Tags

Feeds / Islamic Circle of Aotearoa feed

This feed is published by Islamic Circle of Aotearoa.

This feed is read by this Whakaoko subscription

Added on 15 Jun 2011. Last read 2 minutes ago.

To subscribe to this feed, enter the following location into your feed reader.

This feed currently contains the following newsitems (total count 129):

    • ICA Participation in IFAM 2024 Convention Sydney Austrlia
      • Congratulations to the IFAM Australia Islamic Forum for Australian Muslims (IFAM) for successfully organising their Annual Convention 2024 in Australia! This event marked one of the largest gatherings of the Muslim community in Australia, bringing together renowned Muslim scholars, representatives from the Australian government, local authorities, MPs, and Senators. Islamic Circle of Aotearoa Islamic Circle … ICA Participation in IFAM 2024 Convention Sydney Austrlia Read More »

    • Enroll Your Child in KMCC’s Islamic School!
      • We are pleased to offer Islamic educational classes for children aged 4 to 15 years at the Karori Muslim Community Centre (KMCC) in Wellington. Classes are held every Tuesday and Wednesday, providing an excellent opportunity for your children to learn about their faith and develop a deeper understanding of Islamic values and practices in a … Enroll Your Child in KMCC’s Islamic School! Read More »

    • Join the Fajr Challenge at KMCC!
      • We’re excited to announce a special 10-day Fajr Challenge for kids at the Karori Muslim Community Centre (KMCC) in Wellington, starting from the 1st of Zil Hajj. This is a wonderful opportunity for our young participants to engage in the morning prayer at the community center and experience the beauty of starting their day with … Join the Fajr Challenge at KMCC! Read More »

    • Kaikoura Quake: what it means for Wellington’s inner city
      • Kaikoura Quake: what it means for Wellington’s inner city WREMO / WCC earthquake management: ·         actions and results ·         lessons learned WCC Update on: ·         emergency powers ·         new regulations for facades and parapets Wellington’s Resilience Strategy: ·         community resilience in the CBD (WCC) ·         the CBD Tsunami Blue Line project  (WREMO) When:    Tuesday, 21 March 2017, 6 – 7.30 pm.                  Cash bar from 5:30 – 6pm Where:   CQ Hotel, 213-223 Cuba Street Cost:      Free to all attendees RSVP: https://www.eventbrite.co.nz/e/kaikoura-quake-what-it-means-for-wellingtons-inner-city-tickets-32388913111 No need to RSVP if you have already done so. Please feel free to share this invite with others who may be interested.

    • NZ Geotechnical Database – help increase the value to Wellington
      • Seismic strengthening work will generally require some geotechnical assessment of the ground the building sits on – particularly if the building is in the inner city. These are costly exercises. Once your building has been strengthened, you are unlikely to use the data again. However, it still has value to the wider public good by increasing the knowledge about the ground conditions in the immediate area.  The data retains its value – no matter how often it is used. The NZ Geotechnical Database enables geotechnical information (the data gathered from the bores that we see around the city) to be shared between the public and private sectors.   ICA supports this initiative and encourages owners and body corporates to add the data from their geotechnical assessments. The database is managed by MBIE and they are actively engaging with geotechnical companies in Wellington and public sector organisations, such as WCC, to contribute their existing and new geotechnical assessments of the soils around the city.  It is early days for Wellington and a lot more assessments need to be added for the database to be useful. Key benefits include free access for geotechnical engineers when they add their own geotechnical assessments to the database. This potentially reduces costs to you, the clients, as it could reduce the number of bores or other investigations that are required for your site. How does it work? The users of the database are the technical people in the  geotechnical companies. The companies need to obtain approval from their clients to load the data from the geotechnical assessments into the NZ Geotechnical Database.  Only the raw data on the scientific and engineering properties is held in the database – not the interpretation of the data or the report. Will it cost the client?  Adding the data from geotechnical assessments as they are completed has minimal additional costs over the total cost of the assessment.   MBIE have offered assistance to engineering companies and to WCC to help with resources to upload data from previously completed assessments. ICA will continue to lobby WCC to add their recent and ongoing geotechnical assessments and to take up MBIE’s offer of resources to load data from previous assessments.

