I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Hearings Committee will be held on:

 

Date:                      

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

 

Tuesday, 15 September 2015

2.00pm

Room 1, Level 26
135 Albert Street
Auckland

 

Hearings Committee

 

OPEN AGENDA

 

 

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Chairperson

Cr Linda Cooper, JP

 

Deputy Chairperson

Cr Penny Webster

 

Members

Cr Anae Arthur Anae

 

 

Cr Chris Darby

 

 

Cr Calum Penrose

 

 

Member David Taipari

 

 

Cr Wayne Walker

 

 

Member Glenn Wilcox

 

 

 

 

Ex-officio

Mayor Len Brown, JP

 

 

Deputy Mayor Penny Hulse

 

 

(Quorum 3 members)

 

 

 

Louis Dalzell

Democracy Advisor

 

9 September 2015

 

Contact Telephone: (09) 890 8135

Email: louis.dalzell@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

 

 



TERMS OF REFERENCE

 

 

The Hearings Committee will have responsibility for:

 

·         Decision making (including through a hearings process) under the Resource Management Act 1991 and related legislation;

·         Hearing and determining objections under the Dog Control Act 1996;

·         Decision making under the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012

·         Hearing and determining matters regarding drainage and works on private land under the Local Government Act 1974 and Local Government Act 2002.  This delegation cannot be sub-delegated;

·         Hearing and determining matters arising under bylaws, including applications for dispensation from compliance with the requirements of bylaws;

·         Receiving recommendations from officers and appointing independent hearings commissioners to a pool of commissioners who will be available to make decisions on matters as directed by the Hearings Committee;

·         Receiving recommendations from officers and deciding who should make a decision on any particular matter including who should sit as hearings commissioners in any particular hearing;

·         Monitoring the performance of decision makers including responding to complaints made about decision makers;

·         Where decisions are appealed or where the Hearings Committee decides that the Council itself should appeal a decision, directing the conduct of any such appeals; and

·         Adopting a policy or policies and making any necessary sub-delegations relating to any of the above areas of responsibility to provide guidance and transparency to those involved.

 

Not all decisions under the Resource Management Act 1991 and other enactments require a hearing to be held and the term “decision making” is used to encompass a range of decision making processes including through a hearing.  “Decision making” includes, but is not limited to, decisions in relation to applications for resource consent, plan changes, notices of requirement, objections, existing use right certificates and certificates of compliance and also includes all necessary related decision making.

 

In adopting a policy or policies and making any sub-delegations, the Hearings Committee must ensure that it retains oversight of decision making under the Resource Management Act 1991 and that it provides for Councillors to be involved in decision making in appropriate circumstances.

 

For the avoidance of doubt, these delegations confirm the existing delegations (contained in the Chief Executive’s Delegations Register) to hearings commissioners and staff relating to decision making under the RMA and other enactments mentioned below but limits those delegations by requiring them to be exercised as directed by the Hearings Committee.

 

Relevant legislation includes but is not limited to:

 

Resource Management Act 1991;
Building Act 2004;
Local Government Act 2002;
Local Government Act 1974;
Local Government (Auckland Council Act) 2009;
Local Government (Auckland Transitional Provisions) Act 2010;
Dog Control Act 1996;

Fencing of Swimming Pools Act 1987;

Gambling Act 2003;

Sale of Liquor Act 1989;

Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012
Health Act 1956;
Biosecurity Act 1993;
Related Regulations; and
Council Bylaws.


Exclusion of the public – who needs to leave the meeting

 

Members of the public

 

All members of the public must leave the meeting when the public are excluded unless a resolution is passed permitting a person to remain because their knowledge will assist the meeting.

 

Those who are not members of the public

 

General principles

 

·         Access to confidential information is managed on a “need to know” basis where access to the information is required in order for a person to perform their role.

·         Those who are not members of the meeting (see list below) must leave unless it is necessary for them to remain and hear the debate in order to perform their role.

·         Those who need to be present for one confidential item can remain only for that item and must leave the room for any other confidential items.

·         In any case of doubt, the ruling of the chairperson is final.

 

Members of the meeting

 

·         The members of the meeting remain (all Governing Body members if the meeting is a Governing Body meeting; all members of the committee if the meeting is a committee meeting).

·         However, standing orders require that a councillor who has a pecuniary conflict of interest leave the room.

·         All councillors have the right to attend any meeting of a committee and councillors who are not members of a committee may remain, subject to any limitations in standing orders.

 

Independent Māori Statutory Board

 

·         Members of the Independent Māori Statutory Board who are appointed members of the committee remain.

·         Independent Māori Statutory Board members and staff remain if this is necessary in order for them to perform their role.

 

Staff

 

·         All staff supporting the meeting (administrative, senior management) remain.

·         Other staff who need to because of their role may remain.

 

Local Board members

 

·         Local Board members who need to hear the matter being discussed in order to perform their role may remain.  This will usually be if the matter affects, or is relevant to, a particular Local Board area.

 

Council Controlled Organisations

 

·         Representatives of a Council Controlled Organisation can remain only if required to for discussion of a matter relevant to the Council Controlled Organisation.

 

 


Hearings Committee

15 September 2015

 

 

ITEM   TABLE OF CONTENTS                                                                                        PAGE

1          Apologies                                                                                                                        7

2          Declaration of Interest                                                                                                   7

3          Confirmation of Minutes                                                                                               7

4          Local Board Input                                                                                                          7

5          Extraordinary Business                                                                                                7

6          Notices of Motion                                                                                                          8

7          Determination of an objection to the construction of a proposed stormwater connection through 63A Arawa Street, New Lynn to service 3216 Great North Road, New Lynn 9

8          Appointment of commissioners: Proposed Private Plan Change 39 - Atlas Concrete, Takapuna                                                                                                                      57

9          Appointment of independent commissioners for the resource consent hearing associated with the Northern Interceptor and Greenhithe Bridge Watermain Duplication and Causeway applications                                                                                               63

10        Appointment of Commissioners: Application for resource consent – proposed multi-level retirement complex at 2 and 6 Valley Road, Browns Bay                                       79

