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

 

Date:

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

 

Tuesday, 27 November 2018

9.30am

Reception Lounge
Auckland Town Hall
301-305 Queen Street
Auckland

 

Komiti Whakarite Mahere /

Planning Committee

 

OPEN AGENDA

 

 

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Chairperson

Cr Chris Darby

 

Deputy Chairperson

Cr Richard Hills

 

Members

Cr Josephine Bartley

Cr Daniel Newman, JP

 

Cr Dr Cathy Casey

IMSB Member Liane Ngamane

 

Deputy Mayor Cr Bill Cashmore

Cr Greg Sayers

 

Cr Ross Clow

Cr Desley Simpson, JP

 

Cr Fa’anana Efeso Collins

Cr Sharon Stewart, QSM

 

Cr Linda Cooper, JP

Cr Sir John Walker, KNZM, CBE

 

Cr Alf Filipaina

Cr Wayne Walker

 

Cr Hon Christine Fletcher, QSO

Cr John Watson

 

Mayor Hon Phil Goff, CNZM, JP

Cr Paul Young

 

IMSB Member Hon Tau Henare

 

 

Cr Penny Hulse

 

 

Cr Mike Lee

 

 

(Quorum 11 members)

 

 

 

Kalinda  Gopal

Senior Governance Advisor

22 November 2018

 

Contact Telephone: (09) 367 2442

Email: kalinda.gopal@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

 

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Terms of Reference

 

Responsibilities

 

This committee guides the physical development and growth of Auckland through a focus on land use planning, housing and the appropriate provision of infrastructure and strategic projects associated with these activities. Key responsibilities include:

·         Relevant regional strategy and policy

·         Infrastructure strategy and policy

·         Unitary Plan

·         Spatial plans

·         Plan changes to operative plans

·         Housing policy and projects

·         Special Housing Areas

·         City centre development

·         Tamaki regeneration

·         Built heritage

·         Urban design

·         Environmental matters relating to the committee’s responsibilities

·         Acquisition of property relating to the committee’s responsibilities and within approved annual budgets

·         Initiatives of the following CCOs that have a significant impact upon the implementation of the Auckland Plan and other relevant plans, policies and strategies:

o   Panuku Development Auckland

o   Auckland Transport

o   Watercare Services Limited

o   Regional Facilities Auckland (stadia)

 

Powers

(i)      All powers necessary to perform the committee’s responsibilities, including:

(a)   approval of a submission to an external body

(b)   establishment of working parties or steering groups.

(ii)      The committee has the powers to perform the responsibilities of another committee, where it is necessary to make a decision prior to the next meeting of that other committee.

(iii)     The committee does not have:

(a)   the power to establish subcommittees

(b)   powers that the Governing Body cannot delegate or has retained to itself (section 2).

 

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.

 


Planning Committee

27 November 2018

 

 

ITEM   TABLE OF CONTENTS                                                                                         PAGE

1          Apologies                                                                                                                        7

2          Declaration of Interest                                                                                                   7

3          Confirmation of Minutes                                                                                               7

4          Petitions                                                                                                                          7  

5          Public Input                                                                                                                    7

5.1     Public Input - Panmure Community Action Group - Unlock Panmure and the potential sale of the Panmure Library and Community Hall site at Pilkington Road                                                                                                                       7

6          Local Board Input                                                                                                          8

6.1     Local Board Input - Maungakiekie-Tamaki Local Board - Rezoning of land in Tamaki                                                                                                                   8

7          Extraordinary Business                                                                                                8

8          Panuku programme update                                                                                        11

9          City Centre Masterplan 2040                                                                                      25

10        A snapshot of issues and opportunities to increase affordable housing for Aucklanders                                                                                                                 35

11        Panuku policy for determining housing mix                                                            99

12        Submission for Upper North Island Supply Chain Strategy Working Group (Covering report)                                                                                                       115

13        Auckland Plan 2050 update                                                                                      117

14        City Centre to Māngere Light Rail Update                                                              175

15        Amendments to the Roading Exchange Policy                                                     181

16        Proposed Plan Change 14  – Improving consistency of provisions in Chapter D Overlays, Chapter E Auckland-wide, Chapter J Definitions, Appendix 2, Appendix 17 and the Viewer of the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in part) – Volcanic Viewshafts and Height Sensitive Areas                                                                  195

17        Sites and Places of Significance to Mana Whenua – Tranche 1: Plan Changes to the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) and Auckland Council District Plan - Hauraki Gulf Islands Section 2018                                                                           253

18        Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) - Proposed Plan Change - Rezoning of Land - Tāmaki Regeneration Project Land Exchanges                                         261

19        National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management - Progressive Implementation Plan                                                                                                  353

20        Request to make Private Plan Change 6 (Auranga), operative in part                367

21        Summary of Planning Committee information memos and briefings - 27 November 2018                                                                                                                             401  

22        Consideration of Extraordinary Items 


 

PUBLIC EXCLUDED

23        Procedural Motion to Exclude the Public                                                               417

17        Sites and Places of Significance to Mana Whenua – Tranche 1: Plan Changes to the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) and Auckland Council District Plan - Hauraki Gulf Islands Section 2018

a.      List of Nominated Sites Proposed for Scheduling                                       417

b.      Map of Existing and Nominated Sites and Places of Significance to Mana Whenua                                                                                                              418

c.      Proposed Plan Change and Section 32 document                                      418

d.      Landowner and Local Board feedback on proposed plan changes          419

C1       Changes to Northcote High Level Project Plan - Confidential                             419  

 


1          Apologies

 

At the close of the agenda no apologies had 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.

 

 

3          Confirmation of Minutes

 

That the Planning Committee:

a)         confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Tuesday, 6 November 2018 as a true and correct record.

 

 

 

4          Petitions

 

At the close of the agenda no requests to present petitions had been received.

 

 

5          Public Input

 

Standing Order 7.7 provides for Public Input.  Applications to speak must be made to the Governance Advisor, in writing, no later than one (1) clear working day prior to the meeting and must include the subject matter.  The meeting Chairperson has the discretion to decline any application that does not meet the requirements of Standing Orders.  A maximum of thirty (30) minutes is allocated to the period for public input with five (5) minutes speaking time for each speaker.

 

 

5.1       Public Input - Panmure Community Action Group - Unlock Panmure and the potential sale of the Panmure Library and Community Hall site at Pilkington Road

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       Keith Sharp will speak to the committee on behalf of the Panmure Community Action Group about Panuku Development Auckland’s plans for Panmure (Unlock Panmure) and the potential for the sale of the Panmure Library and Community Hall site at Pilkington Road.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Planning Committee:

a)      receive the public input from Keith Sharp on behalf of the Panmure Community Action Group about Unlock Panmure and the potential for the sale of the Panmure Library and Community Hall site at Pilkington Road, and thank him for attending.

 

 

 

 

 

6          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 one (1) day’s 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.

 

 

6.1       Local Board Input - Maungakiekie-Tamaki Local Board - Rezoning of land in Tamaki

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board Chair, Chris Makoare will be present to address the committee on the rezoning of land in Tāmaki.

2.       This local board input relates to an item on this agenda: Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) - Proposed Plan Change - Rezoning of Land - Tāmaki Regeneration Project Land Exchanges.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Planning Committee:

a)      receive the local board input from Chris Makoare, Chair Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board regarding the rezoning of land in Tāmaki.

 

 

 

 

7          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.”


Planning Committee

27 November 2018

 

 

Panuku programme update

 

File No.: CP2018/20803

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To approve changes to the Panuku priority development programme.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       In March 2018 the Finance and Performance Committee requested Panuku to consider additions to the Transform, Unlock and Support programme and specifically to consider Manurewa, Takanini and Papakura, and report back to a workshop of the Planning Committee.

3.       A workshop was held on 31 July 2018 to which Local Board Chairs were invited. Panuku set out the review process, criteria and conclusions. While there was robust discussion of the three locations, there was broad acceptance of the review methodology and conclusion, to not include Manurewa, Takanini and Papakura as Unlock locations in the Panuku programme at this time. These centres do not have sufficient readily developable surplus council sites. They are not development priorities for years 1-10 in the Auckland Plan development strategy. The market demand and interest are limited and they are not government priority areas.  Panuku will however support development opportunities in these locations through the support and service property optimisation lens.

4.       At the workshop in July, Panuku was also asked to review the development opportunities in the Puketapapa Local Board area, acknowledging the government investment in the area and the proposed city to Mangere light rail. Panuku will meet with the Puketapapa Local Board once the analysis has been completed.

5.       This report seeks some further changes to the programme.

6.       Tāmaki has been included as a “Transform” location in the Panuku programme. Panuku is not leading the transformation of Tāmaki, which is led by Tāmaki Regeneration Company (TRC) together with Homes, Land and Communities (HLC). Removing “Transform Tāmaki” as a label from the Panuku programme is proposed to provide a clearer understanding of the situation and reduce confusion. The Development Programme Office (DPO) is now providing input and oversite for this project on behalf of Auckland Council.

7.       The Planning Committee has approved the High-Level Project Plan for Unlock Panmure where Panuku is leading the redevelopment programme that could deliver 1,000 homes over 10 years.  While Panmure is in the Tāmaki regeneration area, it has been agreed with TRC that we take the lead in Panmure, working in partnership. We are seeking a change to the Unlock Panmure project boundary to include Bill McKinlay Park as this would enable it to be considered as part of the integrated planning of local sports and recreation network when assessing future redevelopment options and deliver a more integrated development outcome. We are also seeking replacement of a Planning Committee resolution to provide assurance to the community that current investigation for the redevelopment of 7-13 Pilkington Road, Panmure does not presuppose its sale. Both changes are supported by the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board and Ward Councillor.  

8.       In March 2016 the Auckland Development Committee endorsed Panuku as the lead agency for council in Northcote and the Northcote High Level Project Plan and granted authority to Panuku to transact a range of properties. Following further planning, Panuku is now seeking changes to the project boundary to be able to integrate two areas of green space and several private properties within the project scope, to enable comprehensive and integrated redevelopment of the town centre consistent with the outcomes of the Northcote High Level Project Plan for urban regeneration, renewal and housing. The proposals are contained in a separate confidential report.

9.       This report recommends that Pukekohe is changed from a “support” location to an unlock location within the Panuku Programme. Pukekohe is a rural node in the Auckland Plan Development Strategy and is identified to accommodate significant growth. It is within an area of focus of central government and there is strong market interest. Council owns a large number of sites in Pukekohe, a number of which are surplus and a strategic approach is required to ensure that the outcomes are optimised for this market town.  If approved, a High-Level Project Plan will be developed for endorsement by the Planning Committee by June 2019. The Franklin Local Board supports this recommendation.

10.     Auckland Council has approved the Panuku budget and reinvestment programme for three years. Auckland Council may wish to review programme priorities as part of the Long-term Plan review in 2020/21. As per earlier decisions, as an Unlock, the proceeds from site sales within the Pukekohe High-Level Project Plan will be included within the reinvestment programme.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Planning Committee:

a)      approve removal of “Transform Tāmaki” from the programme noting that Panuku is not leading the work in Tāmaki but is leading Unlock Panmure

b)      approve changes to the Unlock Panmure boundary, specifically the inclusion of Auckland Council properties at 533 Ellerslie-Panmure Highway, Mt Wellington and 3-35 Ireland Road, Panmure with combined land area of 2.231ha into the Unlock Panmure High Level Project Plan.  

c)      Revoke clause e) of the following decision carried at its 6 March 2018 meeting:

Resolution number PLA/2018/21

That the Planning Committee:

e)         authorise the redevelopment of 7-13 Pilkington Road, Panmure as a mixed-use   development with proceed of sale being ring-fenced to be reinvested into a new community facility in Panmure, subject to agreement with Auckland Council Community Facilities department and Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board (Lot 1 DP 176192, Lots 457-460 DP 42010, Lots 1-3 DP 52083, NA33A/884, NA8B/972, NA33A/840, NA13C/818, NA4C/115, NA100C/965).

and replace with

e)         authorise the investigation into the redevelopment of 7-13 Pilkington Road, Panmure as a mixed-use development, subject to agreement with Auckland Council Community Facilities department and Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board (Lot 1 DP 176192, Lots 457-460 DP 42010, Lots 1-3 DP 52083, NA33A/884, NA8B/972, NA33A/840, NA13C/818, NA4C/115, NA100C/965).

d)      approve the addition of Unlock Pukekohe to the Panuku programme noting that a High-Level Project Plan will be prepared for Planning Committee endorsement in June 2019.

 

Horopaki / Context

11.     The Panuku priority development programme was established in 2015. There have been some changes since then with the addition of Avondale and Panmure as Unlock locations.

12.     A resolution of the Finance and Performance Committee in March 2018 requested that Panuku consider additional centres and areas for inclusion in the overall Transform, Unlock and Support Programme, including consideration of Manurewa, Takanini and Papakura, and that the total work be brought to the Planning Committee workshop before 1 August 2018 (FIN/2018/40).

13.     Panuku presented the results of the review process to a workshop of the Planning Committee on 31 July 2018. The review process involved:

·   A Panuku Board strategy discussion of programme scope and challenges

·   Confirmation of current programme and resource requirements through completion of Programme Business Cases for the priority locations and analysis of existing commitments and new targets, regarding service property optimisation, Auckland Transport property development and the corporate accommodation disposals programme

·   Engagement with Government to increase clarity on further opportunities to partner.

·   Engagement with Council officers on implementation of the Auckland Plan Development Strategy including place-based priorities.

·   Review of the development opportunities in Manurewa, Takanini and Papakura.

·   Review of further strategic opportunities within the existing programme (i.e. movement of locations within categories Transform, Unlock, Support).

14.     In undertaking the review Panuku recognised the changes since 2015 and the new set of drivers including:

·   The Government growth agenda and Auckland Housing Programme, new Ministry of Housing and Urban Development and proposed national Urban Development Agency

·   Transport investment decisions, ATAP and LRT proposals

·   Adoption of the Auckland Plan 2050, approval of the Auckland Council Long-term Plan 2018-2028, Unitary Plan made operative

·   Panuku has a full work programme and three-year budget confirmed, based on reinvestment. The planning for the Transform and Unlock locations has been completed with the approval of the High-level Project Plans by the Planning and Finance and Performance Committees and we are now in implementation phase.

15.     The review process did not include a detailed urban locations analysis as prepared by Council in 2015, which involved analysis and comparison of all town centres across Auckland against agreed criteria, as well as significant local board, mana whenua and councillor engagement. Such a process would raise unrealistic expectations. Moreover, the recently adopted Auckland Plan 2050 including the Development Strategy updates the council view on development priorities.

16.     The criteria for considering new locations is set out below:

·   The location is a government priority (years 1-10)

·   Alignment with Auckland Plan Development Strategy (years 1-10)

·   Council land holdings of a sufficient scale to make an impact

·   Crown funding is available (for acquisitions, amenity or place-making), if limited Council land for redevelopment

·   Demonstrable market interest and demand.

·   Aligned with strategic public transport and planned investment.

·   Potential to add value, beyond current approaches.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

Manurewa, Takanini, Papakura

17.     We have undertaken a high level of analysis of the council sites and development opportunities in Manurewa, Takanini and Papakura. The summary of the analysis is provided in the table below and was discussed by the Planning Committee at a workshop on 31 July 2018:


 

 

Manurewa

Takanini

Papakura

Government priority (1-10 yrs)

No

No

No

Alignment with revised Auckland Plan Development Strategy (yrs 1-10)

No

(11-30 yrs)

No

(20-30 yrs)

No

(11-30yrs)

Council land available for redevelopment of sufficient scale to make an impact

Possible

No

No

Crown funding available for acquisitions, amenity upgrades & place making (if limited council land)

No

No

No

Alignment with strategic public transport investment/s

Yes

Yes

Yes

Demonstrable market interest and demand

Some

Some

No

Potential for Panuku to add value beyond current approaches (Including initiatives led by others in the council family)

No

No

No

 

18.     It is not recommended to add Manurewa, Takanini and Papakura to the Unlock programme because

·   They are not government priorities in years 1-10

·   They do not have sufficient readily developable surplus council sites

·   The locations are within the Auckland Plan development strategy but not in years 1-10 for growth

·   The market demand and interest is limited

·   Panuku can provide assistance via the support category and optimisation processes, including working with Auckland Transport on development of their service sites

·   Panuku cannot provide added value beyond this.

19.     Panuku has agreed to support development outcomes as follows:

Manurewa:

·   Investigate the redevelopment of the train station site as a support category, working with Auckland Transport

·   Investigate the optimisation opportunities and workshop these with the local board

Takanini

·   Investigate developable sites 9 Popes Close and 84 Cosgrove as a support category

Papakura

·   Investigate the redevelopment of the train station site as a support category, working with Auckland Transport

·   Investigate developable sites as a support category

·   Protect the reserve including historic restrooms and time capsule at 35 Coles Crescent through creation of a new title prior to disposal of the remaining site

·   Investigate the optimisation opportunities and workshop these with the local board

·   Work with the commercial group to progress opportunities where possible.

Unlock Panmure and Transform Tāmaki

20.     Since 2015 Tāmaki has been included as a “Transform” location in the Panuku programme. Panuku is not leading the transformation of Tāmaki, which is led by Tāmaki Regeneration Company (TRC) working together with Homes, Land and Communities (HLC). Removing “Transform Tāmaki” as a label from the Panuku programme is proposed to provide a clearer understanding of the situation and reduce confusion. Auckland Council’s role in Tāmaki is coordinated by the Development Programme Office and Panuku will continue to engage with TRC and HLC on development programmes.

21.     The Unlock Panmure High Level Project Plan (HLPP) was endorsed by the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board on 27 February 2018 (MT/2018/3) and approved by the Planning Committee on 6 March 2018 (PLA/2018/21) as a new priority location with Panuku as lead delivery agency. The approved project area covers an approximate 43ha footprint including the town centre mainstreet and commercial area to the west of the Panmure Train Station. While in the Tamaki regeneration area, it has been agreed that Panuku lead the redevelopment of Panmure, in partnership with TRC.

22.     In May 2018, Panuku completed the Unlock Panmure programme business case working in collaboration with Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board and relevant council departments. The proposed FY 2019-2021 work programme received positive support from the local board and was formally endorsed on 22 May 2018 (MT/2018/55).

23.     In addition to the endorsed FY 2019-2021 work programme, Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board requested Panuku to investigate the inclusion of Bill McKinlay Park at 533 Ellerslie-Panmure Highway, Mt Wellington and 3-35 Ireland Road, Panmure into the Unlock Panmure project area. Both sites are owned by Auckland Council and have a combined land area of 2.231ha.

24.     Panuku worked closely with Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board, Bill McKinlay Park Trust, and relevant council departments and concluded the inclusion of Bill McKinlay Park into the Unlock Panmure project area can deliver the following regeneration benefits:

·   Enable Bill McKinlay Park to be considered as part of the integrated planning of local sports and recreation network when assessing future redevelopment to better match growth; and

·   Bill McKinlay Park has intention to redevelop existing facilities including the club room and spectator stand in the immediate years and joint development planning with adjoining land at 535 Ellerslie-Panmure Highway will deliver a more integrated development outcome.

25.     Panuku seek to recommend the inclusion of Bill McKinlay Park into the Unlock Panmure project area as illustrated in Figure 1 because it has clear strategic alignment with the regeneration objectives for Unlock Panmure.

Planning Committee resolution in relation to 7-13 Pilkington Road, Panmure

26.     On 6 March 2018, the Planning Committee endorsed the Unlock Panmure HLPP, including the disposal of properties within the project area to contribute strategically and financially to the plan’s urban regeneration objectives. Clause e) of the resolution relates to the redevelopment of the library, community hall, and the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board office. Councillor Bartley has subsequently advised that the wording of this clause has caused concern within the Panmure community, specifically that the resolution appears to presuppose the sale of these community facilities.

27.     The site at 7-13 Pilkington Road, Panmure has not been presented to the Finance and Performance Committee for disposal as part of the Unlock Panmure HLPP. As part of the Unlock Panmure FY2019 work programme, Panuku is currently working with the Local Board, Auckland Council Community Facilities, and the Panmure community to investigate a range of options to deliver new or improved community facilities that best serve the current and future community.

28.     The Local Board supports and worked alongside Panuku in the development of the Unlock Panmure HLPP. The Local Board is pleased to see the planned redevelopment to improve local community facilities and welcomes the opportunity to revitalise the Panmure town centre. A letter from Chris Makoare, Chair of the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board is attached in Attachment 1.


 

29.     Councillor Bartley and the Local Board acknowledges the community concerns in relation to the resolution wording and seeks clarification from the Planning Committee through a revocation and replacement resolution that sale of the site has not been predetermined. Panuku is committed to working alongside Councillor Bartley and the Local Board to provide assurance to the Panmure community, and seek to recommend the following amendments to the Planning Committee resolution (PLA/2018/21):

30.     Resolution e) below

e)    authorise the redevelopment of 7-13 Pilkington Road, Panmure as a mixed-use   development with proceed of sale being ring-fenced to be reinvested into a new community facility in Panmure, subject to agreement with Auckland Council Community Facilities department and Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board (Lot 1 DP 176192, Lots 457-460 DP 42010, Lots 1-3 DP 52083, NA33A/884, NA8B/972, NA33A/840, NA13C/818, NA4C/115, NA100C/965).

is replaced with

e)    authorise the investigation into the redevelopment of 7-13 Pilkington Road, Panmure as a mixed-use development, subject to agreement with Auckland Council Community Facilities department and Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board (Lot 1 DP 176192, Lots 457-460 DP 42010, Lots 1-3 DP 52083, NA33A/884, NA8B/972, NA33A/840, NA13C/818, NA4C/115, NA100C/965).

Local Board Views

31.     The Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board supports the inclusion of Bill McKinlay Park into the Unlock Panmure project area and gave formal endorsement as part of the Unlock Panmure HLPP on 27 February 2018 (MT/2018/3).  

32.     The Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board supports, and worked alongside Panuku, in the development of the Unlock Panmure HLPP. The Local Board notes that Community Facilities and Panuku have within the FY19 work programme to undertake investigation the facilities at 7-13 Pilkington Road to assess their suitability for current and future service requirements. The Local Board is pleased to see the planned redevelopment of local community facilities and welcomes the opportunity to revitalise the Panmure town centre.

33.     The Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board made the following resolution on 22 May 2018 (MT/2018/77):

I. endorse planning and investigation for the redevelopment of the site at 7-13 Pilkington Road, Panmure but continues to reserve its position on the issue of disposal of any local community facility in Panmure until plans for redevelopment of the Community Hub space have been completed;

II.     Note that disposal of local community facilities are currently not on the agenda but wishes to make its position known as this is an issue that is causing concern in the community;

III.    notes its commitment to working with Panuku and the community to maintain public trust and confidence in the Unlock Panmure project and ensure that community outcomes are determined through good community engagement.

34.     The Local Board supports Panuku in seeking the replacement of the resolution wording to provide assurance to the Panmure community that decisions in relation to the sale of 7-13 Pilkington Road, Panmure will be made post investigation with good engagement with the Local Board and local community.

Unlock Northcote

35.     In March 2016 the Auckland Development Committee endorsed Panuku as the lead agency for council in Northcote and the Northcote High Level Project Plan and granted authority to Panuku to transact a range of properties (AUC/2016/23).

36.     Over the subsequent two and a half years we have continued to work with HLC, and to refine the planning and design for the town centre, accumulate sites/leases and identify private partners who may be interested in the comprehensive redevelopment of Northcote.

37.     Following further planning, Panuku is now seeking changes to the project boundary to be able to integrate two areas of green space and several private properties within the project scope, to enable comprehensive and integrated redevelopment of the town centre consistent with the outcomes of the Northcote High Level Project Plan for urban regeneration, renewal and housing. The proposals are contained in a report on the confidential agenda.

Unlock Pukekohe

38.     Pukekohe is a rural node and significant growth area in the Auckland Plan. Approximately 1700 Ha of land for future urban development has been identified around Pukekohe with potential to accommodate 14,000 dwellings.

39.     Pukekhoe is currently a support location. It is proposed that is moved to the unlock category because it meets the criteria.  There are many council owned sites of reasonable scale or clusters that can be aggregated, for commercial and residential development, some of which have already been approved for sale. In an initial analysis, around 30 properties have been identified with good or somewhat good potential for divestment/development/disposal.  This excludes the Council building which is planned for disposal in the current financial year. There are also four Haumaru sites in the area as well as optimisation opportunities in relation to service sites.

