responsibility of the licence holder. A licence would be developed that reflects this; including ensuring all responsibility for removal costs lie with the licence holder should Council require the Community garden to be removed.

8.1.2 Alexander Park:

8.1.2.1 A garden location for Alexander Park could be positioned anywhere in the park with some set back from boundaries. This proposal assumes a desired location close to Awapuni School if the school is supportive of the project. As shown in Figure Six.

Figure Six: Proposed Alexander Park Community Garden Location option

8.1.2.2 There would be room to expand should the garden prove successful in this location.

8.1.2.3 The PSCT would be responsible for the cost of any garden infrastructure including paths and water lines.

8.1.2.4 Possible effects on the park and its users:

Positive:

· The existing community garden in Hokowhitu is well used and supported. Assuming similar levels of use there would be more activity in the park with more passive surveillance of the park.

· Gardening is the popular recreational activity for adults ranking second, only behind walking in popularity (Sport NZ Survey 2013/14). The proposal would support a gardening activity.

· The garden supports social interaction and is strongly supported by Community Liaison Division of Council.

· There may be opportunities for synergies with the school, Kohanga and kindergarten. These would be explored during the consultation period.

· There may be some small saving in maintenance in the park with a reduction of 5,000 sq m of mowing. The proposal assumes all maintenance within the licence area would be the responsibility of PSCT/the garden users.

Negative:

Neighbours:

8.1.2.5 The proposed layout keeps the garden licence area away from boundaries and preserve a buffer which will also serve to allow mower access around the perimeter of the park. Any issues neighbours may have would be identified during the consultation period.

Other:

8.1.2.6 Construction, maintenance and responsibility for all aspects of the Community Garden (including water supply) would be the responsibility of the licence holder. A licence would be developed that reflects this; including ensuring all responsibility for removal costs lie with the licence holder should Council require the Community Garden to be removed.

8.1.2.7 Officers have expressed concern to PSCT about the potential for vandalism and theft from the proposed Community Garden. PSCT have assessed alternative sites and are prepared to accept that risk.

8.2 Option 2: Council chooses only one of the two options, either Awapuni Park or Alexander Park, to go out for public consultation under the relevant sections of the Reserves Act 1977.

The analysis for each of the potential sites, Awapuni Park and Alexander Park, Option 1 holds for this option. Any additional requirements will be dependent upon any further stipulations the Committee wishes to introduce.

8.3 Option 3: Council declines the proposal and does not adopt either of the options for the proposed licence to go out for public consultation under the relevant sections of the Reserves Act 1977.

There would be no change to the status quo under this option.

9. Conclusion

9.1 PSCT have a proven track record and resourcing of community garden projects. They have assessed alternatives and believe Awapuni Park or Alexander Park are the best options available.

9.2 The proposal will require a small amount of Officer time and cost associated with the Reserves Act 1977 process.

9.3 If Council is comfortable with the loss of 6 trees at Awapuni Park and the reallocation of Alexander Park from a sportsfield to a neighbourhood reserve to support the community garden, then benefits of the proposal to the local community outweigh any costs to Council, and by adopting the recommendation Council will be in a position to test the two options with the community before making a decision.

10. Next actions

10.1 Publicly notify the proposal under Section 119 and 120 of the Reserves Act 1977.

10.2 PSCT, alongside Council, will seek feedback from immediate neighbours and stakeholders in the parks of both options.

10.3 Hold hearings if any submitters wish to be heard.

10.4 Report on the results and recommendations.

10.5 Develop a licence agreement with PSCT, should Council pass the required resolution for one or other of the options, or end the proposal if deal-breaker objections raised during consultation.

11. Outline of community engagement process

11.1 Under Section 54 of the Reserves Act 1977, Council is required to pass a resolution to grant the right to lease or licence a portion of reserves land for reserves held under the Reserves Act 1977. Awapuni Park is held under the Reserves Act 1977. Therefore a resolution is required prior to issuing a licence.

11.2 A resolution may not be passed by Council until a one month public notification period has been completed, which meets the provisions of sections 119 and 120 of the Reserves Act 1977.

11.3 While a Reserves Act process is not required for Alexander Park, operating in a consistent manner when considering the Awapuni Park option will ensure reliable comparison of the options and the same engagement processes.

11.4 Given the scale of the proposal, the number of potentially interested parties in the community, and the proposed removal of up to 6 trees on Awapuni Park, Officers propose that consultation be:

· The mandatory one month public notice period (Section 120 of the Reserves Act 1977).

· Letter drop to all residents within a 500 m walking distance of each Park.

· Social media posts including an online survey link.

· Door knocking the immediate neighbouring properties bounding Awapuni Park by PSCT and Council’s Community Liaison Division.

· Face-to-face engagement with Rangitāne o Manawatu groups as well as written information.

· Face-to- face engagement with key stakeholders at each park:

Awapuni Park

o Community Centre Committee Chairperson,

o Plunket

o Playgroup organisers.

o Tennis Club.

Alexander Park

o Awapuni School

o Te Reo Tupua O Awapuni Kohanga Reo

o Awapuni Kindergarten.

Compliance and administration

This proposal is subject to the conditions stipulated in the Reserves Act 1977.

Does the Committee have delegated authority to decide? If Yes quote relevant clause(s) from Delegations Manual	No
Are the decisions significant?	No
If they are significant do they affect land or a body of water?	No
Can this decision only be made through a 10 Year Plan?	No
Does this decision require consultation through the Special Consultative procedure?	No
Is there funding in the current Annual Plan for these actions?	Yes
Are the recommendations inconsistent with any of Council’s policies or plans?	No

Attachments

Appendix One:PSCT Community Garden Options including tree effects ⇩

Aaron Phillips

Senior Property & Parks Planner

[1] Changes sought of Arena Manawatu in the ARS are increased casual use, disadvantaged groups use, sport and community use, net income and that “The [Arena] business planning moves from being a well-used facility-for-hire to a very popular facility that develops sport and active recreation at all levels.”

Leonie Hapeta (Chairperson)
Duncan McCann (Deputy Chairperson)
Grant Smith (The Mayor)
Brent Barrett	Jim Jefferies
Adrian Broad	Lorna Johnson
Vaughan Dennison	Bruno Petrenas
Lew Findlay QSM	Aleisha Rutherford

1.	Junyi Liu
2.	Graham and Helen Black
3.	Philip Watkinson
4.	Emma Ochei