11        Appointment of Independent Commissioners: Application for resource consents by Auckland Transport for a new Half Moon Bay Ferry Terminal                              91

12        District and Regional Plans Appeal Status Report at 31 August 2015                 99

13        Noting the delegated decision of 12 August 2015: Massey North Special Areas 109  

14        Consideration of Extraordinary Items 

PUBLIC EXCLUDED

15        Procedural Motion to Exclude the Public                                                               119

C1       Approval of supplementary independent commissioners                                   119

C2       Appeal to New Zealand Transport Agency's Notices of Requirement to alter two designations for the Southern Corridor Improvements project                          119

C3       New Resource Consent Appeal - 299A Don Buck Road, Massey                       119

C4       New Resource Consent Appeal - 61 Margan Avenue, New Lynn                        120

C5       Resource Consent Appeals: Status Report 15 September 2015                         120

C6       Appeal by Messrs Soroka and Baigent relation to Variation 13 to Plan Change 14 of the Auckland District Plan (Franklin Section)                                                              120  

 


1          Apologies

 

An apology from Chairperson LA Cooper has been received.

 

 

2          Declaration of Interest

 

Members are reminded of the need to be vigilant to stand aside from decision making when a conflict arises between their role as a member and any private or other external interest they might have.

 

At the close of the agenda no requests for declarations of interest had been received.

 

 

3          Confirmation of Minutes

 

That the Hearings Committee:

a)         confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Wednesday, 19 August 2015, including the confidential section, as a true and correct record.

 

 

4          Local Board Input

 

Standing Order 3.22 provides for Local Board Input.  The Chairperson (or nominee of that Chairperson) is entitled to speak for up to five (5) minutes during this time.  The Chairperson of the Local Board (or nominee of that Chairperson) shall wherever practical, give two (2) days notice of their wish to speak.  The meeting Chairperson has the discretion to decline any application that does not meet the requirements of Standing Orders.

 

This right is in addition to the right under Standing Order 3.9.14 to speak to matters on the agenda.

 

At the close of the agenda no requests for local board input had been received.

 

 

5          Extraordinary Business

 

Section 46A(7) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:

 

“An item that is not on the agenda for a meeting may be dealt with at that meeting if-

 

(a)        The local  authority by resolution so decides; and

 

(b)        The presiding member explains at the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public,-

 

(i)         The reason why the item is not on the agenda; and

 

(ii)        The reason why the discussion of the item cannot be delayed until a subsequent meeting.”

 


 

Section 46A(7A) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:

 

“Where an item is not on the agenda for a meeting,-

 

(a)        That item may be discussed at that meeting if-

 

(i)         That item is a minor matter relating to the general business of the local authority; and

 

(ii)        the presiding member explains at the beginning of the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public, that the item will be discussed at the meeting; but

 

(b)        no resolution, decision or recommendation may be made in respect of that item except to refer that item to a subsequent meeting of the local authority for further discussion.”

 

 

6          Notices of Motion

 

At the close of the agenda no requests for notices of motion had been received.

 


Hearings Committee

15 September 2015

 

 

Determination of an objection to the construction of a proposed stormwater connection through 63A Arawa Street, New Lynn to service 3216 Great North Road, New Lynn

 

File No.: CP2015/13728

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       To hear and determine an objection to a proposed stormwater line and connection.

Executive Summary

2.       This report accompanies the hearing of an objection pursuant to section 460 of the Local Government Act 1974 (“the Act”). The property at 3216 Great North Road, New Lynn, does not have connection to the council’s stormwater drains. To enable site development, the owners of 3216 Great North Road have endeavoured but failed to negotiate access over 63A Arawa Street to install a public stormwater connection. Consequently, the owners at 3216 Great North Road have requested that the council exercise its powers under Section 460 of the Act to enable the works to be carried out.

3.       The property owners of 63A Arawa Street, Ting Li & Zhi Zheng, have advised in writing that they object to the proposed connection. Section 460 of the Act provides a right to be heard by a committee of the council. Delegation to undertake such a hearing lies with the Hearings Committee.

4.       It is considered that the stormwater route and connection to the existing manhole on 63A Arawa Road, New Lynn is the best and most practical option for stormwater disposal.

5.       It is recommended that the Hearings Committee hear and determine the objection.

 

Recommendations

That the Hearings Committee:

a)   hear and consider the objection by the owners of 63A Arawa Street, New Lynn, to the proposed stormwater connection and line extension, pursuant to section 460 and Schedule 12 of the Local Government Act 1974.

b)   determine whether or not to endorse the proposed stormwater connection to 3216 Great North Road, and its associated route through the neighbouring land at 63A Arawa Street, New Lynn and the drainage works generally as set out in the officer’s report, and as referenced on plans titled ‘Servicing Plan – 3216 Great North Road’ Rev A dated 13/06/2015 by Envivo Ltd, and ‘Pipe Longsections – 3216 Great North Road’ Rev B dated 05/06/2015 by Envivo Ltd.

 

Comments

Background

6.       The applicant, Housing New Zealand Limited (HNZL), has been granted resource consent for the establishment of six new dwellings on six separate freehold titles at 3216 Great North Road, New Lynn under land use and subdivision Resource Consents LUC-2014-953 and SUB-2014-854, granted on 21 November 2014. An aerial photo of the subject site and neighbourhood with existing underground services and contours is provided at Attachment A.

 

7.       HNZL is seeking access through an adjacent property to construct a stormwater line that will provide a drainage connection for each future lot to a council compliant public system.

8.       To comply with the council’s Stormwater Code of Practice, it is proposed to install a new 150mm line from the existing stormwater manhole within 63A Arawa Street into 3216 Great North Road.  To minimise disruption, this line will be installed by way of directional drilling/trenchless technology if possible.

9.       A concept plan of the subdivision, with proposed private drainage, and proposed public connections and public line extensions is provided in Attachment B.

10.     On 14 August 2014, an application request for council to use section 460 of the Local Government Act 1974 was received from the agent for 3216 Great North Road, New Lynn (Attachment C). The council has been advised that the applicant has endeavoured but failed to negotiate access through 63A Arawa Street to install the proposed new 150mm public stormwater line.