40.     The Comprehensive Parking Management Plan is nearing completion by Auckland Transport and we will soon have a view as to the transport and parking requirements.

41.     There is active developer and investor interest in the council-owned sites.

42.     The wider area is of significant interest to the Crown and is part of the Hamilton to Auckland Corridor study. Electrification of the rail line is anticipated in next five years.

43.     Pukekohe is already a vibrant, busy town centre. Development in the town centre will increase the business vitality and support the provision of a full range of services for the surrounding rural area.

44.     To unlock value, we will need a cohesive and compelling story. As an Unlock, a High-Level Project Plan (HLPP) will be developed. This process will build Local Board and community support for the commercial strategy and disposal of sites.

45.     The ward councillor and the Franklin Local Board support the inclusion of Pukekohe in the Unlock programme.

Balancing strategic and commercial outcomes

46.     Panuku is charged with balancing commercial and strategic objectives. At the workshop in July, Panuku was asked to set out the difference between the categories (Transform, Unlock, Support) in terms of the strategic and commercial outcomes sought.

47.     The purpose of the categorisation of priority locations into Transform, Unlock, Support in 2015 was to acknowledge that the scale of opportunity varies across the programme and that the same amount of staff resource and effort cannot be taken in each location (due to resource limitations), nor is it necessary.

48.     In Transform locations we are typically looking for a wider variety of strategic outcomes over the longer term, working in partnership with others. Panuku will invest more in terms of time and funding into strategic outcomes. For example, to facilitate a variety of housing outcomes including affordable housing, quality and sustainable design, training or employment opportunities as part of regeneration projects, improved amenity, walking, cycling and recreational opportunities, demonstration projects, community engagement and placemaking.

49.     The Unlock locations are quite varied in terms of the scale of opportunity and the phase of development.  Typically, the level of investment in public good is likely to be lower in Unlock locations but it does depend on the scale of opportunity, developable sites, market challenges, potential to partner, etc.

50.     For Support projects where we are still seeking to control the development outcomes, such as the intensity and design quality of housing and the public interface, we are typically looking for a clear commercial return.

51.     We have established minimums across the programme. For example, quality design and appropriate density, positive impact on public realm, partnerships, Homestar 6, housing mix suitable to the location, working with partners, proactive engagement with Local Boards and Mana Whenua.

52.     Ultimately, we need to be able to attract private sector, third sector, Iwi or Crown as development partners. We need to be open to innovation which requires flexibility to take risks and to find the right balance of commercial and strategic outcomes on sites and across town centres and the portfolio.

53.     All investment is signalled in the endorsed High-Level Project Plans and subject to prioritisation and programme business cases.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe /
Local impacts and local board views

54.     While many town centres need revitalisation and investment and while many have some development opportunities, there is a need to prioritise. The Panuku programme has been endorsed by Auckland Council and is consistent with the development strategy in the Auckland Plan 2050.

55.     A letter was sent to Local Boards about the review process requested by the Finance and Performance Committee. Local Board Chairs were invited to the 31 July Planning Committee Workshop. Panuku also presented on the review process, criteria and conclusions to the Local Board Cluster meetings held on 20 and 27 August 2018. 

56.     Panuku met separately with Manurewa and Papakura Local Boards to discuss the review process and conclusions in detail. Agreement has been reached on the way that Panuku can support development of the council-surplus sites or service sites in the Manurewa and Papakura Local Boards areas, through the support or optimisation lens.

57.     The Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board is supportive of the proposed changes to the Unlock Panmure project boundary.

58.     The Franklin Local Board supports the inclusion of Pukekohe as an unlock location.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

59.     Panuku meets regularly with Mana Whenua and has presented the Panuku programme to the Panuku Mana Whenua Governance Forum. Mana Whenua were informed of the proposed changes to the programme at the Mana Whenua Governance Forum on 6 November 2018. 

60.     Mana Whenua will be engaged in the development of the High-Level Project Plan for Unlock Pukekohe. 

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

61.     Panuku will work with the Manurewa and Papakura Local Boards on specific development and optimisation opportunities. These costs are covered by site sales.

62.     The proposed changes to project boundaries will enable more efficient and integrated planning and may unlock further redevelopment opportunities. Any financial implications will be managed within the programme budgets.

63.     The preparation of a High-Level Project Plan for Unlock Pukekohe will be undertaken within the current budget. As per earlier decisions, the reinvestment of the proceeds from the sale of sites within the Unlock Pukekohe HLPP is assumed.  Given the existing commitments and approved budget we will seek to work within the agreed budget envelope.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

64.     There are no significant risks associated with these proposals.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

65.     Panuku will continue to lead the urban redevelopment of town centres according to the agreed programmes. We will continue to work closely with the Local Boards, Mana Whenua, the council family and partners to deliver sustainable urban redevelopment.

66.     The review of development opportunities in the Puketapapa Local Board area will be undertaken in the next quarter. This work and any other proposed changes to the programme will be brought to a future meeting/s of the Planning Committee.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Letter relating to Unlock Panmure from Maungakiekie-Tamaki Local Board

21

      

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Brenna Waghorn - Manager Strategic Planning, Panuku Development Auckland

Authorisers

David Rankin - Chief Operating Officer, Panuku Development Auckland

Jim Quinn - Chief of Strategy

 


Planning Committee

27 November 2018

 

 

 

 

 


Planning Committee

27 November 2018

 

 

City Centre Masterplan 2040

 

File No.: CP2018/10830

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To approve the proposed process for updating and digitising the 2012 Auckland City Centre Masterplan (the Masterplan) and Waterfront Plan.

2.       To approve development of new Masterplan content for 2019:

i)     Māori Outcomes

ii)    Grafton Gully Boulevard

iii)    Access for Everyone

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

3.       The Masterplan was published in 2012 and set out a compelling vision for the heart of Auckland. Since then, it has shaped the development of the city centre, with strong support and buy-in from the public and private sectors as well as the general public. A resolution passed by Planning Committee in September 2017 reiterated support for this vision and the process for delivering it.

4.       We are proposing to update the City Centre Masterplan to a digital format. The intentions are to:

·   Update the document to reflect changes that have occurred since 2012

·   Deliver a city centre vision for 2040

·   Align the Masterplan with the concurrent update and digitisation of the Waterfront Plan.

5.       A digital Masterplan provides an opportunity to replace the existing six-year refresh period with a programme of rolling reviews. This would retain the core vision for the city centre while allowing updates to the Masterplan’s content to be made more efficiently, frequently and cost-effectively than at present.

6.       For the current round of updates, Council is proposing to produce content on:

i)     Māori Outcomes

ii)    Grafton Gully Boulevard

iii)    Access for Everyone

7.       These have been identified as necessary because they coordinate existing and future programmes from the Auckland Council family and central government, delivering multiple benefits in support of the Masterplan vision.

8.       Access for Everyone responds to the Planning Committee’s March 2017 resolution regarding the implications of light rail on the design of Queen Street. Council is proposing Access for Everyone as a way to coordinate existing workstreams from Auckland Transport and other organisations. Access for Everyone is an innovative new approach for Auckland and is potentially transformative.


 

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Planning Committee:

a)      agree the proposed process for updating the Auckland City Centre Masterplan 2040

i)        Digitisation in time to inform Auckland Council’s2021 – 2031 Long Term Plan.

ii)       The use of rolling updates rather than six-yearly updates

b)      agree on the development of the following new content for public consultation and committee approval by July 2019:

i)        Māori Outcomes

ii)       Grafton Gully Boulevard

iii)      Access for Everyone

 

 

Horopaki / Context

9.       At the 5 September 2017 meeting, the Planning Committee approved the updated implementation of the City Centre Masterplan and Waterfront Plan to incorporate:

i)        Downtown – in particular a pedestrian-friendly Quay Street.

ii)       Waterfront corridor – public realm enhancements in the Viaduct

iii)      Midtown streets – proposed coordinated delivery of two great streets

iv)      Central wharves – proposed staged delivery of additional waterfront public space.

v)      Wynyard Quarter – realignment of Wynyard Point Open space (requires future plan change).

10.     These programmes are now underway. The Downtown programme is progressing at pace, with multiple workstreams underway and at varying stages of design, with the Quay Street seawall the most advanced of these workstreams.

11.     For the Midtown area, there are two major East-West corridor projects (Wellesley Street bus improvements and Victoria Street Linear Park) which will be coordinated around the delivery of two major North-South projects (City Rail Link (CRL) and Light Rail). The working title for this programme is Two Great Streets.

City centre changes

2012 - 2017

10.     Auckland city centre has transformed significantly since the Masterplan was published in 2012. It has developed over the past six years and now offers a unique proposition for New Zealand. Auckland’s package of a high-quality, high-density urban environment has exceeded all expectations and reflects the underlying strength of the City Centre Masterplan. Progress between 2012 and 2017 included the following:

·   Construction has started on City Rail Link; this is the single most important transport project in Auckland. It will increase the two hour morning peak rail capacity by 150% and means that no part of the city centre is more than 15 minutes’ walk from a railway station.

·   The city centre is an increasingly popular place to live. In 2012, its population of 27,000 was expected to reach 45,000 by 2032. This figure was in fact reached in 2017; a full 15 years ahead of predictions.

·   The growth in residential population has taken place alongside business growth. Over 10,000 jobs have been created in the city centre since 2012 and more than 100,000 people now work there. This drove down office vacancy rates to 2.4% in March 2017 (for Grade A properties) – this is a record low.

·   In the Wynyard Quarter former industrial land has been transformed, with high-quality public realm. This has stimulated development of new Grade-A office space (e.g. ASB headquarters), complemented by adaptive re-use of old buildings. This has contributed to Wynyard’s status as the fastest-growing employment centre in Auckland.

·   Significantly, the growth of Auckland city centre has also taken place against a flatlining in private car traffic. More people now live in the city centre than travel in by car. Public transport and active travel have accounted for all increases in trips and since 2017 constitute the majority of peak trips into the city centre.

·   The opening of Te Ara i Whiti, the lightpath in 2013 marked a significant increase in ambition and investment for cycling as a mainstream mode of transport. High-quality protected cycle infrastructure has subsequently been delivered along Quay Street, Beach Road and Nelson Street.

·   The public realm in central Auckland has had to be rethought in order to enable it to work harder. Once-radical streetscape interventions have now entered the mainstream. Shared space treatments have transformed streets like O’Connell Street into prestigious city centre addresses and inspired confidence in the overall quality of Auckland as a place to live, work and visit.

2017 - present

12.     Auckland’s rate of transformation has only continued to increase. Since mid-2017, the following key changes have and influencing factors have included:

·   In June 2017, Team New Zealand won the 35th America’s Cup in Bermuda, bringing the 36th America’s Cup to Auckland in 2021. This date provides a strong impetus to complete improvements to the city centre and waterfront prior to the start of the contest. It is a catalyst for progressing the Downtown programme but will also restrict the amount of time available for construction work.

·   In October 2017, a new government was formed, with a strong commitment to public transport investment, active travel and a Regional Fuel Tax. The NZ Transport Agency was tasked with the business cases of two new Light Rapid Transit (LRT) lines. Completion of these LRT lines from the City Centre to Mangere and north west Auckland will provide capacity of around 10,000 people will allow 10,000 more people per hour into the city centre during the morning peak.

·   In October 2017, Mayor of Auckland Phil Goff signed, along with 14 other Mayors of leading world cities, the C40 Fossil-Fuel-Free Streets declaration. By 2025 Auckland has pledged to procure only zero emissions buses and by 2030 to deliver a major area of the city (the city centre) to be open to zero-emission transport only. 

·   In December 2017, Ports of Auckland Limited released a 30 year Master Plan. This identifies the need for the port to invest to continue operating over the medium term while Council considers the effects of the port’s possible relocation from the Auckland city centre.

·   The Planning Committee noted that the general direction of the Ports Master Plan aligns with the City Centre Masterplan, the Waterfront Plan and Central Wharves Strategy. It is also consistent with the recommendations of the Ports Future Study. The committee recommended continued collaboration between Ports and Council on design and delivery of proposals. Planning for alternative uses of the port site may be required in future; however this is not within the scope of this Masterplan update.

·   In April 2018 the Auckland Transport Alignment Project was published by a group encompassing local and central government agencies. This is a 10 year, fully-funded $28bn plan for transport investment in Auckland. This confirmed substantial public transport investment in support of the city centre.

·   In June 2018, the refreshed Auckland Plan was published. This provides a vision for Auckland to the year 2050. The Masterplan needs to be consistent with the Auckland Plan.

·   In July 2018, Auckland Council voted to future-proof City Rail Link to accommodate nine car trains. Along with signalling improvements, City Rail link has the potential to accommodate 24 trains per hour per direction. With nine car trains, an increase in peak-hour passenger capacity of more than 370% above existing levels is possible.

·   In August 2018, the New Zealand government committed $67m to build Skypath. This will, for the first time in Auckland’s history, provide a direct fixed link from the North Shore to the city centre for foot and cycle users, further increasing connectivity.

·   In October 2018, Stats NZ estimated the city centre’s residential population to have reached 57,000. This is higher than the current population of Nelson. At the prevailing growth rate of 8%, the city centre residential population will double in eight years.

·   In November 2018 it was announced that New Zealand had won its bid to host the 2021 Women’s Rugby World Cup. The matches will take place in Auckland and Northland.

·   Private sector investment in Auckland city centre is running at unprecedented levels, at around $1bn per year. This investment will be transformative for the city centre’ accessibility, liveability and competitiveness on the world stage.

·   The rate and scale of construction is also potentially disruptive and will need to be addressed systematically. 

City Centre Masterplan and Waterfront Plan: Digitisation and Update

13.     We are proposing to update the City Centre Masterplan and Waterfront Plan into a digital format consistent with the Auckland Plan, to allow for regular updates. The overall outcome will be a Masterplan that allows for rolling updates while retaining the eight moves and delivering the city centre vision.

14.     This will be a change from the existing Masterplan, which is designed as a printed document and is separate from the Waterfront Plan. All content produced for the Masterplan from 2018 onwards will be specifically designed for a digital format. This will have the following advantages:

·   Aligned with and linked to the Auckland Plan and other plans hosted on the Auckland Council website

·   Easier to update - allows for rolling updates

·   Easier to access; usable on mobile devices and compliant with web and accessible standards

·   Potential to include interactive maps and images

·   Cost-effective to print and produce.

15.     A digital Masterplan provides an opportunity to change the mechanics of how it is kept up to date. Rather than major rewriting of the plan every six years, a work programme of rolling reviews will be established. This will allow Council to focus resources specifically on components of the Masterplan that need to respond to external changes.

16.     Masterplan content updates will all be informed by and supportive of the eight transformational Moves that sit at the heart of the Masterplan. These are shown below:

17.     Rolling updates would inform Long Term Plan funding and prioritisation decisions, providing a clearer link between city centre projects and funding. The digitisation would need to be complete by mid-2020 in order to inform the Auckland Council 2021 - 2031 Long-term Plan (LTP) update.

18.     This is consistent with progress since 2017.  Since March 2017, Masterplan Refresh work has focused on coordinating various work programmes for the city (e.g. seawall rebuilding, ferry infrastructure, Quay Street public realm) into larger, cohesive work programmes that are both implementable and deliverable.

19.     The overall outcome will be a Masterplan that allows for rolling updates while retaining the eight moves and delivering the city centre vision.

New City Centre Masterplan content

20.     In the meantime, the current key focus areas for rolling updates are listed below:

i)    Māori Outcomes

ii)   Grafton Gully Boulevard

iii)  Access for Everyone

                                               

21.     These have been identified as necessary because they coordinate existing and future programmes from the Auckland Council family and central government. Each one responds to changes since 2012 and is able to coordinate a broad number of outcomes to deliver the Masterplan vision. These include the regionally-significant Light Rail Transit, Queen Street pedestrian prioritisation and the Auckland Climate Action Plan.   

i)          MĀORI OUTCOMES

22.     The 2012 Masterplan does not currently include specific or tangible projects or visions for Māori outcomes. A thriving Māori identity is Auckland’s point of difference in the world and there is a clear policy direction for this in the recently-refreshed Auckland Plan.

23.     As the world’s largest Māori city, Māori design has helped to shape Auckland’s sense of place and of who we are, bringing benefits for all Aucklanders. Since 2012 prizewinning examples of Māori design have been created in Auckland city centre. Auckland Art Gallery Toi o Tāmaki won the prestigious World Architecture Festival Building of the Year award in 2013.

24.     Identity is about more than visual art. It is requires space for cultural practices to function day to day. There is now an opportunity to step up from Māori design to city-wide Māori outcomes. How does Te Ao Māori; the Māori world, flourish as an integral and integrated part of Auckland city centre? How do we recognise the connections that Mana Whenua have with land and water? How can this be reflected in the everyday built form?


 

25.     This is the work being undertaken by the Culture and Identity Pou (work group) of the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum, with representation from 19 iwi. This will contain a vision statement for the city centre and waterfront. It will develop strategies and principles set out as a physical plan that can be included into the Masterplan. These strategic principles will underpin projects delivered in the city centre in support of the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum vision.

26.     Council is currently helping the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum to produce their Outcomes Plan. Once this is complete, Council and the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum will negotiate what content from their Outcomes Plan is included in the Masterplan

ii)         GRAFTON GULLY BOULEVARD

27.     The 2012 Masterplan contains a vision for capping Grafton Gully, linking the Universities with Auckland Domain. While this concept has not progressed far to date, there is still an urgent need to address severance to the east, as per Move 7 of the City Centre Masterplan (City to the Villages).

28.     Council is working with a team of local landowners and stakeholders, including Auckland Transport, the New Zealand Transport Agency and Ngāti Whātua Orākei. The aim is to develop a more affordable ground-based approach at a different location, slightly further north, broadly following the Stanley Street Corridor from Parnell Rise to Tamaki Drive.

29.     The area surrounding Stanley Street/The Strand is generally a low-quality, low-value environment, despite being situated between the city centre and Parnell. The vision is to integrate the many workstreams for the area and surroundings into a coherent vision. These include the Ports Master Plan; the Parnell Plan, regional rail network planning and a private sector proposal to reopen the Albert Park tunnels. There is an opportunity to deliver considerable transport improvements, land value capture, housing and employment space.

30.     This project will examine new design solutions that are more feasible to fund and build. The outcome would be that this connection is able to be provided sooner and cheaper, enabling access to the Port and the Eastern Suburbs; in, out and around the city. It would also improve road safety and deliver better foot, cycle and public transport connections. Completed successfully, it would transform the performance, connectivity and productivity of the entire eastern edge of the city.

iii)        ACCESS FOR EVERYONE

31.     The pedestrianisation of Queen Street was identified as an opportunity in the 2012 Masterplan, where it received the strongest public support of all proposals. Since this time, the issue has been much debated and there is urgency for change.

32.     In order to address Auckland’s future transport needs, plans for Light Rail Transit (LRT) from the city centre to Māngere are under development. The city centre section is proposed to run along the length of Queen Street. The designs are likely to include substantial reallocation of space from vehicular traffic to pedestrians, thus integrating the public transport network with the walking network.

33.     This proposed reconfiguration of Queen Street for construction and operation of light rail will transform movement patterns, not just in Queen Street, but in adjoining streets. This in turn will have knock-on effects on east-west traffic movement across the Queen Street valley, and throughout Auckland city centre. This presents the challenge of maintaining access to and around the city centre with less space available. 

34.     There is an opportunity to anticipate the effects of this disruption, identify how it can be mitigated to allow LRT construction and align it with existing and emerging plans, priorities and strategies for Auckland city centre. The opportunity exists to turn a problem into an exciting possibility.

35.     Auckland Council is working with stakeholders in Auckland Transport and other organisations to develop a new city centre access concept called Access for Everyone. It is based on examples used successfully in cities overseas, such as Groningen and Barcelona and under consideration in Melbourne. The overall aim of Access for Everyone is to ensure that everyone who needs to get to the city centre is able to do so more easily.

36.     Access for Everyone would mean that car drivers would access the city centre from its edge, not via the core. Private motorised through-traffic would be directed around Auckland city centre before entering. East-west journeys would be made exclusively via the motorway box and, in the first instance, Mayoral Drive.

37.     Access within the city would be prioritised for non-discretionary trips. These include, but are not limited to, emergency vehicles, servicing, deliveries, rubbish removal, existing access to buildings, people with specific mobility requirements and other critical business trips.

38.     A reduction in non-discretionary vehicle trips is anticipated of up to 20%. The reduction in discretionary traffic should make non-discretionary vehicular trips (deliveries, etc.) easier and more predictable, as well as allowing for road-space reallocation to walking, cycling and public realm. 

39.     Within the city centre, the existing street network would be reconfigured to function as a series of zones. Buses, light rail vehicles, pedestrians and people on bikes would be able to pass directly between zones. Private motor traffic would generally be required to enter and leave from the same zone. Private vehicles would be able to move within the zones for most of the day but not between them. Traffic to each zone would be carefully accommodated from all motorway points and key arterials.

40.     Access for Everyone allows space to be reallocated from private vehicles to other uses. It therefore meets the needs of the growing residential, worker and visitor populations by favouring spatially-efficient transport modes. As the city centre accommodates more residents, businesses and visitors, there is an imperative to make more efficient use of limited city centre street capacity.

                                            

41.     Reallocation of street space in favour of spatially-efficient modes also increases streets’ abilities to perform other functions, such as loading, servicing and public amenity.

42.     Access for Everyone is predicated on the fact that, over the past 15 years, all growth in commuting to Auckland city centre has taken place via public transport; it now accounts for the majority of commutes. City centre employment growth has been de-coupled from increases in inbound car traffic since 2001. 

43.     With the scale of forthcoming investment in City Rail Link, light rail and the New Bus Network, public transport capacity into the city centre will increase by 150% above existing levels between 2018 and 2028. The number of people within a 30 minute rail journey if the city centre will double when City Rail Link is complete. Access for Everyone therefore reflects wider transformations in Aucklanders’ journey to and from the city centre.

 

44.     Access for Everyone has significant potential benefits. Examples include:

i)          Reconfiguring movement around Queen Street in advance of Light Rail; this would allow pedestrianisation of Queen Street and Light Rail construction “without the need for temporary traffic management”. Instead of trying to manage servicing and delivery temporarily, a better system is in place before construction starts. 

ii)         Removal of east-west traffic movement across the city centre; this in turn removes the need for each individual construction project to have a city centre-wide traffic management plan, thus making construction traffic management more straightforward. At present, construction projects are in conflict with one another due to traffic management constraints; this could dis-incentivise investment.

iii)         Reallocation of inefficient road space to more spatially-efficient transport modes; allowing more people to travel into, and move around the city centre. This addresses existing travel demand as well as future growth forecasts. 

iv)        Delivery of the most-supported proposal in the 2012 CCMP; a pedestrian-friendly Queen Street.

v)         Fulfilment of the Mayor’s C40 Cities declaration of a fossil fuel free Queen Street. This will reduce people’s exposure to air pollution.

vi)        Safety; significant reduction in motorised through-traffic means in the core of the Queen Street valley makes it safer for people to move around.

vii)       Addressing the initiative in the 2017 Waitematā Local Board Plan to pedestrianise Queen Street.

45.     It is also a major departure from existing traffic movement patterns in the city centre, and Auckland Transport will need to test how a zone-based system could work and how it would coordinate with other city centre workstreams.

46.     A working group has been set up with representatives from Council and divisional managers at Auckland Transport. This will allow the many separate city centre objectives and workstreams to be considered in relation to one another and the overall Access for Everyone concept. This includes the many areas of operation needed keep the city centre functioning, such as servicing, loading, emergency access and universal access. 

47.     A desktop case study is underway to test the proof-of-concept in one area of Auckland city centre. The study area is broadly bounded by Queen Street, Beach Road, Anzac Avenue and Albert Park. This will allow us to interrogate how the concept would work from an end-user perspective, explore issues and opportunities and ultimately better understand how Access for Everyone may progress from concept to reality.

48.     The case study is being informed by a stakeholder group made up of representatives from Auckland Transport and external organisations. These include the City Centre Residents' Group and Heart of the City.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe /
Local impacts and local board views

49.     The city centre is within the Waitematā Local Board area. There will be deep and ongoing engagement with the Local Board throughout the update.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

50.     The inclusion of Māori outcomes in the Masterplan update provides the opportunity to make provision for Te Ao Māori as an integral and integrated part of Auckland city centre.

51.     Working with the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum to develop the initial Outcomes Plan will in turn shape the development of the Masterplan.  The result will be a masterplan that is able to deliver Māori outcomes.

