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

 

Date:                      

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

 

Tuesday, 17 November 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

 

 

Mr David Taipari

 

 

Cr Wayne Walker

 

 

Mr Glenn Wilcox

 

Ex-officio

Mayor Len Brown, JP

 

 

Deputy Mayor Penny Hulse

 

 

(Quorum 3 members)

 

 

 

Louis Dalzell

Democracy Advisor

 

11 November 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

17 November 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          Decision on Notification: Resource consent, 80 St Lukes Road St Lukes             9

8          Appointment of Independent Commissioners: Draft variation to the Regional Parks Management Plan to include Te Muri Regional Park                                              49

9          Appointment of commissioners: Notice of Requirement and  resource consent applications - Auckland Transport, Newmarket Level Crossing Project             51

10        Appointment of hearing commissioners - Milford Shopping Centre, 114 Kitchener Road, Milford                                                                                                                           59

11        Hearings Committee Policy - Treaty Audit Update                                                 69

12        District and Regional Plans Appeal Status Report at 31 October 2015                87  

13        Consideration of Extraordinary Items 

PUBLIC EXCLUDED

14        Procedural Motion to Exclude the Public                                                                 97

C1       Auckland Transport Notice of Requirement to designate land for road for the Medallion Drive link - Appeal                                                                                                       97

C2       Appeal relating to the Wiri Oil Services Limited Notice of Requirement for a Designation                                                                                                                                        97

C3       Resource Consent Appeal Update: North Eastern Investments Limited v Auckland Council, 56 Fairview Avenue, Albany                                                                        98

C4       Resource Consent Appeals: Status Report 17 November 2015                            98

 


1          Apologies

 

At the close of the agenda apologies had been received from Mayor Len Brown and Deputy Mayor Penny Hulse.

 

 

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 Tuesday, 20 October 2015, including the confidential section, as a true and correct record.

 

 

4          Local Board Input

 

Standing Order 6.2 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 6.1 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

17 November 2015

 

 

Decision on Notification: Resource consent, 80 St Lukes Road St Lukes

 

File No.: CP2015/23742

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       This report invites the Hearings Committee to make the notification decision for the proposed extension to the St Lukes Centre at 80 St Lukes Road, St Lukes.

Executive Summary

2.       Scentre (New Zealand) Limited have applied for resource consent to expand their existing mall (and associated works) at 80 St Lukes Road (called Stage 4/5).

3.       At the meeting of 19 August 2015, the Committee considered this item and resolved that the matter be “deferred until the section 95 report is completed and can be presented to the Hearings Committee”.

4.       The appropriate section 95 assessment are now provided as attachment of this report.

5.       The Hearings Committee is therefore invited to decide whether the application is processed as notified, limited notified or non-notified in accordance with section 95 of the Resource Management Act 1991.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Hearings Committee:

a)      determine whether the ‘Stage 4/5’ (R/LUC/2015/529 AND R/REG/2015/530) applications shall proceed as notified, limited notified or non-notified pursuant to Section 95 of the Resource Management Act 1991.

 

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Resource Consent Section 95 report: 80 St Lukes Road, St Lukes.

11

      

Signatories

Author

Robert Andrews - Resolutions Team Manager

Authorisers

Ian Smallburn - General Manager Resource Consents

John Duguid - General Manager - Plans and Places

 


Hearings Committee

17 November 2015

 

 






































Hearings Committee

17 November 2015

 

 

Appointment of Independent Commissioners: Draft variation to the Regional Parks Management Plan to include Te Muri Regional Park

 

File No.: CP2015/23126

 

  

Purpose

1.       To appoint independent commissioners to hear submissions and make recommendations on the draft variation to the Regional Parks Management Plan to incorporate Te Muri Regional Park.

Executive Summary

2.       Council has initiated a variation to the Regional Parks Management Plan 2010 (RPMP) to incorporate Te Muri Regional Park.

3.       Public consultation was initiated in mid July 2015 and feedback from this first phase of consultation has been used to develop a draft variation which will be notified in December 2015.

4.       The Parks Recreation and Sport (PRS) Committee have approved appointment of independent commissioners to hear submissions and make recommendations back to the committee on the draft.

5.       Commissioners will likely need to consider a range of issues relating to the Reserves Act, Local Government Act, parks management, regulatory planning, coastal processes and Te Ao Maori.