11.     On 29 January 2015, a letter from the council was sent to the owner of 63A Arawa Street seeking to discuss stormwater disposal options to this drainage issue. A copy of the applicant’s proposed drainage plans was included. No response was received.

12.     On 25 February 2015, a follow-up letter from the council was sent to the owner of 63A Arawa Street seeking to discuss stormwater disposal options to this drainage issue. A letter of objection dated 24 March 2015 was received in reply, and raised concerns relating to: construction disruption; the quality of the proposed drainage work; and implications to their own future property development plans.

13.     On 3 July 2015, a letter from the council was sent to the owner of 63A Arawa Street acknowledging receipt of the letter of objection and concerns; and advising that a new private drain and connection on their property is the only practical route in this situation; and advising of a future hearing to determine their objection under section 460 of the Local Government Act 1974. 

14.     A copy of correspondence between the council and owners of 63A Arawa Street, New Lynn is contained in Attachment D.

15.     Prior to the scheduling of a hearing, a mediation process was initiated by Council.  An experienced independent planning commissioner was appointed as chairperson and mediator.  Representatives for the applicant, the objector and the Council attended a mediation meeting on Wednesday 22 July 2015.  A mandarin-speaking engineer was provided by the Council to act as an interpreter. At the conclusion of the mediation session the applicant and the objector agreed to enter into direct negotiations with regards to a financial settlement.  A copy of the mediator’s summary of the mediation process is provided in Attachment E.

16.     On 24 August 2015, the applicant advised that negotiations for a settlement had failed; and provided copies of email communications, and sought that the matter continue to be determined by the Hearings Committee.

17.     On 4 September 2015, the applicant provided further information regarding other potential stormwater connection options, and maintains the proposed route is the only practical option.

Discussion

18.     In consideration of stormwater drainage at 3216 Great North Road, a number of servicing options have been investigated:     

   a)         63A Arawa Road, New Lynn

b)           65A Arawa Road, New Lynn

c)           2/67 Arawa Road, New Lynn

d)           3/3214 Great North Road, New Lynn

19.     63A Arawa Road, New Lynn – Council’s Development Engineer has considered from the information provided and available to him, considers the that proposed stormwater line thrust under the house and connected to the existing manhole on 63A Arawa Road, is direct and the most practical option, and with the least disruption to surrounding properties.

20.     In regard to primary concerns raised by the owners of 63A Arawa Street in their letter sent to the council and dated 24 March 2015, the following is noted after discussions with Council’s Development Engineer:

·    Disruption will be minimal with the works anticipated to be completed in 1-2 days, subject to the final method of installation.  Works will be fully co-ordinated with and explained to the owners to ensure disruption is minimal and works are carried out in an appropriate fashion for all parties.

·    The pipework will be installed under a council-issued Engineering Approval which will require final sign-off and acceptance by the council. The council’s operational staff will later take over the asset for on-going maintenance once installed.

·    The works will be located in a part of the site close to the boundary and will not be a significant constraint on any future development of the property at 63A Arawa Street, New Lynn.

21.     65A Arawa Road, New Lynn – The position of the public line within 65A Arawa Road means that any line and connection through to this property would necessitate a new stormwater manhole to be installed in the middle of an existing vehicle parking space, and within only 5 meters from the existing manhole on the adjacent property of 63A Arawa Road.  This option would result in comparatively more physical disruption than compared to a connection to 63A Arawa Road, and would result in inefficient management of existing available stormwater infrastructure. The owner of this property has refused to allow a stormwater connection.

22.     2/67 Arawa Road, New Lynn – There is an existing stormwater manhole at the north-eastern corner of this property (closest to the development site). The invert level (base interior level) of the manhole appears to be lower than the proposed development however the applicant considers there is insufficient depth for this to be a viable option.  Council’s development engineer considers this option could be technically viable if the finished ground levels are raised and detention tanks are installed above ground. This option would also affect two or three neighbouring properties depending on the route. Comparatively this option is the least preferred because this option would affect the most properties, and because of the extent of work required to make this route a viable option.

23.     3/3214 Great North Road – An alternative option for a connection into an existing public manhole was discussed by the objector at the mediation session. Council’s GIS maps does not show this manhole or a public stormwater line in this location.  This manhole however has been located at the rear of 3/3214 Great North Road and is only a few meters from the development site.  A CCTV inspection has been undertaken, and Council’s development engineer has confirmed that this manhole is connected to the public stormwater network.  Council’s development engineer consider this option could be technically viable if the finished ground levels are raised and detention tanks are installed above ground.  Connection to this manhole would also involve access approvals from multiple owners, as 3214 Great North Road appears to be held in a three way crosslease title ownerships.

24.     In summary, staff consider that there are at least two viable stormwater route and connection options to serve the proposed development at 3216 Great North Road, New Lynn, being 63A Arawa Road and 65A Arawa Road.  Furthermore, two other potential options exist, through to 2/67 Arawa Road and 3/3214 Great North Road, New Lynn. Refer email from Council Development Engineer contained in Attachment F.

25.     Staff consider that the stormwater route and connection to the existing manhole on 63A Arawa Road, New Lynn is the best and most practical option for stormwater disposal.

 

 

 

26.     Section 460(1) of the Local Government Act 1974 provides for Council to pass a resolution to allow proposed drainage works through private property, with appropriate notification and right of a hearing to any objection, where in the opinion of the council, the “only practical route” is through adjoining land.  Copy of Section 460 and Schedule 12 of the Local Government Act 1974 are contained in Attachment G.

Consideration

27.     Within the framework of the Hearings Committee’s Terms of Reference from the Governing Body, the Hearings Committee has the responsibility for “Hearing and determining the matters regarding drainage and works on private land under the Local Government Act 1974 and Local Government Act 2002. This delegation cannot be sub delegated”.

28.     At the hearing, both the applicant and the objector can present their evidence in support of their positions. After hearing all the evidence and the relevant information, the Hearings Committee will then need to determine whether or not to endorse the proposed stormwater connection.

Local Board views and implications

29.     The Local Board is not advised of service connection requests under the Local Government Act. Further, the determination of this objection requires no consultation beyond the owners of 63A Arawa Street, New Lynn. No comments were provided in 2014 when the subdivision application was send to the Whau Local Board.