52.     This will also be informed by the Independent Māori Statutory Board’s Schedule of Issues of Significance.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

53.     Digitisation of the Masterplan is based on the existing architecture and processes developed for the Auckland Plan. Further details on the scope and content will be developed in 2019. The total cost is estimated at approximately $700,000 for content, editing and website development (note: staff are still investigating scope and costs).

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

54.     The merging and digitisation of the Masterplan and Waterfront Plans will have resourcing, cost and technical risks associated with it. We will mitigate these risks through clear project management, scope definition and lessons learned from the digitisation of the Auckland Plan 2050.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

55.     In the event that the Committee approves the work:

·   Complete consultation and finalise content for Māori Outcomes, Grafton Gully Boulevard and Access for Everyone by the second quarter of 2019

·   Progress digitisation with a view to completion to inform Auckland Council’s 2021-31 Long Term Plan.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.    

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

George Weeks - Principal Urban Design

Authorisers

Ludo Campbell-Reid - GM - Auckland Design Office

Jim Quinn - Chief of Strategy

 


Planning Committee

27 November 2018

 

 

A snapshot of issues and opportunities to increase affordable housing for Aucklanders

 

File No.: CP2018/22549

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To provide a snapshot of issues and opportunities for increasing affordable housing in Tāmaki Makaurau.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       On 2 October 2018 the Planning Committee requested staff produce a snapshot report on affordable housing in Tāmaki Makaurau (PLA/2018/102).  It pulls together regional, national and international data and experiences as a foundation for understanding, discussion and future action.  As agreed with the Committee in October, the report does not make any specific recommendations or provide commentary on the efficacy or otherwise of any solution for Tāmaki Makaurau.

3.       Affordable housing is defined as “a home that a household could occupy for less than 30 percent of its income whether purchasing or renting”.

4.       The snapshot report focuses on the growing number of Auckland households trapped in the ‘intermediate housing market’ - they are renting, but ineligible for government housing assistance and unable to afford to buy their own home.

5.       Between 2012 and 2017 median house prices in Auckland increased three times faster (by 71 percent to $847,000) than incomes (by just 25 percent to $97,300).  The city now has one of the least affordable housing markets in the OECD. In addition, over 40 per cent of Auckland households now rent – of that, 30 per cent spend more than 30 per cent of their income on housing, and three quarters of them cannot afford to buy their own home.

6.       Housing unaffordability has long term costs to whānau and tamariki wellbeing. Māori, Pacific people and single mothers are often forced into low quality rental accommodation, or homelessness.

7.       The report identifies opportunities for increasing affordable housing in the ‘intermediate housing market’ by:

·   increasing the supply of lower cost homes

·   improving the quality, affordability and security of renting

·   assisting households into partial and progressive homeownership.

8.       There are no short-term, low-cost solutions to the systemic issues identified and no one agency can solve it alone.  The snapshot report will form the basis for targeted engagement with key stakeholders between now and March 2019.  Staff will report to the March 2019 Planning Committee on affordable housing approaches, and Auckland Council’s position and role.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Planning Committee:

a)      endorse the use of “Affordable Housing in Auckland: a snapshot report” as the basis for engagement with key stakeholders to develop a “Position and Role” report for the March 2019 Planning Committee.

 

 

Horopaki / Context

Securing a home is becoming increasingly unaffordable for a growing number of Aucklanders

9.       On 2 October 2018 the Planning Committee requested (PLA/2018/102) staff produce a snapshot report on affordable housing introducing the problem, key themes from the literature, international experience, and current and planned Auckland initiatives. 

10.     The most widely used definition of affordable housing is “a home that a household could obtain for less than 30 per cent of its income”.[1] Increasing numbers of Aucklanders fall into this category. Housing unaffordability affects both people renting and home owners.

11.     Auckland Council analysis shows that between 2012 and 2017 median house prices increased three times faster (by 71 percent to $847,000) than incomes (by just 25 percent to $97,300). This is the worst first-home buyer affordability Auckland has ever had, and the city now has one of the least affordable housing markets in the OECD. 

12.     In 2012, a median income household (with a 20 per cent deposit) could afford to buy nearly half (48 per cent) of the houses in the market – by 2017 this was down to less than one fifth (18 per cent). 

13.     Increasing numbers of Auckland households (over 40 per cent) now rent, and three quarters of them cannot afford to buy their own home. Renting itself is increasingly unaffordable with 30 per cent of renting households spending over 30 per cent of their income on housing.

14.     The divide in income and wealth between renters and home owners is growing. Increasing numbers of older people cannot afford to support themselves in a home in retirement.

15.     Māori, Pacific peoples and single parents are increasingly pushed into lower quality housing, overcrowded situations, social housing and homelessness because of the intense competition for affordable homes.

A growing number of Aucklanders are trapped in the ‘intermediate housing market’, unable to make a secure, stable and affordable home

16.     More and more Aucklanders are trapped in what is described as the ‘intermediate housing market’, where rents absorb a large share of household income and house prices mean home ownership is out of reach. Affected households are ineligible for social housing or substantive rental support from the government but are also unable to pay the deposit and sustain a mortgage for their own home (see Figure 1).

17.     These households include key workers like nurses, teachers and police, though these are by no means the only people affected.

18.     In 2015, working households in the private rental market who could not afford to buy a lower quartile home comprised approximately 20 per cent of all households in Tāmaki Makaurau.


 

Figure 1: Intermediate housing market in the housing market continuum

Home-less

Social renters*

 

Private renters

Owner occupiers

Not in work private renters**

In-work

Unable to affordably

Able to affordably buy at median house sale price

Pay rent at:

Buy at:

Lower quartile

Median

Upper quartile

Lower quartile house sale price

Median house sale price

The intermediate housing market**

Relatively well-off private sector renters

 

Note: This diagram is not to scale and does not represent the relative size of each group.

*Social and emergency renters are in housing funded via the Government’s Income Related Rent Subsidy

**Includes households receiving the Government’s Accommodation Supplement.

Housing unaffordability has costs to individual and whānau wellbeing, and the economy

19.     There is compelling evidence of the importance of a stable home to whānau and child wellbeing. Having a warm, dry and stable home is a key determinant of children’s future life chances. High housing costs, financial stress and transience contribute to mental and physical ill-health, family violence and family breakdown.

20.     Social housing and rental assistance to ameliorate the effects of high housing costs have a significant cost to the economy. Housing investment also constrains investment in other economic activities.

21.     There are also costs in terms of educational and health outcomes for the economy: Aucklanders who grow up in warm, dry and stable homes are generally more productive and better educated.

Unaffordable housing in Tāmaki Makaurau is the result of many factors intersecting in a complex system

22.     Housing unaffordability in Tāmaki Makaurau is driven by the intersection of supply and demand factors within a complex system.

23.     Housing demand is shaped and influenced by market trends in the global financial economy (which shapes the availability of capital and interest rates); trends in international immigration and domestic population shifts; the effects of tax policy (for example in incentivising property investment); and financial assistance policies.

24.     Affordable housing supply is influenced by land use planning (for example inclusionary zoning); the provision of infrastructure for housing developments; the consenting process; the capacity of community and Iwi/Māori housing providers; and construction sector productivity.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

Government and Auckland Council are engaged in a range of current measures to address housing unaffordability in Tāmaki Makaurau

25.     The government and Auckland Council are engaged in a range of measures intended to address the affordable housing crisis, across the housing continuum including:

·   The provision of social housing: provided through Housing New Zealand (HNZ) and community housing providers, to those households eligible through the Ministry of Social Development’s (MSD’s) social housing register.

·   Income Related Rent Subsidy (IRRS): an MSD grant provided to eligible households to cover the cost of accommodation in the private rental sector.

·   Accommodation Supplement: a payment to help towards the cost of rental or mortgage payments to eligible households whose income falls below the MSD threshold.

·   Kiwibuild: the government’s scheme to provide 100,000 low cost homes over 10 years (half in Auckland).

·   Auckland Housing Programme: a joint initiative between Housing New Zealand and the developer HLC to deliver small, medium and large-scale housing developments in Auckland over the next 10 years.

·   Kāinga Strategic Action Plan: an initiative led by the Independent Maori Statutory Board to improve housing outcomes for Māori in Tāmaki Makaurau.

·   Panuku’s draft Policy for Determining Housing Mix.

·   Changes in the government’s demand side policy settings including:

-    loan-to-value mortgage restrictions

-    immigration policy

-    restrictions on overseas investment in housing

-    ‘bright line test’ for capital gains tax

·   Changes in supply side policy settings including:

-    Auckland Unitary Plan

-    National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity

-    Auckland mayoral housing taskforce

26.     Other key players include not-for-profit housing providers and NGOs, private sector businesses and developers, and Iwi/Māori housing organisations.

Analysis and international experience support the need for solutions targeted at the intermediate housing market

27.     International experience points to the need for solutions targeted at the intermediate housing market in three policy domains (see Figure 2):

·   increase the supply of lower cost homes

·   improve the quality, affordability and security of renting

·   assist households into partial and progressive home ownership

28.     The evidence suggests the most effective affordable housing policy approaches:

·   have strong political leadership and provide investment certainty

·   involve partnership between different levels of government, a significant not-for-profit sector and the private sector with agreed objectives, policies and roles

·   have objectives relating to both renting and ownership covering a spectrum of household incomes

·   comprise an integrated package of regulatory and non-regulatory policies, particularly incentives that bring private investment to address the problem

·   operate at sufficient scale to make a difference.

 

Figure 2: Affordable homes and social, assisted and market housing products and providers

 

                                                                           Affordable home products

 

 

Note: HNZC – Housing New Zealand Corporation

CHOs – Community housing organisations

 

29.     Several affordable housing policies and mechanisms operating in overseas jurisdictions could be applied in Auckland. Debate about their effectiveness however, highlights the importance of individual design features, and the need for more in-depth engagement. There is no ‘off the shelf’ solution: a tailored approach to Auckland’s unique situation is required.

There are opportunities to make more affordable homes available in Tāmaki Makaurau

30.     The following opportunities and initiatives have been identified through the snapshot analysis of the policy literature and international experience.

Table 1: Affordable housing objectives, opportunities, and options for further analysis

Objective

Opportunity

Initiative

Options that warrant further investigation

1.   Increase the supply of lower cost homes

Address the supply of affordable rentals

Build-to-rent schemes

 

Initiatives to facilitate institutional development and management of rental properties (such as build-to-rent)

Address the supply of affordable homes to buy

Minimum affordable housing planning requirements

Government provision or subsidies for affordable homes, e.g. Kiwibuild

 

A retained minimum affordable housing planning requirement with cost-offsetting incentives

Parties working together to extend Kiwibuild

2.   Improve the quality, affordability and security of renting

Assisted rental policies

 

Legislation for rental tenure and quality standards

Rent controls

Rent subsidies

Tax breaks

Legislation to improve rental tenure security (noting that government is currently consulting on reform of the Residential Tenancies Act)

Reforms to make the Accommodation Supplement more effective

3.   Assist households into partial and progressive home ownership

Assisted ownership policies

 

Subsidies or tax relief to support access to home ownership

Home deposit or mortgage assistance

Rent-to-buy schemes

Shared equity schemes

Leasehold property

Papakāinga housing

Co-housing

Partial and progressive ownership arrangements such as rent-to-buy, shared equity, co-housing, Papakāinga housing and leasehold of public land

 

 

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe /
Local impacts and local board views

31.     Policy changes to increase the availability of affordable housing in Tāmaki Makaurau will improve the wellbeing of Aucklanders across the region particularly in local board areas with large numbers of people in moderate to low incomes.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

32.     Māori are disproportionately affected by the current unaffordability of housing in Tāmaki Makaurau. Improving Māori wellbeing outcomes is a principal objective of this work. Iwi and Māori housing organisations will be critical partners and will be engaged through the snapshot report in the next stage of this project.

33.     Growing Papakāinga housing has been identified as an important opportunity to explore further in the next stage of the work, alongside opportunities to align with Independent Māori Statutory Board’s Kāinga Strategic Action Plan, and other Māori housing policy work led by Te Puni Kōrkiri.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

34.     All solutions come at a cost, and cost analysis needs to be an important part of the future options analysis and scenario planning. At this stage, it is too early to assess what the financial implications might be for the different opportunities and initiatives identified.


 

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

35.     There is significant interest and activity amongst many agencies working to promote affordable housing in Tāmaki Makaurau, including MHUD. Consequently, there is a risk that a disjointed approach may result. Auckland Council’s role in affordable housing is key but must be developed in close collaboration with other agencies to ensure a long term, coordinated and system-based approach. The risk of a disjointed approach will be managed and mitigated through engagement with key partners in the next phase and working closely to develop options for council’s position and role on affordable housing.

36.     The short time available to develop options for council’s position and role on affordable housing generates a risk that the public may not appreciate the complexity of the issues involved and will expect a short-term fix. The affordable housing crisis in Tāmaki Makaurau described in the snapshot report is the culmination of systemic problems over many years. A package of solutions needs to be developed and trialed through a long-term, collaborative approach. The risk of public misperception can be addressed through communicating clearly that the 9 March 2019 report to committee is the beginning of a process to develop a package of solutions under such an approach.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

December 2018 - February 2019

·   The snapshot report will be used to inform targeted engagement with central government agencies (particularly MHUD), Auckland community housing providers, Māori, the Property Council and other stakeholders.

·   This engagement will explore in more depth the issues, opportunities and options for increasing the supply of affordable housing in Tāmaki Makaurau, and council’s future position and role.

By 6 March 2019

·   The report back to the Planning Committee on council’s position and role in affordable housing will reflect this engagement, and will consider affordable housing approaches such as:

-    retained minimum affordable housing planning requirements with cost-offsetting incentives

-    parties working together to extend Kiwibuild

-    initiatives to facilitate institutional development and management of rental properties (such as build-to-rent)

-    legislation to improve rental tenure security

-    reforms to make the Accommodation Supplement more effective

-    partial and progressive ownership arrangements such as rent-to-buy, shared equity, co-housing, Papakāinga housing and leasehold of public land.


 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Affordable housing in Auckland. A snapshot report.

43

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Peter Chaudhry - Principal Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Kataraina Maki - GM - Community & Social Policy

Jim Quinn - Chief of Strategy

 


Planning Committee

27 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Planning Committee

27 November 2018

 

 

Panuku policy for determining housing mix

 

File No.: CP2018/21605

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To endorse the Panuku policy on housing mix.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       In facilitating urban redevelopment Panuku is required to provide a range of residential choices and price points to cater for diverse households.

3.       To support the Homes and Places outcome of the Auckland Plan 2050 and the development of diverse and inclusive communities, Panuku has developed a policy to guide decision making in regard to the appropriate mix of housing for individual development sites and priority development locations.

4.       The policy recognizes that to achieve a mix of housing including social, affordable and market housing, Panuku partners with Community Housing Providers (CHPs), crown agencies, Iwi and the private sector. The appropriate mix will be considered at the neighbourhood scale with a broad aim to achieve a mix of 30% social, 30% affordable and 40% market housing, in key locations, but with flexibility to reflect local conditions. The town centre vision and outcomes, the existing housing typologies and tenure mix, commercial feasibility and market demand, proposed development typology/s, development partners and community expectations, all need to be considered.

5.       Panuku presented the draft policy to a workshop of the Planning Committee on 6 November. The feedback to the draft policy was largely positive and there was broad support for the policy approach including:

·   Council’s role, though Panuku, in enabling some social and affordable housing on surplus council land.

·   The principle of diverse, inclusive communities and ensuring regeneration, not gentrification.

·   Taking a mixed tenure approach in key locations where Panuku is facilitating the delivery of a large number of housing units.

·   The proposed 30% social, 30% affordable, 40% market housing mix being a “starting assumption”, on the basis suggested in the policy, but with flexibility to consider context and work with partners.

·   An upper limit of 30% social housing as a working assumption and acknowledged rule of thumb.

·   Continuing to work with HNZ and Community Housing Providers (CHPs) to deliver the mixed tenure model and ensure social and affordable housing is included in the mix and facilitated where possible and appropriate.

·   Ensuring that any affordable housing is “retained”.

6.       There was discussion about whether Panuku could be expected to facilitate affordable housing in all locations including the areas with high land values like central Takapuna and the waterfront. The consensus was that this was probably not realistic, or a sound use of limited resources.  It was also acknowledged that any land value trade-offs would impact on the reinvestment programme in the Transform and Unlock locations.


 

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Planning Committee:

a)      endorse the Panuku policy on determining appropriate housing mix, noting that this is consistent with Panuku mandate to provide residential choices and with the Auckland Plan 2050.

 

 

Horopaki / Context

7.       The Homes and Places outcome of the Auckland Plan 2050 sets out the vision that Aucklanders live in secure, healthy and affordable homes, and have access to a range of inclusive public places.  The Panuku programme contributes to developing a compact urban form and accommodating growth, accelerating the construction of homes to meet changing needs and preferences and providing quality public spaces. The primary focus is town centre revitalization and unlocking value.

8.       Facilitating a range of residential choices and price points to cater for diverse households is a core mandate of Panuku. We do this by facilitating private sector, third sector, iwi and government investment into the sustainable redevelopment of the priority locations.

9.       Auckland Council is responsible for the setting of strategy and policy and provides strategic direction to the CCOs. Housing is of significant political and public interest.

10.     The purpose of the Panuku policy for determining housing mix is to set the framework for Panuku to establish the desired housing mix for individual development sites and priority development locations, in advance of engaging with prospective development partners.

11.     The term “housing mix” used by Panuku is intended to refer to both tenure mix and the range and balance of housing choices in any project or wider location.

12.     Panuku has been exploring the question of housing mix and housing outcomes, diverse communities and mixed tenure models for some time. The appropriate share of social housing has been considered.

13.     While not a social housing provider, Panuku has and continues to partner with both social and affordable housing providers, in order to provide for a mix of housing in our projects.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

Literature review and case studies

14.     A report to the Panuku Board in June 2018 set out the issues, current practice in terms of determining housing outcomes, a literature review and summary of recent studies, local case studies and policy options.

15.     The key findings of that research included:

·   Promoting the development of communities that are socio-economically diverse is an often-stated goal of planning policy.

·   Heterogeneity in a community is considered positive in the research literature.

·   While it is good practice in urban regeneration to have a mix of housing typologies and tenure, there is limited research around what spatial configurations work best and the optimal social mix including the precise proportion of a neighborhood in social housing that generates either beneficial or problematic outcomes.

·   Housing mix aspirations vary globally based on political priorities, community preference and the level of public-private partnership in housing development.


 

·   The optimal share of social housing suggested in reports ranges from 20%-50% with the lower share associated with inclusionary zoning rules and private sector-led development and developer concerns about the saleability of private homes. Policy positions of 30-50% social housing are largely driven by government social housing agencies aiming to meet demand.

·   The disadvantages of high concentrations (for example 60-70%) of social housing, particularly in apartment typologies (with the exception of the elderly), seem to be well established noting that it is often not just the proportion of social rental that is the issue, but also tenancy management, allocation policy, building quality and maintenance and access to services, and other factors such as the level of poverty.

·   Very high concentrations of social housing can impact on the ability to revitalize the town centre, the value of future sites and ability to find development partners.

·   A share of 30% social housing as an upper limit is a “rule of thumb” widely used both in New Zealand and overseas. Testing with industry colleagues has confirmed this.

·   Social mix should be considered at the neighbourhood scale not at the project or redevelopment site scale.

·   Auckland Community Housing Providers Network (ACHPN) members work on the basis that no one tenure should be dominant using the rule of thumb that a new housing development should roughly have a housing tenure mix that provides social rental housing (20-30%), affordable housing options (30-40%) and competitively priced market housing (20-40%).

·   Mixed tenure approaches are more successful where neighbourhoods are well designed and housing standards are consistent (blind tenure), private owners are aware of the mix, community hubs (schools, parks, cafes) bring different social groups together and there is ongoing placemaking activities and sufficient on-going management.

The Policy Approach

16.     The key elements of the policy approach are:

·   Facilitating diverse, mixed tenure communities, at the neighbourhood scale, in key locations where Panuku is facilitating a large number of housing units. A target mix will be developed for each location based on the starting assumption of a 30/30/40 social/affordable/market mix.

·   The desired housing outcomes being determined on a site-by-site basis in other locations where Panuku is facilitating fewer homes on fewer sites. This will be based on a range of considerations:

o Town centre vision, outcomes and key moves, as set out in the approved High-Level Project Plan

o Existing housing typologies and tenure mix in and around the centre

o Locational factors such as facilities and amenities

o Commercial feasibility and market demand

o Type of development, including typology

o Development counterparty/s.

o Shareholder and community expectations.

o Opportunity for demonstration, innovation, leadership, partnership.

·   A maximum of 30% social housing, however with some flexibility to enable higher proportions where appropriate in the context of the project location.

·   Facilitating residential choices relies on working with the third sector, government, Iwi and private development partners and will be impacted by their priorities, interests and balance sheets.

·   Panuku needs flexibility to balance social and commercial outcomes across the portfolio and to work effectively with a diversity of development partners.

·   The desired housing outcomes, including housing mix, will be conveyed to potential development partners at the outset, by inclusion in the Expression of Interest or Request for Proposal documentation.

17.     In supporting the development of a policy to guide decision making on housing mix, the Panuku Board noted that because getting the mix right is challenging and will impact on the social fabric of areas of Auckland, the policy will be subject to ongoing review.

Council engagement

18.     The draft policy was widely circulated and discussed with council staff during September.

19.     Panuku presented the draft policy for discussion at the Planning Committee workshop on 6 November 2018, at which there was very good attendance.  In terms of the feedback there was broad support for:

·   The draft policy approach.

·   Council’s role, though Panuku, in enabling some social and affordable housing on surplus council land.

·   The principle of diverse, inclusive communities and ensuring regeneration, not gentrification.

·   Taking a mixed tenure approach in key locations where Panuku is facilitating the delivery of a large number of housing units.

·   The proposed 30% social, 30% affordable, 40% market housing mix being a “starting assumption”, on the basis suggested in the policy, but with flexibility to consider context and work with partners.

·   An upper limit of 30% social housing as part of that mix as a working assumption and acknowledged rule of thumb.

·   Continuing to work with HNZ and CHPs to deliver the mixed tenure model and ensure social and affordable housing is included in the mix.

·   Ensuring that any affordable housing is “retained” i.e. remains affordable for the duration of the house and is not lost to the open market once affordability restrictions are removed after a set period.

20.     There was discussion about whether Panuku could be expected to facilitate affordable housing in all locations including the areas with high land values like central Takapuna and the waterfront. The consensus was that this was probably not realistic, or a sound use of limited resources.  It was also acknowledged that any land value trade-offs would impact on the reinvestment programme in the Transform and Unlock locations. It was noted that Panuku does not have a mandate to systemically trade-off land value.

21.     The use of financial analysis to illustrate the housing construction costs and the level of subsidy required to support affordable housing was suggested as a way to advance discussion of this issue.

22.     The importance of “accessible design” of housing was also raised and is currently only a design criterion for Haumaru Housing. This is included in the current Panuku work programme and will involve working with the Auckland Design Office to identify appropriate standards.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe /
Local impacts and local board views

23.     Local Boards have a strong interest in housing outcomes and have had significant input to the Auckland Plan 2050 outcomes and Development Strategy. The Auckland Plan 2050 supports a quality compact urban form that allows opportunities for more intensive housing development, as well as the benefits of diverse communities.

24.     This policy will have local impacts where Panuku is leading development, i.e. in the priority development locations.  It will ensure Panuku is taking a considered approach to housing mix while working with a range of development partners.

25.     Panuku works closely with Local Boards in the priority locations. Housing outcomes are discussed and included in the High-Level Projects Plans that have been endorsed by the Planning Committee. In regular meetings with Local Boards there is an opportunity to ensure they are aware of how site development processes are progressing and of potential development partners and will have the opportunity to provide ongoing input on housing mix.

26.     The draft policy has not been discussed with Local Boards.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

27.     Like all Aucklanders, Māori want to live in warm and secure homes. Māori want their homes to support the way they live and the activities they associate with a prosperous quality of life, especially education and employment. Connectivity in terms of transport and communications are equally as important.

28.     Māori have experienced particular housing stresses over many years. An Auckland Plan focus area is to invest in and support Māori to meet their specific housing aspirations.

29.     Many Māori in Auckland live in homes that do not meet these aspirations. Housing choices can be limited by employment options and income, access to savings and intergenerational equity and not being able to access services, support, and bank lending on an equitable basis.