    • Submission on proposed methodology to identify earthquake-prone buildings
      • MBIE has consulted on a proposed methodology to assess existing buildings to identify potentially earthquake-prone buildings.   (Note: an earlier post refers to ICA’s submission on the proposed regulations). This will be a prescribed methodology under the Building (Earthquake-prone buildings) Amendment Act 2016. This means that engineers have to use this methodology to assess existing buildings and it prescribes the process for councils. The development of a prescribed methodology is in response to the widely variable seismic ratings that have been given to the same building by qualified engineers. ICA’s submission supports the development of a prescribed methodology. ICA’s submission highlights the following key points: the profile approach potentially passes the full costs of determining if the building is potentially earthquake-prone to owners, whereas the WCC approach to this task shared this cost with ratepayers (given the public good outcome of public safety).  There should be at least reasonable grounds for a building to be identified as potentially earthquake-prone. the power to identify potentially earthquake-prone buildings is potentially in conflict with the act that aims to provide certainty to owners who have completed strengthening under the building code in force. The current wording is open to interpretation. the methodology uses ‘life safety hazard’, ‘injury and death’ and ‘injury’ interchangeably. These mean different things and have different impacts in terms of risk and response; the term needs to be clarified and defined. that the outcome of any assessment completed under the prescribed methodology by a qualified engineer should be accepted by council. The Council has submitted that if it chooses to require a peer review, the owner should pay for it. ICA does not agree with this. ICA has also submitted that the methodology should have the status of a legislative instrument (and be clearly communicated as such) to ensure there is greater transparency if there are any changes in the future. ICA has raised concerns about the timeframes to confirm whether a building is earthquake-prone, as there have been several instances of drawn-out processes. There also needs to be an accessible, low-cost, timely mediation mechanism where there are disputes between various parties involved throughout the process. ICA’s submission refers to WCC’s final submission.  

    • Submission on proposed EQ prone building regulations
      • MBIE has consulted on proposed regulations under the Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Act 2016. The key points in ICA’s submission relate to the following matters: that there should not be two categories of earthquake-prone buildings (20 -33%NBS) as this would not be an effective means of incentivising faster strengthening, could further compound problems of accessing funds and a specific breakpoint between categories is inconsistent with other proposals around reporting. that establishing criteria for when substantial alterations would trigger strengthening is problematic and that government and councils should be supporting owners to establish phased work programmes that enable owners (particularly in body corporate environments) to cost-effectively phase all the work – deferred maintenance as a result of strengthening, the strengthening work and any added value work. that the proposals should be exemptions should not proceed at this time as there is insufficient information about the types of buildings and uses, and it will create inequities by providing some owners with choices where others have to strengthen. ICA also reiterated the need for an authoritative advisory service and financial assistance for owners, particularly those who are not able to access funds through commercial channels. ICA reminded MBIE that the deadlines for many buildings are looming – and some of these buildings have not been able to make progress due to lack of funds, capability and/or capacity, and selling isn’t always an option. MBIE and council will need to start thinking about how it will manage this problem. FYI – here is Wellington City Council’s final submission, which is referred to in our submission.

    • Call for financial assistance and advisory support infrastructure for seismic strengthening
      • Since ICA’s beginning, lobbying on behalf of owners facing seismic strengthening has been a core part of ICA’s activities. Today, ICA and the Body Corporate Chairs’ Group released a position paper calling for the government to establish a financial assistance and advisory support infrastructure for owners. ICA and BCCG welcome the financial package that has been announced to support those owners who will have to strengthen unreinforced masonry facades and parapets within 12 months. But more is needed. The key support mechanisms outlined in the position paper are: a lender of last resort facility for owners who cannot raise funds through commercial channels a comprehensive technical advisory service that includes a ‘toolkit’ of plain English guidance on how to get started and complete the process access to a free/low cost mediation service to help bodies corporate address the issues that arise with owners, their local Council, or technical professionals tax deduction/credits to compensate those private commercial and residential owners fully funding public good outcomes Read the position paper and media release.