Recommendations

That the Hearings Committee:

a)      appoint two independent commissioners to hear submissions and make recommendations on the draft variation to the Regional Parks Management Plan to incorporate Te Muri Regional Park.

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

6.       Te Muri Regional Park comprising 382.46ha was purchased by council in 2010. Since then a number of actions have been undertaken to manage the property as a regional park.  

7.       A variation to the Regional Parks Management Plan 2010 to incorporate Te Muri Regional Park has been initiated to enable the Park to formally open to the public, ensure an integrated open space planning approach and allow development of regional recreational opportunities. 

8.       The variation will cover Te Muri Regional Park and a minor variation to the adjoining Mahurangi (West) Regional Park to edit and remove reference to Te Muri from this section of the RPMP. There will also be an addendum added to the RPMP of consequential changes relating to the addition of Te Muri to the regional park network.

9.       While the land is held under the Local Government Act public consultation on the variation is following the Reserves Act 1977 process, which provides for two periods of public consultation. The first is the notice of intention to vary the RPMP which is complete and the feedback has been used to develop the draft variation. The second consultation period, notifying the draft variation is due to commence in mid-December 2015 with the submission period open until early March 2016. 

Consideration

General

10.     In June 2015 the PRS Committee approved notification of the intention to vary the RPMP to include Te Muri, and approval for an independent hearings commissioner to hear submissions and to recommend a draft variation back to the PRS Committee.

11.     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.

12.     Given the range of matters to be considered in making its determination, council officers recommend that the commissioners’ areas of expertise include the Reserves and Local Government Acts, park management, regulatory planning, coastal processes and Te Ao Maori.

Local Board views and implications

13.     A workshop was held with the Rodney Local Board in June to advise them of the scope and process for the variation, and seek their input into the drafting stage.  A further workshop was held in September to provide the board with a summary of the feedback to the first round of public consultation. 

14.     A report to the Parks Culture and Community Development Committee of the local board on 2 November 2015 confirmed the local board’s views on this initial feedback so this could be considered in the preparation of the draft variation and included in the report to the PRS Committee, seeking endorsement of the draft variation for public notification.

Māori impact statement

15.     Te Muri and the wider Mahurangi area has a long history of Māori occupation.  A commissioner with expertise in Te Ao Māori is requested to ensure recommendations are developed that appropriately consider the significance of the area to Mana Whenua.

16.     This report only seeks approval to appoint independent commissioners to hear submissions and make recommendations, there are no other readily identifiable impacts on Mana Whenua at this time.

Implementation

17.     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 Auckland Council’s Regional Parks Department.

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.    

Signatories

Author

Dafydd  Pettigrew - Parks and Open Space Specialist - Region Wide

Authorisers

Mace Ward - Group Manager Regional and Specialist Parks

Mark Bowater - Acting General Manager - Parks, Sports and Recreation

John Duguid - General Manager - Plans and Places

 


Hearings Committee

17 November 2015

 

 

Appointment of commissioners: Notice of Requirement and  resource consent applications - Auckland Transport, Newmarket Level Crossing Project

 

File No.: CP2015/21881

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       To appoint independent commissioners to make a recommendation and decisions under the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) for a notice of requirement (NoR) and applications for resource consent for the Auckland Transport (AT) Newmarket Level Crossing Project (the Project).

Executive Summary

2.       The Project will involve the construction, operation and maintenance of a new road connecting Laxon Terrace to Cowie Street, Newmarket. The scope of work includes construction of a bridge over the Newmarket Branch Line and the closure of the current road connection between Sarawia Street and Laxon Terrace.

3.       A NoR for a designation in the Auckland Council District Plan: Isthmus Section and the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan (PAUP) has been made by Auckland Transport. This NoR relates to land between Sarawia Street, Laxon Terrace, Youngs Lane and Cowie Street, Newmarket and will provide for the Project.

4.       A range of resource consent applications under the provisions of the PAUP, the Auckland Council Regional Plan: Air Land and Water and the National Environmental Standard for Assessing and Managing Contaminants in Soil to Protect Human Health have been made.

5.       The council is processing the NoRs and resource consent applications on an integrated basis.

6.       Given the technical complexity of the project, AT’s request for public notification and the high degree of public interest that surrounds this Project, the Project falls into the ‘significant’ category as defined by the Hearings Committee’s ‘Hearings Policy’.

7.       As AT is an Auckland Council Controlled Organisation (CCO), council officers request that the Hearings Committee appoint independent commissioners to make RMA decisions and recommendations on the NoR and resource consent applications.