30.     This policy will deliver increased housing choices including social and affordable housing in the Priority Locations which generally have good access to services and transport. The commitment to diverse communities and a mixed tenure approach will ensure that opportunities for social and affordable housing and for innovative housing projects, are facilitated by Panuku on suitable sites.

31.     This policy specifically refers to the Panuku Mana Whenua Outcomes Framework and an action plan which will be developed during the next few months. This provides a good opportunity to discuss housing outcomes, housing mix and opportunities for Iwi. The policy is sufficiently flexible to accommodate a range of outcomes. 

32.     We have sought feedback on the draft policy from the Independent Māori Statutory Board.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

33.     Panuku is charged with balancing strategic and commercial outcomes. The policy does not have any financial implications as working with partners to achieve a mix of housing has been built into the programme. Facilitating affordable housing is likely to require some level of land value trade-off over time which will be balanced by achieving full value on other sites. Land value trade-offs will impact on the available funding for reinvestment for broader public good outcomes in the priority locations.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

34.     Implementation of this policy is subject to the ongoing participation of the private sector, third sector, iwi and government to deliver housing on council surplus sites

35.     Market conditions impact on the commercial feasibility of housing projects, on the revenue from site sales and on the nature and scale of projects that the development sector will deliver.


 

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

36.     Panuku Board approval of the policy on 28 November.

37.     Continue to engage with local boards in priority locations on housing outcomes.

38.     Continue to engage with Government to ensure alignment of housing aspirations (Auckland Housing Programme, KiwiBuild, HLC) and identify opportunities to partner.

39.     Present the policy and development opportunities pipeline to CHPs in 2019.

40.     Over the next financial year 2019/20, develop housing target mix for the key locations, working with Auckland Council and stakeholders.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Policy for determining desired housing mix

105

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Brenna Waghorn - Manager Strategic Planning, Panuku Development Auckland

Authorisers

David Rankin - Chief Operating Officer, Panuku Development Auckland

Jim Quinn - Chief of Strategy

 


Planning Committee

27 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Planning Committee

27 November 2018

 

 

Submission for Upper North Island Supply Chain Strategy Working Group (Covering report)

 

File No.: CP2018/22721

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To notify the Planning Committee of the Government’s Upper North Island Supply Chain Strategy process and Working Group

2.       To agree principles to communicate to the Working Group working Group at its, first, upcoming engagement 13 December 2018.

3.       This provide background on Auckland’s 2015-2016 Port Future Study as important context to the Working Group’s work.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

4.       This is a late covering report for the above item. The comprehensive agenda report was not available when the agenda went to print and will be provided prior to the 27 November 2018 Planning Committee meeting.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

The recommendations will be provided in the comprehensive agenda report.

 


Planning Committee

27 November 2018

 

 

Auckland Plan 2050 update

 

File No.: CP2018/16145

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To update the committee on events related to the Auckland Plan 2050 since its adoption, to seek approval for a change to one of the Māori Identity and Wellbeing measures and to outline an approach for using the plan to build the foundation for the next Auckland Council Long-term Plan.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       The Auckland Plan 2050 is a digital plan adopted in June 2018. The first six-monthly update on the Auckland Plan in this report covers:

·   reforms and initiatives from central government that indicate the plan is providing a strong strategic direction for advocacy for Auckland Plan outcomes.  In August and September 2018, the government released two discussion documents related to tenants and housing quality respectively. Council has submitted on both proposals advocating for changes based on the strategic direction set in the Auckland Plan

·   central government’s Urban Growth Agenda and the programmes underneath it that, as they progress, will impact on Auckland and the Auckland Plan. Staff will maintain a watching brief for impacts on the plan’s evidence base or implementation potential

·   required changes to data and information contained in the plan following the release of the 2018 Quality of Life survey results and 2017/2018 new residential dwelling consents data

·   anticipated data changes in the plan when the 2018 Census data is released.

3.       The Auckland Plan 2050 Baseline Measures report (November 2018) outlines the status of each of the 33 measures across the six outcomes and the Development Strategy, which reflects work to determine the best data sets for each measure. As a result, the report notes that 16 measures have final baseline data sets, 10 will have final data sets available in 2019, 6 require further development, and 1 measure needs to be changed.

4.       Committee approval is sought to change a Māori Identity and Wellbeing outcome measure to reflect a broader outcome.  The proposed change is from “Benefits of whānau Māori measured through tamariki and rangatahi” to “Whānau wellbeing”.

5.       The Planning Committee has established a political working group to develop core targets with central government.  Further work on core targets is on hold until discussions with central government can provide more clarity on a joint approach.

6.       To build the foundation for the next long-term plan and provide evidence to support decision-making, work is underway to embed the monitoring of key funded long-term plan programmes to ensure they deliver on Auckland Plan outcomes.  This means operationalising the Auckland Plan by bringing it into the business of the council group and requires:

·   investment to align with growth and development in the Development Strategy

·   strategies to translate the high-level directions of the plan into what needs to be delivered

·   the planning and delivery of place-based plans to align with the timing and sequencing of the Development Strategy

·   regulatory plans to be effective in delivering on the Auckland Plan

·   strategies, place-based plans and regulatory plans to be informing the service and asset management plans which are the basis of most of the council’s capital and operational expenditure programmes.

7.       The annual Auckland Plan scorecard in July 2019 will give a snapshot of progress against the outcomes of the plan.  This will be followed by the Annual Report in September 2019 which will focus on council’s contribution to these outcomes through the services and programmes delivered in that year. The side-by-side reporting will help tell an integrated story to see if the collective efforts are making a difference to Auckland and Aucklanders.

8.       More in-depth analysis will be provided in the three-yearly Auckland Plan report which will be brought to committee in 2020 in time to support decision making for the 2021 long-term plan.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Planning Committee:

a)      receive the six-monthly update on the Auckland Plan 2050.

b)      receive the first Baseline Measures report and timing of future reports.

c)      approve the change to one of the Māori Identity and Wellbeing measures, from “Benefits of whānau Māori measured through tamariki and rangatahi” to “Whānau wellbeing”.

d)      note the approach to building the foundation for the next Auckland Council Long-term Plan.

 

 

Horopaki / Context

9.       The Auckland Plan 2050 is a 30-year spatial plan for Auckland adopted in June 2018 (Resolution number PLA/2018/62).

10.     Upon adoption, the committee resolved to develop an implementation approach. This included core targets that relate to existing measures and priorities in the Auckland Plan, in collaboration with central government. This report provides an update on the development of baseline measures and the targets.

11.     The plan is a digital plan and this report also sets out the reforms and initiatives underway that are relevant to the plan, and ways that the data in the plan is being kept up to date.

12.     The legislation for the Auckland Plan sets out the requirements for implementing the plan, meaning that it must:

·   provide a basis for aligning the implementation plans, regulatory plans, and funding programmes of the Auckland Council

·   identify policies, priorities, land allocations and programmes and investments to implement the strategic direction and specify how resources will be provided to implement the strategic direction.

13.     Recognising that the Auckland Plan 2050 has a 30-year timeframe, this report sets out an approach to building the foundation for the next Long-term Plan to meet the legislative requirements above.


 

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

Six-monthly update

14.     This report is the first six-monthly update and it will cover changes that impact on Auckland’s context or any new data or information that may have an impact on the plan and its implementation. This update will be made available on the ‘what’s new’ section of the digital plan website.  Any developments or events that could have a significant impact on the plan would be brought to committee as they arise.

Reforms and initiatives since adoption of the plan 

15.     There has been a range of activity relevant to the Auckland Plan 2050 since its adoption. This includes central government legislative reforms and the announcement and delivery of new programmes. This section of the report provides a summary of that activity and what it means for Auckland and the Auckland Plan.

16.     Central government has commenced work in several areas of importance to Auckland that indicate the plan is providing a strong strategic direction for advocacy for the outcomes in the Auckland Plan on behalf of Aucklanders: 

·   In August and September 2018, the government released two discussion documents related to tenants and housing quality respectively. Council has submitted on both proposals advocating for changes based on the strategic direction set in the Auckland Plan.

o The first, reform of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986, is designed to improve security and stability for tenants while maintaining adequate protection of landlords’ interests and improve quality standards of boarding houses. The proposal is consistent with the intent of the Homes and Places outcome and focus areas in that it recognises the reality of renting for many Aucklanders and the need for security of tenure. It also responds to the plan’s recommendation to clarify the Act’s provisions.

o The Healthy Homes Standards discussion document proposes changes that would raise the minimum quality standards for rental homes to ensure that they are warm and dry. This is also consistent with the Auckland Plan, which recognises the need to increase the quality of existing rental homes. 

·   Central government’s Urban Growth Agenda contains several initiatives and work programmes that, as they progress, will impact on Auckland and the Auckland Plan. These are areas where Auckland Council and central government agencies are working together or where council is assisting with a project.  Examples are the Hamilton to Auckland Corridor, Congestion Question, Supporting Growth Alliance, and City Centre to Māngere light rail.  In addition to providing advice consistent with the strategic direction set in the Auckland Plan, staff will maintain a watching brief to identify any impacts on the plan’s evidence base or implementation potential. 

Keeping the digital Auckland Plan up to date

17.     One benefit of the digital Auckland Plan is that it can be kept up to date when data and information that has informed the plan changes.  The plan takes a 30-year view and therefore changes in data are not expected to drive a change in strategic direction at this stage. 

18.     The plan needs to be updated to reflect two new sets of information and data released since it was adopted:

Quality of Life survey 2018 results

The survey measures the perceptions of over 7,000 New Zealanders by council area. It is undertaken every two years and is a partnership between Auckland Council, six city councils and one regional council. 

Topics covered in the survey include: overall quality of life, built and natural environment, housing, transport, health and wellbeing, crime and safety, economic wellbeing and council processes.

The Belonging and Participation outcome includes a range of Quality of Life data used in infographics, the evidence report and plan narrative. These parts of the plan will be updated accordingly. 

Consenting data 2017/2018

Released on 30 July 2018 by Statistics New Zealand, this annual data shows the number and location of new residential dwelling consents granted in Auckland. The Development Strategy section of the plan shows this data annually and as trends over time. The graphs show the proportion of consented dwellings, by type (attached/detached) and whether outside or inside the 2010 metropolitan urban limit. These graphs will be updated accordingly.  

19.     Further changes to data and information in the Auckland Plan are anticipated. 

Census 2018

From March 2019 onwards, Stats NZ will release its Census 2018 data in stages, as well as its Te Kupenga 2018 survey findings, a survey of Māori wellbeing. 

The most significant changes resulting from Census 2018 data and Te Kupenga 2018 will be estimates of population growth, working age population, internal migration and the health of te reo Māori. As the new data is released, staff will review it against the Auckland Plan and make the necessary adjustments to data, infographics and related text. 

Auckland Plan 2050 monitoring framework

Auckland Plan Measures

20.     The Auckland Plan 2050 has 33 measures across the six outcomes and the Development Strategy.

21.     Since adoption there has been work to determine the best data sets for each measure. The Auckland Plan 2050 Baseline Measures (November 2018) report (Attachment A) describes the status of each measure:

·   16 measures have final 2018 baseline data sets

·   10 measures will have final data sets available in 2019

·   6 measures require further development of their data sets

·   1 measure is to be changed.

22.     Five of the six measures requiring further development are under the Environment and Cultural Heritage outcome. Environmental data is collected and reported through different mechanisms, such as report cards, technical reports and publications for different needs and users.  Composite measures (that combine different components of current reporting) are being developed for reporting against the Auckland Plan at the regional and sub-regional level. These will combine existing data sets and components of the Auckland Unitary Plan monitoring system under development.

23.     The sixth measure under development is “homelessness” from the Homes and Places outcome.  An appropriate data set for homelessness will be drawn from the cross-sectoral Homelessness plan once it is finalised. 

24.     As a result of the data identification process, it is proposed that the Māori Identity and Wellbeing measure “Benefits of whānau Māori measured through tamariki and rangatahi” be changed to “Whānau wellbeing” as this is a broader outcome where data sets will be more readily available.   


 

25.     The availability and range of specific and enduring data sets for the Māori Identity and Wellbeing outcome are relatively limited but improving.  There are new metrics being developed internal to council (Unitary Plan, Te Waka Anga Mua ki Uta) and external to council (Statistics NZ – Indicators Aotearoa New Zealand) that could potentially provide for more robust data sets.  Ongoing work by the Independent Māori Statutory Board could also provide support in this area.

26.     All measures will be reported through an annual Auckland Plan scorecard which will be brought to committee in July 2019 and will contain a short commentary on the observed trends.  Where possible the measures will be spatialised through geographic mapping at a local board level.

27.     More in-depth analysis, to explain why measures are tracking in particular directions, will be undertaken every three years as part of the supporting evidence base for long-term plan decision making. The first such report will be brought to committee in 2020 in time to support the 2021 Long-term Plan.

28.     The baseline data will be publicly available as part of the digital plan in December 2018.

Auckland Plan Targets

29.     In June 2018 the Planning Committee resolved that further work would be undertaken to develop core targets with central government based on the measures in the plan. In August 2018 the Planning Committee agreed to the establishment of a political working group, which includes a representative from the Independent Māori Statutory Board, to provide guidance in the development of targets. 

30.     Staff have identified potential measures suitable for setting targets but have had limited opportunity to engage formally with central government staff.

31.     This is due in part to ongoing discussions between council and central government regarding a joint programme of work.

32.     Further work on core targets is on hold until discussions with central government can provide more clarity on a joint approach.

Building the foundation for the next Long-term Plan

33.     The current 10-year budget and the Auckland Plan were finalised at the same time. While they are not completely aligned, there is a strong foundation as both plans share the same key aspects:

·   Key challenges: population growth and its implications, sharing prosperity with all Aucklanders, and reducing environment degradation

·   Outcomes: activities that articulate council’s contribution in achieving the Auckland Plan outcomes with performance measures in place where applicable

·   Development Strategy: the timing and sequencing of growth, supported by the 30-year Infrastructure Strategy, both of which drive Service and Asset Management Plans.

34.     Work is underway to embed the monitoring of key funded long-term plan programmes to ensure they deliver what is intended, recognising that some programmes make a significant contribution towards the Auckland Plan.  This will take shape through interim long-term plan reporting to the Finance and Performance Committee, a new reporting initiative.  Focussing on the main programmes for example, water quality, will facilitate discussion on key issues and allows understanding of performance over time.


 

Operationalising the plan

35.     The focus for 2018-2021 is to build a strong foundation for the next Long-term Plan. This requires operationalising the plan, capturing and reporting quality and consistent information to develop a better understanding of what impacts the council family is making collectively against the outcomes. 

36.     Operationalising the plan means bringing the Auckland Plan into the business of the council group and requires:

·   investment to align with growth and development in the Development Strategy

·   strategies to translate the high-level directions of the plan into what needs to be delivered

·   the planning and delivery of place-based plans to align with the timing and sequencing of the Development Strategy

·   regulatory plans to be effective in delivering on the Auckland Plan

·   strategies, place-based plans and regulatory plans to be informing the service and asset management plans which are the basis of most of the council’s capital and operational expenditure programmes.

37.     Implementation of the Development Strategy will focus on the first three years of the coming decade and requires the cooperation of central government agencies. It includes two main components:

·   developing a clear understanding of funding requirements to prioritise infrastructure provision

·   working with central government and private sector partners to develop a consistent approach to scoping infrastructure provision, and potential for alternative finance, cost sharing or shared funding opportunities.

This will help form a picture of infrastructure prioritisation, planning and delivery, as well as enabling council to make decisions for the next long-term plan about infrastructure provision in growth priority areas. 

Joint programme of work

38.     At officer level, council and central government are developing a joint programme of work centred around the government’s Urban Growth Agenda. A key element of the programme is a spatial focus – based on the Auckland Plan Development Strategy – for joint action to unlock development.

39.     This will include understanding infrastructure constraints and requirements, and funding requirements, in the areas identified. 

40.     The programme may also include investigating new tools and approaches such as:

·   testing the effectiveness and efficiency of regulatory and non-regulatory interventions in the housing system

·   removing barriers to the efficient delivery of housing in the Building Act and Building Code, for example.

41.     The development of joint council-central government targets may also form part of this programme.

42.     The joint programme is likely to be presented to the committee early in 2019.

Strategies

43.     The Auckland Plan provides direction to council’s strategies, which provide a further level of detail to inform the council family’s implementation and funding programmes. Council currently has many strategic action plans, strategies and policies.  While some provide a high-level of direction, others have a narrow focus and may be better viewed as supporting guidance to other high-level plans.

44.     Most of the current strategies and plans are generally aligned with the Auckland Plan 2050.  Further refinement to improve alignment and provide enough direction for implementation will occur when each strategy is scheduled for review.

45.     There are some areas that require action in the short-term to improve alignment and address gaps in council’s strategic programme:

·   better align the current Economic Development Strategy with the plan.  The five-yearly review for this strategy, due in 2017, was put on hold pending the adoption of the Auckland Plan 2050

·   ensure that the Auckland Climate Action Plan and the Auckland Waters Strategy (both under development) can implement the Auckland Plan

·   work with government on aspects of infrastructure provision and housing (some of which may be captured in the council/central government joint programme of work)

·   better align measures in the plan with Māori-specific measures in the long-term plan. 

46.     Staff have commenced work in these areas and some of this work is referenced elsewhere in this report and in the work programme of the Environment and Community Committee. As these programmes of work progress they will brought to committees. The medium to long-term work to address gaps will be brought to Planning Committee in updates from July 2019 onwards.

Place-based plans

47.     Place-based plans are intended to provide the more detailed planning layer to assist with the implementation of the Auckland Plan 2050 Development Strategy.  Council’s current and scheduled place-based planning (Attachment B) reflects agreements with the Planning Committee and local boards, and the approach of the Auckland Plan 2012.  These show that for the period 2018-2021, council is already working on several plans that assist implementation of the Auckland Plan Development Strategy.  Nodes, Development Areas and Future Urban Areas are the focus for this work. 

48.     A framework to consider and respond to future planning requests, guided by the Auckland Plan Development Strategy priorities, is being developed.

Regulatory plans

49.     Regulatory plans are a key vehicle for delivery of the Auckland Plan.  Enabling growth and the protection of the natural and physical environment are core components of the Auckland Plan and the Auckland Unitary Plan.  There is strong alignment between the Auckland Plan and the Unitary Plan through the objectives and policies set out in the Regional Policy Statement. The effectiveness of the Unitary Plan in delivering upon its objectives is therefore critical to the success of the Auckland Plan.  The data gathered for the statutory monitoring of the Unitary Plan can therefore be used to evaluate the effectiveness of the Unitary Plan in delivering on the Auckland Plan. 

Monitoring, evaluating and reporting

50.     The annual Auckland Plan scorecard in July 2019 will be closely followed by the Annual Report in September 2019.  The Auckland Plan scorecard gives a snapshot of progress against the outcomes of the plan. The Annual Report will focus on council’s contribution to these outcomes through the services and programmes delivered in that year.

51.     This side-by-side reporting will help tell an integrated story to see if the collective efforts are making a difference to Auckland and Aucklanders.

52.     The more in-depth analysis provided in the three-yearly Auckland Plan report will draw on other data sets and information to help explain trends across the 33 measures and provide the evidence base to support decision making for the next Long-term Plan.  The spatial breakdown of information, where possible, will also be useful for local board plans 2020-2024.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe /
Local impacts and local board views

53.     There are several council projects during the 2018-2021 period that will contribute to implementing the Development Strategy at a local level. Staff are developing a framework to consider and respond to future planning requests from local boards, guided by the Auckland Plan.

54.     The Local Board Services Department will use 19 of the 33 measures to help track the progress of the current local board plans and to inform the development of their future plans. 

55.     Four local board members are represented on the political working group for developing core targets with central government.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

56.     To ensure that there is an implementation programme that links the Auckland Plan strategic direction and the Long-term Plan with better outcomes for Māori, Te Waka Anga Mua ki Uta will commence work to better understand what programmes of implementation work the council family needs to do over the next 10 years.  This will guide the implementation of the Māori Identity and Wellbeing outcome of the Auckland Plan as well as other directions and focus areas in the plan that are of high relevance to delivering strategic Māori outcomes.  This work will also assist council to respond to PwC’s recommendations to the Independent Māori Statutory Board on improving council’s strategic alignment. It will be incorporated in the wider work to operationalise the plan into the business of council.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

57.     The strategic direction set in the Auckland Plan 2050 is a key vehicle to support decision-making on council’s long-term plans.  Staff are working to ensure that the programmes that have been funded through the current Long-term Plan are tracked to support better decision-making for the next Long-term Plan. 

58.     The setting of core targets with central government will have funding implications that would be tested through the Long-term Plan process.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

59.     Inconsistencies in council’s reporting will reduce the ability to provide robust advice to decision-makers. The new Long-term Plan reporting initiative will help address this risk.

60.     The Development Strategy sets the sequencing and location of growth for the next decade. It is vital to stay on this course as significant changes will have consequential planning, delivery and funding impacts.

61.     Council’s capital programmes (through Services and Asset Management Plans) will need to be aligned with the Development Strategy. Potential differences between regional and local priorities will need to be proactively managed.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

Current and next Long-term Plan

62.     The following work will be prioritised in coming months to operationalise the Auckland Plan:

·   making the key elements of the long-term plan that require governance oversight more visible with clearly stated financial information and outcomes.  This includes identifying and finalising the information required to form part of the regular reporting to the Finance and Performance Committee

·   setting up the framework and approach for outcome reporting in the 2018/2019 Annual Report, supported by the Auckland Plan annual scorecard

·   embedding the Auckland Plan into the business and scoping for the preparatory work required for the next Long-term Plan.

Measuring and reporting

63.     Work will continue to complete the baseline for those measures where data sets are outstanding. Work will also continue across the council family on improving alignment between measurement and reporting.

Reporting to committee

64.     The Planning Committee will receive the following regular reporting on the Auckland Plan 2050:

·   impacts on the content or implementation of the Plan – reported six monthly, next report due July 2019

·   Auckland Plan scorecard, containing a commentary on observed trends – reported annually, first report due July 2019

·   an analysis report that uses the measures as well as additional data-sets to explain the trends. This will provide a stronger evidence base for decision making in time to help inform decision making on the next Long-term Plan - first report due in 2020.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Baseline Measures Report 2018

127

b

Place-based plans status and timing

173

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Vanessa  Blakelock – Team Leader Strategic Scanning

Authorisers

Denise O’Shaughnessy – Manager Strategic Advice

Jacques  Victor - GM Auckland Plan Strategy and Research

Jim Quinn - Chief of Strategy

 


Planning Committee

27 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Planning Committee

27 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Planning Committee

27 November 2018

 

 

City Centre to Māngere Light Rail Update

 

File No.: CP2018/21662

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To provide the Planning Committee with an update of the New Zealand Transport Agency-led City Centre to Māngere Light Rail Project, including new governance arrangements and council’s role in the project.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       Substantial technical work done since 2012 shows the need for a new rapid transit connection through the central isthmus and onto Māngere and the airport.  This connection will help address several major transport challenges that are increasingly negatively impacting on Auckland’s economic, employment and social outcomes.

3.       The project’s objectives are focussed on the role of light rail in enabling and supporting access to employment, housing development and urban regeneration opportunities, particularly in the substantial public land holdings in the corridor.

4.       In early 2017 the boards of Auckland Transport and the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) confirmed light rail as the long-term mode for the corridor.  The August 2017 update to the Auckland Transport Alignment Project (ATAP) identified the City Centre to Mt Roskill section of the corridor as a first decade priority (although it did not specify the mode). 

5.       The 2018 ATAP update confirmed that light rail should be delivered along the entire corridor as a first decade priority.  ATAP was endorsed by Cabinet and supported by the Governing Body in April 2018.

6.       Until recently Auckland Transport led the development of the project.  However, in May 2018 the Minister of Transport assigned responsibility for planning, funding and delivering the project to NZTA. 

7.       While NZTA leads the project, Auckland Council and Auckland Transport continue to have substantial ongoing roles in the planning, delivery and, ultimately, the operations, of light rail in the corridor.

8.       Completing the City Centre to Māngere light rail project will require substantial public investment.  Making the most of this investment, particularly in terms of its potential to unlock growth and improve urban amenity, will require a comprehensive urban planning response from Auckland Council and Homes. Land. Community (HLC) – a development focussed subsidiary of Housing New Zealand.     

9.       The Council-led Mass Transit Spatial Programme, approved by the Planning Committee in August 2017, is a critical element of its overall planning response.     