Māori impact statement

30.     Managing and protecting natural resources is a matter of national importance under section 6 of the Resource Management Act, and so is recognising and providing for the relationship of Maori with ancestral water and other taonga.

31.     It is recognised that stormwater works which impact on the mauri of waterways are of significance to mana whenua in their role as kaitiaki of natural environments. The proposed works will concentrate rainfall on the site but does not alter flow within the catchment and has no identified impact on the mauri of surrounding waterways.

32.     The 2014 subdivision application did not trigger the need to forward the application for Iwi comment.

Implementation

33.     The determination of this objection requires no consultation beyond the owners of 63A Arawa Street, New Lynn.

34.     If this stormwater pipeline and connections are approved, all costs incurred in carrying out the said work shall be payable to the council in the first instance and recoverable from the owner of 3216 Great North Road, New Lynn pursuant to s460(3) of the Local Government Act 1974.

 


 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Aerial Photo of 3216 Great North Road, New Lynn and neighbourhood with underground services and contours

15

bView

Services Plan and Pipe Longsection Plan of proposed Subdivision SUB-2014-854

17

cView

Application under s460 of Local Government Act 1974

19

dView

Correspondence between Council, Applicant's agent, and Neighbour (63A Arawa Street)

27

eView

Prehearing Mediation Meeting Memorandum

51

fView

Council Development Engineer comments

53

gView

Section 460 of the Local Government Act 1974

55

      

Signatories

Authors

Clarke McKinney - Principal Planner Hearings and Resolutions

Robert Andrews - Resolutions Team Manager

Authorisers

Ian Smallburn - General Manager Resource Consents

 


Hearings Committee

15 September 2015

 

 



Hearings Committee

15 September 2015

 

 


Hearings Committee

15 September 2015

 

 


Hearings Committee

15 September 2015

 

 









Hearings Committee

15 September 2015

 

 



















Hearings Committee

15 September 2015

 

 



Hearings Committee

15 September 2015

 

 



Hearings Committee

15 September 2015

 

 



Hearings Committee

15 September 2015

 

 

Appointment of commissioners: Proposed Private Plan Change 39 - Atlas Concrete, Takapuna

 

File No.: CP2015/16449

 

  

 

 

Purpose

1.       To appoint a hearing panel to hear submissions to Private Plan Change 39 – Atlas Concrete Ltd. The plan change seeks that residential sites be rezoned Business 9 under the North Shore section of the Auckland Council District Plan.

Executive Summary

2.       The report recommends that a hearing panel be formed to hear submissions and make a decision regarding Private Plan Change 39, Atlas Concrete Ltd. The request is to rezone approximately 0.6 ha of land, being 7-11 Wairau Road and 8-12 Thornton Road, Takapuna, from Residential 7 and Residential 4A, to Business 9. The main issues are traffic generation, urban design and the business/residential amenity interface.

 

Recommendations

That the Hearings Committee:

a)      appoint a panel of three planning commissioners (including one as chair), to hear submissions and make a decision on Private Plan Change 39 (Atlas Concrete Ltd) to the operative Auckland Council District Plan (North Shore Section 2002).

b)      delegate authority to the chairperson of the Hearings Committee to appoint  replacement commissioner/s should any of the commissioners appointed in (a) above be unavailable.

 

 

Comments

3.       Proposed Private Plan Change 39 has been notified (9 April 2015). Two submissions were received, one from Auckland Transport and one from ‘Metlifecare’ (the owner of the Poynton Metlifecare Retirement Village on the corner of Taharoto Road and Shakespeare Road). One further submission in support of the Metlife submission was received as at the closing date, 25 June 2015.

4.       It is noted that a separate letter has been received from Westlake Girls’ High School requesting to be kept informed of discussions regarding the design of the future intersection which would provide signalised access to both the school and Atlas Concrete.

5.       The applicant – Atlas Concrete Ltd – has commenced discussions with the submitters, with a view to narrowing the issues required to be heard.

6.       The key issues are traffic generation, coupled with a redesigned access to the site, and the potential amenity effects of existing concrete batching and various other possible business activities that a Business 9 (General Business) zoning would enable. It would therefore be beneficial for the appointed commissioners to have some general planning/urban design /traffic expertise.

7.       While there is proposed to be a minor internal reconfiguration of the functioning of the site, the concrete batching plant will remain in its present location. The applicant proposes some new building developments at the southern end of the rezoned site.

8.       The sites that are the subject of the plan change are proposed to be zoned Mixed Use under the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan (PAUP). The short term plans the applicant has for the land are not inconsistent with the direction of the PAUP.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

9.       The plan change was reported to the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board in 2012 and the Board identified concerns for ‘urban design and transport’, given the residential properties nearby and the ‘arterial’ function of Wairau Road. The local board’s Chair has confirmed that these concerns remain relevant for the local board and would expect them to be carefully evaluated in considering the submissions to the plan change.

Māori impact statement

10.     The following iwi agencies were notified in April 2015, and no submissions were received:

·     Ngati Paoa Trust; Te Kawerau Iwi Tribal Authority; Te Runanga o Ngati Whatua; Ngati Whatua Ōrakei Maori Trust Board; Hauraki Maori Trust Board; Te Hao o Ngati Whatua; Te Tinana o Ngati Whatua; Nga Puhi; Te Runanga o Ngati Whatua

Implementation

11.     A hearing will be scheduled as soon as prehearing negotiations have reached an appropriate conclusion. It is possible, but unlikely, that resolution of all issues can be achieved prehearing.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Locality Plan

59

bView

Operative zoning, PPC 39 area

61

     

Signatories

Authors

Ewen Patience - Principal Planner

Authorisers

Penny Pirrit - GM - Plans & Places

Ian Smallburn - General Manager Resource Consents

 


Hearings Committee

15 September 2015

 

 


Hearings Committee

15 September 2015

 

 


Hearings Committee

15 September 2015

 

 

Appointment of independent commissioners for the resource consent hearing associated with the Northern Interceptor and Greenhithe Bridge Watermain Duplication and Causeway applications

 

File No.: CP2015/17625

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       To appoint independent hearing commissioners to hear submissions and determine resource consent applications associated with the construction of the Northern Interceptor and Greenhithe Bridge Watermain Duplication and Causeway by Watercare Services Limited.