 

Recommendations

That the Hearings Committee:

a)      appoint three independent commissioners to hear and make decisions on the resource consent applications pursuant to section 104 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) and a recommendation on the Notice of Requirement pursuant to section 171 of the RMA, for the Newmarket Level Crossing Project.

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

8.       The Project is intended to improve pedestrian and traffic safety at the crossing and support improvements to the efficiency of the passenger rail service operated by AT.

9.       The general location of the project extent and preliminary design is represented in Attachment A, with the designation plan at Attachment B.

10.     The following is a summary of the NoR and resource consent applications lodged by AT for this Project.

·    A Notice of Requirement for a designation in the Auckland Council District Plan: Isthmus Section 1999 and the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan for the Project being the construction, operation and maintenance of a new road connecting Laxon Terrace to Cowie Street, including the construction of a bridge over the Newmarket Branch Line and the closure of the existing connections between Sarawia Street and Laxon Terrace, Newmarket.

·        Land Use Consent R/LUC/2015/3627; for earthworks within a Significant Ecological Area, vegetation removal and soil disturbance pursuant to the National Environmental Standard for Assessing and Managing Contaminants in Soil to Protect Human Health.

·        Discharge Permit R/REG/2015/3629; for stormwater discharges from impervious areas greater than 1,000m2 but less than or equal to 5,000m2.

·        Discharge Permit R/REG/2015/3633; for discharge of contaminants to land or water from land containing elevated levels of contaminants.

11.     The NoR and resource consent applications were publically notified together on 7 October 2015 at the request of the applicant. The submission period closes at 5pm on 18 November 2015.  At the time of writing this report, one submission in support had been received by Council.

Consideration

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.     Given the technical complexity of the project, that AT have requested public notification and the NoR contains a policy making component 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.

14.     As AT is a CCO, Council officers recommend that only independent commissioners be appointed, to determine the applications.

15.     Given the range of matters to be considered in making the determinations, Council Officers recommend that the commissioners’ areas of expertise include an understanding of planning matters pertaining to NoRs and resource consents, legal and traffic matters.

 

Local Board views and implications

12.     AT have consulted and attended numerous meetings with the Waitemata Local Board to inform and seek comment about the Project.

13.     Council officers have provided a copy of the application to the Waitemata Local Board and have invited the local board to make comment.  No formal comments from the local board have been received at the time of writing this report.

 

Māori impact statement

14.     AT has consulted with representatives of the following mana whenua groups:

·        Ngati Maru

·        Ngati Paoa

·        Ngai Tai ki Tamaki

·        Ngati Tamaoho

·        Ngati Te Ata Waiohua

·        Ngati Whatua Orakei

·        Te Akitai Waiohua

·        Ngati Whatua Runanga

15.     Hui, including the provision of information and site visits, commenced in September 2014, several months in advance of the formal lodgement of the NoR and resource consent applications.

16.     Following the lodgement of the NoR and resource consent applications, Ngai Tai ki Tamaki has provided written correspondence to confirm that, subsequent to reviewing the application reports, and on the basis of the proffered consent conditions, a Cultural Impact Assessment (CIA) is not required.  Written correspondence has been provided to Council stating that Ngati Te Ata Waiohua requires no further engagement.

17.     All 13 mana whenua groups that have a registered interest in the Waitemata Local Board area have been directly notified of the project by council and invited to make a submission.

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

General Location of the Project Extent and Preliminary Design Plan

55

bView

Designation Plan

57

     

Signatories

Authors

Peter Kensington - Principal Planner, Hearings and Resolutions

Robert Andrews - Resolutions Team Manager

Authorisers

Ian Smallburn - General Manager Resource Consents

John Duguid - General Manager - Plans and Places

 


Hearings Committee

17 November 2015

 

 


Hearings Committee

17 November 2015

 

 


Hearings Committee

17 November 2015

 

 

Appointment of hearing commissioners - Milford Shopping Centre, 114 Kitchener Road, Milford

 

File No.: CP2015/23201

 

  

Purpose

1.       This report invites the Hearings Committee to appoint hearing commissioners to determine a resource consent application at Milford Shopping Centre, 114 Kitchener Road, Milford.