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Planning Committee:

a)      note that the New Zealand Transport Agency has been confirmed as the lead delivery agency for the City Centre to Māngere light rail project;

b)      support Auckland Council’s ongoing involvement in delivering the project, including strategic input, urban planning and regulatory advice.  

 

 

Horopaki / Context

Previous investigations

10.     The need for a rapid transit connection between the City Centre and Māngere, and onto Auckland International Airport, has been highlighted in several strategic transport plans over the last decade including:

·   City Centre Future Access Study 1 & 2 (2012-13)

·   Central Access Strategy (2014-15)

·   Central Access Plan, Strategic Case and Programme Business Case (2015-16)

·   Southwest Multi-Modal Airport Rapid Transit (SMART) study (2010-14)

·   SMART Indicative Business Case (2015)

·   Advanced Bus Solutions Study (2016-17)

·   Airport Access Programme Business Case (2017)  

11.     In 2016 the first iteration of ATAP identified mass transit along the corridor as a second decade (2028-38) priority.  The 2017 ATAP update prioritised the City Centre to Mt Roskill section of the corridor for delivery in the first decade.  Neither the 2016 nor the 2017 version of ATAP specified a mode for the corridor, instead both referred to “mass transit”.

12.     In early 2017 the boards of both NZTA and Auckland Transport confirmed light rail as the optimal long term mode for this corridor.  The boards noted that further work was needed to consider the timeframes for implementing light rail along the corridor and to determine whether an interim upgrade to an advanced bus service was warranted in the meantime. 

13.     ATAP was again updated in 2018 to reflect the priorities of the new government and the refreshed Auckland Plan (which includes light rail along the corridor as part of the future rapid transit network).  The 2018 ATAP update confirmed light rail along the entire corridor as a first decade priority and set four overarching expectations for the project:

·   alleviate current and forecast bus capacity constraints;

·   improve access to growing employment areas, particularly at and around Auckland Airport;

·   unlock significant growth potential along the corridor, especially around Māngere, Onehunga and Mt Roskill;

·   provide an attractive and reliable “one seat journey” for travellers between the City Centre and the airport

14.     The 2018 ATAP update was endorsed by Cabinet and supported by the Governing Body on 30 April 2018.

Project Governance

15.     The project’s Joint Establishment Group was conceived for the first time in early 2018.

16.     Joint governance arrangements involving multiple agencies were established to reflect the diverse objectives of the project and the fact that the corridor includes both local roads and state highways. As part of these arrangements a project office has been set up in central Auckland to enable closer collaboration between staff from partner agencies.          

17.     Until recently Auckland Transport led the development of the project.  However, on 14 May 2018 the Minister of Transport directed the NZTA to “plan, fund, design, supervise, construct and maintain rapid transit networks and/or projects, including light rail” (Gazette Notice Number 2018-go2500).


 

18.     Several factors underpinned this decision:

·   it is a nationally significant project that will form a core part of Auckland’s rapid transit network and serve New Zealand’s largest employment centre (the City Centre) and its main international gateway;

·   the greater focus on the project’s role in unlocking growth, particularly through Housing New Zealand’s large-scale redevelopment plans on government-owned land along the corridor;

·   the high priority the government has assigned to the development of rapid transit in cities, as outlined in its policy statement on transport (the GPS) and through ATAP;

·   the creation of a rapid transit activity class in the GPS, which now enables NZTA to fund projects such as light rail from the National Land Transport Fund;

·   the debt constraints faced by Auckland Council.

19.     A steering group meets regularly to guide the project’s development.  The group consists of representatives from the four partner agencies - NZTA, Auckland Council, Auckland Transport and HLC.

Business case process

20.     The NZTA led single stage business case for the project is nearing completion.

21.     The business case will:

·   indicate a preferred route, including indicative stop locations;

·   provide analysis of the costs and benefits of the project;

·   outline an indicative implementation programme

22.     Staff from Auckland Council, Auckland Transport and Panuku Development Auckland have provided input into the development of the business case.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

What are the existing challenges the project will address?

23.     The project’s business case describes three high level challenges that light rail between the City Centre and Māngere will address:

·   increasingly constrained access to the key economic hubs of the City Centre and the airport precinct will limit the growth in prosperity of Auckland and New Zealand – cars and buses cannot provide the level of access required to enable these centres to reach their potential in terms of employment, economic activity and amenity (particularly the City Centre which is home to the largest concentration of high value jobs in the country). The City Rail Link will transform access to the City Centre for those communities that live along the existing heavy rail corridors, light rail will do the same for a new and different set of communities;

·   poor urban amenity, access and travel choice is reducing liveability and contributing to sustained deprivation for residents in parts of the corridor – light rail will deliver a substantial improvement in access to jobs and other opportunities for some of the most deprived communities in New Zealand. It will also catalyse improved amenity and urban regeneration for those same communities; 

·   public and private land in the corridor is not fulfilling its potential to help address Auckland’s housing shortage – light rail will enhance the development attractiveness of the corridor and enable more people to live there than would otherwise be possible.   The extent of Housing New Zealand’s plans to intensively redevelop its land holdings in Māngere, Mt Roskill and Onehunga is in part predicated on the access improvements that light rail will bring.

Auckland Council’s role

24.     Central government is continuing to investigate whether legislative change is required to support the delivery of this project.  Staff will report back when further information is available.

25.     While NZTA are leading the project, Auckland Council and Auckland Transport have significant ongoing roles:

·   leading urban planning along the corridor and ensuring the project is well integrated with land use planning. This entails:

-    leading a corridor study in accordance with August 2017 Planning Committee resolutions (see below);

-    ensuring the business case aligns with wider growth and transport strategies;

-    ensuring the route selection process considers growth opportunities and optimum urban and transit outcomes.

·   determining whether any changes to the Auckland Unitary Plan are required over time to optimise development opportunities and maximise the benefits of light rail in the medium and long term; 

·   various regulatory roles in relation to, for example, the processing of consents; 

·   Auckland Transport is likely to operate light rail once it is complete and is currently providing advice on how it will integrate with the rest of the transport network

Integration of light rail with urban outcomes

26.     There are approximately 57,000 dwellings, and 170,000 residents, within one kilometre of the corridor.  The Auckland Unitary Plan provides capacity for an additional 175,000 dwellings in the corridor.

27.     While the Auckland Unitary Plan provides for substantial growth, assessing land use planning along the corridor is critical to maximising the benefits of the investment in light rail.  Specifically, it is important that any future land use planning supports the growth that light rail can, and will likely, generate. Quality place-making will be required to support urban regeneration within the corridor.

28.     Auckland Council has a key role to play in this respect, primarily facilitated through the corridor study being done by the Plans and Places Department. The corridor study will identify the constraints and opportunities for possible interventions along the corridor. It will inform the preparation of any spatial planning work and/or statutory planning processes that may be required to guide and manage land use and built form changes arising from expected growth and intensification.

29.     The study is progressing well. Final versions of the supporting topic papers are nearing completion and drafting of the corridor study itself is underway.

30.     Council officers are also working alongside HLC and HNZ on the Auckland Housing Programme to help prepare HLC’s spatial delivery strategy, with a specific focus on Māngere and Mt Roskill. This work includes the identification of urban development opportunities and built infrastructure needs, and consideration of how best to achieve Māori outcomes.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe /
Local impacts and local board views

31.     The project passes through five local board areas - Waitematā, Albert-Eden, Puketāpapa, Maungakiekie-Tāmaki and Māngere-Otahuhu.  NZTA has provided briefings for the chairs (or their representatives) of these boards twice in recent months. Individual follow-up meetings with the five local boards have recently been completed.

32.     The project’s communications and engagement strategy focuses on ensuring local boards and their communities are given opportunities to fully engage in the project throughout its development.

33.     The purpose of engagement at a local neighbourhood level is to:

·   inform the wider Auckland community and neighbourhoods about the preferred route for the City Centre to Māngere line;

·   re-start the conversation with the community;

·   build support and advocacy for the project;

·   give people confidence that they will be well informed and have the opportunity to be involved.

34.     Initial meetings have been held with priority stakeholders such as Heart of the City, Dominion Road Business Association and Māngere Town Centre Business Association, and will continue on a rolling basis.

35.     NZTA wants to make sure elected members are kept up-to-date and intend use existing communications channels of Auckland Council, Auckland Transport and HLC.

36.     Specific workshops with councillors and local boards are proposed in the first quarter of 2019 as part of public engagement.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

37.     The project has the potential to impact positively on the social and economic well-being of Māori living in the corridor through improved access to jobs and education.  Māori will also benefit from the additional housing in the corridor that the project will enable.  In particular, Māngere contains one of the highest concentrations of Māori in Auckland and will be one of the areas that benefits the most from the provision of light rail.

38.     NZTA is leading iwi engagement on the project and is developing a Māori/mana whenua engagement strategy.  To inform the project’s development, iwi will have the opportunity to provide Cultural Value Assessments (CVAs) for different parts of the corridor. Identifying issues, opportunities and aspirations relevant to mana whenua groups and matāwaka is also a key theme of the Council led corridor study.

39.     Ongoing iwi involvement in the project will likely include (but not be limited to) inputting into the design and delivery phases, and advising as to how the project can maximise benefits for Māori well-being.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

40.     The financial arrangements for the delivery of the project are yet to be finalised.  Central Government has made provision for $1.8 billion of seed funding for light rail (including the proposed City Centre to North West corridor) through the ATAP process.  It is likely that some form of third-party funding and financing will be involved in the project’s delivery.

41.     Staff time spent on the project is covered within existing departmental budgets

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

42.     There are several significant financial, reputational and timing (i.e. risk of delay in project delivery) risks associated with this project.  Most of these are due to the scale of the project and because it will be the first light rail project undertaken in New Zealand.  NZTA is developing a register to help mitigate and manage risks.

43.     The decision by government to assign responsibility for delivering the project to NZTA significantly reduces the scale of any financial risks Auckland Council may have otherwise been exposed to.


 

44.     During project delivery, and following the commencement of light rail services, Auckland Council may be required to make decisions in relation to land use planning in the corridor.  Any associated risks will be identified and managed as they arise.  The corridor study and other preparatory work currently underway will likely help in this regard.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

45.     The single stage business case for the project is nearing completion.  It will need to be approved by the NZTA board and, potentially, Cabinet.

46.     Consenting, detailed design, procurement and land acquisition processes need to be completed before construction can commence.  NZTA are working through the timeframes for these processes.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.    

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Robert Simpson - Principal Transport Advisor

Amanda Harland - Lead Growth and Infrastructure Strategy Advisor

Authorisers

Jacques  Victor - GM Auckland Plan Strategy and Research

Jim Quinn - Chief of Strategy

 


Planning Committee

27 November 2018

 

 

Amendments to the Roading Exchange Policy

 

File No.: CP2018/20863

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.     To approve amendments to the Roading Exchange Policy to allow the requirement for a developer to provide a guarantee or a bond for a road exchange transaction to be waived in certain cases.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.     The Roading Exchange Policy was developed by Auckland Council and Auckland Transport to encourage developers to achieve good design outcomes and optimise land development opportunities (see policy in Attachment A).

3.     The policy enables developers to exchange stopped roads (i.e. roads that will be closed to enable development) for new roads that will be created as a result of development. Developers are required to provide a guarantee or a bond to Auckland Transport to ensure that the new roads are built and constructed to public road standards.

4.     Since the creation of the roading exchange policy several developers with a good track record have applied to use the roading exchange function. However, council staff have identified some improvements that could be made to the policy.

5.     Staff recommend the road exchange process be made more efficient, through allowing the requirement for a guarantee or a bond to be waived in some cases. These are where Auckland Council and Auckland Transport staff consider that:

·   a developer is reputable, with a good history in completing similar developments, and has the financial means to complete the proposed development, and

·   the roads being stopped and created are not of material benefit to the rest of the wider roading network, and

·   there are appropriate mechanisms in place, whether under the Resource Management Act 1991 or otherwise, to ensure the developer is required to construct new public roads that are fully compliant with the public road standards required by Auckland Council and Auckland Transport, before obtaining subdivision titles for their development.

6.     In such cases, it is recommended that Auckland Council indemnify (guarantee) Auckland Transport for any reasonable costs incurred by Auckland Transport as a result of a developer breaching its obligations to construct new roads. Staff consider that this will create minimal financial risk to the council as the guarantee or bond requirement would only be waived according to the criteria above (i.e. the developer has a good financial position and there are mechanisms in place to ensure they do construct roads to desired standards).

7.     The amendments will improve on the status quo, as they will allow developers who meet the criteria (such as crown agencies) to progress subdivisions more quickly and efficiently.

8.     Since the policy is jointly owned by Auckland Transport and Auckland Council, if the Planning Committee approves these amendments, they will then be forwarded to the Auckland Transport Board for their consideration and approval.


 

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendations

That the Planning Committee:

a)      approve amendments to the Roading Exchange Policy to allow waiving of the requirement for a developer to provide a guarantee or bond for road exchanges according to the criteria shown below:

i)        a developer is reputable, with a good history in completing similar developments, and has the financial means to complete the proposed development, and

ii)       the roads being stopped and created are not of material benefit to the rest of the wider roading network, and

iii)      there are appropriate mechanisms in place, whether under the Resource Management Act 1991or otherwise, to ensure the developer is required to construct new public roads that are fully compliant with the public road standards required by Auckland Council and Auckland Transport, before obtaining subdivision titles for their development.

b)      where a guarantee or bond is not applied, approve Auckland Council reimbursing Auckland Transport for any reasonable costs incurred as a result of a developer breaching their obligations to construct new roads.

c)      refer this report and decisions to the Auckland Transport Board for their consideration and approval.

 

 

Horopaki / Context

9.     Auckland Council and Auckland Transport jointly developed the Roading Exchange Policy in 2016. The policy was then approved by Auckland Council’s Planning Committee in November 2016 (resolution number PLA/2016/11) and Auckland Transport Board in February 2017 (Item 11.1). 

10.   The roading exchange policy was established to encourage developers to achieve good design outcomes and optimise land development opportunities. Good design outcomes that the policy supports include:

·   creating connected streets for walking, cycling and vehicles,

·   encouraging developers to locate buildings close to and facing the street

·   improving access to the coast and reserves

·   creating a variety of housing types including affordable houses

·   encouraging more efficient use of land for housing.

Reasons for developing policy

11.   Traditionally, when developers are working in brownfields areas they prefer to create rear lots down long shared driveways, rather than applying to modify public roads.

12.   This is because developers were required to reimburse the council for the value of any ‘stopped road’ created by their development. For example, when a development involved the closure of a cul de sac and creation of a through road, the developer would be required to pay for the portion of the cul de sac that they had ‘stopped’ – i.e., closed and then rebuilt as a through road - as well as the cost of the new road.

13.   Developers perceived this as ‘double-dipping’, as Auckland Council was reimbursed for the stopped road but the developer also had to pay for any new roads that were formed through their subdivision, although these roads were then vested to council.

14.   This meant that developers would design their subdivision to avoid modifying existing roads, leading to bad design outcomes and more efficient use of land for housing.

15.   The Roading Exchange Policy was created to address this situation, by allowing developers to exchange ‘stopped roads’ for new roads. Since the creation of the roading exchange policy several developers with a good track record have applied to use the policy in both brownfields and greenfields contexts.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and adviceUse of bonds for roading exchanges

16.   When a developer applies through the roading exchange policy, to exchange a stopped road for a new road, Auckland Transport currently requires them to provide a financial bond i.e. an unconditional promise from a bank to pay an agreed amount of money on-demand. This is provided for security to ensure that the developer completes the new roads to required standards.

17.   The bond is purchased by the developer at a cost, with lenders or financiers generally requiring security over developer’s property, normally in the form of a mortgage. Bonds can be called upon by Auckland Transport in the event that the developer does not complete the physical works required.

18.   Whilst this approach suits most developments there are some circumstances where staff consider that the requirement for a guarantee or bond should be waived. For example, some crown agencies with a good track record, such as HLC (Homes. Lands. Communities), have applied through the roading exchange policy and been required to pay bonds. This requirement could have been waived without creating significant risk to the council.

19.   Different forms of security may also be appropriate depending on the circumstances. For example, rather than a bond, the council or Auckland Transport could require a parent company guarantee. This is a promise from an entity that owns a subsidiary company to ‘make good’ on the subsidiary company’s obligations in the event that their subsidiary does not comply with its obligations. However, bonds are the preferred form of security.

Options considered: Status quo versus amending the policy

20.    Staff have considered two main options for the roading exchange policy. These are:

·   Option one: The status quo: Make no further changes to the policy

·   Option two: Amend the roading exchange policy to allow the requirement for a guarantee or bond to be provided by developers to be waived when certain criteria are met. These are:

o the developer is reputable, with a good track history in completing similar developments, and has the financial means to complete the development

o the roads being stopped and created are not of material benefit to the rest of the wider roading network; and

o there are appropriate mechanisms in place, whether under the Resource Management Act 1991 or otherwise, for the council to ensure that the new public roads are compliant with all required public road standards, before obtaining subdivision titles for their development.

21.      Under option two, in cases where the requirement for a guarantee or bond was waived, Auckland Council would reimburse Auckland Transport for any reasonable costs incurred as a result of a developer breaching their obligations to construct new roads.

22.      Through this option, the waiving of the guarantee or bond requirement would be applied according to a continuum. For developers with either no track record or a poor track record Auckland Council and Auckland Transport would require bonds covering the full value of works. 

23.      At the next level, there may be developers with a good track record but whose development will take place over multiple years and at a large scale. Such developments will generally also impact on the wider roading network. This type of developer would be required to provide a bond but the quantum would be commensurate with the risk involved.

24.      Finally, the guarantee or bond requirement might be fully waived for developers who a) have a good track record and b) whose obligations can be secured through other mechanisms. For example, a developer might not receive titles to their subdivision until the new roads are constructed to required standards and vested in Auckland Council.

Benefits and disadvantages of amending the policy

25.    The benefits and disadvantages of both options are outlined below in Table One.

Table One: Options analysis for amending roading exchange policy

Options

Benefits

Disadvantages

Option one:
The status quo: Make no further changes to the policy

 

No administrative effort required to change process

No financial risk to the council

 

 

Some developments may be stalled because developers will not provide a bond for new roads.

Developers will be more likely to choose alternatives, such as ‘rear lots’, that do not create good design outcomes

Option two:
Amend the roading exchange policy to allow the requirement for a guarantee or bond to be waived when certain criteria are met.

(Recommended)

Makes roading exchange process more efficient when the criteria are met

Enables more housing developments to proceed

Encourages better design outcomes and more efficient use of land.

Minor financial risks to the council, as we will act as a guarantor for the new public roads. This can be managed through other controls, such as approval to subdivide.

Some administrative effort required to change process

Recommended option

26.      As the analysis shows, option one would not require any further effort by staff. However, it could lead to delays to development, if a developer will not provide a bond, or poor design outcomes if a developer deliberately designs to avoid the bond requirement.

27.      Overall, option two: amending the Roading Exchange Policy is recommended. It will make the roading exchange policy for new subdivisions more efficient and encourage better design outcomes.

28.      Financial risks of this option for Auckland Council are considered to be minimal, as the requirement for a guarantee or bond would only be waived in situations where developers meet all the other criteria outlined above.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe /
Local impacts and local board views

29.      Local boards have not been consulted on this specific proposal to amend the Roading Exchange Policy. However, local boards and local communities benefit from quality design which the recommended amendments will encourage.


 

30.      Local boards have been consulted in relation to one proposal on the North Shore, which involves a reserve and road exchange. Other road exchange proposals lodged by Tāmaki Redevelopment Company and HLC have been the subject of workshops with local boards who are generally supportive.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

31.    Māori are not impacted in any greater way than the public generally.  Māori developers/land owners may benefit from the proposed amendments.

32.    Māori have not been consulted on this specific proposal to amend the Roading Exchange Policy.

33.    Māori have been (and will be) consulted on all significant road exchanges and road stopping applications considered under the policy.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

34.    As outlined above, if the council approves the amendments then it will be agreeing to indemnify Auckland Transport against any costs incurred if developers do not construct roads to required standards.

35.    Six developers have made applications under this policy since it was adopted in 2017. The exact values of specific bonds are commercially sensitive, but values are typically between $1 to $10 million.

36.    Staff consider that the financial implications of council providing indemnification are minor, as only low-risk developments would have the requirement for a guarantee or bonds waived.

37.    In one recent example, a developer has asked for the bond requirement to be waived where the new roads and roads to be closed only service their development. In that case, if the developer does not construct the roads, there would be no access to their dwellings. This represents a low-risk scenario, where the subdivision process would not allow titles to be issued until the roads were fully formed.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

38.    The policy has had good up-take from leading developers. The risk of not acting on the advice in this report is that good developers will produce ‘sub-optimal’ design outcomes that cause them less cost and delays. However, roads generally are slow to be re-designed once built and residents will live with the results for a generation.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

39.      If approved by the Planning Committee, staff will forward the amended policy to the Auckland Transport Board for their consideration and approval.


 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Roading Exchange Policy with proposed amendments shown in track changes

187

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Alina Wimmer - Manager Development Strategy

Chris Linwood - Senior Solicitor

Authorisers

Barry Potter - Director Infrastructure and Environmental Services

Jim Quinn - Chief of Strategy

 


Planning Committee

27 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Planning Committee

27 November 2018

 

 

Proposed Plan Change 14  – Improving consistency of provisions in Chapter D Overlays, Chapter E Auckland-wide, Chapter J Definitions, Appendix 2, Appendix 17 and the Viewer of the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in part) – Volcanic Viewshafts and Height Sensitive Areas

 

File No.: CP2018/21631

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To obtain approval from the Planning Committee (the ‘Committee’) to include amendments to the Volcanic Viewshaft and Height Sensitive Area provisions within Proposed Plan Change 14 – Improving consistency of provisions in Chapter D Overlays, Chapter E Auckland-wide, Chapter J Definitions, Appendix 2, Appendix 17 and the Viewer of the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in part) (PC14).

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       On 6 November 2018 the Planning Committee resolved to publicly notify a series of amendments to improve the consistency of the Auckland Unitary Plan. A decision on proposed amendments relating to Volcanic Viewshafts and Height Sensitive Areas was deferred to enable further engagement with the Tūpuna Maunga o Tāmaki Makaurau Authority (the Authority).

3.       Further engagement has now occurred, agreement has been reached with the Authority and a revised set of amendments is recommended for inclusion in the proposed plan change. 

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Planning Committee:

a)      approve the inclusion of the proposed amendments to the Volcanic Viewshafts and Height Sensitive Areas Overlay set out in Attachment A to the agenda report within Proposed Plan Change 14 to the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part).

b)      endorse the section 32 report in respect of the proposed amendments to the Volcanic Viewshafts and Height Sensitive Areas Overlay included as Attachment B to the agenda report.

c)      delegate to the Chair and Deputy Chair of the Planning Committee and a Member of the Independent Māori Statutory Board the authority to approve minor amendments to the wording of this aspect of Proposed Plan Change 14 prior to public notification.

d)      note that staff will to continue discussions with the Tūpuna Maunga o Tāmaki Makaurau Authority regarding the Height Sensitive Areas in the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part), and that those discussions may lead to further amendments being recommended.

 

 


 

Horopaki / Context

4.       As a result of the scale of the Auckland Unitary Plan and the nature of the layered provisions, a number of technical issues affecting the usability and overall integration between different parts of the plan have been identified. Since the Auckland Unitary Plan became operative in part on 15 November 2016, the Council has been registering potential issues that have been identified by both staff and members of the public.

5.       On 6 November 2018 the Committee approved the public notification of Proposed Plan Change 14 which introduces amendments to address technical issues within Chapter D Overlays, Chapter E Auckland-wide, Chapter J Definitions, Appendix 2, Appendix 17 and the Auckland Unitary Plan viewer.

6.       Shortly prior to the meeting, the Tūpuna Maunga o Tāmaki Makaurau Authority raised concerns with aspects of the proposed plan change that relate to the Volcanic Viewshaft and Height Sensitive Area provisions of the Auckland Unitary Plan. The Committee requested staff to engage further with the Authority on the proposed changes and to report back to the Planning Committee on 27 November 2018.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

Overview of the Proposed Amendments to the Volcanic Viewshaft and Height Sensitive Area Provisions

7.       The purpose of the Volcanic Viewshafts and Height Sensitive Areas Overlay is to protect significant views of Auckland’s volcanic cones and to limit the scale of development on and immediately around the volcanic cones. The volcanic viewshafts and height sensitive areas are identified on the Auckland Unitary Plan maps.