    • Charity Quest Quiz night! – Thursday 9 February, 6pm
      • CQ Hotels Wellington is embarking on a Charity Quest and taking part in the PWC Foundation Charity Relay Race.   This is a 100km fundraising relay on Friday 24 February 2017, which involves teams running and biking 100kms from Wellington’s waterfront to Martinborough – all with the aim of raising over $200,000 for The Neonatal Trust, Wellington Free Ambulance, Ronald McDonald House Charities and Life Flight Trust. The CQ Hotel team is hosting this “Charity Quest Quiz Night” with the primary goal of reaching a target of $5,000 for the PWC Charity Race Event charities. CQ Hotel is very supportive of ICA in providing facilities for our meetings. Let’s support their efforts by participating in the Charity Quiz on 9 February. When: Thursday, 9 February 2017, 6pm start.  Event will finish around 8.30pm. Where: CQ Hotel, 213-223 Cuba St.  A table has been reserved for ICA. How to book your place All you need to do is ring 913 1804 or email sales@cqwellington.com and book your place. Cost: $25 per person.  You can pay online or at the door, and credit card/eftpos will be available. A bottle of wine is provided for each table and drinks and food can be purchased on the night. What happens on the night? As well as the quiz, there will be spot prizes, raffles and auctions for amazing goodies. Quiz master is Chris Coydale and MC Steve Joll. CQ Hotels Wellington has a long history with assisting the local community starting out as early as 1908 when the hotel was originally the “People’s Palace” run by the Salvation Army. Let’s support them on this journey – using our brains for a couple of hours over a drink will be much easier than the 100km running and biking relay! Look forward to seeing you there.

    • Wellington Central MP calls for better quake support for inner city residents
      • Grant Robertson’s opinion piece echoes the concerns raised by the Inner City Association in our numerous submissions to central and local government on earthquake prone buildings legislation.  If some owners cannot access funds to pay their share of strengthening costs (eg, retirees on fixed income or owners with insufficient equity) then the project cannot go ahead – or the Body Corporate may be put in the invidious position of forcing the owners to sell (at additional expense). The legislation is driven primarily by public safety concerns – hence the life safety focus of the 34% NBS threshold. WCC has strongly pushed for economic resilience to minimise the downtime for the city in the event of a EQ (such as 14 Nov and 2013 EQs). Public safety and economic resilience are public good outcomes. They should not be paid for solely by private owners. Both central and local government have a role to play in providing financial support – beyond the support for heritage buildings. The rates relief and building consent fee rebates have been made available but in reality do not help owners fund this level of costs.

    • EQ Seminars 4 and 5 material available
      • EQ Seminar 4 (Technical and professional input into strengthening projects) and EQ Seminar 5 (Proposed Building Act Regulations and seismic assessment methodology) are now available. Click here to access documents on seminar page and scroll down the page.

    • EQ Seminar 5, 22 November: EQ Prone Building regulations and methodology – overview of consultation documents
      • The Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) is consulting on the regulations and a methodology that set the new approach for identifying and managing earthquake-prone buildings. This 5th Facing Seismic Strengthening meeting provides an opportunity for building owners and body corporate committee members to get more details on the regulations and methodology and what it means for them and to ask questions of officials. When: Tues 22 November, 6 – 7.30 pm Where: CQ Hotel, 223 Cuba St Who: MBIE speakers overview of the regulations and what they mean for owners WCC Resilience Manager (Steve Cody) on implementation aspects for WCC  BCCG Chair (Neil Cooper) on making a submission We encourage you to read the discussion documents prior to the meeting.  If you have specific questions please send those by the 10 November by replying to this email and we will collate them for the speakers. This meeting will be of interest to any individual owners who are considering making a submission.  It is also an opportunity for the Inner City Association to gather feedback on matters that concern our members for our submission.  Submission are due by 15 December 2016. The requirement for these regulations and methodology was set in the recently passed Buildings (Earthquake-prone buildings) Amendment Act.

    • Facing seismic strengthening: seminar 4: Technical and professional input into strengthening projects
      • Technical and professional input into strengthening projects When: Wednesday, 26 October Time: 5:30pm for drinks (cash bar); the meeting will start at 6:00pm and finish by 7.30pm. Please be seated by 5:50pm Where: CQ Hotel, 223 Cuba St, Wellington. Free to all attendees. We will hear from: Geotechnical and structural engineers: perspective on managing the project A development option: a developer’s perspective Mediation: resolving disputes collaboratively Following the presentations, there will be time for questions for the speakers. This is a public meeting organised by the Inner City Association, the Body Corporate Chairs’ Group and the Wellington City Council. Please feel free to share this invite with others who may be interested.