Executive Summary

2.       NZRPG have applied for resource consents for a mixed-use retail and residential expansion of the Milford Shopping Centre. The mixed use component comprises 2,550 m2 of gross leasable retail floor area and 121 residential apartments, to be served by 175 new car parking spaces. The development involves a four-storey base building to a height of RL 25.2 m along Milford and Ihumata Roads, with a further six-storey building to a height of RL 46 m (including parapets). The applicant has requested that the consent be processed on a notified basis.

3.       The Hearings Committee is therefore invited to appoint commissioners to hear and determine the application under section 104 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (“RMA”).

Recommendations

That the Hearings Committee:

a)      appoint three independent commissioners and a local board member to hear and determine the application for resource consent by NZRPG to extend an existing mall with retail and residential components, including associated land use and earthworks consents pursuant to section 104 of the Resource Management Act 1991.The site is located at 114 Kitchener Road, Milford.

b)      delegate to the chairperson of the Hearings Committee the authority to make replacement appointments in the event that any hearing commissioners appointed in a) above are unavailable.

Comments

4.       Milford Shopping Centre at 114 Kitchener Road is a two-storey fully-enclosed shopping mall located in the Milford Town Centre. The mall contains a range of retail shops and a small amount of café use. Its two anchor tenants are a Countdown supermarket and The Warehouse.

5.       The mall sits behind the northern side of the town centre’s retail street, Kitchener Road, which is also the main thoroughfare connecting Milford to Takapuna. The western, northern and eastern edges of mall site are bounded by public roads, with residential housing on the opposite sides to the north and east. To the west lies tidal section of Wairau Creek. Milford Beach is approximately 400 m to the north of the site, and Lake Pupuke is approximately 300 m to the south

6.       The site is zoned Business 2 (local centre) under the Auckland Council District Plan (North Shore Section) (“the District Plan”) as are the surrounding businesses. The neighbouring residential areas are zoned Residential 4A (standard residential).

7.       The previous property owner initiated a private plan change (Plan Change 34), which was declined by Auckland Council in February 2013. The plan change was subsequently granted by the Environment Court on appeal, after it was scaled back. The plan change was made operative on 11 December 2014.

8.       Plan Change 34 provides for residential and retail expansion on the mall site, subject to requirements, which set the maximum footprint and height of buildings using a series of nine building envelopes varying from 21 m to 45 m high. The intention of these envelopes is to provide for ‘buildings of varying height and mass within the platforms.... to promote a noticeable transition in built form and interest and variety to the building skyline’ (Policy 3 of the Milford Intensive Residential Development Overlay Area).

9.       The current application was lodged on 27 July 2015 and proposes a mixed-use retail and residential expansion to the existing mall, comprising 2,550 m2 of gross leasable area and 121 residential units serviced by 175 on-site vehicle parking spaces. The expansion will be located on the north-eastern corner of the site, largely over the top of an existing car parking area. The expansion will be contained within a four-storey base building to a height of RL 25.2 m with a further six-storey narrower building on top to a height of RL 46 m.  The proposal is a non-complying activity due to the higher building component extending outside of the higher 45m envelope area. Consents are also required for earthworks, works in an overland flow path, transport matters, tree removal and potentially also a coastal permit for a stormwater outfall. Overall, the proposal is a non-complying activity due to the height infringement.

10.     The application was publicly notified, at the applicant’s request, on 7 October 2015, with the submission period due to close on 5 November 2015. A hearing needs to be set to hear and determine the application.

11.     In response to the current proposal, the Milford Residents Association held a public meeting on 27 October 2015. In excess of 150 people attended – many expressing concern over the proposal, particularly in relation to building height and bulk, shadowing and amenity and traffic effects.

12.     At the time of writing, the council has received 28 submissions with the majority of these against the proposal. Based on the history of the site and the feedback received to date by staff, it is likely that there will be a large number of submissions expressing opposition to the proposal.

13.     A site location plan and some drawings of the proposal are attached as Attachment A.

Consideration

14.     The Hearings Committee has adopted a hearings policy at section 4.2 refers to Allocation of decision making responsibility between elected members, independent commissioners and staff". This includes procedural decisions such as whether or not to notify in addition to substantive decision-making. Section 4.2.2 states that in deciding who is the most appropriate decision maker, the Hearings Committee will take into account recommendations from staff, the significance of a particular matter and whether it is contentious.

15.     This application is considered potentially significant and contentious due to the nature of the proposal, the level of interest in development of the site, the departure of the proposal from PC34 limits, and the interest from local board and local media.