Executive Summary

2.       Watercare Services Limited (WSL) have applied to construct the Northern Interceptor (NI) and Greenhithe Bridge Watermain Duplication and Causeway (GBWDC).

3.       The NI will provide for a new wastewater connection between the Hobsonville Pump Station (Buckley Avenue, Hobsonville) and the Rosedale Wastewater Treatment Plant on the North Shore. The route of the works will include land at Hobsonville Point, a proposed reclamation alongside State Highway 18, beneath the harbour (directional drilling or marine trenching) from the Greenhithe foreshore via the alignment of a number of local roads, through Wainoni Park, the North Shore Memorial Park and the North Shore Golf Club to the Rosedale Wastewater Treatment Plant.

4.       The GBWDC involves a new watermain from Hobsonville to the northern terminus of the Greenhithe Bridge, where it connects into the existing North Harbour watermain. This project is also reliant on the reclamation of new land beside State Highway 18.

5.       The applications were publicly notified on 21 August 2015, with the submission closing on 18 September 2015. Notice was directly served on several hundred parties, including adjoining property owners, occupiers and mooring holders.

6.       A hearing will be required if submissions are received and those submitters wish to be heard.

7.       Commissioners with expertise in planning, coastal management, traffic, stormwater, contamination, landscape, cultural matters and ecology would be beneficial.

8.       It is recommended that a panel of three independent commissioners be appointed to hear submissions and make decisions on the Resource Consent applications. However, in the event that no submissions are received, the matter will be referred to the commissioner appointed as chair, to make decisions.

 

Recommendations

That the Hearings Committee:

a)      appoint a panel of three independent commissioners, one to be the Chair, to hear submissions and make recommendations on the Resource Consent applications.

b)      delegate to the Chair of the Hearings Committee the authority to make replacement appointments, should any of the appointed commissioners be unavailable.

c)      appointed the Chair in (a) above with the authority to make decisions on the Resource Consent applications, should no submissions be received or a hearing otherwise not be required.

 

 

Comments

9.       WSL have applied for a package of resource consents associated with improving the potable water supply to the North Shore (GBWDC) and the strategic realignment of the metropolitan wastewater network (NI).

10.     While both projects have separate functions, they rely on a shared corridor along a proposed area of reclamation alongside State Highway 18 at Hobsonville. As such, both projects are being processed as a single package of resource consent applications.

11.     The NI is the larger of the two projects and runs from the Hobsonville Pump Station to the Rosedale Wastewater Treatment Plant at Albany. The project involves a range of works including trenching and directional drilling through public reserves, creeks, private land and road reserve. It will also cross the Upper Waitemata Harbour near the Greenhithe Bridge, either by marine trenching or directional drilling.

12.     WSL have provided a summary of both projects and a copy of this summary is provided as Attachment A.

13.     A key component of both projects is the reclamation of between 1.3ha to 1.8ha of the Upper Waitemata Harbour alongside State Highway 18. This reclaimed area will provide the space needed for both projects to transit from Hobsonville to the North Shore.

14.     Consents have been sought across a range of planning documents, including:

·    Auckland Council District Plan: Waitakere and North Shore Sections;

·    Auckland Council Regional Plan: Air Land Water, Sediment Control and Coastal Plan Sections;

·    The Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan; and

·    National Environmental Standard for Assessing and Managing Contaminants in Soil to Protect Human Health

15.     WSL have sought the following consent types:

Northern Interceptor

·   Regional and District Land Use Consents,

·   Water Permit

·   Discharge Permit and

·   Coastal Permits.

 

The above package of consents involves:

 

·   Earthworks, including earthworks within flood plains, significant ecological areas, public open space zones; sediment control protection areas and land under the NES (Soil Contamination)

·   Earthworks and establishment of infrastructure in proximity to sites of value to Mana Whenua;

·   Vegetation removal, alteration and works within the dripline of trees and significant ecological areas.

·   Construction of above ground infrastructure and pipe bridge

·   Undertaking works not related to a designation.

·   The use and placement of structures in, on, under or over the bed of streams with associated stream bed disturbance and diversion of water;

·   Taking and diversion of groundwater;

·   Discharge of  contaminants to land; and

·   Discharge of wastewater and/or washwater from construction activities.

·   Placement of structures on the seabed or entirely beneath the foreshore and seabed;

·   Occupation of the seabed and foreshore;

·   Disturbance of seabed and foreshore, including vegetation removal;

·   Removal of moorings and placement of moorings inside and outside of a mooring management area; and

·   Occupation and works within a significant ecological area.

 

Greenhithe Bridge Watermain Duplication and Causeway

·   Regional and District Land Use Consents,

·   Water Permits,

·   Discharge Permits, and

·   Coastal Permits.

 

The above package of consents involves;

 

·   Site works including earthworks within the sediment control protection areas, significant ecological areas and a heritage area;

·   Creation of impervious surfaces;

 

Vegetation alteration, removal and works within the dripline of trees; and

 

·   Use of reclaimed land for utilities, public open space, infrastructure access and earthworks.

·   Taking and diversion of groundwater and coastal water and diversion of overland flow paths.

·   Discharge of contaminants into the Coastal Management Area.

·   Reclamation and disturbance of the seabed and foreshore including vegetation removal, and

·   Occupation of the Coastal Marine Area.

16.     Overall, consent is required for a non-complying activity. It should be noted that WSL have not sought any notices of requirement at this time.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

17.     This report invites the Committee to appoint independent hearing commissioners which is not a matter within the delegated authority of the Local Board.

18.     WSL has advised that they have previously engaged with the Upper Harbour Local Board. As a response to Local Board comments, WSL have made several alterations to the projects, including alterations to the NI’s alignment through public reserves.

19.     The Local Board’s views on notification were not required as the resource consents have been fully notified at the request of the applicant. The Board was informed of the applications notification on 21 August 2015. No response has been received at the time of this report.