8.       A number of technical issues within the Volcanic Viewshafts and Height Sensitive Areas Overlay have been identified. Table 1 below summarises the proposed amendments to address these technical issues. The amendments are set out in Attachment A.

 

Theme

Description of amendment

Temporary construction and safety structures  

 

Amendments are proposed to the standards for temporary construction and safety structures within viewshafts. Under the current provisions, it is a non-complying activity for temporary construction and safety structures that intrude into the viewshaft which are erected for more than 30 days.  This does not provide sufficient time, for example, for a crane to erect a building.  Amendments are proposed to permit temporary construction and safety structures for up to 12 months, with provision for up to 24 months as a restricted discretionary activity. It is considered that the proposed provisions will not unduly compromise views of the maunga due to the temporary nature of any impacts.

 

 

Buildings that intrude a viewshaft but are not visible due to presence of a landform

 

 

Amendments are proposed to the standards for buildings that intrude into a viewshaft but are not visible due to the presence of a landform. The amendments aim to make it clear that only buildings that have intruded into the floor of the viewshaft are to be considered under the provisions.

Upgrades to utility structures in volcanic viewshafts and in height sensitive areas 

Currently, in the volcanic viewshafts and in height sensitive areas around the maunga, new network utilities that do not comply with standards, or upgrades to existing utility structures that do not comply with standards, are non-complying activities with compulsory public notification.  Other buildings in the same locations, such as houses, are permitted or restricted discretionary activities if they are less than 9m (subject to any other height constraint in the Auckland Unitary Plan).  The change proposed is to provide for utilities that are less than 9m high as restricted discretionary activities. 

 

Traffic signal height in volcanic viewshaft and Height sensitive areas

Many traffic-related structures are enabled in the volcanic viewshafts and in height sensitive areas, up to a height of 5.3m.  These include signs and cameras.  It is not entirely clear that ‘traffic signals’ (e.g. traffic lights) are included in this list of structures.  For clarity, it is proposed to add ‘traffic signals’ to the list of structures enabled in these areas.

 

 

9.       Since the last Planning Committee meeting, productive discussions have been undertaken with Tupuna Maunga o Tamaki Makaurau Authority. The Authority is now comfortable with the four proposed amendments outlined in the table above.

Relationship between the Volcanic Viewshaft and Height Sensitive Area Rules

10.     A further amendment was previously included in Proposed Plan Change 14 to clarify the relationship between the volcanic viewshaft rules and the height sensitive area rules. The council’s interpretation of the Auckland Unitary Plan is that when sites are affected by both rules, the height sensitive area rules take precedence over the viewshaft rules. In practice, this means that in most situations, buildings are permitted up to 9 metres. The Tūpuna Maunga o Tāmaki Makaurau Authority does not agree with this interpretation and has sought a declaration about this from the Environment Court.

11.     In relation to this interpretation, staff and representatives of the Authority agree that prior to undertaking a plan change, a more comprehensive review of the height sensitive area provisions should be undertaken to establish whether a better approach exists. Staff will work with the Authority’s representatives on this review.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe /
Local impacts and local board views

12.     Local boards have been consulted on the development of PC14. In September 2018 a draft of PC14 and the Section 32 Evaluation Report were provided to local boards with the invitation to discuss any aspects of the plan change.

13.     Local boards will be invited to provide written feedback on PC14 through the processes established with Local Board Services. Any feedback received from local boards will be assessed and included verbatim in the final recommendations on the plan changes.

14.     Local boards did not provide any feedback in relation to the volcanic viewshafts and height sensitive areas.


 

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

15.     Impacts on Māori of Proposed Plan Change 14 and the engagement that has occurred with Mana Whenua were discussed in the 6 November 2018 report to the Planning Committee. A further understanding of the impacts of the proposed amendments to the Volcanic Viewshaft and Height Sensitive Area provisions has been obtained through discussions with the Tūpuna Maunga Authority. Those discussions have led to amendments being made to the proposed plan change.   

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

16.     The costs of the plan change process are within the Plans and Places department’s operating budget.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

17.     There are no risks associated with the recommendations made in this report. 

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

18.     If approval is obtained to notify the volcanic viewshaft and height sensitive area amendments within PC 14, public notification will likely occur late in November 2018.  

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Proposed Plan Change 14 - Amendments relating to Volcanic Viewshafts and Height Sensitive Areas

199

b

Proposed Plan Change 14 - Section 32 Report - Volcanic Viewshafts and Height Sensitive Areas Excerpt

211

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Todd Elder - Planner

Authorisers

John Duguid - General Manager - Plans and Places

Jim Quinn - Chief of Strategy

 


Planning Committee

27 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Planning Committee

27 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Planning Committee

27 November 2018

 

 

Sites and Places of Significance to Mana Whenua – Tranche 1: Plan Changes to the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) and Auckland Council District Plan - Hauraki Gulf Islands Section 2018

 

File No.: CP2018/21466

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To seek approval to notify a plan change to the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) (Auckland Unitary Plan) and a plan change to the Auckland Council District Plan – Hauraki Gulf Islands Section 2018 (HGI Plan) to add Sites and Places of Significance to Mana Whenua to the existing schedules in the respective plans.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       In collaboration with 19 mana whenua entities, council has initiated a Māori Cultural Heritage Programme (Programme) to improve the understanding and protection of Māori cultural heritage across the Auckland region.

3.       As part of the implementation of the findings of the Programme, council has initiated the preparation of two plan changes to schedule Sites and Places of Significance to Mana Whenua by amending the text and maps of the Auckland Unitary Plan and the HGI Plan. These two plan changes form Tranche 1 in a series of future plan changes for scheduling sites of significance to mana whenua.

4.       The purpose of the two plan changes is to recognise and protect the cultural values of the nominated Sites and Places of Significance to Mana Whenua within the region by way of scheduling in the two plans.

5.       11 mana whenua entities have completed assessments for sites in the Tranche 1 plan changes, and 38 sites in total are proposed for scheduling (Attachment A – List of Nominated Sites Proposed for Scheduling). 34 sites are proposed to be scheduled in Schedule 12 of the Auckland Unitary Plan and four sites are proposed to be scheduled in Appendix 1f of the HGI plan. The nominated sites proposed to be scheduled meet the Auckland Unitary Plan’s Regional Policy Statement (RPS) criteria for identification and evaluation of new sites for inclusion into the two plans.

6.       As part of consultation on the matter, staff have briefed all 19 mana whenua entities, affected landowners and 14 local boards on the draft plan changes. All parties support the scheduling, except the Ministry of Education.

7.       Adding the nominated sites to Schedule 12 of the Auckland Unitary Plan and Appendix 1f of the HGI Plan is considered to be the appropriate method to meet the purpose of the draft plan changes. Scheduling would lead to recognition and protection of the cultural values of the places in a clear manner. Scheduling the sites into the plans will also encourage collaborative engagement with mana whenua and enable the consideration of cultural values through the resource consent process

8.       Staff seek endorsement from the committee to publicly notify the two proposed plan changes in accordance with the process set out in Schedule 1 to the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA).


 

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Planning Committee:

a)      approve public notification of a proposed plan change to the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) to amend schedule 12 of the plan to include 34 Sites and Places of Significance to Mana Whenua.

b)      approve public notification of a proposed plan change to the Auckland Council District Plan – Hauraki Gulf Islands Section 2018 to amend appendix 1f of the plan to add four Māori heritage sites.

c)      approve the proposed plan changes and the section 32 evaluation report (contained as Attachment C to the agenda report).

d)      delegate authority to the Planning Committee chairperson, deputy chairperson and a member of the Independent Māori Statutory Board to make any final changes to the two plan changes (text and maps) and Section 32 statutory assessment report for the purposes of public notification.

e)      note that the report attachments (A, B, C and D) will remain confidential until the plan changes are publicly notified.

 

 

Horopaki / Context

Current Plan provision

9.       The Auckland Unitary Plan contains 75 scheduled sites and places of significance (Attachment B- Map of Existing and Nominated Sites and Places of Significance to Mana Whenua – existing scheduled sites identified in green dots). There are no Māori Heritage sites listed in the HGI Plan.

Māori Cultural Heritage Programme and Proposed Plan Changes

10.     In 2014 Auckland Council initiated a Māori Cultural Heritage Programme (Programme) in collaboration with 19 mana whenua entities in the Auckland region with the purpose of improving the understanding and protection of Māori cultural heritage, and to identify the best management options that recognise and protect the cultural values of the sites.

11.     As part of this programme of work, to date over 400 sites and places of significance have been nominated by mana whenua for consideration.

12.     In March 2017 a Planning Committee resolution (PLA/2017/39) approved engagement with mana whenua and landowners in order to develop a draft plan change to add sites of significance to mana whenua to the Auckland Unitary Plan and the HGI plan that meet the criteria set out in the RPS section of the Auckland Unitary Plan.

13.     Having reviewed the information provided by mana whenua against the criteria set out in the RPS section, staff recommend that two plan changes are initiated to identify new Sites and Places of Significance to Mana Whenua in council’s statutory documents (Auckland Unitary Plan and HGI Plans).


 

Purpose and Options

14.     The purpose of the plan changes would be to recognise and protect the cultural values of the nominated Sites and Places of Significance to Mana Whenua within the region.

15.     To identify and protect the nominated sites and places of significance, the following options are available:

·   Option 1 – Adopt a ‘do nothing’ approach/retain the status quo

·   Option 2 – Other methods

·   Option 3 – Scheduling nominated sites into the Auckland Unitary Plan and/or HGI Plans.

Option 1 – Adopt a ‘do nothing’ approach/retain the status quo

16.     The ‘do nothing’ option means no change to the way sites are recognised or protected, including being added to the schedules of the Auckland Unitary Plan and HGI. By doing nothing, the values of these places will not be actively protected, which may lead to further loss of their cultural values through inappropriate subdivision, use and development.

17.     Staff do not support the ‘do nothing’ option as it is not considered an appropriate option to achieve the purpose of the RMA as the method does not achieve active recognition and protection of cultural values across the region.

Option 2 – Other methods

18.     Other methods for the protection and management of Sites and Places of Significance to Mana Whenua include the following regulatory and non-regulatory methods:

i.     land covenants;

ii.     assistance by way of heritage funds, grants and other incentives;

iii.    reserve management plans;

iv.   iwi management plans;

v.    development of non-statutory plans and strategies (e.g. centre plans, area plans, park masterplans);

vi.   the use of Memoranda of Understanding;

vii.   joint management agreements between a local authority and an iwi authority; or

viii.  nomination of various sites for listing under the Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act 2014.

19.     The use of the above methods can provide recognition and in some cases protection of specific sites through bespoke processes, however in isolation these options are not considered the most appropriate option to achieve the purpose of the RMA. Although these methods may be effective in recognising cultural values of individual sites, using a suite of different methods is not an efficient way to achieve statutory recognition and protection of cultural values for sites across the region.  

20.     Overall staff do not support the use of ‘other methods’ alone to achieve the purpose of the Act.


 

Option 3 – Scheduling nominated sites into the Auckland Unitary Plan and/or HGI Plans

21.     The RPS provides a framework for the identification, protection and recognition of Sites and Places of Significance to Mana Whenua by way of scheduling. The methods prescribed in the Auckland Unitary Plan and HGI Plan give effect to the RPS.

22.     The RPS objectives in relation to the recognition and protection of mana whenua values are contained in sections B6.3 and B6.5.  The objectives seek to identify, protect and enhance the tangible and intangible values of sites and places of significance to mana whenua. The RPS policy seeks to protect cultural and historic heritage areas that are of significance to mana whenua. Policy 6.5.5.2 sets out criteria for identifying and evaluating new sites for inclusion into the two plans.

23.     The rules of the two plans (Auckland Unitary Plan and HGI) are triggered when a development is proposed on a site affected by the Sites and Places of Significance to Mana Whenua overlay or the Māori Heritage sites schedule.  Among other criteria, the matters of discretion specifically relate to the effects of the proposal on the values and associations of mana whenua with the site or place, including effects on the context of the local history and whakapapa.

24.     The addition of the nominated sites to the Auckland Unitary Plan and HGI Plan schedules (Schedule 12 of Auckland Unitary Plan) and Appendix 1f of HGI Plan) will provide for the identification and protection of these places within the plans and will ensure their cultural values are considered when the use and development of these places is proposed. 

25.     Adding new sites into the Auckland Unitary Plan and HGI Plan schedules (Option 3) is therefore considered the most appropriate option to achieve the purpose of the plan change and the Act.  

26.     Staff support the method described in Option 3 as the basis for initiating the two plan changes. 

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

Development of the two proposed plan changes (Option 3)

27.     From the 400 nominated sites, 11 mana whenua entities have completed assessments and have provided cultural values for 38 sites within the region.  Participating mana whenua entities are:

i.     Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei

ii.     Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whātua

iii.    Te Ahiwaru

iv.   Te Patukirikiri

v.    Te Kawerau a Maki

vi.   Te Ākitai Waiohua

vii.   Ngāti Tamaoho

viii.  Ngāti Manuhiri

ix.   Te Uri o Hau

x.    Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki

xi.   Ngāti Paoa


 

28.     34 sites are located within the Auckland Unitary Plan area and four sites fall within the HGI Plan. Refer to Attachment B- Map of Existing and Nominated Sites and Places of Significance to Mana Whenua – (nominated sites shown in red dots) for location of nominated sites proposed for scheduling.

29.     The proposed amendments to the two plans form Tranche 1 plan changes in a series of plan changes to include new sites of significance to mana whenua into the council’s plans.

Proposed Plan Change

30.     The proposed plan changes recommend:

·   addition of 34 sites to the Auckland Unitary Plan’s Sites and Places of Significance to Mana Whenua Overlay, as identified in Chapter L Schedule 12;

·   addition of four sites to the Hauraki Gulf Island District Plan’s Appendix 1f Schedule of Māori Heritage sites – Inner islands.

31.     The proposed plan changes do not alter any of the existing objectives, policies, rules or assessment criteria set out in the two plans.

32.     14 of the 38 nominated sites are already scheduled in the Auckland Unitary Plan within the Outstanding Natural Features Overlay Schedule (ONF) and/or the Schedule of Historic Heritage. While the respective schedules include ‘mana whenua’ as a criterion, the 14 sites currently do not reference this criterion as a factor for their scheduling. The draft plan changes therefore:

·   apply the ‘importance to Mana Whenua’ criterion to nine nominated sites scheduled in the Auckland Unitary Plan’s ONF overlay in Chapter L Schedule 6 (Schedule 6);

·   apply the ‘Mana Whenua’ criterion to the four sites scheduled in the Auckland Unitary Plan’s Schedule of Historic Heritage in Chapter L Schedule 14.1 (Schedule 14.1).

33.     The proposed plan change is contained in Attachment C – draft Plan Changes and draft Section 32 document.

34.     Of the 38 nominated sites, 34 are in public ownership including Auckland Council (Parks), Auckland Transport, Watercare, New Zealand Transport Agency, City Rail Link, Ministry of Education and the Department of Conservation. The remainder of the sites are privately owned, either by mana whenua or by private landowners who support the scheduling of the sites.

35.     A list of sites is attached as Attachment A – List of Nominated Sites Proposed for Scheduling.

36.     The Auckland Unitary Plan and the HGI plans contain objectives, policies, and rules to manage and protect Sites and Places of Significance to Mana Whenua (Auckland Unitary Plan and Māori Heritage sites (HGI) at Regional Policy Statement, Regional Coastal Plan, Regional Plan and District Plan level.

Site Nomination and Overlapping Interest

37.     As there is a long history of settlement in Tāmaki Makaurau, many of the nominated sites and places within the region hold significance to multiple mana whenua entities.  All 19 mana whenua entities note and agree that, nomination for inclusion of the site in the schedule by one mana whenua group does not imply that the values or significance held by other mana whenua entities in relation to that site are diminished in any way. 


 

Resource Consent process

38.     Scheduling sites into the two plans will not impact existing lawful activities on the sites.

39.     Any new activity on a site that is proposed to be scheduled (such as a building or structure, land disturbance, infrastructure, etc.) and that would require a resource consent in the Auckland Unitary Plan/HGI Plan is also likely to require consent under other relevant chapters or overlays that may also be applicable to the site.

40.     By scheduling the sites, consideration of mana whenua cultural values would be required as part of any future resource consent assessment. This would provide opportunities for collaborative engagement with mana whenua to enable consideration of cultural values as part of any future activities or works on the sites.

41.     Auckland Council, its CCOs and other stakeholders already work closely with mana whenua entities and the addition of sites of significance to the relevant schedules would have little or no impact on, or place an additional requirement on, this working relationship.

42.     It is important to note that while cultural values have been provided by a mana whenua entity to support scheduling of the site, once any resource consents received for a scheduled site, this will be circulated to all mana whenua entities who have an interest in the area as part of the resource consent process.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe /

Local impacts and local board views

43.     The following landowners and local boards have been briefed on the proposed plan changes.

a)       Auckland Council (Parks)

b)       New Zealand Transport Agency

c)       Watercare Services Limited

d)       Department of Conservation

e)       Ministry of Education

f)       Auckland Transport

g)       Crown (Land Information New Zealand)

h)       City Rail Link Limited

i)        2 Private Landowners

j)        Albert-Eden Local Board

k)       Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

l)        Franklin Local Board

m)     Kaipātiki Local Board

n)       Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

o)       Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

p)       Ōrākei Local Board

q)      Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board

r)       Papakura Local Board

s)       Rodney Local Board

t)        Upper Harbour Local Board

u)       Waiheke Local Board

v)       Waitākere Ranges Local Board

w)      Waitematā Local Board

44.     All local boards and landowners are generally support the inclusion of the nominated sites within the two proposed plan changes. Ministry of Education, Waiheke Local Board, Waitamata Local Board, Rodney Local Board and Franklin Local Board have raised concerns on some of the nominated sites located within their area. Their concerns/comments are noted in Attachment D – Landowner and Local Board feedback on proposed plan changes.

Proposed Plan changes and Local Board Plans

45.     The two proposed plan changes meet several objectives set out in local board plans and provide for local boards to deliver on council’s commitments to Māori at the local level and to meet responsibilities under Te Tiriti o Waitangi and other statutes.  

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

46.     This report addresses matters that relate to two plan changes to protect and manage new nominated Sites and Places of Significance to Mana Whenua. All 19 mana whenua entities have participated and 11 mana whenua entities have actively contributed to Tranche 1 of the Māori Cultural Heritage Programme.

47.     Recognising and protecting mana whenua cultural heritage is identified as an issue of regional significance in the RPS. Policies in the RPS specifically provide for the identification, protection and enhancement of the tangible and intangible values of identified mana whenua cultural heritage through scheduling.

48.     On 15 November 2018, staff briefed mana whenua representatives on the landowner and local board feedback on the two plan changes. At the hui, mana whenua representatives have collectively resolved to support the two proposed plan changes and associated s32 report to be considered by the Planning Committee for public notification.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

49.     Costs associated with the engagement process and preparation and notification of the two plan changes have been allocated in the Plans and Places budget.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

50.     There are potential risks associated with the impact of the proposed plan changes on the use of the land to which they relate, however the risks are considered to be low and outweighed by the benefits of providing statutory protection to the cultural values associated with sites.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

51.     The next steps in the process will be to publicly notify the proposed plan changes, summarise any submissions received and to assign commissioners to hear submissions and make decisions on the plan changes.


 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

List of Nominated Sites Proposed for Scheduling - Confidential

 

b

Map of Existing and Nominated Sites and Places of Significance to Mana Whenua - Confidential

 

c

Proposed Plan Change and Section 32 document - Confidential

 

d

Landowner and Local Board feedback on proposed plan changes - Confidential

 

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Vrinda Moghe - Principal Planner

Anna Papaconstantinou - Planner

Authorisers

John Duguid - General Manager - Plans and Places

Jim Quinn - Chief of Strategy

 


Planning Committee

27 November 2018

 

 

Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) - Proposed Plan Change - Rezoning of Land - Tāmaki Regeneration Project Land Exchanges

 

File No.: CP2018/21604

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To obtain the Planning Committee’s approval to publicly notify the Proposed Plan Change – Rezoning of Land – Tāmaki Regeneration Project Land Exchanges, to the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part).

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       The Tāmaki Regeneration Company has requested the rezoning of parts of three reserves in the Tāmaki area – Taniwha, Maybury and Boundary reserves.  The rezoning is part of the Tāmaki regeneration project which involves transforming housing, streets and open spaces. The plan change involves a series of land swaps and associated rezoning to improve the quality and safety of parks/open spaces in the area.

3.       The land swaps and proposed rezoning have been guided by the draft Tāmaki Open Space Network Plan (Aug 2017). There is sound urban design justification for each of the changes. These relate primarily to improving the usability and safety of the existing reserves.

4.       The proposed changes to the three reserves in Tāmaki were considered by the Planning Committee on 7 August 2018 as part of a wider “Open Space” Plan Change. The Tāmaki changes were however removed from the notified plan change pending community consultation on the draft Open Space Network Plan.

5.       Since 7 August 2018, that consultation has occurred and there is majority community support for the changes. The finalisation of the Tāmaki Open Space Network plan to reflect the community’s feedback has yet to occur.

6.       Approval is sought to notify the plan change. The community will still have an opportunity to comment on the proposed rezoning through the plan change process.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Planning Committee:

a)      approve notification of the proposed plan change – Rezoning of Land – Tāmaki Regeneration Project Land Exchanges (Attachments A and B of the agenda report: Proposed Plan Change Maps and Proposed Plan Change Section 32 Report), to the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part).

b)      delegate to the Chair and Deputy Chair of the Planning Committee, the authority to approve any minor amendments to the proposed plan change prior to notification.

 

 

Horopaki / Context

7.       The Tāmaki Regeneration Company is a joint venture between the Government and Auckland Council and aims to deliver 7500 homes together with new community facilities over the next 20 years.  It is the first urban regeneration company of its kind in New Zealand.

8.       There are three outcome areas for the regeneration project based on community feedback. The following outcome relates to open space.

·   Places and neighbourhoods - Connected, safe, attractive and well-used spaces with quality, healthy homes.

9.       Three reserves within the Tāmaki regeneration area are the subject of the initial phase of land exchanges and rezonings. These are:

i.   Taniwha Reserve

ii.  Maybury Reserve – West

iii.  Boundary Reserve.

10.     The land parcels that are the subject of this plan change were considered by the Planning Committee as part of a wider “Open Space” plan change on 7 August 2018. The Tāmaki component of the plan change was removed pending the completion of public consultation on the Tāmaki Open Space Network Plan.

11.     Since 7 August 2018, the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board has undertaken consultation with the community on the draft network plan.

12.     A copy of the “Consultation Feedback Overview Final Report” is contained in Attachment C. Key findings relevant to the consideration of the three land exchanges are:

·   81% support the proposed land exchanges for Maybury Reserve (number of survey responses=200);

·   75% support the proposed land exchanges for Taniwha Reserve;

·   67% support the proposed land exchanges for Boundary Reserve.

13.     The main themes from those not satisfied with the proposed land exchanges for boundary reserve were flood risks and the concerns for development.

14.     Parks Recreation and Policy staff advise that changes to the draft Tāmaki Open Space Network Plan are still being worked through.

15.     Given the majority community support (2/3 support for Boundary Reserve is the least supported change) for the changes associated with the three reserves, it is considered appropriate that the plan change now proceeds. There is still the opportunity through the plan change process for anyone concerned about the changes to make a submission.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

16.     The proposed changes to the three reserves in the Tāmaki regeneration area have been guided by the draft Tāmaki Open Space Network Plan (August 2017). That plan contains the following rationale related to the zoning/configuration of the land for zone changes:

·   Many of Tāmaki’s parks are poorly located with respect to the built environment around them. For example, many parks are located behind private residential properties. These parks generally have little street frontage, small alleyway type entrances and are bounded by high solid fences;

·   The shape and topography of much of the open space restricts its usefulness for recreation activities. Many of the parks consist of sloping ground, are fragmented by creeks and are of narrow, linear shape. Many open spaces also serve a drainage function and as a result become boggy during wet periods, reducing access and useable space;

·   There is generally an uncoordinated approach to the provision of amenities such as playgrounds and walkways within Tāmaki. The varying quality of existing assets, missing sections of path network, and poor surveillance of many parks greatly reduces the recreational potential of Tāmaki’s uniquely connected network of open spaces.