16.     For the reasons highlighted above and in accordance with the Hearings Committee policy, it is considered that the Hearings Committee should determine the decision makers for this application. It is recommended that commissioners with urban design, landscape and planning expertise be appointed to consider the application.

Local Board views and implications

17.     At the time of writing this report, formal comment has not yet been received from the local board but is expected shortly.

 

 

18.     The Devonport-Takapuna Local Board adopted The Milford Centre Plan 2015-2045 in April 2015. The plan has been developed ‘to take Milford into the next 30 years adapting to the future but respecting and honoring the past’. It was developed through consultation with the residents, businesses and iwi of the local area. The Milford Shopping Centre occupies a large amount of the land identified as the ‘Milford Centre’ in the plan.

19.     The outcomes the Milford Centre Plan seeks to achieve are:

·   A strong connection between quality destinations

·   Kitchener Road as a pedestrian friendly ‘main street’

·   An attractive, vibrant community focal point

·   A healthy and attractive Wairau Estuary

·   Tell the local stories and celebrate our heritage.

Māori impact statement

20.     The applicant has not consulted directly with any iwi groups.

21.     There are no consents under the District Plan or the PAUP that require consultation with iwi or trigger the potential need for a cultural impact assessment. The site is fully covered with current development.

22.     The council regularly sends a register of resource consent applications to iwi groups and they have the opportunity to make submissions through the public notification process. At the time of writing the council has not received a submission from any iwi group.

Implementation

23.     There are no financial or legal implications beyond those normally associated with the appointment of hearing commissioners. The applicant meets the costs of commissioners.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Site location plan and drawings of proposal

63

     

Signatories

Authors

Gerard  McCarten - Principal Planner Hearings and Resolutions

Robert Andrews - Resolutions Team Manager

Authorisers

Ian Smallburn - General Manager Resource Consents

John Duguid - General Manager - Plans and Places

 



Hearings Committee

17 November 2015

 

 


Hearings Committee

17 November 2015

 

 


Hearings Committee

17 November 2015

 

 


Hearings Committee

17 November 2015

 

 


Hearings Committee

17 November 2015

 

 


Hearings Committee

17 November 2015

 

 


Hearings Committee

17 November 2015

 

 

Hearings Committee Policy - Treaty Audit Update

 

File No.: CP2015/18191

 

  

 

 

Purpose

1.       To approve the attached Hearings Committee Policy, which has been updated in response to the Independent Māori Statutory Board (IMSB) Te Tiriti o Waitangi Audit recommendations.

Executive Summary

2.       The Independent Māori Statutory Board (IMSB) Te Tiriti o Waitangi Audit 2012 (Treaty audit) recommended that the Hearings Committee policy be updated to reflect the statutory requirements of the council in relation to hearings.

3.       An update of the Hearings Committee Policy was therefore included in the 2014/15 Treaty Audit work programme. The Treaty audit report 2015 also recommended that the Hearings Policy be updated to recognise and provide for effective participation of Māori and the inclusion of tikanga and te reo Māori where appropriate.

4.       Sections 39 and 42 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) require council to recognise tikanga Māori where appropriate, receive evidence written or spoken in Māori, and provides direction to protect sensitive information to avoid serious offence to tikanga Māori or to avoid the disclosure of the location of wāhi tapu during hearings and other proceedings.  Similar provisions were introduced through recent changes to the Local Government Act 2002 for development contributions commissioners.

5.       Te Waka Angamua coordinated input from Democracy Services, the Chief Planning Office, Resource Consents, Legal and Risk and the Independent Māori Statutory Board Secretariat to determine the scope and investigate how best to meet the Treaty audit recommendation and implications of the proposed changes.

6.       Staff recommend minor changes to the Hearings Committee Policy to ensure te reo Māori, tikanga and the handling of sensitive information is provided for. The policy will be supported by a set of hearings practice notes, which are currently in draft form and are expected to be finalised by the end of November 2015.

7.       The draft practice notes provide detailed guidance to staff and decision-makers on how to consider proposals in the context of Te Ao Māori, accommodate tikanga Māori in hearing proceedings, enhance participation of Māori in hearings and ensure sufficient information is available for the panel to make well informed and balanced decision-making in respect of Māori subject matter.

8.       Other improvements to council’s processes and practices since 2012 include updates to the Resource Consents Procedures Manual and the development of procedures by the Auckland Unitary Plan Independent Hearings Panel that recognise tikanga Māori and evidence written or spoken in te reo Māori.