Māori impact statement

20.     WSL have advised that they have engaged with 19 mana whenua entities during the development of the projects, with four of these entities preparing Cultural Impact Assessments (CIAs).

21.     Key areas of interest identified by mana whenua include the disturbance of historical remains, effects on the wellbeing of the coastal environment and the effects of works on streams.

22.     All 19 mana whenua entities were notified of the consent applications on 21 August 2015. No responses had been received at the time of this report.

Implementation

23.     Following the decision to appoint the hearings panel, a hearing date will be set by the Council’s Hearings Unit within Democracy Services in the event that submissions are received and submitters wish to be heard.  This is likely to take place sometime in November or December 2015.

24.     Alternatively, in the event that no submissions are received, the decisions on the Resource Consents will be made by the chair of the appointed Hearings Panel.

25.     All costs associated with the processing of the resource consent applications are recoverable from the applicant.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Summary of Projects

67

     

Signatories

Authors

Tim Hegarty - Senior Planner - Major Infrastructure Projects

Robert Andrews - Resolutions Team Manager

Authorisers

Ian Smallburn - General Manager Resource Consents

 


Hearings Committee

15 September 2015

 

 





Hearings Committee

15 September 2015

 

 



Hearings Committee

15 September 2015

 

 



Hearings Committee

15 September 2015

 

 



Hearings Committee

15 September 2015

 

 


Hearings Committee

15 September 2015

 

 

Appointment of Commissioners: Application for resource consent – proposed multi-level retirement complex at 2 and 6 Valley Road, Browns Bay

 

File No.: CP2015/18236

 

  

Purpose

1.       To appoint commissioners to make decisions under section 104 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) on a notified application for resource consent for the construction and operation of a four to five storey retirement living facility at 2 & 6 Valley Road, Browns Bay.

Executive Summary

2.       In May 2015 the Council received an application for resource consent from Oceania Healthcare Limited for the demolition of existing onsite buildings and the construction of a new four to five storey retirement complex building at 2 & 6 Valley Road, Browns Bay (the site).  At the applicant’s request the application was publicly notified on 25 June 2015. The submission period closed on 23 July 2015.

3.       The proposal seeks a height infringement well beyond the 8 metres allowed under the Auckland Council Operative District Plan: North Shore Section 2002 (“District Plan”)  and has received a large number of submissions in opposition.  The application therefore falls into the ‘significant’ category as defined by the Hearings Committee’s ‘Hearings Policy’.

4.       The Hearings Committee is invited to appoint commissioners to hear and determine the application under section 104 of the RMA.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Hearings Committee:

a)      appoint two independent commissioners and a local board member to hear submissions and determine the application for resource consent by Oceania Healthcare Limited, to construct and operate a four to five storey retirement village at 2 & 6 Valley Road, Browns Bay, under section 104 of the Resource Management Act 1991.

b)      delegate authority to the Chairperson of the Hearings Committee to make replacement appointments should any of the independent commissioners in (a) above be unavailable.

 

 

Comments

5.       The site at 2 and 6 Valley Road, Browns Bay consists of seven lots that combined comprise a large corner site fronting Manly Esplanade to the east, Valley Road to the north, Bayview Road to the south and residential properties to the west. The land is zoned Residential 4B (Main Residential) under the District Plan with the eastern half of the site located within the ‘Coastal Conservation Area’.

6.       The site was previously owned and occupied by the Salvation Army and is currently occupied by an existing aged care facility which was established in 1982.  A church building was established on site in 1984 and will be relocated off site should the current application be granted. A single dwelling at 6 Valley Road, Browns Bay is proposed to remain as part of the development.

 

7.       The site is in close proximity to the main shopping area of Browns Bay. Immediately across Manly Esplanade to the east is a war memorial statue and to the north-east a recreational boat ramp providing access to Browns Bay beach.

8.       Resource consent for a discretionary activity is sought to demolish some existing buildings on site and construct a large four to five level retirement complex accommodating:

·   64 independent living units comprising a mixture of 2-3 bedroom apartment style units located on the ground and upper levels.

·   40 care suites located on the first floor of the building.

·   Hydrotherapy pools.

·   Residential lounges.

·   Resident’s restaurant, cafe, hair salon and convenience shop.

·   Below ground (basement) car parking level.

·   Entrance to basement car parking off Bayview Road and exit off Valley Road.

9.       The application also seeks regional consents for groundwater diversion, stormwater management and earthworks.

10.     A site plan and perspectives of the proposed development (as notified) are attached to this report as Attachment A.

11.     The application for resource consent was publicly notified on 25 June 2015 at the request of the applicant. At the close of the submissions period, 110 submissions were received, with 109 in opposition, and 1 in support.

Consideration

General

12.     The Hearings Committee has adopted a hearings policy that, at section 4.2, refers to “Allocation of decision making responsibility between elected members, independent commissioners and staff”. Section 4.2.2 states that in deciding who is the most appropriate decision maker, the Hearings Committee will take into account recommendations from council officers, the significance of a particular matter and whether it is contentious.

13.     The application falls within the policy’s definition of significant due to the scale of buildings, the extent of the Operative District Plan height infringement and the large number of submissions in opposition. The application seeks to exceed the 8 metre height limit to an extent not envisaged by the Residential 4B zone. The proposal is for a building that reaches heights of 16.7m.

14.     Therefore, it is recommended that the Hearings Committee in accordance with its policy appoint independent commissioners and a local board member as decision-makers for this application. It is recommended that the independent commissioners appointed include those with planning and urban design expertise.

 

Local Board views and implications

15.     The Hibiscus and Bays Local Board was sent information of the proposal on 25 May 2015 and were re-contacted on the 21 August 2015.  No comments were received from the local board in relation to the application for resource consent.

Māori impact statement

16.     As part of the resource consent process the applicant has engaged with iwi for the area. The applicant notified iwi of the proposal prior to the application being lodged. Of the 14 iwi groups contacted nine provided no response and three groups (Ngati Wai, Te Runanga o Ngati Whatua, and Ngai Tai Ki Tamaki) responded confirming that they did not consider a cultural impact assessment was required. The remaining two groups (Ngati Maru and Ngati Tamatera) responded stating they have an ‘interest’ in the project and that specifically Ngati Tamatera wished to be represented by Ngati Maru. The applicant has ongoing communication with Ngati Maru and will be providing a concluding statement to Council in regards to whether a cultural impact assessment is required or not.