    • Facing seismic strengthening: seminar 3: case studies
      • Sharing experiences of seismic strengthening projects: 3 case studies When: Monday, 25 July Time: 5:30pm for drinks (cash bar); the meeting will start at 6:00pm and finish by 7.30pm. Please be seated by 5:50pm Where: CQ Hotel, 223 Cuba St, Wellington. Free to all attendees. Three inner city body corporates will share their experience of their seismic strengthening projects.  All three buildings have s124 notices. The 3 case studies are:          a completed strengthening project          a non-heritage building in a heritage area          a non-heritage, standalone building Speakers will outline the processes their Body Corporate undertook or are underway, and share their experiences for others beginning or on this journey. Following the presentations, there will be time for questions for the speakers and an opportunity to hear from others who wish to share their experience. This is a public meeting organised by the Inner City Association, the Body Corporate Chairs’ Group and the Wellington City Council. Please feel free to share this invite with others who may be interested.

    • AGM, 14 June 2016, 6 – 7pm, CQ Hotel – papers
      • The AGM 2016 Agenda & papers for the AGM are now available.   Please print and bring your copy along with you to the meeting: When: Tues, 14 June Time: 6 – 7pm Where: CQ Hotel Cuba St We are keen to have new people on the ‘committee’ to strengthen the community fabric of ICA.  Self-nominations are welcome and will be taken on the night. We are also keen to have ideas for meetings – ideally, with suggestions for speakers; or for events (topic and participants for a debate perhaps).

    • Beeping beepers … in the dark of the night …
      • Are beepers keeping you awake at night?  Have you wondered if they need to be so loud in the middle of the night?  A member has shared their investigations … ‘Following the installation of double glazing in a bedroom, which significantly reduced the sound, we could still hear the beepers quite loudly in the lounge. We have not been able discover when it became the Council approach to have these beepers running continuously. Previously, I recall that they would do a slow beep when the pedestrian crossing button is pushed, then the fast beep when it is time to cross. Then no sound until the button was pushed again. We recently enquired what was the council approach. We understand that the loudness of the beep sound is adjustable. However, the partially sighted and others complain when the sound level is turned down. I understand that the loudness of the noise will also increase when other loud noises are detected. Council is therefore trying to manage the concerns of partially sighted and blind people, some of whom may not have good hearing, versus the concerns of residents. We were told that Council has a few ( perhaps 4) add-on units it proposes to try, which are designed to reduce the signal sound level between 10 pm to 7.00 am. We do not know if any of these have been installed yet. We would suggest that anyone who lives in the cbd, or is near a traffic light controlled intersection, and finds the sound level disturbing, should raise this directly with WCC – phone the main WCC number and lodge a complaint.  If enough of us raise the issue, council will put greater effort into finding a workable solution. The problem is not just cbd. We know people in Newtown, three houses from a Constable Street intersection, who are finding newly installed signal noises to be a nuisance.’

    • Beeping beepers … in the dark of the night …
      • Are beepers keeping you awake at night?  Have you wondered if they need to be so loud in the middle of the night?  A member has shared their investigations … ‘Following the installation of double glazing in a bedroom, which significantly reduced the sound, we could still hear the beepers quite loudly in the lounge. We have not been able discover when it became the Council approach to have these beepers running continuously. Previously, I recall that they would do a slow beep when the pedestrian crossing button is pushed, then the fast beep when it is time to cross. Then no sound until the button was pushed again. We recently enquired what was the council approach. We understand that the loudness of the beep sound is adjustable. However, the partially sighted and others complain when the sound level is turned down. I understand that the loudness of the noise will also increase when other loud noises are detected. Council is therefore trying to manage the concerns of partially sighted and blind people, some of whom may not have good hearing, versus the concerns of residents. We were told that Council has a few ( perhaps 4) add-on units it proposes to try, which are designed to reduce the signal sound level between 10 pm to 7.00 am. We do not know if any of these have been installed yet. We would suggest that anyone who lives in the cbd, or is near a traffic light controlled intersection, and finds the sound level disturbing, should raise this directly with WCC – phone the main WCC number and lodge a complaint.  If enough of us raise the issue, council will put greater effort into finding a workable solution. The problem is not just cbd. We know people in Newtown, three houses from a Constable Street intersection, who are finding newly installed signal noises to be a nuisance.’