9.       Hearings procedures have improved by recruiting Māori commissioners who understand tikanga and have Treaty expertise, and improvements to Māori impact statement reporting and the involvement of IMSB in decision-making. The use of te reo, tikanga and protection of sensitive information needs to be notified with plenty of time for staff to prepare. Updates to the policy supported by clear practice guidelines will enable good practice and is in line with legislative requirements.

 

 

Recommendation

That the Hearings Committee:

a)      approve the revised Hearings Committee Policy as set out in “Attachment A” to this report.

 

 

Comments

IMSB Treaty Audit

10.     In June 2012, the Independent Māori Statutory Board (IMSB) Te Tiriti o Waitangi Audit (Treaty audit) recommended that council’s Hearings Policy be updated to better reflect the use of te reo Māori, tikanga and protect sensitive information.

11.     The Treaty audit (2012) states:

“Council has a Hearings Policy in place. However, this policy does not state that the Auckland Council group is required to recognise tikanga Māori, where appropriate, and receive evidence written or spoken in Māori, and the need to protect sensitive information to avoid serious offence to tikanga Māori or to avoid the disclosure of the location of Wāhi Tapu”.

As a result, the audit report recommended the following action:

“The Hearings Policy should be updated to include:

· The requirement for Council to recognise tikanga Māori, where appropriate, and receive evidence written or spoken in Māori

· Who is responsible for determining when it is appropriate to recognise tikanga Māori

· Guidance on when this is appropriate (this could be in process documentation)

· The need to protect sensitive information to avoid serious offence to tikanga Māori or to avoid the disclosure of the location of Wāhi Tapu.”

12.     The Treaty audit report 2015 also recommended that the Hearings Policy be updated to recognise and provide for effective participation of Māori and the inclusion of tikanga and te reo Māori where appropriate.

13.     The Hearings Committee Policy update forms part of the 2014-15 Treaty audit work programme developed in consultation with the IMSB Secretariat [resolution FIN/2014/55]. In collaboration with staff from the IMSB, a team of staff from Te Waka Angamua, Democracy Services, Chief Planning Office, Resource Consents and Legal and Risk has drafted an updated policy for the Hearings Committee’s consideration and approval.

14.     The team has also developed a set of draft practice notes to support the implementation of the Hearings Committee Policy. The draft practice notes provide detailed guidance to staff and decision-makers on how to consider proposals in the context of Te Ao Māori, accommodate tikanga Māori in hearing proceedings, enhance participation of Māori in hearings and ensure sufficient information is available for the panel to make well informed and balanced decision-making in respect of Māori subject matter. The practice notes are progressing through an internal approval process and will be finalised by the end of November 2015.

15.     Other improvements to hearings practice and protocols have occurred since 2012, including updates to the Resource Consents Procedures Manual and the development of procedures by the Auckland Unitary Plan Independent Hearings Panel that recognise tikanga Māori and evidence written or spoken in te reo Māori.

 

Hearings Committee Policy

16.     The Hearings Committee Policy is an operational policy and sets out the sub-delegations of the Auckland Council Hearings Committee.  The policy provides an efficient, open and transparent framework for the decision-making processes for which the Hearings Committee is responsible.

17.     The policy currently makes no reference to te reo Māori, tikanga or sensitive information specifically although the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) is referred to under the section on related legislation or regulations.

18.     Some provisions for understanding te ao Māori exist in the training required for certifying hearings panel members. All RMA hearings panel members are required to have completed the Making Good Decisions certification.

19.     Since amalgamation, there have been significant improvement to hearings procedures. For example, the IMSB provides input to decision-making at the committee level. Training and accreditation of commissioners, and appointment of Māori commissioners, will provide better oversight of Māori issues in hearings. The ability of submitters to present information appropriately in te reo, and in a way that they can determine and location they feel comfortable with, will lead to better decisions and reduced potential for litigation in the future.

Issues

20.     Mana whenua are responsible for caring for all people living in their domain and matters relating to the physical and natural environment. Mana whenua responsibilities are expressed through tikanga and mātauranga Māori which includes te reo Māori, tikanga and guardianship of sensitive information on wāhi tapu.