17.     No submissions to the application from iwi have been received by the Council.

Implementation

18.     There are no financial or legal implications beyond those normally associated with the appointment of hearing commissioners. The costs of the hearing commissioners will be met by the applicant.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Attachment A: Site plan and perspectives

83

     

Signatories

Authors

Robert Andrews - Resolutions Team Manager

Authorisers

Ian Smallburn - General Manager Resource Consents

 



Hearings Committee

15 September 2015

 

 


Hearings Committee

15 September 2015

 

 


Hearings Committee

15 September 2015

 

 


Hearings Committee

15 September 2015

 

 


Hearings Committee

15 September 2015

 

 


Hearings Committee

15 September 2015

 

 


Hearings Committee

15 September 2015

 

 



Hearings Committee

15 September 2015

 

 

Appointment of Independent Commissioners: Application for resource consents by Auckland Transport for a new Half Moon Bay Ferry Terminal

 

File No.: CP2015/18627

 

  

Purpose

1.       To invite the Committee to appoint independent commissioners to hear and determine an application for resource consents by Auckland Transport (AT) for the proposed new Half Moon Bay Passenger Ferry Terminal.

Executive Summary

2.       On 14 August 2015 Auckland Council received an application from AT for coastal and landuse resource consents relating to the proposed wharf, gangway, pontoon, berthing poles, temporary access and related structures to construct the new Half Moon Bay Passenger Ferry Terminal.  At AT’s request, the resource consent applications were publicly notified on Wednesday 26 August 2015.

3.       The applications require consent for coastal structures, coastal yard infringements, temporary access, earthworks and works in the Public Open Space Conservation zone under the provisions of the Auckland Council Regional Plan: Coastal, the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan (PAUP) and Auckland Council District Plan (Manukau Section). Overall, the applications are for a discretionary activity.

4.       Given the technical complexity of the project, the fact that AT have requested public notification and that the location of the proposal is in a high public use area, the application falls into the ‘significant’ category as defined by the Hearings Committee’s ‘Hearings Policy’.

5.       As AT is an Auckland Council Controlled Organisation (CCO), it is recommended that independent commissioners be appointed to determine the resource consents under section 104 of the RMA.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Hearings Committee:

a)      appoint three independent commissioners to hear submissions and determine the application by Auckland Council for resource consents to develop a new Half Moon Bay Ferry Terminal, under section 104 of the Resource Management Act 1991.

b)      delegate authority to the chairperson of the Hearings Committee to make replacement appointments should any of the appointed independent commissioners in (a) above be unavailable.

 

 

Comments

Proposal:

6.       AT has applied for a new passenger ferry terminal at Half Moon Bay.  The existing Half Moon Bay Ferry Terminal is located on the eastern side of the Tamaki River and to the north of Wakaaronga Creek.  It provides services to Waiheke Island and the Downtown Ferry Terminal.  The existing Half Moon Bay Ferry Terminal operates from a wharf leased from the Bucklands Beach Yacht Club and the lease is due to end soon.  The proposed new wharf and related structures will service the public passenger ferries.

Resource consents are required as follows:

·     47956 - Coastal structure consent pursuant to s12(1), s12(2) and s12(3) of the RMA for the proposed wharf, gangway, pontoon, berthing poles and temporary access ramp/temporary staging; and for deposition which involves the backfilling of holes left by the removal of the layover berth under the Auckland Council Regional Plan: Coastal and the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan (PAUP).

·     47955 - Landuse consent under the Auckland Council District Plan (Manukau Section) for the proposed wharf structure and temporary access staging above Mean High Water Springs (MHWS), where the structure will infringe the yard requirements as it crosses the boundary between land and the coastal marine area; and for earthworks (above MHWS) for the temporary access ramp in the Public Open Space (Conservation) Zone under the PAUP.

·     Overall, the applications are for a discretionary activity.

7.       The submission period for the applications closes at 5pm on 23 September 2015.  At the time of writing this report, no submissions had been received by the Council.

8.       The following plans and elevations have been included in Attachment A

·    Half Moon Bay Ferry Terminal Proposed Passenger Ferry Pontoon ‘Figure 2 Revision 1’;

·    Proposed Site Plan (Enlarged) ‘Drawing No. 10-03’;

·    North and South Elevation Drawings ‘No. 30-01’; and ‘No. 30-02’

Consideration

General

9.       The Hearings Committee has adopted a hearings policy that, at section 4.2, refers to “Allocation of decision making responsibility between elected members, independent commissioners and staff”. Section 4.2.2 states that in deciding who is the most appropriate decision maker, the Hearings Committee will take into account recommendations from council officers, the significance of a particular matter and whether it is contentious.

10.     Given the technical complexity of the project, the fact that AT have requested public notification and the location of the proposal in a high public use area, the application falls into the ‘significant’ category as defined by the Hearings Committee’s ‘Hearings Policy’.  Therefore, it is recommended that the Hearings Committee in accordance with its policy appoint independent commissioners as decision-makers for this application.

11.     As AT is a CCO, Council officers recommend that only independent commissioners be appointed, to hear and determine the resource consents application.

12.     Given the range of matters to be considered in making its determination, Council officers recommend that the commissioners’ areas of expertise include planning, coastal processes and landscape architecture and iwi.

Local Board views and implications

13.     The Howick Local Board has been provided with an electronic copy of the application and briefed by the Council processing planner with an internal memorandum inviting internal comment.

14.     No formal comment from the Howick Local Board has been received by Council officers at the time of writing this report.