 

17.     The draft Tāmaki Open Space Network Plan identified the following actions for the respective open spaces/reserves:

Taniwha Reserve (page 44)

·   Implement greenways priority links path network providing a shared path between Line Road and Taniwha Street.

·   Increase road frontage to Epping Street and open up views to Maungarei (Mt Wellington).

Maybury Reserve – West (page 43)

·   Potential land exchange to remove one block of housing on the south side of Taniwha Street to improve visibility and access.

Boundary Reserve (page 59)

·    Potential land exchange to transfer former Wainui Sea Scouts land into development.

18.     The Tāmaki Regeneration Company’s land exchange document prepared by Jasmax Architects provides an analysis of the existing state of each of the reserves. It also provides the urban design justification for the proposed changes as follows:

Taniwha Reserve (Maps 1-4)

19.     The proposed change involving the removal of the narrow pedestrian linkage to Harlow Place (Map 1).

·   This is a small, narrow alleyway entrance, bounded on one side by a high solid fence.

·   It results in access to the reserve that is hidden from public view and potentially unsafe.

·   Proposed land exchange 1 in conjunction with the Line – Epping development proposes to replace the existing pedestrian path with a publicly vested extension of Delemere Place.

·   This provides improved pedestrian access and sight lines into the reserve and from the town centre up to Maungarei (Mt Wellington).

20.     The proposed change involving the rezoning of three lots fronting Epping Place to Open Space – Informal Recreation (Maps 2 & 3).

·   Taniwha Reserve lacks street frontage and much of the park is located behind private residential properties.

·   Increasing the Epping Street frontage opens the park more to the street and increases surveillance.

·   It provides vastly improved pedestrian access from Epping Street to the reserve.

·   The angle of the proposed eastern reserve boundary sets up a key sightline when approaching from the north down Epping Street and is in line with Maungarei (Mt Wellington) in the distance.

·   The northern boundary of the proposed land exchange provides clear sightlines from Epping Street across the reserve to Line Road.

21.     The proposed change involving the rezoning some of the existing park to Terrace Housing and Apartment Buildings (Map 4).

·   Reshapes the reserve to provide better utilisation of land which is currently underutilised open space due to its separation by Omaru stream and lack of access from the west.

·   The resultant development block would allow for development to front both onto Line Road and Taniwha Reserve with space for vehicle access in between.

·   This will provide an active western edge to the reserve and provide passive surveillance.


 

Maybury Reserve – West (Map 5)

22.     The proposed change involving the rezoning the four Taniwha Street properties to Open Space – Informal Recreation.

·   This widens the street frontage for the park, provides an active street edge to the reserve and improves sightlines and access to the street.

·   The adjacent land use zoning provides the opportunity for intensive development which will provide a strong active development edge and increase surveillance of the reserve and safety.

Boundary Road Reserve (Map 6)

23.     The proposed change involving the rezoning the site of the former Wainui Sea Scouts to Residential – Mixed Housing Suburban.

·   The area of reserve proposed to be exchanged to residential zoning currently creates a poorly defined corner to Riverside Avenue and Tangaroa Street.

·   Boundary Reserve forms an east – west link between Pilkington Road, Riverside and Dunkirk Reserves on the Tāmaki Estuary. The proposed area for land exchange, where a Sea Scouts building was serves little functional purpose (i.e. there is plenty of reserve land in this vicinity).

·   The existing boundaries of the reserve are generally formed by rear fences of properties. This provides poor edges and a lack of passive surveillance into the reserve thereby causing safety issues.

·   The proposed land exchange will provide a well-defined and actively fronted corner to Tangaroa Street, Riverside Avenue and the entrance to Boundary Reserve.

24.     The proposed changes are closely aligned to the actions identified in the draft Tāmaki Open Space Network Plan. This plan has now been consulted on. Although the open space network plan is yet to be updated to reflect the results of the consultation, the views of the community are now known and there is majority support for changes to all three reserves. The proposed changes will achieve the outcome of better connected, safer and more attractive open spaces. 

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe /
Local impacts and local board views

25.     A memo was sent to all local boards providing a summary of the “Open Space” Plan Change on 18 July 2017.  At this stage the draft plan change contained the three Tāmaki reserves. Feedback was received from one local board, the Rodney Local Board, who supported the plan change.

26.     The three reserves lie within the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board area. The Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board Plan contains high level objectives and key initiatives around improving the quality of parks and open spaces in Maungakiekie-Tāmaki.  Workshops and meetings were held between the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board and staff.  The board endorsed the proposed re-zonings on 24 July 2018 (refer Attachment D). The results of community consultation undertaken in October 2018, show there is majority support for the proposed changes.


 

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

27.     A draft copy of the “Open Space” plan change was forwarded to all Auckland’s 19 mana whenua entities as required under the Resource Management Act on 20 June 2018. At this stage it contained the three Tāmaki reserves. Feedback on the draft plan change was received from Ngāti Tamaoho, Ngāi Tai Ki Tāmaki and Ngāti Whatua Ōrākei. Ngāti Tamaoho and Ngāi Tai Ki Tāmaki expressed strong opposition to any changes to Puhinui Reserve. As a result of this opposition, Puhinui Reserve was removed from the “Open Space” plan change. Ngāti Whatua Ōrākei stated they did not need to engage on the plan change.

28.     The Tāmaki Regeneration Company undertakes monthly mana whenua engagement on neighbourhood development including consultation on adjacent reserves.  Mana whenua were consulted during the development of the Tāmaki Open Space Network Plan. In response to feedback received, an additional key move– reaffirming and revitalising Mana Whenua identity, was added to the draft document.

29.     The outcome of the plan changes will benefit all park users, including Māori, with improved quality and safer reserves/open spaces.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

30.     The cost of the plan change is part of Plans and Places’ operational budget.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

31.     Delays in the rezoning of land in the Tāmaki Regeneration Area could have implications for the redevelopment of land for housing.  

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

32.     If approval is obtained to notify the plan change, notification will occur in late January 2019 after the Christmas/holiday period.  Thereafter, the typical plan change process of further submissions, a hearing, the release of the decision by independent hearing commissioners and rights of appeal to the Environment Court would occur.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Proposed Plan Change Maps - Tāmaki

267

b

Proposed Plan Change Section 32 Report - Tāmaki

273

c

Draft Tamaki Open Space Network Plan - Consultation Feedback Overview Final Report

337

d

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board resolutions 24 July 2018

351

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Tony Reidy - Team Leader Planning

Authorisers

John Duguid - General Manager - Plans and Places

Jim Quinn - Chief of Strategy

 


Planning Committee

27 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Planning Committee

27 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Planning Committee

27 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Planning Committee

27 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Planning Committee

27 November 2018

 

 

National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management - Progressive Implementation Plan

 

File No.: CP2018/20385

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To adopt and publicly notify a revised Progressive Implementation Programme for implementing the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2014, amended 2017 (NPS-FM).

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       The purpose of the Progressive Implementation Programme is to outline the continued staged implementation of actions Auckland Council will undertake to implement the NPS-FM by 2025.

3.       The NPS-FM requires the council to review and, if necessary, revise, adopt and publicly notify by 31 December 2018, changes to its programme for progressively implementing the NPS-FM.

4.       A draft Progressive Implementation Programme (Attachment A) has been prepared by council staff. Given changes to the operating context since the previous programme, adopted in 2015, it is recommended that Auckland Council’s programme should be revised to:

a)    Reflect the intended introduction of freshwater objectives and limits around the region via plan changes to the Auckland Unitary Plan (AUP) using an attribute[2] group based approach (as opposed to the previous geographic approach). This allows the spatial scale to be set at either the regional or catchment level.

b)    Include reference to the Freshwater Management Tool model which will provide a better understanding of water quality across the region. The model will incorporate data from the AUP performance, compliance measures, planning, infrastructure projects, education programmes, and implementation of other national level tools (for example national stock exclusion regulations). The development of scenarios will assist in engagement and decisions on setting limits or targets to restrict resource use where appropriate (including whether these occur at a regional or catchment level).

c)    Recognise programmes resulting from the water quality targeted rate as they are a tool for, and part of the process towards, improving water quality.

5.       Attachment A of this report provides a draft 2018 Progressive Implementation Plan.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Planning Committee:

a)      adopt the updated Progressive Implementation Programme (Attachment A of the agenda report) for the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management.

b)      approve public notification of the updated Progressive Implementation Programme.

 

 

Horopaki / Context

6.       The NPS-FM sets the direction for future freshwater management in New Zealand. It includes objectives and policies that direct local government to manage water in an integrated and sustainable way. Council’s must also provide for economic growth and freshwater values that are important to communities. Every regional council and unitary authority must implement the NPS-FM by 31 December 2025.

7.       Policy E1 (f) of the NPS-FM 2017 states: 

“Any programme adopted under Policy E1 (c) of the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2011 or under E1 (c) of the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2014 by a regional council is to be reviewed, revised if necessary, and formally adopted by the regional council by 31 December 2018, and publicly notified.”

8.       Auckland’s current Progressive Implementation Programme was adopted on 3 December 2015. Under this programme, the NPS-FM will be implemented fully by 31 December 2025 through a series of scheduled changes to the Auckland Unitary Plan, planned at the time to commence in 2017. It was considered that these plan changes would be best addressed using a staged geographical approach across the region, initially beginning with the Manukau Harbour. 

9.       Changing policy and data requirements by central government mean that implementation of the NPS-FM through the 2015 programme is no longer achievable. The council has therefore adapted processes and initiatives to accommodate these changes. In response to changes to the policy, a range of actions and work programmes have been introduced to implement the NPS-FM.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

10.     Given changes to the operating context since 2015, staff have revised the Progressive Implementation Programme to address the following: 

·   Attribute group based plan changes

·   Freshwater Management Tool development

·   Water quality targeted rate outcomes

            Attribute group based plan changes

11.     During 2015-2016, separate plan changes based on geographic areas were piloted in five locations. Following early engagement, it was found that there was enough similarity of issues between the areas that it merited rolling out the plan changes by attribute instead.

12.     A progressive roll out of plan changes by attribute groupings promotes and drives integrated management of land use, fresh water and coastal water. This provides clear policy direction to adopt an integrated management approach in planning and decision making at all levels i.e. growth strategies, the regional policy statement, regional plan and district plan and resource consents.

13.     This also enables the council to learn from the first plan change and develop ways to streamline the process, the testing of statutory parameters and ensure outcomes are technically sound. It reduces the risk of appeals, as each plan change occurs only once detailed investigation and modelling work is available for each attribute, and enables flexibility in approach and recognition of issues within the catchment level. Importantly, it enables the spatial scale to be set at either the regional or catchment Ievel on an attribute approach, unlike the 2015 staged geographic approach, which addressed all attributes within a specific area.  


 

14.     While plan changes to the AUP are required for the successful implementation of the
NPS-FM, other significant work continues to be carried out across the council family that will improve water outcomes. For example, the Strategic Approach to Sediment project is developing a strategic, cross-council approach to managing sediment. This will be followed by development of an implementation programme in 2019. At an overarching level, the development of Auckland’s Water Strategy provides strategic direction and priorities for the council family to improve management of water in all its forms, and ensures outcomes are achieved in an integrated way.

15.     Subject to investigations on groundwater quantity (due for completion in December 2018), it may be possible to initially undertake a plan change for water quantity in 2019. The timing of plan changes for water quality attributes (E. coli, nutrients, sediment, copper and zinc) will be determined subject to further assessment of the current evidence base, additional modelling of predicted future states provided by the Freshwater Management Tool (see below) scenario testing and supporting investigations in 2020.

            Freshwater Management Tool development

16.     To support the roll out of plan changes by attribute groupings, dynamic contaminant load models that estimate the total daily loads of each attribute in all the region’s waterways have been developed. These models with the associated scenario analysis software are called the Fresh Water Management Tool (FWMT). The outputs of the tool will be reviewed with respect to existing AUP policies and rules, compliance measures, proposed infrastructure upgrades across the region, education programmes, and implementation of other national level tools (for example national stock exclusion regulations). The development of scenarios will assist the council when engaging with key stakeholders and the community, and decisions on limits or targets to restrict resource use (including whether these occur at a regional or catchment level). The first iteration of the FWMT is due to be completed in 2019. 

            Water quality targeted rate

17.     In June 2018 Council introduced a water quality targeted rate which will provide $452 million of additional investment over the next ten years into water quality outcomes. Programmes include the western isthmus water quality improvement programme, the contaminant reduction programme, urban and rural streams rehabilitation, and proactive compliance and monitoring of onsite waste water systems. In addition, numerous infrastructure upgrades, community initiatives and other council projects that support the outcomes of the NPS-FM. Have been or are in the process of being completed.

18.     The full draft 2018 Progressive Implementation Plan containing the above additional matters is included within Attachment A to this report.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe /
Local impacts and local board views

19.     Many local boards have identified water quality as being of significance to their communities. A range of projects and programmes are already being implemented by local boards, supported by council staff, to improve water quality.

20.     Local boards have not been consulted directly on the proposed revision to the programme, however workshops with local boards were undertaken in October and November 2017 to explore how local boards can contribute to the programme.

21.     Local Boards will be engaged fully during the drafting and creation of plan changes to the Auckland Unitary Plan.


 

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

22.     Mana whenua have an ancestral relationship with freshwater and consider the mauri of freshwater to be both a primary responsibility and key priority for the council. In implementing the NPS-FM, council is committed to ensuring that mana whenua have an effective voice across the various initiatives of the programme.

23.     In recognition of the unique partnership between mana whenua and the Council, a stand-alone engagement plan for working with mana whenua has been developed in partnership with mana whenua. Engagement will follow the stages below:

·   introduction of the programme – complete;

·   input into current state / watershed plans – in progress;

·   discussion of values and attributes – in progress;

·   development of scenarios; and

·   creation of objectives, limits and targets.

24.     Regular hui have been occurring with mana whenua through NPS-FM engagement by the Healthy Waters department during 2016 and 2017, and since 2018 by the Plans and Places department.

25.     The success of the plan changes to give effect to the NPS-FM depends on a good partnership with mana whenua, and staff will be working to establish this throughout all stages of policy development.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

26.     There are funding implications to the council associated with the implementation of appropriate policy and planning frameworks to set water quality and quantity objectives for the state of fresh water bodies in the region, and to set limits on resource use to meet these objectives. The actions and work programmes to implement the NPS-FM engagement will be managed within existing operational budgets and staffing within the Healthy Waters and Plans and Places departments.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

27.     It is critical that the Progressive Implementation Programme (Attachment A) is implemented to ensure momentum to progress full implementation of the NPS-FM by December 2025. While the Progressive Implementation Programme has been designed to meet the 2025 timeframe, policy direction changes by central government require the Council to adapt processes and initiatives to comply with the NPS-FM. 

28.     It is likely that the NPS-FM will be amended soon, as a National Environmental Standard on Ecological Flows and Water Levels is being developed by central government. This standard will set methods for establishing ecological flows and water levels for water bodies[3]. The effects of the standard are currently being mitigated through council staff involvement in national level discussions. When the standard is issued under the Resource Management Act by central government, Auckland Council’s Implementation Programme and investigations for the water quantity plan change to the AUP will need to be revised accordingly.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

29.     A revised Progressive Implementation Programme must be publicly notified by 31 December 2018.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management, Progressive Implementation Programme for Auckland

359

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Debra Yan – Principal Planner - Aucklandwide

Authorisers

John Duguid - General Manager - Plans and Places

Jim Quinn - Chief of Strategy

 


Planning Committee

27 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Planning Committee

27 November 2018

 

 

Request to make Private Plan Change 6 (Auranga), operative in part

 

File No.: CP2018/20932

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To seek approval to make Private Plan Change 6 (Auranga) operative in part.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       Private Plan Change 6 (Auranga) seeks to rezone 83.05 hectares of land in the Drury West area from Future Urban Zone to a combination of Residential – Mixed Housing Urban and Mixed Housing Suburban zones; and to extend the Drury 1 Precinct provisions with amendments to the land.

3.       Private Plan Change 6 was notified on 19 October 2017.  Submissions were heard over three days in April 2018.  The independent hearings commissioners released their decision on 30 June 2018 and the decision was publicly notified on 9 July 2018.  The period for lodging appeals has closed.  One appeal was received on the Council’s decision on Private Plan Change 6 from Elly S-Y Pan, dated 17 August 2018.  Elly S-Y Pan filed a revised notice of appeal on 28 September 2018.

4.       As the appeal does not challenge the Council’s decision in its entirety and is limited to seeking changes to discrete parts of Private Plan Change 6, the plan change can be made operative in part.

5.       Staff recommend that Private Plan Change 6 be made operative in part except for:

·   the provisions in Drury 1 Precinct that deal expressly with the Future Collector Road (New) and the Collector Road (Possible Future Arterial Road), which are identified as being still subject to appeal (refer Attachment B) and as a consequence;

·   the zonings of land located on and to the south of the proposed east-west Future Collector Road (New) (refer Attachment A).

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Planning Committee:

a)      approve the parts of Private Plan Change 6 (Auranga) that are not subject to appeal, under clause 17(2) of Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act 1991, those parts being:

i)        the zoning of land located on, and to the north of, the proposed east-west Future Collector Road (New) as set out in Attachment A of the agenda report; and

ii)       the provisions in Private Plan Change 6, except for those provisions identified as subject to appeal, as marked up in Attachment B of the agenda report.

b)      authorise staff to complete the necessary statutory processes to publicly notify the date on which Private Plan Change 6 (Auranga) becomes operative in part as soon as practicable, in accordance with the requirements in clause 20(2) of Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act 1991. 

c)      delegate to the Chair and Deputy Chair of the Planning Committee, authority to approve any further amendments to Private Plan Change 6 (Auranga), following the outcome of appeal negotiations with the appellant and the section 274 parties.

 

Horopaki / Context

6.       Private Plan Change 6 (Auranga) seeks to rezone 83.05 hectares of land in the Drury West area from Future Urban Zone to a combination of Residential – Mixed Housing Urban and Mixed Housing Suburban zones; and to extend the Drury 1 Precinct provisions with amendments to the land in the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in part).

7.       Private Plan Change 6 was publicly notified on 19 October 2017.  Fifty-one submissions and five further submissions were received and were considered by Independent Hearings Commissioners.  The council released its decision on 9 July 2018.  One appeal was received on the Council’s decision on Private Plan Change 6 from Elly S-Y Pan, dated 17 August 2018.  Elly S-Y Pan filed a revised notice of appeal on 28 September 2018 (refer Attachment C).

8.       As the appeal does not challenge the Council’s decision in its entirety and is limited to seeking changes to discrete parts of Private Plan Change 6, the plan change can be made operative in part.

9.       Staff recommend that Private Plan Change 6 be made operative in part except for:

·   the provisions in Drury 1 Precinct provisions that deal expressly with the Future Collector Road (New) and the Collector Road (Possible Future Arterial Road), which are identified as being still subject to appeal (refer Attachment B) and as a consequence

·   the zonings of land located on and to the south of the proposed east-west Future Collector Road (New) (refer Attachment A).

Appeal lodged by Elly S-Y Pan

10.     The appeal from Elly S-Y Pan (owner of 38 Burberry Road and 341 Jesmond Road) expresses concern about the effects of the Future Collector Road (New) across 341 Jesmond Road, including:

·   the detrimental effects on the existing and future use and enjoyment of the land

·   the adverse effects from development on neighbouring sites

·   there being no agreement for infrastructure funding before development commences

·   inadequate consultation on proposed land uses and provision of infrastructure.

11.     The appeal seeks that the proposed east-west Future Collector Road (New) be deleted; or it seeks that the road be moved south, although no further south than the southern boundary of 235 Jesmond Road where it shares a boundary with 221 Jesmond Road.

12.     In addition, the appeal seeks to delete the proposed amendments to the Drury 1 Precinct provisions that deal expressly with the Future Collector Road (New) and the Collector Road (Possible Future Arterial Road).

13.     In its decision report, the Commissioners agreed with Auckland Transport and staff on the alignment of the Future Collector Road (New), noting that it would serve as a frequent (public) transit network for the Private Plan Change 6 area and the wider Drury West area.

14.     Staff consider that the properties located on and to the south of the Future Collector Road (New) should not be made operative at this time, given that the appeal relief could result in the road moving further south. This will likely result in further consequential changes to the indicative local road network in the south, and the Collector Road (Possible Future Arterial Road) located along the western boundary of 221 and 235 Jesmond Road.

15.     Further, staff consider that the amendments sought to the Drury 1 Precinct provisions are relatively discrete, as they relate specifically to the Future Collector Road (New) and the Collector Road (Possible Future Arterial Road), and it is possible to identify which provisions are to remain subject to appeal, and those that can be made operative.


 

16.     Section 274 parties involved in the appeal are Auckland Transport, New Zealand Transport Agency, Stable Village Limited Partnership (owner of 321, 325, 329, and 333 Bremner Road), and Wing Family Trust (owner of 221 Jesmond Road).  The Minister of Education has applied to the Environment Court to be a section 274 party to the appeal.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

17.     As this report is procedural in nature, no further analysis and advice is required.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe /
Local impacts and local board views

18.     The Franklin and Papakura Local Boards were consulted on Private Plan Change 6 prior to notification.  The Franklin Local Board were supportive of the plan change being a logical extension of the existing Drury 1 precinct, enabling the development of a new community in the area.

19.     The Papakura Local Board did not support Private Plan Change 6 as they considered it premature, given that the development proposed would place significant pressure on existing infrastructure, in particular the Drury motorway interchange.

20.     Local Board views were not sought for this report as making Private Plan Change 6 operative in part is a procedural matter.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

21.     Prior to notification, Karaka and Drury Limited (the applicant) advised staff that consultation had been undertaken with Ngāti Tamaoho, Ngāti Te Ata, and Te Akitai Waiohua as part of the development of Private Plan Change 6.  Three cultural impact assessments by the three iwi authorities were submitted with Private Plan Change 6.

22.     The consultation undertaken by the applicant and cultural impact assessments identified the following issues as being important to mana whenua:

·   archaeology

·   stormwater treatment

·   management of waterways

·   waste water management

·   naming opportunities

·   natural reserves and the management of nearby off-shore islands.

23.     Submissions made by Ngāti Tamaoho, Ngāti Te Ata, and Te Akitai Waiohua all supported Private Plan Change 6, premised on the basis that three factors are assured, being the mana of the iwi, that iwi can assert their rangatiratanga over ancestral taonga, and that the iwi can fulfil their kaitiaki obligations.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

24.     There are no financial implications associated with making Private Plan Change 6 operative in part.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

25.     There are no risks associated with making Private Plan Change 6 operative in part.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

26.     The final step in making Private Plan Change 6 operative in part is to publicly notify the date on which it will become operative in part, and to update the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in part).

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Precinct plan showing zoning & provisions to be made operative in part

371

b

Unitary Plan text to be made operative in part

373

c

Amended Notice of Appeal from Elly S-Y Pan

393

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

David Wong - Principal Planner

Authorisers

John Duguid - General Manager - Plans and Places

Jim Quinn - Chief of Strategy

 


Planning Committee

27 November 2018

 

 



Planning Committee

27 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Planning Committee

27 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Planning Committee

27 November 2018

 

 

Summary of Planning Committee information memos and briefings - 27 November 2018

 

File No.: CP2018/22346

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To receive a summary and provide a public record of memos or briefing papers that have been distributed to committee members. 

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       This is a regular information-only report which aims to provide greater visibility of information circulated to committee members via memo/briefing or other means, where no decisions are required.

3.       The following information items are attached:

·   Planning Committee work programme (Attachment A)

4.       The following workshops/briefings have taken place:

·    6 November – Proposed plan changes to Auckland Unitary Plan and Hauraki Gulf Islands Plan - Sites & Places of significance to Mana Whenua Tranche 1 (Attachment B)

·    6 November – Panuku – Draft policy for determining Housing Mix (Attachment C)

·    21 November – Discussion on the port in preparation for a meeting with the Upper North Island Supply Chain Study work group (Attachment D)

5.       This document can be found on the Auckland Council website, at the following link: http://infocouncil.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/

o at the top of the page, select meeting “Planning Committee” from the drop-down tab and click ‘View’;

o under ‘Attachments’, select either the HTML or PDF version of the document entitled ‘Extra Attachments”.

6.       Note that staff will not be present to answer questions about the items referred to in this summary. Committee members should direct any questions to the authors.

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Planning Committee:

a)      receive the Summary of Planning Committee information memos and briefings – 27 November.