21.     The council is required to recognise tikanga Māori where appropriate, and receive evidence written or spoken in Māori in RMA hearings processes. Similar provisions were introduced through recent changes to the Local Government Act 2002 for development contributions commissioners. However, this is not explicit in the Hearings Committee Policy. The council is also required to establish a hearings procedure that is appropriate and fair in the circumstances. Hearings are held in public unless permitted to do otherwise by section 42, which relates to the protection of sensitive information. This enables the council to make orders to restrict publication or communication of such information and/or exclude the public from relevant portions of the hearing.

22.     To support the Hearings Committee Policy, staff have developed draft hearings practice notes that describe in more detail how to incorporate te reo Māori and tikanga in hearings processes and how to handle sensitive information. The draft practice notes confirm that the chairperson will determine the procedure to be followed in consultation with hearings support staff. The practice notes also cover when it is appropriate to recognise tikanga Māori and other matters.

23.     Further guidance for staff can also be found in the Resource Consents Procedures Manual.

Recommended changes

24.     The key aim of the proposed policy amendment is to strengthen Māori participation in hearings processes. This is achieved by applying the relevant RMA provisions in the first instance. The policy also extends to other legislative provisions to take into account and provide for the rights and interests of Māori including the Local Government Act 2002. 

25.     Staff consider that, if approved, the updated policy and supporting practice notes fulfill the recommendations specified in the Treaty audit reports for 2012 and 2015.

 

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

26.     Local boards have not been consulted on the updated policy because the proposed changes are minor and will not affect the way they participate in hearings.

Māori impact statement

27.     The updated Hearings Committee Policy confirms that Māori are able to use te reo Māori and ensures that their tikanga will be respected through the hearings process.

28.     In addition, the council recognises that some information surrounding the values and associations of mana whenua may be sensitive, therefore procedures for the protection and management of sensitive information have been included in the draft hearings practice notes.

29.     A project closure group – Waharoa – has been formed and approved by the Finance and Performance Committee on 22 October 2015 (RES FIN/2015/100). Members of the Waharoa group include project business owners, Internal Audit, Te Waka Angamua and the IMSB secretariat. The Waharoa group is responsible for agreeing what actions and deliverables constitute closure of each 2015 Treaty Audit recommendation.

Implementation

30.     A set of hearings practice notes have been developed to support and implement the Hearings Committee Policy. The practice notes provide detailed guidance to staff and decision-makers about how to involve Māori more effectively and include methods for integrating Māori values and views into hearing processes. The draft practice notes are progressing through an internal approval process and will be finalised before the end of November 2015.

31.     If the Hearings Committee approves the revised policy it will be presented to the Waharoa group along with the final hearings practice notes, seeking their agreement that the Treaty audit recommendation to update the policy is complete and can be closed. The policy and practice notes will then be uploaded to council’s intranet.

32.     The changes proposed in this report are cost neutral and no additional budget is required. No increase in the number of requests is anticipated as a result of the recommended changes to the policy. It is expected that future requests for translation services and kaumatua (elder) will be consistent with current allocations and included in annual budgets.

33.     Te Waka Angamua will continue to support the hearings process to ensure te reo Māori translation services and tikanga advice are available from the appropriate mana whenua experts.

34.     There is no identified risk associated with the recommendation.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Revised Hearings Policy

73

     

Signatories

Authors

Roger  Jolley - Kaiwhakatere Principal  

Authorisers

John Duguid - General Manager - Plans and Places

 


Hearings Committee

17 November 2015

 

 














Hearings Committee

17 November 2015

 

 

District and Regional Plans Appeal Status Report at 31 October 2015

 

File No.: CP2015/22609

 

  

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

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 Māori Impact Statement covering matters related to each specific matter.

Implementation

7.       There are no implementation issues.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Region-wide Appeals Status Report at 31 October 2015.

89

     

Signatories

Authors

Warren Maclennan - Manager Planning - North/West

Authorisers

John Duguid - General Manager - Plans and Places

 


Hearings Committee

17 November 2015

 

 







     

 


Hearings Committee

17 November 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       Auckland Transport Notice of Requirement to designate land for road for the Medallion Drive link - Appeal

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 Auckland Transport's and the council's position in regards 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.

 

C2       Appeal relating to the Wiri Oil Services Limited Notice of Requirement for a Designation

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 with 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       Resource Consent Appeal Update: North Eastern Investments Limited v Auckland Council, 56 Fairview Avenue, Albany

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 expresses opinions about an appeal currently before the Environment Court and one on which without prejudice discussions will be undertaken.

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       Resource Consent Appeals: Status Report 17 November 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.