Māori impact statement

1.         AT invited Mana Whenua to undertake Cultural Impact Assessments (CIAs) for the project.  CIAs were prepared by Ngāi Tai Ki Tāmaki and Ngāti Maru. There are no identified heritage or archaeological sites in proximity to the terminal or Half Moon Bay Marina in the district or regional plans, on the New Zealand Archaeological Association ‘Archsite’ website or in the ‘Cultural Heritage Inventory’.  However, given the history of the site and its location below a headland and on the edge of the Tamaki River, Ngāi Tai and Ngāti Maru have identified the potential for the presence of unknown or unrecorded cultural features.  The following Mana Whenua were sent a letter advising them of public notification:

·    Ngāi Tai Ki Tāmaki

·    Te Kawerau a Maki

·    Ngāti Tamaoho

·    Te Akitai Waiohua

·    Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua

·    Ngāti Paoa

·    Ngāti Maru

·    Ngāti Whanaunga

·    Ngāti Tamaterā

·    Te Patukirikiri

Implementation

15.     There are no financial or legal implications beyond those normally associated with the appointment of hearing commissioners. The costs of the hearing commissioners will be met by the applicant

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Attachment A: Half Moon Bay Ferry Terminal proposed passenger ferry pontoon ‘Figure 2 Revision 1’
Proposed Site Plan (Enlarged) ‘Drawing No. 10-03’;
North and South Elevations ‘Drawing No. 30-01’; and No. 30-02’

95

     

Signatories

Authors

Robert Andrews - Resolutions Team Manager

Authorisers

Ian Smallburn - General Manager Resource Consents

 


Hearings Committee

15 September 2015

 

 





Hearings Committee

15 September 2015

 

 

District and Regional Plans Appeal Status Report at 31 August 2015

 

File No.: CP2015/18089

 

  

Purpose

1.       To receive an update on the current status of outstanding appeals region wide.

Executive Summary

2.       This report provides a summary of current district and regional plan appeals (refer Attachment A).  Should members have detailed questions concerning specific appeals, it would be helpful if they could be raised with Warren Maclennan – (Mobile 021 646590), or email warren.maclennan@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz, prior to the meeting.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Hearings Committee:

a)      receive the District and Regional Plans Appeal Status Report.

 

Comments

3.       The summary table is attached as Attachment A.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

4.       Local Board views have not been sought.

Māori impact statement

5.       The decision requested of the Hearings Committee is to receive this progress report on appeals rather than to decide each appeal.

6.       All of these appeals relate to Plan Changes or Notices of Requirement which are being processed according to the Resource Management Act.  As each appeal is negotiated or settled, a report is prepared for the Committee’s consideration which includes a Maori Impact Statement covering matters related to each specific matter.

Implementation

7.       There are no further matters requiring consideration.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Region-wide Appeals Status Report at 31 August 2015

101

     

Signatories

Authors

Warren Maclennan - Manager Planning - North/West

Authorisers

Penny Pirrit - GM - Plans & Places

Ian Smallburn - General Manager Resource Consents

 


Hearings Committee

15 September 2015

 

 








Hearings Committee

15 September 2015

 

 

Noting the delegated decision of 12 August 2015: Massey North Special Areas

 

File No.: CP2015/16941

 

  

 

 

Purpose

1.       To advise of the decision made under delegation by the chair of the Hearings Committee to appoint replacement commissioners for current and future resource consent applications in all precincts within the Massey North Special Areas.

Executive Summary

2.       On 21 September 2012 the Hearings Committee appointed five independent commissioners to determine future resource consent applications for development within all precincts with the Massey North Special Areas.

3.       Four of the appointed independent commissioners were no longer available to determine resource consent applications.

4.       Under delegated authority on 12 August 2015 Chairperson Linda Cooper reappointed Alan Watson and appointed Leigh McGregor, Ian Munro, Les Simmons and Rebecca Skidmore.

 

Recommendation

That the Hearings Committee:

a)      note the decision to reappoint Alan Watson and appoint Leigh McGregor, Ian Munro, Les Simmons and Rebecca Skidmore for current and future resource consent applications in all precincts within the Massey North Special Areas.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Appointment of replacement commissioners for future applications within Massey North Special Areas

111

     

Signatories

Authors

Louis Dalzell - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Ian Smallburn - General Manager Resource Consents

 


Hearings Committee

15 September 2015

 

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator

     

 


Hearings Committee

15 September 2015

 

 

Exclusion of the Public: Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987

 

 

That the Hearings Committee:

a)      exclude the public from the following part(s) of the proceedings of this meeting.

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 follows.

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 relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting in public, as follows:

 

C1       Approval of supplementary independent commissioners

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Particular interest(s) protected (where applicable)

Ground(s) under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

s7(2)(a) - The withholding of the information is necessary to protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person.

In particular, the report contains the names and personal information of candidates submitted to council on a confidential basis for recuitment purposes..

s48(1)(a)

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

 

 

C2       Appeal to New Zealand Transport Agency's Notices of Requirement to alter two designations for the Southern Corridor Improvements project

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Particular interest(s) protected (where applicable)

Ground(s) under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

s7(2)(i) - The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations).

In particular, the report contains information relating to an Environment Court appeal and the disclosure of information may prejudice the council's position in regard to negotiations and the potential settlement of the appeal..

s48(1)(a)

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

 


 

C3       New Resource Consent Appeal - 299A Don Buck Road, Massey

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Particular interest(s) protected (where applicable)

Ground(s) under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

s7(2)(i) - The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations).

In particular, the report contains information that could compromise the council in undertaking without prejudice negotiations of this appeal that is before the Environment Court..

s48(1)(a)

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

 

 

C4       New Resource Consent Appeal - 61 Margan Avenue, New Lynn

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Particular interest(s) protected (where applicable)

Ground(s) under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

s7(2)(i) - The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations).

In particular, the report contains information that could compromise the council in undertaking without prejudice negotiations of this appeal that is before the Environment Court..

s48(1)(a)

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

 

 

C5       Resource Consent Appeals: Status Report 15 September 2015

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Particular interest(s) protected (where applicable)

Ground(s) under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

s7(2)(i) - The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations).

In particular, the report contains information that could compromise the council in undertaking without prejudice negotiations of these appeals that are before the Environment Court.

s48(1)(a)

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

 


 

C6       Appeal by Messrs Soroka and Baigent relation to Variation 13 to Plan Change 14 of the Auckland District Plan (Franklin Section)

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Particular interest(s) protected (where applicable)

Ground(s) under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

s7(2)(i) - The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations).

In particular, the public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7..

s48(1)(a)

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.