 

 


 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Planning Committee forward work programme 28 November 2018

403

b

Proposed plan changes to Auckland Unitary Plan and Hauraki Gulf Islands Plan - Sites & Places of significance to Mana Whenua Tranche 1 workshop minutes

411

c

Panuku – Draft policy for determining Housing Mix workshop minutes

413

d

Discussion on the port in preparation for a meeting with the Upper North Island Supply Chain Study work group workshop minutes

415

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Kalinda  Gopal - Senior Governance Advisor

Authoriser

Jim Quinn - Chief of Strategy

 


Planning Committee

27 November 2018

 

 

 

PLANNING COMMITTEE FORWARD WORK PROGRAMME 2018

This committee guides the physical development and growth of Auckland through a focus on land use planning, housing and the appropriate provision of infrastructure and strategic projects associated with these activities

 

Priorities for the second 12 months are:

·          Auckland Plan refresh

·          Strategic infrastructure planning

·          City Centre and Waterfront development

 

Lead

Area of work

Reason for work

Planning Committee role

(decision or direction)

Expected timeframes

Highlight financial year quarter and state month if known

 

FY19 

FY20

Oct-Dec

2 Oct

6 Nov

27 Nov

Jan-Mar

5 Feb

5 Mar

 

Apr-Jun

2 Apr

7 May

4 Jun

Jul-Sep

2 Jul

6 Aug

3 Sep

HOUSING

Auckland Council

Auckland Housing Accord monitoring and National Policy Statement requirements

All decisions on Special Housing Areas have been completed in the last council term.  This relates to ongoing monitoring of the outcomes of the Housing Accord and the requirements of the National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity.

Direction

Completion of Housing Accord obligations and assessment of effectiveness of interventions.

 

Progress to date

Review and update of Housing Accord

Aug 2017 PLA/2017/92

 

Update on affordable housing in Special Housing Areas Oct 2017 PLA/2017/132

 

National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity initial assessment results PLA/2017/156 and high-level findings of housing capacity assessment reported Nov 2017 PLA/2017/157

 

Quarterly reporting on the National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity since Feb 2018

 

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q1

Auckland Council

Implementation of Housing Taskforce

The Housing Taskforce is led by His Worship the Mayor. The taskforce is likely to recommend actions to council and some of these actions may fall under the Planning Committee remit.  Actions may include strategic overview and spatial outcomes of council’s role in housing.

Direction

Provide strategic direction and oversight of council’s role in housing to ensure the remedying of any impediments to effective housing supply

 

Progress to date

Scope of housing affordability policy work approved Oct 2018 PLA/2018/102

 

Snapshot report scheduled 27 Nov 2018

 

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q1

Auckland Council

Auckland Housing Programme

Housing New Zealand Limited, HLC and Auckland Council are working together to speed up the delivery of housing in Auckland.  Some initiatives will also include the delivery of affordable housing.

 

Auckland Council’s role focuses on the delivery of infrastructure which enables delivery of housing.   Staff are currently working with Housing New Zealand Limited and HLC to determine what actions and decisions are required from Council. There may be direction and decisions required from the Planning Committee as well as Finance and Performance Committee and Governing Body.

Direction and Decision

Provide strategic direction and decisions as required

Progress to date

Workshop with Housing NZ and HLC March 2018

 

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q1

REGIONAL LAND USE AND INFRASTRUCTURE

Auckland Council

 

Auckland Plan Implementation

The Auckland Plan, Auckland 2050, will be adopted in June 2018. Focus is now on implementation of the plan. A decision will be sought on the overall framework and priority initiatives for implementation.

Update reports will be provided at 6-monthly intervals, highlighting both progress on initiatives as well as emerging issues and trends impacting on Auckland 2050 including central government policy and legislation.

Direction and Decision

Adoption of the Auckland Plan 2050.

Approval and oversight of implementation of Auckland 2050.

Baseline monitoring report to be presented in Q3 followed by six-monthly update reports.

 

Progress to date

Adoption of Auckland Plan 2050 Jun 2018 PLA/2018/62

Formation of working group to develop core targets in collaboration with central government Aug 2018 PLA/2018/76

Update report 27 Nov

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q1

Auckland Transport

Auckland Transport Alignment Project implementation (including the Congestion Question)

The second version of the Auckland Transport Alignment Project strategic approach was adopted by Government and Council in April 2018. Any consideration of transport should be for the purpose of informing future Long-term Plans.

Direction

Regional strategy and policy relating to infrastructure, land use and housing.  Auckland Transport and Central Government have decision-making responsibilities.  Financial recommendations made to Finance and Performance Committee

 

Progress to date

AT Board/Governing Body workshop April 2017

 

Auckland Smarter Transport Pricing Project delegation agreed Jul 2017 PLA/2017/74

 

Phase One Congestion Question project report received Feb 2018 PLA/2018/7

 

Updated Auckland Transport Alignment Project given support and implementation actions agreed by Governing Body GB/2018/76

 

Congestion Question Phase Two project update workshop Aug 2018

 

Draft Regional Public Transport Plan report Nov 2018  PLA/2018/109

 

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q1

 


 

Auckland Council

Auckland Unitary Plan appeals

The Auckland Unitary Plan is Operative in Part until all current appeals are resolved.

Decision

Decisions on council’s position on the current Auckland Unitary Plan appeals as required.

Once the current appeals are resolved, the Regulatory Committee will be responsible for future appeals.

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q1

Auckland Council

 

Auckland Unitary Plan Monitoring of Performance

The development of an internal strategy to identify key performance measures of the Auckland Unitary Plan together with establishing Plan effectiveness monitoring and reporting is being progressed. 

Direction

Reporting on project progress

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q1

HOUSING

Auckland Council

Auckland Unitary Plan plan changes

The Auckland Unitary Plan is Operative in Part until all appeals are resolved.  The council may decide to promulgate public plan changes at any time.  Council can decide not accept or reject private plan changes within the first 2 years

Decision

Decisions on Auckland Unitary Plan plan changes

 

Progress to date

8 council plan changes and 3 private plan changes have been notified since the Auckland Unitary Plan became operative in part in November 2016. Two of those plan changes are now operative. Further plan changes are currently being developed in accordance with the plan change programme endorsed by the Planning Committee in July 2017 PLA/2017/76

 

The Auckland Unitary Plan enhancements plan change and corrections to the Schedule of Notable Trees plan change will be presented to the Planning Committee in Q2/Q3 of the 2019 financial year.

 

Options for rezoning road reserve and public owned “paper roads” as open space requested Aug 2018 PLA/2018/72

 

Approval to make operative Plan Change 11- Three Kings Precinct to the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in part) Oct 2018 PLA/2018/100

 

Approval to notify Plan Change – Rural Activities
Oct 2018 PLA/2018/101   

 

Approval to develop a plan change to resolve differences between the Special Character Areas Overlay and the underlying zones
Nov 2018 PLA/2018/110

 

Approval to notify Plan Changes to Improve Consistency in several chapters of the Unitary Plan Nov 2018 PLA/2018/111

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q1

Auckland Transport

Mass transit - airport

Agree strategic direction with Auckland Transport through its consideration of options for mass transit to the Auckland International Airport.

 

Direction

Strategic direction relating to infrastructure and land use.  Auckland Transport has responsibility for the provision of public transport in Auckland.

 

Progress to date

Workshops held Apr, Jun and Oct 2017 and Feb 2018

Elected member site visits of key locations along proposed route
Mar and Apr 2018

 

Workshop City Centre to Mangere Light Rail proposed communications strategy held Oct 2018.

 

Update report scheduled 27 Nov

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q1

Auckland Transport

Mass transit – light rail

Agree strategic direction with Auckland Transport through its consideration of options for light rail on the isthmus.

 

Direction

Strategic direction relating to infrastructure and land use.  Auckland Transport has responsibility for the provision of public transport in Auckland.

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q1

Auckland Transport and City Rail Link Limited

City Rail Link (public realm)

Provide direction to Auckland Transport on the public realm works associated with the City Rail Link.

Direction

Strategic direction relating to infrastructure and land use.  CRL Company has responsibility for the delivery of the City Rail Link.  Auckland Transport has responsibility for the road corridor

 

Progress to date

Workshops held Mar and Jun 2017

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q1

Auckland Transport

Auckland Council

Additional Waitemata Harbour Crossing

Provide strategic direction to Auckland Transport as it considers the Additional Waitemata Harbour Crossing project.

Provide strategic direction to the New Zealand Transport Agency as it develops the Additional Waitemata Harbour Crossing project.

Direction

To Auckland Transport relating to public transport options

 

Decision

Approve Auckland Council’s submission on the consent applications made by New Zealand Transport Agency     

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q1

Auckland Transport

Active Transport (Walking and Cycling)

Delivery of active transport initiatives

Direction

Feedback to Auckland Transport on the plans and programmes

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q1

Auckland Council Auckland Transport

Supporting growth

Delivering transport networks

Delivery and route protection phase of the former Transport for Future Urban Growth process jointly undertaken by Auckland Council/Auckland Transport and New Zealand Transport Agency

Direction

Reporting on project progress

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q1

Auckland Council

Technical Guidance Programme

To deliver a programme of technical guidance documents to facilitate development to comply with the Unitary Plan and Auckland Council’s infrastructure standards 

Decision

Approval of some documents

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q1

PLACE-BASED LAND USE AND INFRASTRUCTURE

Auckland Council

Spatial Planning Work Programme

Spatial Planning is an important placemaking tool that enables the integration of land use aspirations with the identification of the necessary supporting infrastructure.

Decision

Approve the proposed spatial planning work programme

 

Progress to date

Approval of additional place-based planning projects and preparation of structure plans Formation of Political Reference group

Aug 2017 PLA/2017/95

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q1

 

Auckland Council

 

Drury-Opaheke and Paerata structure plans

 

The Drury-Opaheke and Paerata structure plans will provide specific spatial planning for this area and assist with infrastructure investment decisions

Decision

Approve the Drury-Opaheke and Paerata Structure Plans

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q1

Auckland Council

Silverdale and Warkworth structure plans

 

The Silverdale and Warkworth structure plans will provide specific spatial planning for these areas and assist with infrastructure investment decisions

Decision

Approve the Silverdale and Warkworth structure plans

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q1

Auckland Council

Port Future Study

The Port Future Study was recommended to this council by the previous council.  In conjunction with the Governing Body this committee will need to decide the next steps with this study.

Direction

Likely to recommend actions to the Governing Body for decision

 

Progress to date

Decision to undertake further scoping work on an alternative port location and identifying related triggers/constraints PLA/2017/126
Technical review of Ports of Auckland Draft 30-year Plan. Ongoing collaboration with council, POAL and central government on the Upper North Island Supply Chain Strategy requested as well as oversight of the capital expenditure programme as approved by the Finance and Performance Committee May 2018
PLA/2018/53 - PLA/2018/56

 

Workshop Upper North Island Supply Chain Strategy 21 Nov

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q1




Panuku

Tamaki redevelopment

Panuku leads council’s involvement in the Tamaki redevelopment programme.  There are some decisions of council required from time to time.  This is part of the Spatial Priority Area programme.

 

Decision

Regional strategy and policy relating to infrastructure, land use and housing. 

 

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q1

Panuku

Transform Manukau

The previous council approved the High Level Project Plan for Transform Manukau, covering 600 hectares around the Manukau metropolitan centre.

Direction
Feedback on the Framework Plan and priorities for Manukau.  Panuku has responsibility for the delivery of Transform Manukau.

 

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q1


LEGISLATION/CENTRAL GOVERNMENT PROGRAMMES

Auckland Council

National Planning Standards

The Resource Legislation Amendment Act 2017 introduced national planning standards to improve the consistency of resource management plans and policy statements under the Act. Council will have the opportunity to make a formal submission in July – August 2018.

Decision

Approve Auckland Council Submission.

 

Progress to date

Endorsement of feedback on discussion papers Aug 2017 PLA/2017/97

Approval of submission on draft standards Aug 2018 PLA/2018/75

 

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q1

Auckland Council

 

Urban Development Authorities

Urban Development Authorities legislation is planned to be introduced by the end of 2018.

 

Decision/Direction

Approve Auckland Council submission.

 

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q1

Auckland Council

 

Tax Working Group

 

 

The Tax Working Group has been directed by government to advise on a number of specific challenges including taxation as it relates to housing affordability. The Tax Working Group will produce an interim report and draft recommendations to government in September 2018. There will be an opportunity for submissions. This work may sit under the Finance and Performance Committee. However, its scope is very broad.

 

Decision/Direction

Approve Auckland Council submission.

 

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q1

Auckland Council

Resource Management Act reforms

 

The Government has indicated that Resource Management Act reform will be a focus from November 2018. Opportunities may arise to provide feedback to early discussion papers.

 

Decision/Direction

Approve Auckland Council submission.

 

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q1


 

Auckland Council

Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill

 

The Local Government and Environment Select Committee reported back on this bill in Jun 2017. The bill provides greater flexibility for councils to collaborate on service delivery, new processes for council-led reorganisations, and a more proactive role for the Local Government Commission. There is no formal timeframe for the bill’s progression.

 

 

Decision/Direction

Approve Auckland Council submission

 

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q1

Auckland Council

National Environmental Standards

 

Decision/Direction

As required

 

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q1

Auckland Council

National Policy Statements

 

Decision/Direction

As required

 

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q1



RESOLUTIONS OF OTHER COMMITTEES WHICH IMPACT PLANNING COMMITTEE

Panuku

Transform and Unlock programmes

Panuku produces High Level Project Plans which outline redevelopment projects and the delivery of initiatives in areas assessed against specific criteria i.e. scale of development based on council-owned land area, proximity to transport, potential for partnerships, infrastructure readiness and commercial opportunities.

Finance and Performance Committee decision for Panuku to consider additional areas for inclusion in the Transform and Unlock Programmes, including Manurewa, Takanini and Papakura and workshop these with the Planning Committee.

Mar 2018 FIN/2018/40

 

Workshop held 31 Jul 2018.
Report on Panuku programme scheduled for 27 November.

 

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q1




RESOLUTIONS OF PLANNING COMMITTEE WHICH IMPACT OTHER COMMITTEES


Auckland Council

Urban Forest Strategy

 

The Environment and Community Committee approved the Urban Forest Strategy, a strategic approach to delivering on the wider social, economic and environmental benefits of a growing urban forest in the context of rapid population growth and intensification.

The Environment and Community Committee requested a report on the results of the LIDAR (Light Detection and Ranging) survey, an implementation plan for the Urban Forest Strategy including costs and benefits and funding sources, by Aug 2018 ENV/2018/12

 

Planning Committee decision to include resource consents data in the report to the Environment and Community Committee Apr 2018 PLA/2018/41

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q1

Auckland Council

Strategic approach to marinas

The Planning Committee has requested a workshop with council staff to develop a strategic approach and forward plan regarding the future of Auckland’s marinas.

Planning Committee recommendation to Finance and Performance Committee not to proceed with the sale of any marina land pending the development of a strategic approach and forward plan for Auckland marinas Sep 2018 PLA/2018/87

 

Progress to date

Planning Committee workshop held 30 October

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q1




COMPLETED

Auckland Council

Future Urban Land Supply Strategy refresh

Regional strategy and policy relating to greenfield infrastructure, land use and housing.  Financial and Infrastructure Strategy recommendations made to Finance and Performance Committee

Decision to adopt the refreshed Future Urban Land Supply Strategy Jul 2017 PLA/2017/75

 

Auckland Council

Manurewa/Takanini/Papakura Integrated Area Plan

The Manurewa/Takanini/Papakura Integrated Area Plan is part of the Spatial Priority Area programme.
It provides specific spatial planning of the area and assists with infrastructure investment decisions.

Decision to endorse the Manurewa/Takanini/Papakura Integrated Area Plan Nov 2017 PLA/2017/153

 


 

Panuku

Transform Onehunga

Panuku completed the High Level Project Plan for Transform Onehunga in 2017 (slightly delayed because of the East West Link proposal). 

Decision to adopt the High Level Project Plan for Transform Onehunga Mar 2017 PLA/2017/34

 


Panuku

Unlock Henderson

Panuku completed the High Level Project Plan for Henderson which outlines the delivery of initiatives for the Henderson metropolitan centre.

Decision to adopt the Unlock Henderson High Level Project Plan May 2017 PLA/2017/53

 

Panuku

Unlock Papatoetoe

Panuku completed the High Level project for Papatoetoe which outlines redevelopment projects and the delivery of initiatives in Papatoetoe.

Decision to adopt the Unlock Papatoetoe High Level Project Plan Jul 2017 PLA/2017/78

 

 

Panuku

Unlock Panmure

Panuku completed the High Level Project Plan for Panmure which outlines the delivery of initiatives for the Panmure metropolitan centre.

 

Decision to endorse the Unlock Panmure High Level Project Plan Mar 2018 PLA/2018/21

 

Decision of the Finance and Performance Committee to dispose of properties specified in the Unlock Panmure High Level Project Plan Apr 2018 FIN/2018/59

 

Panuku

Unlock Avondale

Panuku completed the High Level Project Plan for Avondale which outlines the delivery of initiatives for the Avondale town centre. This is part of the Spatial Priority Area programme.

Decision to endorse the Unlock Avondale High Level Project Plan Nov 2017 PLA/2017/142

 

 

Auckland Council

Seachange – Tai Timu Tai Pari

The marine spatial plan for the Hauraki Gulf – Seachange Tai Timu Tai Pari – was completed by the independent stakeholder working group in November 2016.  Staff reported on implications of the plan and options for Auckland Council implementation.

Decision to establish a political reference group to provide direction to council on how to implement the plan, propose a work programme of activities and collaborate with other agencies. Further reporting referred to the Environment and Community Committee. May 2017 PLA/2017/50

 


Auckland Council

Resource Management Act reforms

The previous council made submissions on the Regulatory Systems (Building and Housing) Amendment Bill.  Parliament is expected to pass this legislation in March 2017.  Staff will advise of any implications for Auckland Council.

 

Update Resource Legislation Amendment Act 2017 passed - memo circulated to committee outlining implications for council Apr 2017.

 


Auckland Council

Productivity Commission – Better Urban Planning

The previous council made submissions on the Better Urban Planning discussion document.  The Productivity Commission is due to report back to Government with their final report in March/April 2017.  Staff will report on any implications for Auckland Council.

Update Government released the Productivity Commission report in March 2017.

Memo circulated to committee outlining implications for council Apr 2017.

 

 

 

Auckland Council

Unit Titles Act review

The Government released the Unit Titles Act discussion document in December 2016.  Auckland Council submission March 2017 on regional strategy and policy relating to infrastructure, land use and housing.

Decision to approve Auckland Council submission Mar 2017 PLA/2017/18

 

 


Auckland Council

Urban Development Authorities discussion document

The Government released the Urban Development Authorities discussion document on 14 February 2017.  Auckland Council submission May 2017.

 

Decision to approve Auckland Council submission May 2017 PLA/2017/51

 

Auckland Council

National Environmental Standards

The Government released the proposed national environmental standard for marine aquaculture on 14 June 2017. Auckland Council submission Aug 2017.

 

Decision to approve Auckland Council submission Aug 2017 PLA/2017/98

 

 


 

Auckland Council

Whenuapai structure plan

The Whenuapai Structure Plan provides specific spatial planning for these areas and assists with infrastructure investment decisions.

 

Decision to adopt the Whenuapai structure plan adopted by Auckland Development Committee Sep 2016 AUC/2016/117

 

Auckland Council

Panuku

City Centre and Waterfront development

A refresh of the 2012 City Centre Master Plan will ensure that it remains current and will inform Long-term Plan prioritisation and budget decisions.                            

Panuku is leading the refresh of the spatial planning for the Wynyard Point area in Wynyard Quarter, and a refresh of the Central Wharves strategy which was deferred while the Port Future Study was undertaken. 

      

Decision to update the City Centre Master Plan

Mar 2017 PLA/2017/31

 

In principle approval of Queens Wharf inner dolphin Mar 2017 PLA/2017/32

 

Decision to approve updated implementation of City Centre Master Plan and Waterfront Plan
Sep 2017 PLA/2017/111

 

Auckland Council Auckland Transport

Government Policy Statement on Land Transport 2018

The Government released the draft document for consultation in February 2018. This document informs the Regional Land Transport Plan and the Council’s Long-term Plan.

Decision to approve Auckland Council submission May 2018 PLA/2018/57

 

 

 

Auckland Council

 

Local Government (Community Well-being) Amendment Bill

 

The Local Government (Community Well-being) Amendment Bill seeks to reinstate the purpose of local government to promote the social, economic,

environmental and cultural well-being of communities and restore the power to collect development contributions for a wider group of

infrastructure projects.

Decision/Direction to establish a political working group to provide direction and approve Auckland Council submission May 2018 PLA/2018/58

 

 

 


Planning Committee

27 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Planning Committee

27 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Planning Committee

27 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator

     

 


Planning Committee

27 November 2018

 

 

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

That the Planning 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:

 

17        Sites and Places of Significance to Mana Whenua – Tranche 1: Plan Changes to the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) and Auckland Council District Plan - Hauraki Gulf Islands Section 2018 - Attachment a - List of Nominated Sites Proposed for Scheduling

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)(c)(i) - The withholding of the information is necessary to protect information which is subject to an obligation of confidence or which any person has been or could be compelled to provide under the authority of any enactment, where the making available of the information would be likely to prejudice the supply of similar information or information from the same source and it is in the public interest that such information should continue to be supplied.

In particular, the attachment contains information on nominated sites and places of significance to mana whenua that has been provided to Council on a confidential basis until the plan change has been approved for public notification. .

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.

 


 

17        Sites and Places of Significance to Mana Whenua – Tranche 1: Plan Changes to the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) and Auckland Council District Plan - Hauraki Gulf Islands Section 2018 - Attachment b - Map of Existing and Nominated Sites and Places of Significance to Mana Whenua

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)(c)(i) - The withholding of the information is necessary to protect information which is subject to an obligation of confidence or which any person has been or could be compelled to provide under the authority of any enactment, where the making available of the information would be likely to prejudice the supply of similar information or information from the same source and it is in the public interest that such information should continue to be supplied.

In particular, the attachment contains information on nominated sites and places of significance to mana whenua that has been provided to Council on a confidential basis until the plan change has been approved for public notification. .

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.

 

17        Sites and Places of Significance to Mana Whenua – Tranche 1: Plan Changes to the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) and Auckland Council District Plan - Hauraki Gulf Islands Section 2018 - Attachment c - Proposed Plan Change and Section 32 document

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)(c)(i) - The withholding of the information is necessary to protect information which is subject to an obligation of confidence or which any person has been or could be compelled to provide under the authority of any enactment, where the making available of the information would be likely to prejudice the supply of similar information or information from the same source and it is in the public interest that such information should continue to be supplied.

In particular, the attachment contains information on nominated sites and places of significance to mana whenua that has been provided to Council on a confidential basis until the plan change has been approved for public notification. .

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.

 


 

 

17        Sites and Places of Significance to Mana Whenua – Tranche 1: Plan Changes to the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) and Auckland Council District Plan - Hauraki Gulf Islands Section 2018 - Attachment d - Landowner and Local Board feedback on proposed plan changes

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)(c)(i) - The withholding of the information is necessary to protect information which is subject to an obligation of confidence or which any person has been or could be compelled to provide under the authority of any enactment, where the making available of the information would be likely to prejudice the supply of similar information or information from the same source and it is in the public interest that such information should continue to be supplied.

In particular, the attchment contains information on nominated sites and places of significance to mana whenua that has been provided to Council on a confidential basis until the plan change has been approved for public notification. .

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.

 

C1       Changes to Northcote High Level Project Plan - Confidential

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.

s7(2)(h) - The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities.

In particular, the report contains information about sites that may be acquired.

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.

 

   

 



[1] See Perry, B. (2018) The material wellbeing of NZ households: Overview and Key Findings

From the 2018 Household Incomes Report and the companion report using non-income measures (the 2018 NIMs Report). Ministry of Social Development: Wellington. P.24.

[2]  “Attribute” is defined in the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2017 as “… a measurable characteristic of fresh water, including physical, chemical and biological properties, which supports particular values”. “Value” is defined as “…: a) any national value; and b) includes any value in relation to fresh water, that is not a national value, which a regional council [or Unitary Authority] identifies as appropriate for regional or local circumstances (including any use value)”.

[3]Water body” is defined in the Resource Management Act 1991 as “… fresh water or geothermal water in a river, lake, stream, pond, wetland, or aquifer, or any part thereof, that is not located within the coastal marine area”