    • Pigeon control – submission on draft Animal Control Bylaw
      • 87 members (25% of all members) responded to ICA’s recent survey on pigeon control to inform our Animal Control Bylaw Submission on WCC’s Draft Animal Control Bylaw.  This is the highest response to any survey. Respondents provided feedback on concerns arising from the size of the pigeon population, measures they take to manage the impact (eg, removing excrement, putting up netting, picking up dead birds, etc) and whether they considered a ‘no feeding’ ban would be effective. 69% did not think changing the bylaw to include a no feeding ban would be effective, and 74% strongly felt that WCC officers would have to actively enforce the ban on feeding in public places. ICA submits that WCC should work with other local authorities, that are also having the same problem with growing pigeon numbers, to get a contraceptive product approved to provide a long-term solution, in conjunction with the no feeding ban.

    • Pigeon control – submission on draft Animal Control Bylaw
      • 87 members (25% of all members) responded to ICA’s recent survey on pigeon control to inform our Animal Control Bylaw Submission on WCC’s Draft Animal Control Bylaw.  This is the highest response to any survey. Respondents provided feedback on concerns arising from the size of the pigeon population, measures they take to manage the impact (eg, removing excrement, putting up netting, picking up dead birds, etc) and whether they considered a ‘no feeding’ ban would be effective. 69% did not think changing the bylaw to include a no feeding ban would be effective, and 74% strongly felt that WCC officers would have to actively enforce the ban on feeding in public places. ICA submits that WCC should work with other local authorities, that are also having the same problem with growing pigeon numbers, to get a contraceptive product approved to provide a long-term solution, in conjunction with the no feeding ban.

    • Support for topical Long Term Plan initiatives
      • Respondents to the survey on the draft Annual Plan also provided feedback on some of the topical initiatives in the current Long Term Plan as outlined below. While there was strong opposition to selling Jack Ilott Green for development, there was a spread of views across the spectrum on selling ground leases of WCC assets to fund earthquake strengthening and the airport runway extension. Selling Jack Ilott Green for development: Strongly Support/Support: 18% –  12% (4)/6% (2) Neutral: 9% (3) Oppose/Strongly Oppose: 74% – 24% (8)/ 50% (17 respondents) Selling ground leases of WCC assets to fund earthquake strengthening of WCC buildings: Strongly Support/Support: 38% – 9% (3) /29% (10) Neutral: 21% (7) Oppose/Strongly Oppose: 39 % – 21% (7) / 18% (6) Airport runway extension: Strongly Support/Support: 36% – 21% (7) / 15% (5) Neutral: 24% (8) Oppose/Strongly Oppose: 41% – 15% (5) / 26% (9)

    • Support for topical Long Term Plan initiatives
      • Respondents to the survey on the draft Annual Plan also provided feedback on some of the topical initiatives in the current Long Term Plan as outlined below. While there was strong opposition to selling Jack Ilott Green for development, there was a spread of views across the spectrum on selling ground leases of WCC assets to fund earthquake strengthening and the airport runway extension. Selling Jack Ilott Green for development: Strongly Support/Support: 18% –  12% (4)/6% (2) Neutral: 9% (3) Oppose/Strongly Oppose: 74% – 24% (8)/ 50% (17 respondents) Selling ground leases of WCC assets to fund earthquake strengthening of WCC buildings: Strongly Support/Support: 38% – 9% (3) /29% (10) Neutral: 21% (7) Oppose/Strongly Oppose: 39 % – 21% (7) / 18% (6) Airport runway extension: Strongly Support/Support: 36% – 21% (7) / 15% (5) Neutral: 24% (8) Oppose/Strongly Oppose: 41% – 15% (5) / 26% (9)

Updated Feeds

Recently updated feeds from local organisations.